Yes, and as such it seems entirely stupid. So the executive flying to L.A. won't be able to access the documents while on a 4-hour flight. Nor will he be able to do so from the hotel unless they open up the firewall to let him access the authenticatio
I'm just waiting for the horror stories from the first MS customers who have their server crash, and then lose all access to critical documents. Even if they have backups, they'll still lose access to recently created documents that don't have their rights backed up. (talk about logic-bomb central!)
Either that, or we'll end up finding out just how much of a sham MS's "protection" of those documents is.
Sure, they are supposed to contribute source back in, but what's to stop them if they don't. AFAIK, nobody has ever been forced by law to contribute source back in. Then again, mabey they will.
Actually, given that it's likely to be internal use only, there's no legal requirement for them to contribute any of those source changes back. They're only required to distribut source for copies that go to external users.
On the other hand, it's very much to their advantage to contribute most of their source changes back to the community, if it gets folded back into the main source tree. When that happens, it means that they don't have to keep track of the changes when they upgrade versions of the software, and support on those changes will tend to get done by others.
Yeah, you haven't installed XP. Otherwise you would have known that IIS is disabled by default and that Outlook comes with Office, not Windows.
Does Outlook Express come with XP? Excuse me for the misnaming. It seems silly for me that the extended version of the program has no extension while the basic version does. I intended "Outlook" to indicate any version of the MS mail system, not just the extended version.
Yeah, most of the XP updates are not for core XP components either (only one updates NTDLL AFAIK). Others are for "commonly used software": IE, IIS, Outlook Express
When Microsoft meaningfully unbundles IE from XP, then you can distinguish it from "Core XP components".
It's easy to install RedHat (or any other distro) without mozilla, Galeon and/or konqueror. Never having installed XP, I don't know how easy it is to install it without IIS and Outlook and, in all honesty, I don't care to try it.
. . . . I think it's AOL's right to do this, they don't want livejournal linking to them.
In the context of: you can do anything with your machines/site you want to, AOL has the right to block whomever they want.
In the context of: "They're a seriously dominant player, they just started into the blogging business and now they're messing with links from a large blogging site", this smacks of anti-competetive business practices and just begs for a lawsuit and/or DOJ investigation.
It's clearly not bandwidth for another reason: If it was a bandwidth issue, they'd be blocking everything (or, at least, a lot more than just one blogging site) -- and as the previous reply pointed out, they've got lots of bandwidth available. I doubt that LiveJournal is that high a volume site.
On the other hand, this really stinks of anti-competetive practices in the light of the fact that they're just now moving into the blogging market. If LiveJournal can come up with a lawyer (other than Boies) willing to work on a contingincy basis, I expect that they could get a nice legal settlement.
I wouldn't call them slow... They're all but down already, and only 35 comments up.
My quick response is: It's too bad you didn't manage to record those conversations. They'd be good to use in court for anybody who faced down a battery of DEL lawyers claiming "You agreed to the license and it says xxxxxxx".
No... I couldn't read any of the licenses until after I'd gone past that point, so there was nothing for me to agree to.
If they not only don't really expect people to read it, but they also design things so that you can't read it until after it's been "accepted", then it's really shouldn't be binding -- no matter how much they might hope it is.
One quote that I remember is: "Diplomacy is the art of telling a lion 'nice kitty, kitty', while you reach for a big rock."
points as I see it:
This is SCO Australia. i.e. they have no current plans in Australia.
No current and/or concrete plans is diplomacy speak for "we're not ready to announce it yet".
This is very different than SCO US sending letters to the 1500 customers they threatened a couple of months ago announcing that they've abandoned all plans to sue customers in the US.
In this SCO vs Linux thing, SCO has been acting like a cross between a drug-crazed waif babbling incoherently and a sociopathic liar saying different things to differnt people expecting that nobody is going to remember what was said elsewhere.
In other words, there's really nothing serious to listen to here.
I have a script (which I now just forward my virus emails to) which automatically scans the Recieved: lines and finds the last mail server that collects emails for me. Wherever that mail server got forwarded the email from is the ISP that my script bounces the email to (so they can figure out who it came from and have them de-virus their box).
At the very worst, it will end up in the hands of an ISP that now knows that they have to deal with an open relay on their network.
One more important feature:
Stunningly beautiful women.
Some time ago, I went on a cruise. Of 2500 people on the boat, only 50 were Brazilian, but 4 of the 5 most beautiful women on the boat were Brazilians.
I was impressed....
I think that the "ripoff" in question is the money that companies like mcafee make selling anti-virus software that's no better than F-Prot -- which is free (at least for home use).
As for "Patching" your systemagainst SoBig, I'd presume that he meant that the heuristic scanning of his (F-Prot?) anti-virus system was able to catch SoBig before it was officially recognized by the likes of Norton's.
e. What it gave me was a whole load of things like compilers (....) and zero networking support. The W98Se install I followed this with gave me no compilers (as MS doesn't expect the user to have to patch the OS by themselves)
This reminds me of a quote from a comedian about party crashers.
You know how some people will show up unannounced and spouting about how you forgot to tell them, and they're sure that if you'd seen them, you would have told them???? Well, I want you, now, to know:
If I don't tell you, it's because I don't want you to know.
Compilers for Windows are an extra couple hundred dollars. The reason why XP doesn't load compilers is because they're not available.
Unlike Windows, Linux installs are capable, out of the box, of setting up anything from a kernel developers box to a minimal firewall.
I've never done a Mandrake install, but I'm sure that it's got a "desktop office box" style of installation. Asking mandrake to "just install whatever" into a relatively limited space is just asking for trouble. 600MB of disk space will fit a Linux installation with about the capability of Windows (i.e. no compilers, word processors, etc), but you do need to say what you don't want.
Ie; my machine was patched against SoBig before the copy of NAV pro we use in the office had an updated definition for it.
How did you manage that?
There are email checkers that will spot the signature of viruses in the email. They can either simply remove the virus right then and there, or put up really explicit warnings so you know to stay clear.
I just finished helping a friend suck 800K copies of sobig out of an email server. If we can do that, so can a (well-written) piece of anti-virus software.
One could definitely consider some of those words to be threats.
What? his threat to shot McBride's
"high horse" out from under him??? His threat that he "will not like" what we're cooking up for him? Analogies and references.
SCO has been acting like a brain-damaged hysteric brat, and sometimes harsh words, like a slap across the face are what are required to get the attention of somebody in a state like that.
Reasoned logic hasn't gotten thru. It may now be time for something a bit more harsh. There's nothing even close to illegal about what ESR wrote -- it's little more than a synthesis of what's been being written here on slashdot and elsewhere.
I used to have a signature: "Killing a person is hard. Killing a dream is murder". I think that that applies here.
Re:GUI does not imply !(batchable||scriptable)
on
E-Postage for Linux?
·
· Score: 1
I am a developer - a Windows developer..., and I make sure the things I produce are appropriately scriptable.
My claim is that you're the exception, not the rule.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm just waiting for the horror stories from the first MS customers who have their server crash, and then lose all access to critical documents. Even if they have backups, they'll still lose access to recently created documents that don't have their rights backed up. (talk about logic-bomb central!)
Either that, or we'll end up finding out just how much of a sham MS's "protection" of those documents is.
Actually, given that it's likely to be internal use only, there's no legal requirement for them to contribute any of those source changes back. They're only required to distribut source for copies that go to external users.
On the other hand, it's very much to their advantage to contribute most of their source changes back to the community, if it gets folded back into the main source tree. When that happens, it means that they don't have to keep track of the changes when they upgrade versions of the software, and support on those changes will tend to get done by others.
Does Outlook Express come with XP? Excuse me for the misnaming. It seems silly for me that the extended version of the program has no extension while the basic version does. I intended "Outlook" to indicate any version of the MS mail system, not just the extended version.
In the meantime, perhaps they should re-codename it to "LongWait"....
When Microsoft meaningfully unbundles IE from XP, then you can distinguish it from "Core XP components".
It's easy to install RedHat (or any other distro) without mozilla, Galeon and/or konqueror. Never having installed XP, I don't know how easy it is to install it without IIS and Outlook and, in all honesty, I don't care to try it.
If they'd done it on a moterbike, would they have been written up on slashdot?
What more reason does a geek need?
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a paper-boy on a bicycle.
or:
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a van full of newspapers.
(Not enought SCO news today.. I really HAD to do something to get my fix)
In the context of: you can do anything with your machines/site you want to, AOL has the right to block whomever they want.
In the context of: "They're a seriously dominant player, they just started into the blogging business and now they're messing with links from a large blogging site", this smacks of anti-competetive business practices and just begs for a lawsuit and/or DOJ investigation.
On the other hand, this really stinks of anti-competetive practices in the light of the fact that they're just now moving into the blogging market. If LiveJournal can come up with a lawyer (other than Boies) willing to work on a contingincy basis, I expect that they could get a nice legal settlement.
I'm betting that it's a hacked version of LILO, -- and they haven't distributed the source code.
(God, am I cynical!)
(some things are WORTH the karma burn)
I managed to get The startup splash screen image, and I've put it on my website.
My quick response is: It's too bad you didn't manage to record those conversations. They'd be good to use in court for anybody who faced down a battery of DEL lawyers claiming "You agreed to the license and it says xxxxxxx".
No... I couldn't read any of the licenses until after I'd gone past that point, so there was nothing for me to agree to.
If they not only don't really expect people to read it, but they also design things so that you can't read it until after it's been "accepted", then it's really shouldn't be binding -- no matter how much they might hope it is.
Hold on: You mean that this thing was GPLed???
I never got source code with my infection! Did you?? Oh boy... GPL violaiton! This guy is in deep doodoo.
(sorry -- just had to do that).
- points as I see it:
-
This is SCO Australia. i.e. they have no current plans in Australia.
- No current and/or concrete plans is diplomacy speak for "we're not ready to announce it yet".
- This is very different than SCO US sending letters to the 1500 customers they threatened a couple of months ago announcing that they've abandoned all plans to sue customers in the US.
In this SCO vs Linux thing, SCO has been acting like a cross between a drug-crazed waif babbling incoherently and a sociopathic liar saying different things to differnt people expecting that nobody is going to remember what was said elsewhere.In other words, there's really nothing serious to listen to here.
"i" before "e" except after "c"!
Luckily eye all ways rum my sea code through a spill cheque her.
At the very worst, it will end up in the hands of an ISP that now knows that they have to deal with an open relay on their network.
Stunningly beautiful women.
Some time ago, I went on a cruise. Of 2500 people on the boat, only 50 were Brazilian, but 4 of the 5 most beautiful women on the boat were Brazilians.
I was impressed....
- track, log and block each one separately, or
- Just block the whole d@mn netblock and get on with life.
Either is legal. The fact that the latter WILL catch some innocent CI users unaware is really just too bad.As for "Patching" your systemagainst SoBig, I'd presume that he meant that the heuristic scanning of his (F-Prot?) anti-virus system was able to catch SoBig before it was officially recognized by the likes of Norton's.
This reminds me of a quote from a comedian about party crashers.
Compilers for Windows are an extra couple hundred dollars. The reason why XP doesn't load compilers is because they're not available.Unlike Windows, Linux installs are capable, out of the box, of setting up anything from a kernel developers box to a minimal firewall.
I've never done a Mandrake install, but I'm sure that it's got a "desktop office box" style of installation. Asking mandrake to "just install whatever" into a relatively limited space is just asking for trouble. 600MB of disk space will fit a Linux installation with about the capability of Windows (i.e. no compilers, word processors, etc), but you do need to say what you don't want.
How did you manage that?
There are email checkers that will spot the signature of viruses in the email. They can either simply remove the virus right then and there, or put up really explicit warnings so you know to stay clear.
I just finished helping a friend suck 800K copies of sobig out of an email server. If we can do that, so can a (well-written) piece of anti-virus software.
What? his threat to shot McBride's "high horse" out from under him??? His threat that he "will not like" what we're cooking up for him? Analogies and references.
SCO has been acting like a brain-damaged hysteric brat, and sometimes harsh words, like a slap across the face are what are required to get the attention of somebody in a state like that.
Reasoned logic hasn't gotten thru. It may now be time for something a bit more harsh. There's nothing even close to illegal about what ESR wrote -- it's little more than a synthesis of what's been being written here on slashdot and elsewhere.
I used to have a signature: "Killing a person is hard. Killing a dream is murder". I think that that applies here.
My claim is that you're the exception, not the rule.