Heatsinks don't just fall off. If they did, it couldn't be good for the system anyway to have a huge conductor rolling around on your motherboard.
Given how often couriers "drop" things that are being shipped via their services, it's amazing how often you find things out of place. I've worked on systems that had the heatsink removed, all the cards poped out of their slots (both PCI and AGP cards), screws that worked themselves loose and the RAM had popped out. All this on ONE system that was shipped. The other three were similar.
To make things worse, the Althon line still uses the old socket7 CPU fans, and many of the specialty CPU fans are so heavy that they can actually break the tabs right off the socket.
Read Tom's original article:
"A motherboard that doesn't read the thermal diode is unable to protect the new Athlon processor from a heat death. We used a specific Palomino motherboard, Siemens' D1289 with VIA's KT266 chipset. [...] The engineers assured us that what we had seen was for real. The thermal diode of Palomino is unable to react quickly enough. Only 1 degree/s is what the thermal diode is able to handle."
It's also probable that the Athlon XP is of a different stepping than the Athlon MP, and the 1 degree/s limitation was remedied (or it was a siemens board problem that they were unwilling to accept responsibility for).
Id like to see the elimination of the artifical scarcity of goods.
That is not going to happen until the scarcity of all goods, tangible and intangible is negated. So long as there's a functional scarcity of physical goods, we need money, and things that can bring people money, such as copyright. What a revolution that would be...
Dimitry wrote and sold software that was designed to violate copyrights. Even without the DMCA the ebooks license specifies you may not make copies and contrary to Slashlore there is no indescriminant "Fair Use Right" that allows this behavior.
Bullshit. Dmitry wrote a program that his EMPLOYER sold that removed the restrictions on Adobe e-books. There is a world of difference between copyright violation and removing access controls, despite the fact it's easier to duplicate without access controls. And the only reason he's being tried is he was accessable, and he's an "evil" russian whose product was hurting an American company. I hope it gets thrown out for a number of reasons, including the fact it would set a very bad precident where an employee ends up responsible for the acts of his or her employer.
You obviously don't work for a company of any size. You can bet that with a company the size of Microsoft, the paperwork alone probably accounts for 50% of that time, along with tracking down which group is responsible for the code, and the exchange of blame between groups. Never underestimate the ability for a company to build up a bureaucracy. And I was referring to the fact that Microsoft is PROMPT in releasing patches compared to almost all commercial software vendors. Many of them will take well over a month, or just completely refuse to acknowledge such a bug exists.
It is my opinion that if the security community didn't publicize exploit code samples, that Microsoft would take even longer to release patches for their security holes than they do, and despite the number and severity of problems they have, they are fairly slow to respond to them.
Microsoft isn't too slow at responding to security holes, and they usually release a patch within a couple weeks of being notified. The problem, however, is that they don't always successfully fix the problem the first time. Some of the UNICODE decode path traversal vulnerabilities have been "fixed" by Microsoft several times before being completely fixed. The real value of published vulnerabilities is that if you're concerned, you can check the server to make sure the patch was successful in closing and eliminiating the vulnerability.
What is far more likely is that independent artists, novelists, and even small publishing companies will simply ignore DRM and release their content in open formats. Check out www.baen.com for how this might possibly work.
That's exactly what makes the SSSCA so dangerous. Anything that plays an "unprotected" media format can be considered against the law under it's terms. That means MP3s, AVIs,.MPGs, text documents, MS Word documents, and so on would all become illegal from that point on. Existing hardware that made use of those technologies could still be sold, but could no longer be built. It's plain sickening to think about it.
Congress can pass all the laws they want, they aren't likely to make it illegal to give your work away, or to sell it at a vastly lower price than your competitors. And that is exactly what will happen.
And that is why most people don't understand the SSSCA, because it's doing exactly that -- making it illegal to give your work away in any unofficial format that doesn't incorporate DRM. It's a bad law being drafted under the guise of protecting artists from being ripped off, even though it hurts artists, consumers and electronics hardware manufacturers for the benefit of the entertainment industry. I can't imagine that Microsoft, or any of the major computer hardware manufacturers would want that, because although it might mean some limited additional income via licensing of patents and such, the pain to everyone would be much greater.
Ruling aside the obvious objections (changing major subsystems in a so-called "stable" kernel, NIH syndrome) I can only assume Alan's objection is that it was yet another really neat thing developed (or sponsored) by rival Linux company SuSE (like reiserfs, which he also objected to)
The sooner Redhat stop leveraging its collection of kernel hackers to drive Linux kernel development the better for the rest of us that don't care for their crappy distribution.
I don't think RedHat had ANYTHING to do with Alan's objections. For one, numerous people have reported severe stability problems with Andreas' VM, which are things that simply should not occur in a so-called "stable" kernel. This kind of experimentation should be occurring in 2.5, not 2.4. The problem is that the VM got almost no testing before being rolled into 2.4.10. The same was true of ReiserFS when it was introduced into 2.4 -- it, too, had a number of problems, including stability and data integrity problems. Rik's VM is not very good, granted, but 2.5 is the proving grounds for new features, not 2.4.
Seems like a great idea. But some of the components (TV and DVD player) have a single button/signal for power on/off. So if my TV was already on, then this macro does everything right, but turns the TV off. Damn.
Well, many devices have only one power button, but also have discreet codes for turning off and turning on. Far worse are pre-programed remote controls that try to do that themselves, despite the fact that you may not want them to. I have a remote control that came with my digital TV reciever that insists on toggling the power of my television when I press the power button when the digital cable terminal is selected.
They were even explaining that if you held a mic upto the speakers and recorded it that way the mp3 encoder would still have trouble because of the signals.
Then I'd have difficulty believing their claims that it is inaudible. MP3 encoders specificly try to discard all data that is inaudible, and hence would discard all the "protection" that might make it out of the speakers. I imagine whoever said that was attributing features to the copy prevention system that can't really exist. It's also a little unreasonable to think that these copy prevention technologies won't have problems with standard CD players. I imagine there's going to be some very angry people who find out that their new CDs won't work in their old CD players, and that the publishers have no intention of releasing a version that can be used with the older equipment. Either way, if I ever come across one of these protected discs, I intend on making certain that the company I buy it from pays for it, one way or another. That may only mean returning the CD repeatedly and complaining at length about the fact it doesn't work, but if it happens often enough, they're likely to retreat from these schemes.
Then there's always "fair dealings", and the laws that were passed recently that allow me to make copies of any music I purchase, in exchange for the ridiculous levies the recording industry gets to collect on casette tapes and CD-Rs.
I know a woman who bought a jug of wine at a grocery store in Italy, walked outside and the jug exploded because the wine had fermented. When she told the store manager about it, he asked if she wanted to buy another bottle. In the U.S. the store would give her another bottle. See the difference?
Sounds like a pretty shady store to begin with. Probably just hoping to take advantage of her. In the States, the store could be in danger of being sued for endangering her (glass is sharp!), or a dozen other things. Don't forget the lady who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonalds because of it. If the store would give her another bottle free of charge would probably have more to do with trying to protect themselves from far more costly lawsuits than trying to obey consumer protection laws.
He's in jail for selling it, not for some imaginary academic study.
No, he's in jail because he wrote the program, and his employer was offering to sell it to American citizens. There should be a difference, but sadly, it doesn't seem to be in the eyes of the prosecutors.
Microsoft's been astroturfing for quite a while now. Their entire "grassroots" Freedom to Innovate Network is just another example. Unfortunately, FIN failed to generate any kind of serious concern in most people. Microsoft knows that if they can sway or appear to sway public opinion on the matter and discourage the individual states from continuing the prosecution, the case may well die by itself. It doesn't help that Microsoft has admitted to doing this before, as well.
Unfortunately, so does DVD-R, DVD+R, and DVD-RW... With seven different competitive "standards" around, none of them are particularily appealing. The DVD Forum, on the other hand is only backing DVD-RAM, DVD-RW and DVD-R. The only really useful thing about DVD+RW and DVD+R is that it's directly compatible with CD-R and CD-RW, so a DVD+RW drive should be able to write all four types of discs without problem. Unfortunately, only time will tell which format ends up widely adopted and which ones will fail miserably.
If the RIAA, MPAA, "the artists", song writers, etc. care so much about their precious IP, then they shouldn't ever allow it to be recorded in medium that can be read by an electronic device. Only give live concerts or only allow the films to be shown in theaters and check for recording devices at the door.
NO! That won't do! They must completely stop distributing their "Intellectual Property", because analog sources can be digitized one way or another, or even if that is blocked in some way, someone might manage to actually hum the song they heard. Imagine the theft that could be done by an audience that actually thinks and remembers. It's obvious that we need to make sure people do not have the mental or physical capability to store any of these crucial forms of intellectual property!
Okay, this might be a little OT, but have you found anywhere to buy a copy of Debian where some of the money filters back to the Debian and SPI project? I've looked for somewhere to buy some kind of boxed set of Debian, and have failed. Apparently there was a boxed release of slink, but it seems it's gone. Maybe I'm greedy, but I'd rather buy something than just donate.
Uh huh. I'm sure Microsoft will document ALL of Microsoft.NET, just like they documented all of the Win32 API, and all of the Win16 API, and all of the MS-DOS Int21h calls... They don't need to add much to make non-MS platforms worthless with.NET, in fact, their Hailstorm technology may end up being enough. Or maybe they'll encapsulate something in the same file format that.ASF file use, since according to MS lawyers, they have the format patented. Use your imagination a bit, it wouldn't be hard to sabotage everyone else, the only question is will they do it, and do they think they'll manage to get away with it?
That said, however, it does make some good points about the Internet with its dumb network, smart terminal model, as perhaps not being the best mechanism for content delivery.
That's precisely why the internet works. The "dumb" network acts indifferent to the data that flows across it, and acts with only enough inteligence to try and assure that all the data it can possibly deliver gets delivered. What the article should be arguing against is the fact that the content types that are usable on computers are ill-suited for television and other forms of 'dumb' media. That shouldn't surprise anyone. Most computers have keyboards that include at least 101 keys and a pointer device, whereas most remotes have maybe 20-30 buttons, and only directional arrows for navigation. Should it be any surprise that there would be difficulty using material designed for computers on a television would be difficult?
The article also blames the 'dumb network' for unreliability (don't know about anyone else, but my internet provider goes down more than any of the major backbone providers I access sites through), viruses (before the Internet became popular, we had no viruses, what-so-ever. CIH, stoned, etc viruses did not exist, and weren't a problem for anyone. Right.) and privacy intrusions (credit card companies have been doing this for years by means of credit reports, so again, this is a problem of the Internet's design? I think not). None of these problems started with the internet, and nor were they made any worse by the internet.
I really have to object to much of the rest of the article that goes on to praise Windows XP, Microsoft.NET and Passport authentication and it's claim that this will assure that uniform standards are promoted across the entire Internet. It completely ignores the fact that many uniformly accepted and implemented standards have always been in use on the internet (TCP/IP being the most obvious), and continue to be developed on the internet, regardless of Microsoft's co-operation, and in fact, Microsoft tends to be the enemy of such standards more often than not, by extending them in incompatible ways in their own products.
3. Punish the crime not the tool: [...] A tool designed to bypass copy protection, while it may have it's legitimate uses, come on, nobody here is stupid. We know what we'd all use it for;).. And that is what MOST would use it for.. we can fool ourselves all we want.
Okay, how about this, then. I encode every CD I get to MP3 format. Why? No, I don't share or distribute them on Napster, I don't post them to websites, I don't distribute it through warez groups on IRC. I keep them all to myself, so what other reasons could I have?
Convenience when using my computer -- I like to listen to music when using my computer and swapping CDs constantly is inconvenient and increases the likelyhood that either the CD-ROM drive, or CD disc will become damaged with use. CD-ROM drives, in particular, are designed for burst use and constant use can severely deplete their useful life. Hard drives, on the other hand, are designed for near constant use, and instant access.
Portability -- I recently purchased a portable MP3 CD player. 1 MP3 disc with my favorite tunes is a lot more compact than 20 or so CDs with the same songs and a lot of other songs that I may not care for.
Longevity -- As I previously mentioned, MP3s cause a lot less wear and tear on a computer than an audio CD would. It can even extend the life of my CD collection.
Now, when you tell me that there's no legitimate reason why anyone would want to bypass copy protection, I have to disagree. It shouldn't matter if the principle use that most people find with a device is a crime, if there is significant potential for the device to be put to good use for legitimate means. Most places allow people to own a rifle, because they are very useful for hunting. It doesn't mean the rifle can't be just as easily used for killing innocent people.
Searched the web for "innocent until prooven guilty". Results 1 - 7 of about 11. Search took 0.26 seconds.
Searched the web for "guilty until prooven innocent". Results 1 - 7 of about 9. Search took 0.33 seconds.
Did you read the story? This is not about database corruption. Yes, databases get corrupted, just about anything can cause it. A good server that can do transaction logging so that you can roll the database forward from the recovered transaction logs is extremely important. But this article isn't about database corruption. It's about SQL server returning incorrect results from a simple, common command. The best DBA and sysadmin in the world can't combat this. And if Oracle had these kinds of problems with their database, they deserve the same criticisms. The database corruption problem arrises from relying on data that the server is telling you is correct, but is, in fact, incomplete. This is one of those things that you can't even work around very easily in your own software, because aside from running multiple queries of the same type and comparing them, how are you to know how many results you're supposed to get each time?
But by this logic Unix has an inherent failure in letting any idiot do rm -r when they've just backed up one level from a symlink, and trashed a vital directory structure! My point was that blaming a standard human-computer interface allowing you to delete a database hardly constitutes MS evil.
Any my point was that Microsoft constantly touts their "user friendly" graphical user interface as a primary reason to buy their products, goes out of their way to point out that UNIX's may cost more because you have to hire a qualified administrator (implying that you don't with NT). I think it's fair game to criticise them on their GUIs when they've obviously made an error in the design of the interface by their very own GUI guidelines. If UNIX was being marketed the same way as NT is, then, yes, I'd have the same criticism of UNIX and the rm command or the MySQL 'drop [database]' command. Now, I'm sure you know, just as I do, that you do need a qualified administrator for NT machines, just as you do for UNIX ones.
Try it, with SQL server it usually works. If it doesn't then revert to your backup.
I don't think so. The program that contacts that SQL database is so picky that the program fails to work properly unless the client is running Windows NT 4.0 SP5 or SP6 with Office 97 SR2-a and Internet Explorer 4.0 or 5.0x. Windows 2000, 98, 95, XP or ME don't work. Office 97 SR-1, 97 SR-2b, 2000 or XP don't work. Internet Explorer 5.5 is known to break it. ANYTHING that updates ODBC drivers breaks it. It's a house of cards. There's no way I'm bringing it down on myself.
I think you may find "online ordering" is fairly mission critical for those websites who rely on the Internet as a shop-front, and thousands of those rely on MS SQL Server.
Perhaps, but I use it only for non-critical data. If, by chance, it did horribly die, I could either just restore from backup with little or no ill effects, or consequences. Orders, credit card numbers, etc are not stored in that database (well, it does keep a copy of the order, but it's unused). The "house of cards" database I mentioned above handles all the orders... Somehow I do seem to be able to manage to keep things running on the crappy servers the company has purchased (no name brand anything). Damn this job sucks.
I'd deploy Oracle on Solaris 8 days a week if I could, but it's expensive, full of magic (none of which is in manuals, it's smoke & mirrors DBAing), and is only cost-effective for real cash-generating business entities. If you want a reasonably straightforward system with cheap support costs (in terms of manpower), then there are far worse things than deploying SQL server.
That's one thing that bugs me about Microsoft SQL Server. Many salespeople will simply say SQL without qualifying it with Microsoft, leaving you guessing about if they mean Microsoft's product, or just some SQL server in general. And regarding Oracle's price... There's the old saying, "You get what you pay for."
Depends on your DSL provider. Here, the DSL is constantly having problems. If it's not their backbone going down, it's the mail servers crashing, or the authenication servers crashing, or the PPPoE servers crashing. We also have two different companies providing cable service to the city (in different parts of the city), one of them provides excellent cablemodem service and the other provides extremely poor service.
How the hell can you blame Microsoft for your stupidity on not being able to handle the most common input device?
Okay, now you're just going out of your way to be an asshole. People make mistakes, learn to live with it. I'm not the only person who's deleted a file I shouldn't have, and I'm almost certain that you're not infallable, either. Microsoft has always touted the user interface of Windows NT as a selling feature, implying even a rank idiot could operate a Windows NT server (and many do). I think it's fair game to call out user interface errors when they are found.
Now, I'm not a DBA and won't even claim to be one, but I do have to keep one MS SQL server up and running. The only thing I've ever really even modified on it was configuring it to do daily backups because the original programmers had some strange notion that automated backup proceedures are somehow bad. Other than that, I stay away from it -- the program that connects to it is fragile and buggy, and I don't want to accept blame for breaking it in any way. I don't even dare apply Windows NT or MSSQL7 service packs to it. But the fact the company won't hire a qualified DBA is not my concern, as long as I fulfill my obligations as sys admin by making sure all the data on that server is properly backed up, and that it remains running all day long.
What I don't want to hear about is some'l33t MySQL server with 10 records in it doing a better job from someone barely out of school.
Well, if anyone ever suggested MySQL for something that was "mission critical" and that no data could ever be lost, they really should be fired on the spot. MySQL was never designed for that, and anyone who uses it for that is just plain stupid. That said, I do use it myself at work for the website and the online ordering for non-critical data such as pricing, and minimal customer data. If information is lost, it's not important, because it will not affect operations at the company one bit (although it might make a little more work for one person -- me). For "Open Source" software, PostgreSQL and InterBase are probably better competitors to MS SQL and Oracle, although I don't have any real information on any of them.
One difference... Mouse pointers sometimes slip by accident when you're trying to click on something. I know I'm not the only one who's hand has slipped from time to time, and dragged a desktop icon to the "Recycle Bin" or folder by accident. Now, unless you're stupid enough to name your databases in some kind of sequential order, this wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem with a CLI, since you'd have to be thinking wrong to do remove the wrong database (not that CLI or GUI can really protect you from that, either way).
Slashdot Mirror
To make things worse, the Althon line still uses the old socket7 CPU fans, and many of the specialty CPU fans are so heavy that they can actually break the tabs right off the socket.
It's also probable that the Athlon XP is of a different stepping than the Athlon MP, and the 1 degree/s limitation was remedied (or it was a siemens board problem that they were unwilling to accept responsibility for).
You obviously don't work for a company of any size. You can bet that with a company the size of Microsoft, the paperwork alone probably accounts for 50% of that time, along with tracking down which group is responsible for the code, and the exchange of blame between groups. Never underestimate the ability for a company to build up a bureaucracy. And I was referring to the fact that Microsoft is PROMPT in releasing patches compared to almost all commercial software vendors. Many of them will take well over a month, or just completely refuse to acknowledge such a bug exists.
Then there's always "fair dealings", and the laws that were passed recently that allow me to make copies of any music I purchase, in exchange for the ridiculous levies the recording industry gets to collect on casette tapes and CD-Rs.
Sounds like a pretty shady store to begin with. Probably just hoping to take advantage of her. In the States, the store could be in danger of being sued for endangering her (glass is sharp!), or a dozen other things. Don't forget the lady who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonalds because of it. If the store would give her another bottle free of charge would probably have more to do with trying to protect themselves from far more costly lawsuits than trying to obey consumer protection laws.
No, he's in jail because he wrote the program, and his employer was offering to sell it to American citizens. There should be a difference, but sadly, it doesn't seem to be in the eyes of the prosecutors.
Microsoft's been astroturfing for quite a while now. Their entire "grassroots" Freedom to Innovate Network is just another example. Unfortunately, FIN failed to generate any kind of serious concern in most people. Microsoft knows that if they can sway or appear to sway public opinion on the matter and discourage the individual states from continuing the prosecution, the case may well die by itself. It doesn't help that Microsoft has admitted to doing this before, as well.
Unfortunately, so does DVD-R, DVD+R, and DVD-RW... With seven different competitive "standards" around, none of them are particularily appealing. The DVD Forum, on the other hand is only backing DVD-RAM, DVD-RW and DVD-R. The only really useful thing about DVD+RW and DVD+R is that it's directly compatible with CD-R and CD-RW, so a DVD+RW drive should be able to write all four types of discs without problem. Unfortunately, only time will tell which format ends up widely adopted and which ones will fail miserably.
NO! That won't do! They must completely stop distributing their "Intellectual Property", because analog sources can be digitized one way or another, or even if that is blocked in some way, someone might manage to actually hum the song they heard. Imagine the theft that could be done by an audience that actually thinks and remembers. It's obvious that we need to make sure people do not have the mental or physical capability to store any of these crucial forms of intellectual property!
Okay, this might be a little OT, but have you found anywhere to buy a copy of Debian where some of the money filters back to the Debian and SPI project? I've looked for somewhere to buy some kind of boxed set of Debian, and have failed. Apparently there was a boxed release of slink, but it seems it's gone. Maybe I'm greedy, but I'd rather buy something than just donate.
Uh huh. I'm sure Microsoft will document ALL of Microsoft .NET, just like they documented all of the Win32 API, and all of the Win16 API, and all of the MS-DOS Int21h calls... They don't need to add much to make non-MS platforms worthless with .NET, in fact, their Hailstorm technology may end up being enough. Or maybe they'll encapsulate something in the same file format that .ASF file use, since according to MS lawyers, they have the format patented. Use your imagination a bit, it wouldn't be hard to sabotage everyone else, the only question is will they do it, and do they think they'll manage to get away with it?
The article also blames the 'dumb network' for unreliability (don't know about anyone else, but my internet provider goes down more than any of the major backbone providers I access sites through), viruses (before the Internet became popular, we had no viruses, what-so-ever. CIH, stoned, etc viruses did not exist, and weren't a problem for anyone. Right.) and privacy intrusions (credit card companies have been doing this for years by means of credit reports, so again, this is a problem of the Internet's design? I think not). None of these problems started with the internet, and nor were they made any worse by the internet.
I really have to object to much of the rest of the article that goes on to praise Windows XP, Microsoft.NET and Passport authentication and it's claim that this will assure that uniform standards are promoted across the entire Internet. It completely ignores the fact that many uniformly accepted and implemented standards have always been in use on the internet (TCP/IP being the most obvious), and continue to be developed on the internet, regardless of Microsoft's co-operation, and in fact, Microsoft tends to be the enemy of such standards more often than not, by extending them in incompatible ways in their own products.
Convenience when using my computer -- I like to listen to music when using my computer and swapping CDs constantly is inconvenient and increases the likelyhood that either the CD-ROM drive, or CD disc will become damaged with use. CD-ROM drives, in particular, are designed for burst use and constant use can severely deplete their useful life. Hard drives, on the other hand, are designed for near constant use, and instant access.
Portability -- I recently purchased a portable MP3 CD player. 1 MP3 disc with my favorite tunes is a lot more compact than 20 or so CDs with the same songs and a lot of other songs that I may not care for.
Longevity -- As I previously mentioned, MP3s cause a lot less wear and tear on a computer than an audio CD would. It can even extend the life of my CD collection.
Now, when you tell me that there's no legitimate reason why anyone would want to bypass copy protection, I have to disagree. It shouldn't matter if the principle use that most people find with a device is a crime, if there is significant potential for the device to be put to good use for legitimate means. Most places allow people to own a rifle, because they are very useful for hunting. It doesn't mean the rifle can't be just as easily used for killing innocent people.
Searched the web for "guilty until prooven innocent". Results 1 - 7 of about 9. Search took 0.33 seconds.
Spelling errors are FUN!
Did you read the story? This is not about database corruption. Yes, databases get corrupted, just about anything can cause it. A good server that can do transaction logging so that you can roll the database forward from the recovered transaction logs is extremely important. But this article isn't about database corruption. It's about SQL server returning incorrect results from a simple, common command. The best DBA and sysadmin in the world can't combat this. And if Oracle had these kinds of problems with their database, they deserve the same criticisms. The database corruption problem arrises from relying on data that the server is telling you is correct, but is, in fact, incomplete. This is one of those things that you can't even work around very easily in your own software, because aside from running multiple queries of the same type and comparing them, how are you to know how many results you're supposed to get each time?
Any my point was that Microsoft constantly touts their "user friendly" graphical user interface as a primary reason to buy their products, goes out of their way to point out that UNIX's may cost more because you have to hire a qualified administrator (implying that you don't with NT). I think it's fair game to criticise them on their GUIs when they've obviously made an error in the design of the interface by their very own GUI guidelines. If UNIX was being marketed the same way as NT is, then, yes, I'd have the same criticism of UNIX and the rm command or the MySQL 'drop [database]' command. Now, I'm sure you know, just as I do, that you do need a qualified administrator for NT machines, just as you do for UNIX ones.
Try it, with SQL server it usually works. If it doesn't then revert to your backup.
I don't think so. The program that contacts that SQL database is so picky that the program fails to work properly unless the client is running Windows NT 4.0 SP5 or SP6 with Office 97 SR2-a and Internet Explorer 4.0 or 5.0x. Windows 2000, 98, 95, XP or ME don't work. Office 97 SR-1, 97 SR-2b, 2000 or XP don't work. Internet Explorer 5.5 is known to break it. ANYTHING that updates ODBC drivers breaks it. It's a house of cards. There's no way I'm bringing it down on myself.
I think you may find "online ordering" is fairly mission critical for those websites who rely on the Internet as a shop-front, and thousands of those rely on MS SQL Server.
Perhaps, but I use it only for non-critical data. If, by chance, it did horribly die, I could either just restore from backup with little or no ill effects, or consequences. Orders, credit card numbers, etc are not stored in that database (well, it does keep a copy of the order, but it's unused). The "house of cards" database I mentioned above handles all the orders... Somehow I do seem to be able to manage to keep things running on the crappy servers the company has purchased (no name brand anything). Damn this job sucks.
I'd deploy Oracle on Solaris 8 days a week if I could, but it's expensive, full of magic (none of which is in manuals, it's smoke & mirrors DBAing), and is only cost-effective for real cash-generating business entities. If you want a reasonably straightforward system with cheap support costs (in terms of manpower), then there are far worse things than deploying SQL server.
That's one thing that bugs me about Microsoft SQL Server. Many salespeople will simply say SQL without qualifying it with Microsoft, leaving you guessing about if they mean Microsoft's product, or just some SQL server in general. And regarding Oracle's price... There's the old saying, "You get what you pay for."
Depends on your DSL provider. Here, the DSL is constantly having problems. If it's not their backbone going down, it's the mail servers crashing, or the authenication servers crashing, or the PPPoE servers crashing. We also have two different companies providing cable service to the city (in different parts of the city), one of them provides excellent cablemodem service and the other provides extremely poor service.
Okay, now you're just going out of your way to be an asshole. People make mistakes, learn to live with it. I'm not the only person who's deleted a file I shouldn't have, and I'm almost certain that you're not infallable, either. Microsoft has always touted the user interface of Windows NT as a selling feature, implying even a rank idiot could operate a Windows NT server (and many do). I think it's fair game to call out user interface errors when they are found.
Now, I'm not a DBA and won't even claim to be one, but I do have to keep one MS SQL server up and running. The only thing I've ever really even modified on it was configuring it to do daily backups because the original programmers had some strange notion that automated backup proceedures are somehow bad. Other than that, I stay away from it -- the program that connects to it is fragile and buggy, and I don't want to accept blame for breaking it in any way. I don't even dare apply Windows NT or MSSQL7 service packs to it. But the fact the company won't hire a qualified DBA is not my concern, as long as I fulfill my obligations as sys admin by making sure all the data on that server is properly backed up, and that it remains running all day long.
What I don't want to hear about is some'l33t MySQL server with 10 records in it doing a better job from someone barely out of school.
Well, if anyone ever suggested MySQL for something that was "mission critical" and that no data could ever be lost, they really should be fired on the spot. MySQL was never designed for that, and anyone who uses it for that is just plain stupid. That said, I do use it myself at work for the website and the online ordering for non-critical data such as pricing, and minimal customer data. If information is lost, it's not important, because it will not affect operations at the company one bit (although it might make a little more work for one person -- me). For "Open Source" software, PostgreSQL and InterBase are probably better competitors to MS SQL and Oracle, although I don't have any real information on any of them.
One difference... Mouse pointers sometimes slip by accident when you're trying to click on something. I know I'm not the only one who's hand has slipped from time to time, and dragged a desktop icon to the "Recycle Bin" or folder by accident. Now, unless you're stupid enough to name your databases in some kind of sequential order, this wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem with a CLI, since you'd have to be thinking wrong to do remove the wrong database (not that CLI or GUI can really protect you from that, either way).