Actualy, I thought Compaq and HP servers already had this special hardware built-in. Usually it's used over a network, but some Compaq server allow you to access "managablity" through RS232. --
Note that there is also remote keyboard/mouse/video boxes that support very long cable lengths, and some that even bridge to a network, essentially acting as hardware remote control.
Given that you can get a switcher pretty cheap nowdays, this might be a better solution than RS232. --
Actually Microsoft Word is one of their few products where the version numbering is fairly correct. Versions 1.0 thru 5.1 were on the Mac, seperate versions 1.0 and 2.0 on Windows with a different feature set, and with version 6.0 they merged the codebase. The only real problem was that version 7 (95) was more like 6.1 in that the only new feature was red squigglies.
Better examples might be Windows NT (first version = 3.1), Exchange (first version = 4.0, jumped to 5.0 for no good reason), MS SQL (where'd version 5.0 go?), MS Access (MIA versions 3.0 - 6.0), and so on.
Thank god we still have companies like Apple that will produce a version number like 8.7. --
Right on - Right now it seems that the biggest threat to "world domination" is new forms of hardware that aren't solidly suppported under Linux. You already have all USB computers like the iMac and some Sonys, and there's more coming. There's the real possiblity that by next year, there could be a ton of computers on the market that won't work with Linux 2.2.
They could take all the work in progress on USB, ISDN, Firewire, dynamic reconfiguration, plug-and-play, ACPI, and so on and get it into shape and justifiably call it version 2.4, even without all of the other big changes planned (SMP, ext3, etc.) --
Well I don't know if this eases your conspiricy theories at all, but I just search www.msnbc.com for both "GE" and "General Electric" and got "No MSNBC articles found". "Microsoft" of course provides a gazillion hits.
Even if Linux doesn't beat NT, if it comes close, then it has won. The reason is in the cost.
This comment is indicative of how the Linux advocacy party line has been affected by the Mindcraft tests. Before the tests it was conventional wisdom that Linux/Apache would pretty much stomp on NT/IIS. Now it's some cost/benifit ratio calculation.
Bottom line is who cares? I would guess that less than 1% of MCSEs are even aware of this study. Performance benchmarks are only going to make a difference in a small number of cases. If I was making the Linux/Apache versus NT/IIS decision, there would be a large number of other factors to think about first, such as what your developers know for example (ASP/VB or PHP/CGI), or how the reliablity or managiblity stands up.
The fact that some in the Linux community have gotten into a pissing match with MS on this one only shows that they're playing the game by Microsoft rules. --
If collaboration is the way of the future, then someone needs to come up with an answer to Windows 2000 Server, Exchange 6, and Office 2000 - and quickly.
Lotus Domino 5 for Linux (coming soon)?
(If it's taken the mighty Microsoft years and years to competively position a product against Lotus, I don't know if it's realistic that free software programmers could come up with one "quickly". Besides, when you cut through the marketing smoke of "collaboration", "groupware", and "knowledge management", you can see that many or most of the tools to do this stuff are there already. Maybe someone just needs to work on the packaging. The weak spot in both Notes/Domino and OSS is the client interfaces, which is the strong side of MS Office.)
1. Remove the extension.HTR from the ISAPI DLL list. Microsoft has just updated their checklist to include this interim fix.
Here's where the 90% of public ISS servers figure probably is not true. A standard security recommendation for IIS is to disable ISAPI extensions that are not in use. As for how many people use HTR, I don't know, but I'd guess it's not 90%. If your local IIS admin hasn't done the basics such as this, this is a gentle reminder.
And as for the folks crowing about Unix versus NT security, you know there's lots of stuff you can run on a Unix box that will create security holes. Certain Linux installers will automagically activate some of this stuff. The fault with Microsoft here is shipping a product with pre-activated 'features' that you many not want to use. (Third party ISAPI extensions require manual registration - a 30 second process). Obviously the more untested, unused features you might have running, the more security holes you are exposed to.
Of course with Unix and open source products, you can be somewhat sure that someone is trying to find the holes for you. But, IIS is a pretty immature product, despite it's version number, so I don't know if you can say the same for Unix software that hasn't been in the field for many years. --
Re: BSOD crap is getting old
on
Digital VCRs
·
· Score: 2
I can believe it. (A peril of GDI in the kernel.) --
Actually, according to this the 3.51 certification is still good (at least for a few more months): http://www.microsoft.com/mcp/certstep/mcse.htm#N T 351
--
Re:bootable with b&w g3s
on
LinuxPPC R5 Ships
·
· Score: 2
Well, I've had my share of troubles even with non-ISA hardware. (PCI IRQ sharing that was broken, PCMCIA modems on IRQ 9, Laptops that ship from the factor with NO free IRQS making expansion impossible, I could go on forever...)
If someone who doesn't understand PC AT IRQs (let's say your average Mac user, even the hardware techs), you honestly expect them to build their own AMD system? --
Dude, no one reads the license agreement anyway, and I've never heard about anyone suing Microsoft for crashes so I must agree with your comment.
Individuals/small businesses may not care about the EULA, but if your corporation is big enough to have a legal department, you aren't exactly going down to the CompUSA and buying shrinkwrap stuff and pressing "I Accept".
Larger corporations have seperate licencing and support contracts with Microsoft/Sun/IBM/whoever, and work out all of the details seperately. These contracts certainly preclude the standard shrinkwrapped licences.
I don't know about Microsoft, but IBM has been sued many times for systems that didn't deliver.
--
Re: BSOD crap is getting old
on
Digital VCRs
·
· Score: 2
And were those Windows 9x BSOD or a Windows NT BSODs?
The reason I ask is that it seems that Linux users are honestly confused on the issue. Win 9x (with only some memory protection) can blue screen on normal user programs. It takes a kernel fault on Windows NT to produce the blue screen, which was the point the original poster was trying to make when comparing a BSOD to a Linux panic.
The worst thing I've seen a user space program such as Netscape or Word do on NT is to take down the entire user session and drop back to the logon screen (assuming you don't have a hardware problem). Similar things happen under Linux.
Now, of course, there's more stuff in the NT kernel to crash (graphics drivers, file sharing, IIS, extra bits of poor programming, etc.). And the STOP message should tell you what crashed. If you can't isolate the problem down to something more specific than "windows", that's simply bad troubleshooting on your part. Perhaps it's the same defective RAM that was troubling your Linux setup. (Most NT bscreens are hardware/driver related.)
I'm only making this point because on this "news for nerds" site, people can get away with saying "BSODs three times a day!" without giving any specific information. If someone posted "The Linux Kernel PANICS all the time!! ", they'd be certainly called on it.
Now it could be your talking about Windows 98. If so, who cares? *Every* OS on the market today is more stable than Win98.
Apple has never and will never be a piece of the enterprise puzzle.
Who says OSX Server is aimed the "enterprise"? What about the traditional Mac server market in DTP shops and education? Right now, these people are largely using WinNT for the bigger jobs.
Besides, Apple only makes desktop hardware - hardly enterprise server stuff. --
Lots of people of course have bad taste in their mouth from the poorly designed Windows registry. (Someone should build another database as a front end to the WinRegistry, just so you can find user adjustable settings!)
I think the problem comes in when you are trying to build a slick configuration front end. There's just too many different file formats in/etc to parse correctly. (At least my experience with RedHat 5.2 LinuxConf seemed to verify that.) So you pull it out and replace it with a binary database, which makes the hardcore unix types mad.
Apparently Apple/Next's NetInfo database allows manual exporting/importing to and from/etc, so maybe that's a solution acceptable to all. --
Corporate applications moving really quickly to web interfaces from green screen or platform-specific VisualBasic (etc.) front ends. That means time is money as far as your web browser is concerned. While Netscape/Linux is certainly usable, it's not as fast or stable as Netscape/Win32 or IE. (Stop to pray to the Mozilla gods.)
Think about a corporate call center moving from 5250s to a web/java interface. Your choices are: (1) A "NC" from IBM, (2) A tighly controlled Windows PC, or (3) A tighly controled Linux PC. Unfortuantely, number (2) is winning in many cases.
I looked at the XFMail screen shots, and you're right, it does need a facelift bad. Same goes for Netscape Messenger, which has all the features, it's just kinda clunky. I've looked at KMail and a few others, and it's too bad that everyone is in the progress of trying to reinvent the wheel here. --
On every PC I've ever owned, I've spent a significant amount of time futzing with the retarded 1980s-style hardware settings such as IRQs and IO ports. Fine for me, because I know how to do it, but quite a few people do not (and nor should they have to in this day-and-age,)
So, is being able to avoid this by running Mac hardware worth the couple hundred bucks extra? It is if you look at the market rate for PC hardware technicians.
(What I'd expect, though, is that the Linux/PPC driver support for expansion cards is more limited than x86, so maybe the point is moot.)
As I write this, the rules are changing. The world isn't just about PC's anymore. A PC is nothing if it can't connect with something. (we all know that, right?)
Right! However, Linux currently has a substandard web browser and fragmented Java support. That makes it a non-contender to Windows on the desktop even if you factor the Office Suite out.
(A top shelf web browser + JVM + 3270/5250 emulator + sexy mail client like Eudora or MSOE could replace *millions* of Windows desktops, even without the office suite. And, no, pine/lynx is no an acceptable general solution - the radiation from your VT420 has driven you insane.) --
My understanding was that Microsoft paid Dell for the conversion costs. (And that the WebObjects setup was breaking under the load, but who knows if that was hardware of software.) --
If what I heard was correct, the part that croaked on Hotmail was Exchange, not IIS.
(Which shouldn't be a suprise - Exchange only started supporting > 16 GB in it's database last year or so. For those not used to dealing with corporate mail enviornments, 16 GB is not very much.) --
Well, eBay is constantly slow or being interrupted due to IIS or MS-ODBC flakeyness. When I heard eBay was down for 19 hours (on the radio), I assumed it was the Microsoft side. If I was them, I'd have a press release washing their hands too.
By the way - has anyone tried to buy anything at buy.com? I have on a couple occassions, and the damn thing is so flakey and defective that it won't let me. It also appears to be all MS Tech. --
Slashdot Mirror
Actualy, I thought Compaq and HP servers already had this special hardware built-in. Usually it's used over a network, but some Compaq server allow you to access "managablity" through RS232.
--
Note that there is also remote keyboard/mouse/video boxes that support very long cable lengths, and some that even bridge to a network, essentially acting as hardware remote control.
Given that you can get a switcher pretty cheap nowdays, this might be a better solution than RS232.
--
Actually Microsoft Word is one of their few products where the version numbering is fairly correct. Versions 1.0 thru 5.1 were on the Mac, seperate versions 1.0 and 2.0 on Windows with a different feature set, and with version 6.0 they merged the codebase. The only real problem was that version 7 (95) was more like 6.1 in that the only new feature was red squigglies.
Better examples might be Windows NT (first version = 3.1), Exchange (first version = 4.0, jumped to 5.0 for no good reason), MS SQL (where'd version 5.0 go?), MS Access (MIA versions 3.0 - 6.0), and so on.
Thank god we still have companies like Apple that will produce a version number like 8.7.
--
If you read between the lines...
Right on - Right now it seems that the biggest threat to "world domination" is new forms of hardware that aren't solidly suppported under Linux. You already have all USB computers like the iMac and some Sonys, and there's more coming. There's the real possiblity that by next year, there could be a ton of computers on the market that won't work with Linux 2.2.
They could take all the work in progress on USB, ISDN, Firewire, dynamic reconfiguration, plug-and-play, ACPI, and so on and get it into shape and justifiably call it version 2.4, even without all of the other big changes planned (SMP, ext3, etc.)
--
Well I don't know if this eases your conspiricy theories at all, but I just search www.msnbc.com for both "GE" and "General Electric" and got "No MSNBC articles found". "Microsoft" of course provides a gazillion hits.
(GE owns NBC.)
--
Even if Linux doesn't beat NT, if it comes close, then it has won. The reason is in the cost.
This comment is indicative of how the Linux advocacy party line has been affected by the Mindcraft tests. Before the tests it was conventional wisdom that Linux/Apache would pretty much stomp on NT/IIS. Now it's some cost/benifit ratio calculation.
Bottom line is who cares? I would guess that less than 1% of MCSEs are even aware of this study. Performance benchmarks are only going to make a difference in a small number of cases. If I was making the Linux/Apache versus NT/IIS decision, there would be a large number of other factors to think about first, such as what your developers know for example (ASP/VB or PHP/CGI), or how the reliablity or managiblity stands up.
The fact that some in the Linux community have gotten into a pissing match with MS on this one only shows that they're playing the game by Microsoft rules.
--
If collaboration is the way of the future, then someone needs to come up with an answer to Windows 2000 Server, Exchange 6, and Office 2000 - and quickly.
Lotus Domino 5 for Linux (coming soon)?
(If it's taken the mighty Microsoft years and years to competively position a product against Lotus, I don't know if it's realistic that free software programmers could come up with one "quickly". Besides, when you cut through the marketing smoke of "collaboration", "groupware", and "knowledge management", you can see that many or most of the tools to do this stuff are there already. Maybe someone just needs to work on the packaging. The weak spot in both Notes/Domino and OSS is the client interfaces, which is the strong side of MS Office.)
--
Laser Disc is alive and well. Perhaps you are thinking of those RCA Video Discs which were played with a needle?
--
1. Remove the extension .HTR from the ISAPI DLL list. Microsoft has just
updated their checklist to include this interim fix.
Here's where the 90% of public ISS servers figure probably is not true. A standard security recommendation for IIS is to disable ISAPI extensions that are not in use. As for how many people use HTR, I don't know, but I'd guess it's not 90%. If your local IIS admin hasn't done the basics such as this, this is a gentle reminder.
And as for the folks crowing about Unix versus NT security, you know there's lots of stuff you can run on a Unix box that will create security holes. Certain Linux installers will automagically activate some of this stuff. The fault with Microsoft here is shipping a product with pre-activated 'features' that you many not want to use. (Third party ISAPI extensions require manual registration - a 30 second process). Obviously the more untested, unused features you might have running, the more security holes you are exposed to.
Of course with Unix and open source products, you can be somewhat sure that someone is trying to find the holes for you. But, IIS is a pretty immature product, despite it's version number, so I don't know if you can say the same for Unix software that hasn't been in the field for many years.
--
I can believe it. (A peril of GDI in the kernel.)
--
Actually, according to this the 3.51 certification is still good (at least for a few more months):N T 351
http://www.microsoft.com/mcp/certstep/mcse.htm#
--
Well, I've had my share of troubles even with non-ISA hardware. (PCI IRQ sharing that was broken, PCMCIA modems on IRQ 9, Laptops that ship from the factor with NO free IRQS making expansion impossible, I could go on forever...)
If someone who doesn't understand PC AT IRQs (let's say your average Mac user, even the hardware techs), you honestly expect them to build their own AMD system?
--
Dude, no one reads the license agreement anyway, and I've never heard about anyone suing Microsoft for crashes so I must agree with your comment.
Individuals/small businesses may not care about the EULA, but if your corporation is big enough to have a legal department, you aren't exactly going down to the CompUSA and buying shrinkwrap stuff and pressing "I Accept".
Larger corporations have seperate licencing and support contracts with Microsoft/Sun/IBM/whoever, and work out all of the details seperately. These contracts certainly preclude the standard shrinkwrapped licences.
I don't know about Microsoft, but IBM has been sued many times for systems that didn't deliver.
--
And were those Windows 9x BSOD or a Windows NT BSODs?
The reason I ask is that it seems that Linux users are honestly confused on the issue. Win 9x (with only some memory protection) can blue screen on normal user programs. It takes a kernel fault on Windows NT to produce the blue screen, which was the point the original poster was trying to make when comparing a BSOD to a Linux panic.
The worst thing I've seen a user space program such as Netscape or Word do on NT is to take down the entire user session and drop back to the logon screen (assuming you don't have a hardware problem). Similar things happen under Linux.
Now, of course, there's more stuff in the NT kernel to crash (graphics drivers, file sharing, IIS, extra bits of poor programming, etc.). And the STOP message should tell you what crashed. If you can't isolate the problem down to something more specific than "windows", that's simply bad troubleshooting on your part. Perhaps it's the same defective RAM that was troubling your Linux setup. (Most NT bscreens are hardware/driver related.)
I'm only making this point because on this "news for nerds" site, people can get away with saying "BSODs three times a day!" without giving any specific information. If someone posted "The Linux Kernel PANICS all the time!! ", they'd be certainly called on it.
Now it could be your talking about Windows 98. If so, who cares? *Every* OS on the market today is more stable than Win98.
--
Apple has never and will never be a piece of the enterprise puzzle.
Who says OSX Server is aimed the "enterprise"? What about the traditional Mac server market in DTP shops and education? Right now, these people are largely using WinNT for the bigger jobs.
Besides, Apple only makes desktop hardware - hardly enterprise server stuff.
--
Lots of people of course have bad taste in their mouth from the poorly designed Windows registry. (Someone should build another database as a front end to the WinRegistry, just so you can find user adjustable settings!)
I think the problem comes in when you are trying to build a slick configuration front end. There's just too many different file formats in
Apparently Apple/Next's NetInfo database allows manual exporting/importing to and from
--
Corporate applications moving really quickly to web interfaces from green screen or platform-specific VisualBasic (etc.) front ends. That means time is money as far as your web browser is concerned. While Netscape/Linux is certainly usable, it's not as fast or stable as Netscape/Win32 or IE. (Stop to pray to the Mozilla gods.)
Think about a corporate call center moving from 5250s to a web/java interface. Your choices are: (1) A "NC" from IBM, (2) A tighly controlled Windows PC, or (3) A tighly controled Linux PC. Unfortuantely, number (2) is winning in many cases.
I looked at the XFMail screen shots, and you're right, it does need a facelift bad. Same goes for Netscape Messenger, which has all the features, it's just kinda clunky. I've looked at KMail and a few others, and it's too bad that everyone is in the progress of trying to reinvent the wheel here.
--
On every PC I've ever owned, I've spent a significant amount of time futzing with the retarded 1980s-style hardware settings such as IRQs and IO ports. Fine for me, because I know how to do it, but quite a few people do not (and nor should they have to in this day-and-age,)
So, is being able to avoid this by running Mac hardware worth the couple hundred bucks extra? It is if you look at the market rate for PC hardware technicians.
(What I'd expect, though, is that the Linux/PPC driver support for expansion cards is more limited than x86, so maybe the point is moot.)
--
That place is BO RING.
That's why those freaks are driving the rent up in San Francisco (where the 101 commute is now worse outbound than inbound.)
--
As I write this, the rules are changing. The world isn't just about PC's anymore. A PC is nothing if it can't connect with something. (we all know that, right?)
Right! However, Linux currently has a substandard web browser and fragmented Java support. That makes it a non-contender to Windows on the desktop even if you factor the Office Suite out.
(A top shelf web browser + JVM + 3270/5250 emulator + sexy mail client like Eudora or MSOE could replace *millions* of Windows desktops, even without the office suite. And, no, pine/lynx is no an acceptable general solution - the radiation from your VT420 has driven you insane.)
--
My understanding was that Microsoft paid Dell for the conversion costs. (And that the WebObjects setup was breaking under the load, but who knows if that was hardware of software.)
--
If what I heard was correct, the part that croaked on Hotmail was Exchange, not IIS.
(Which shouldn't be a suprise - Exchange only started supporting > 16 GB in it's database last year or so. For those not used to dealing with corporate mail enviornments, 16 GB is not very much.)
--
Well, eBay is constantly slow or being interrupted due to IIS or MS-ODBC flakeyness. When I heard eBay was down for 19 hours (on the radio), I assumed it was the Microsoft side. If I was them, I'd have a press release washing their hands too.
By the way - has anyone tried to buy anything at buy.com? I have on a couple occassions, and the damn thing is so flakey and defective that it won't let me. It also appears to be all MS Tech.
--
9 times out of 10 eBay is hosed due to the ASP/ODBC/IIS front end. Today it's the database backend (Sun + Oracle).
--
Find an NT box and look at the stock permissions. There's holes for sure, but your post is largely FUD.
--