Actually, governments stron-arm each other all the time, trying to get laws passed, particularly with copyright stuff lately.
So, yeah, you can do something - you can pressure your leaders to pressure the US congress to not be stupid. SOAP may be dead, but there are two more piles of shitty toilet paper that need to follow it.
It may not be re-emergence behavior, but even so, the other factor is - yeast are eukaryotic cells, which took a long time develop. If this example were done with prokaryotic cells, it might be more interesting from the perspective of an evolutionary biologist, given that is what life started with.
I work for a Wniversity, and they pay my salary. If I were paid by MS, I probably wouldn't have moved a bunch of Windows servers over to Linux (network filesystems + Windows = PAIN IN THE ASS).
As for them, how the hell do I know where their salary comes from? It seems to me you are trying to say everyone who disagrees with your dogma is one person, in an attempt to discredit them, without any evidence.
Normally I don't agree with the "this is for anticompetative purposes..." stuff, but... I this case, unless the new FS is amazingly fast, I'd have to agree...
It's losing quite a few useful features. I'm guessing the OSS NTFS drivers got too good for them, and they wanted to move to something different, and those "depricated" features are simply things they didn't have time/budget to implement.
Except if you look at my post history, I criticize as well as agree with MS. Likewise I criticize as well as agree with non-MS projects/group.
About the only biases you can really accuse me of are: (1) I strongly dislike Apple. (2) I prefer BSD licenses to the GPL license, but I both lacking. (3) Perl should die, python is better for anything you'd do with Perl.
How can it? In terms of car analogies, the comparison for the GPs answer is:
Question: "Hey, I need to buy a new vehicle. I need a dealer with a good price, stands behind their warrantees, doesn't have high pressure sales people, and sells Toyotas." GPs Answer: "I really like the Subaru Impreza."
WYSIWYG is not professional for many programming tasks, but for designers, unless you are in the scientific community, and sometimes even then, WYSIWYG is pretty much the professional standard. You'd probably have better traction saying OSS isn't professional (which might have worked 10 years ago... but isn't so true now).
Silverlight targets flash, not Dreamweaver, it is a framework not dev tool - the dev tool would be Visual Studio or MonoDevelop). The former is closed source, the latter won't do what he wants.
Don't worry, I'm sure you'll recover from your lobotomy soon.
Knowing a few people who have gotten that certification (after several tries) - I am fairly comfortable in saying that the test for that, and many similar MS certifications, are on par with some of the harder actuarial examinations. Even a particularly intelligent person will be challanged.
That being said, it is a lot of memorization, not necessarily analysis. But when you have quick recall to that many situations, if your logical abilities are fairly good, then you will be able to troubleshoot A LOT.
They aren't spreading FUD, they are countering it.
a) only to anti-MS zelots b) same as a c) Much the same seems applicable about you. Actually a young child, or someone blinded by a religious take on their technology. Everyone else will apply some logic and see that the points do have validity. d) The same could be said about all the anti-MS zelots on this thread.
* You don't need WHQL drivers to run on MS's operating systems - meaning it will run on non-restricted devices * As the OP put it, there are major security reasons to do this, as well as anticompetative. Nobody outside of MS can honestly say which is the priority reason.
So, unless they have changed it so that WHQL certification is required for things to work, who gives a shit? COmpanies can make locked-down and non-locked down variants, depending on their customer bases desires.
You have an axe murderer in one room. He WILL chop off your head. You have a guy with a single bullet in his gun in the next. He WONT miss, but he probably won't kill you either (he likes legs and arms?) You are in the room in the middle. One of the two will come into the room, and he will do whatever is his forte, to you.
Does going into the room where the guy will shoot you, mean that you support his actions?
It's a bit of a different story here, some times you can't make a huge change in one go, but you can direct small changes over time. It's like natural selection + mutation in evolution... Or numerical estimations for complex math problems.
Probably about as safe as SSH in the first place? Aside from the obvious, it also deals with issues of compromised machines SSHing to the server (immediate CLI access for whoever does the compromising).
I think what he is saying is that a server will be, in general, placed where it has equal or better network access than the desktops.
Servers need better bandwidth than desktops (typically) so: 1) When a company/organization needs/wants to save money, it will cut corners on desktop networking long before server networking. 2) If there are times when the connection is maxed, or near maxed, servers will typically be given priority on bandwidth. 3) Depending on the size of the organization, multiple tiers of hubs/switches/routers may be needed to get *everyone* to the outside world. Since servers tend to be higher priority connections, it there is a difference in "number jumps to the outside", servers will tend to have fewer jumps. 4) Along the above lines, desktops/workstations tend to be physically more sparsely positioned, it may be cheaper to have an extra switch/hub for a smaller group to save on wiring, which could add extra hops for those users.
There's nothing magical about it, just a combination of cost effectiveness, what systems tend to be used for, and networking engineers who aren't retarded. Are there exceptions to the above? Sure, an internal-only server, wouldn't need to access the outside world, and may take more jumps on networking hardware to get there. Such servers would probably still have better bandwidth to any arbitrary internal machine, than any arbitrary desktop/workstation though.
He's just trolling. Not every server application for Windows is made by MS, and therefore not all of them will go GUIless. One of the two I administrate cannot be administrated without the GUI, except possibly by some of it's developers. The other can be administrated without the GUI, but even if you run it on Linux, Solaris or HPUX, the creator highly recommends using the GUI and won't support some changes being made except within the GUI.
HOWEVER, as long as I've administrated Windows and *Nix server, and applications on them, I have very much missed the ability to have GUIless access to a server, when working with Windows. This change should mean that pretty much every server/os level task can be done without a GUI, which will be nice. I prefer to not have to pick one or the other, I'd rather have a server that allows both options well. Using the GUI for tools I don't use much, and CLI for tools I use frequently.
And by not casting a vote, allow the system to roll over you without saying anything. The politicians don't care if the people legitimize the system, as long as they get their money and power.
At least, by casting a vote, you can nudge the system in the right direction. It's a lot more than what you would get by not voting.
the problem with ARM PC's for Microsoft is that people will think they can install x86 apps on them and they can't.
Responded to this previously.
Apple, by virtue of their costs tend to be used by more educated people and because of the smaller market share had/have fewer head aches dealing with migrations.
I've seen no correlation between Apple use over PC use and education (or intelligence for that matter). Many of them are more willing to pay more for their computer and do without in other areas. Looking around my university, and several other, CS, Engineering and Physicists are mostly PC (Linux), Math is split between Linux and WIndows PC, Chemists, Geological Sicences and most of the Biological Sciences are mostly PC (WIndows), About the only "Mostly Mac" areas are Art/Graphical Design, Philosophy, and Genetics. As someone with a degree in genetics, that is one of the least difficult of the biological sciences. The hard stuff is all PC. Most of the trends in the sciences are because these systems are where they find the best software. Mind you, the Physicists have a prety easy time moving to Mac if they want, so outside of physics, it seems the trend would be fairly strong across universities. From what I've seen, it is.
Making the iPad enabled to run iPhone apps was very smart on Apple and Microsoft can't really do that with the market share Windows Phone phones have.
I doubt very much we'll see anything running ARM SoCs which look like a PC(desktop or laptop) and runs Windows 8 for ARM. Metro is the UI and API they need to get cross CPU and cross device applications and without widespread use of that a Windows for ARM PC will just drive the public nuts as they find out there existing software will not work and there's nothing like it available. Maybe in 5 years but looking at Android and Apple's iOS you have to wonder if they can even get to 20% market share in the phone segment in that time.
Yep, like Mac users were mad at Mac apps not working on ipod/iphone/ipad? LIke Linux users being being mad at Linux apps not working on Android? Like Mac users with pre-rosetta apps flocked away from Apple when they stopped producing Power series sytems? MS is moving to Metro for all platforms (with a "classic desktop" option for the desktop systesm), and it seems they are moving towards.NET as the recommended app development platform.
Between moving towards.NET and towards online applications (the latter I mentioned before), the whole "can't use my old apps" argument seems rather flimsy.
There are numerous candidates, but that is the one generally accepted by biologists. The only "biologist" I've seen use anything different (and not, effectively synonymous) in 20 years or so, was here on slasdot. Quotes since I can't confirm he/she is a biologist
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, governments stron-arm each other all the time, trying to get laws passed, particularly with copyright stuff lately.
So, yeah, you can do something - you can pressure your leaders to pressure the US congress to not be stupid. SOAP may be dead, but there are two more piles of shitty toilet paper that need to follow it.
I'm sure, once we rinse off all the SOPA, wikipedia will come back.
SOPA may be dead (or dieing) but PIPA and the other crap legislation are still out there, and need to be stopped.
Glad this got the mod up.
It may not be re-emergence behavior, but even so, the other factor is - yeast are eukaryotic cells, which took a long time develop. If this example were done with prokaryotic cells, it might be more interesting from the perspective of an evolutionary biologist, given that is what life started with.
I work for a Wniversity, and they pay my salary. If I were paid by MS, I probably wouldn't have moved a bunch of Windows servers over to Linux (network filesystems + Windows = PAIN IN THE ASS).
As for them, how the hell do I know where their salary comes from? It seems to me you are trying to say everyone who disagrees with your dogma is one person, in an attempt to discredit them, without any evidence.
Normally I don't agree with the "this is for anticompetative purposes..." stuff, but... I this case, unless the new FS is amazingly fast, I'd have to agree...
It's losing quite a few useful features. I'm guessing the OSS NTFS drivers got too good for them, and they wanted to move to something different, and those "depricated" features are simply things they didn't have time/budget to implement.
Except they are getting rid of those features, so, maybe we should say they are falling behind (or running the wrong direction in the race?)
Except if you look at my post history, I criticize as well as agree with MS. Likewise I criticize as well as agree with non-MS projects/group.
About the only biases you can really accuse me of are:
(1) I strongly dislike Apple.
(2) I prefer BSD licenses to the GPL license, but I both lacking.
(3) Perl should die, python is better for anything you'd do with Perl.
I disagree on the 'paid' part. The posts are too incompetent. It seems more like a "I'll make MS look bad by posting this crap" type thing.
Trust me, I know, but when it comes to marketing... They are nitwits, but even they aren't dumb enough to hire that guy.
So, you are a troll, posing as a MS shill (no way they could be as incompetent to use someone like you) to make MS look bad?
Trust me, they don't need the help.
More likely he's just a troll. I can see MS wasting money, but not like that.
How can it? In terms of car analogies, the comparison for the GPs answer is:
Question: "Hey, I need to buy a new vehicle. I need a dealer with a good price, stands behind their warrantees, doesn't have high pressure sales people, and sells Toyotas."
GPs Answer: "I really like the Subaru Impreza."
WYSIWYG is not professional for many programming tasks, but for designers, unless you are in the scientific community, and sometimes even then, WYSIWYG is pretty much the professional standard. You'd probably have better traction saying OSS isn't professional (which might have worked 10 years ago... but isn't so true now).
Silverlight targets flash, not Dreamweaver, it is a framework not dev tool - the dev tool would be Visual Studio or MonoDevelop). The former is closed source, the latter won't do what he wants.
Don't worry, I'm sure you'll recover from your lobotomy soon.
Knowing a few people who have gotten that certification (after several tries) - I am fairly comfortable in saying that the test for that, and many similar MS certifications, are on par with some of the harder actuarial examinations. Even a particularly intelligent person will be challanged.
That being said, it is a lot of memorization, not necessarily analysis. But when you have quick recall to that many situations, if your logical abilities are fairly good, then you will be able to troubleshoot A LOT.
So... Would that make Linux the Comic Book Guy and Windows is Sideshow Bob?
They aren't spreading FUD, they are countering it.
a) only to anti-MS zelots
b) same as a
c) Much the same seems applicable about you. Actually a young child, or someone blinded by a religious take on their technology. Everyone else will apply some logic and see that the points do have validity.
d) The same could be said about all the anti-MS zelots on this thread.
* You don't need WHQL drivers to run on MS's operating systems - meaning it will run on non-restricted devices
* As the OP put it, there are major security reasons to do this, as well as anticompetative. Nobody outside of MS can honestly say which is the priority reason.
So, unless they have changed it so that WHQL certification is required for things to work, who gives a shit? COmpanies can make locked-down and non-locked down variants, depending on their customer bases desires.
Well spoken. Both parties tend to have some very good candidates during the primaries.
You have an axe murderer in one room. He WILL chop off your head.
You have a guy with a single bullet in his gun in the next. He WONT miss, but he probably won't kill you either (he likes legs and arms?)
You are in the room in the middle. One of the two will come into the room, and he will do whatever is his forte, to you.
Does going into the room where the guy will shoot you, mean that you support his actions?
It's a bit of a different story here, some times you can't make a huge change in one go, but you can direct small changes over time. It's like natural selection + mutation in evolution... Or numerical estimations for complex math problems.
Probably about as safe as SSH in the first place? Aside from the obvious, it also deals with issues of compromised machines SSHing to the server (immediate CLI access for whoever does the compromising).
I think what he is saying is that a server will be, in general, placed where it has equal or better network access than the desktops.
Servers need better bandwidth than desktops (typically) so:
1) When a company/organization needs/wants to save money, it will cut corners on desktop networking long before server networking.
2) If there are times when the connection is maxed, or near maxed, servers will typically be given priority on bandwidth.
3) Depending on the size of the organization, multiple tiers of hubs/switches/routers may be needed to get *everyone* to the outside world. Since servers tend to be higher priority connections, it there is a difference in "number jumps to the outside", servers will tend to have fewer jumps.
4) Along the above lines, desktops/workstations tend to be physically more sparsely positioned, it may be cheaper to have an extra switch/hub for a smaller group to save on wiring, which could add extra hops for those users.
There's nothing magical about it, just a combination of cost effectiveness, what systems tend to be used for, and networking engineers who aren't retarded. Are there exceptions to the above? Sure, an internal-only server, wouldn't need to access the outside world, and may take more jumps on networking hardware to get there. Such servers would probably still have better bandwidth to any arbitrary internal machine, than any arbitrary desktop/workstation though.
He's just trolling. Not every server application for Windows is made by MS, and therefore not all of them will go GUIless. One of the two I administrate cannot be administrated without the GUI, except possibly by some of it's developers. The other can be administrated without the GUI, but even if you run it on Linux, Solaris or HPUX, the creator highly recommends using the GUI and won't support some changes being made except within the GUI.
HOWEVER, as long as I've administrated Windows and *Nix server, and applications on them, I have very much missed the ability to have GUIless access to a server, when working with Windows. This change should mean that pretty much every server/os level task can be done without a GUI, which will be nice. I prefer to not have to pick one or the other, I'd rather have a server that allows both options well. Using the GUI for tools I don't use much, and CLI for tools I use frequently.
And by not casting a vote, allow the system to roll over you without saying anything. The politicians don't care if the people legitimize the system, as long as they get their money and power.
At least, by casting a vote, you can nudge the system in the right direction. It's a lot more than what you would get by not voting.
the problem with ARM PC's for Microsoft is that people will think they can install x86 apps on them and they can't.
Responded to this previously.
Apple, by virtue of their costs tend to be used by more educated people and because of the smaller market share had/have fewer head aches dealing with migrations.
I've seen no correlation between Apple use over PC use and education (or intelligence for that matter). Many of them are more willing to pay more for their computer and do without in other areas. Looking around my university, and several other, CS, Engineering and Physicists are mostly PC (Linux), Math is split between Linux and WIndows PC, Chemists, Geological Sicences and most of the Biological Sciences are mostly PC (WIndows), About the only "Mostly Mac" areas are Art/Graphical Design, Philosophy, and Genetics. As someone with a degree in genetics, that is one of the least difficult of the biological sciences. The hard stuff is all PC. Most of the trends in the sciences are because these systems are where they find the best software. Mind you, the Physicists have a prety easy time moving to Mac if they want, so outside of physics, it seems the trend would be fairly strong across universities. From what I've seen, it is.
Making the iPad enabled to run iPhone apps was very smart on Apple and Microsoft can't really do that with the market share Windows Phone phones have.
I doubt very much we'll see anything running ARM SoCs which look like a PC(desktop or laptop) and runs Windows 8 for ARM. Metro is the UI and API they need to get cross CPU and cross device applications and without widespread use of that a Windows for ARM PC will just drive the public nuts as they find out there existing software will not work and there's nothing like it available. Maybe in 5 years but looking at Android and Apple's iOS you have to wonder if they can even get to 20% market share in the phone segment in that time.
Yep, like Mac users were mad at Mac apps not working on ipod/iphone/ipad? LIke Linux users being being mad at Linux apps not working on Android? Like Mac users with pre-rosetta apps flocked away from Apple when they stopped producing Power series sytems? MS is moving to Metro for all platforms (with a "classic desktop" option for the desktop systesm), and it seems they are moving towards .NET as the recommended app development platform.
Between moving towards .NET and towards online applications (the latter I mentioned before), the whole "can't use my old apps" argument seems rather flimsy.
There are numerous candidates, but that is the one generally accepted by biologists. The only "biologist" I've seen use anything different (and not, effectively synonymous) in 20 years or so, was here on slasdot. Quotes since I can't confirm he/she is a biologist