It's the AARP, attempting to force the world to conform to their expectations. In a few years, the font size will go to 20, 4 o'clock dinner times will be federally enforced, and Matlock will be the official TV show of the nation.
Oddly enough I'm starting law school once I get my IT degree this May and I've got more certifications than I know what to do with. My plan is to be that one lawyer that actually understands the technology that's being litigated. You know, to help stop a state doing something stupid, like banning NAT. Oh, wait a sec...
I remember my two stays at Space Camp... both times a group of campers screwed up on ther mission at the end of the week and burn up on re-entry or collide with the space station. While we explored the aspects of using the shuttle's computer to compensate for mistakes and accidents (such as fuel loss) we pretty much considered any physical damage to be a lost cause.
From the looks of how NASA really runs the show, it appears they held the same attitude with the shuttle fleet. Granted, it's nigh impossible to do complex repairs in space (especially to repair a heat shield) and inspecting an in-flight shuttle for damage analogous to a medevial European investigating himself for any wounds and praying he hasn't gotten an infection. Because of this "hope we don't get hit" attitude, the shuttle fleet needs some kind of in-flight repair process. Unfortunately, the nature of the shuttle design makes it extremely hard to perform such repairs. Sure, there is a repair process being develop (good) but it's a repair process for an out of date product used by an agency that refuses to replace it (bad).
I'm glad the shuttle fleet was made and it's something that needed to be done. But it has served its purpose and is now outdated. It's time we upgraded and it's time NASA's management understands they are not the top dogs of engineering and astrophysics anymore.
While the Do-Not-Call list does protect you from unsolicited calls from private groups, it does not protect you from non-profit groups (such as charities).
While I'm glad I some protection from telemarketers I know I am still going to get calls from the police asking for donations and silently threatening to ticket me if I don't donate.
As far as requiring a Windows client for administration, I don't see how that is/was an issue - especially for enterprise clients
While you can administer NetWare using ConsoleOne, it lacks some of the more complex functions available with NetWare Administrator (which is a Windows-only app). From my experience, there are some things that just can't be done w/o NWAdmin. Hopefully this new plan includes a version of NWAdmin for Linux.
I know, it did(and maybe still does) suck compared to the WinBlows admin utilities, but if you wanted to migrate away from Micro$oft products you were able to, with a little bit of effrot.
Yea, the alternative was there, but at a diminished capacity compared to NetWare using Windows servers. IMHO, NetWare blows Active Directory out of the water for functioanlity but that just wasn't available before. So what's different now is that NetWare can fully be used w/those *nix systems (well, assuming you've got right distro).
Actually, I think this would have been a smart move for Novell two years ago, maybe even four years ago.
I remember the big push by Microsoft to use Active Directory in enterprise networks, upgrading from NT to 2K and using Active Directory to manage everything. Just like today, no one else really had a solution for massive infrastructures (using a client-server setup) with a central system for administration. Sure, NetWare was/is available, but it requires Windows to be utilized completely. This new functionality now makes it possible to have a massive server-clinet network with a non-Windows client OS and still retain the central point of administration.
Novell + Linux = an alternative for Active Directory. Had this possbility been available before Active Directory was proven/accepted, we would be seeing a more competive enterprise business.
Slashdot Mirror
That's no artistic saga... it's a money making scheme!
It's the AARP, attempting to force the world to conform to their expectations. In a few years, the font size will go to 20, 4 o'clock dinner times will be federally enforced, and Matlock will be the official TV show of the nation.
Oddly enough I'm starting law school once I get my IT degree this May and I've got more certifications than I know what to do with. My plan is to be that one lawyer that actually understands the technology that's being litigated. You know, to help stop a state doing something stupid, like banning NAT. Oh, wait a sec...
I remember my two stays at Space Camp... both times a group of campers screwed up on ther mission at the end of the week and burn up on re-entry or collide with the space station. While we explored the aspects of using the shuttle's computer to compensate for mistakes and accidents (such as fuel loss) we pretty much considered any physical damage to be a lost cause.
From the looks of how NASA really runs the show, it appears they held the same attitude with the shuttle fleet. Granted, it's nigh impossible to do complex repairs in space (especially to repair a heat shield) and inspecting an in-flight shuttle for damage analogous to a medevial European investigating himself for any wounds and praying he hasn't gotten an infection. Because of this "hope we don't get hit" attitude, the shuttle fleet needs some kind of in-flight repair process. Unfortunately, the nature of the shuttle design makes it extremely hard to perform such repairs. Sure, there is a repair process being develop (good) but it's a repair process for an out of date product used by an agency that refuses to replace it (bad).
I'm glad the shuttle fleet was made and it's something that needed to be done. But it has served its purpose and is now outdated. It's time we upgraded and it's time NASA's management understands they are not the top dogs of engineering and astrophysics anymore.
While the Do-Not-Call list does protect you from unsolicited calls from private groups, it does not protect you from non-profit groups (such as charities).
While I'm glad I some protection from telemarketers I know I am still going to get calls from the police asking for donations and silently threatening to ticket me if I don't donate.
As far as requiring a Windows client for administration, I don't see how that is/was an issue - especially for enterprise clients
While you can administer NetWare using ConsoleOne, it lacks some of the more complex functions available with NetWare Administrator (which is a Windows-only app). From my experience, there are some things that just can't be done w/o NWAdmin. Hopefully this new plan includes a version of NWAdmin for Linux.
I know, it did(and maybe still does) suck compared to the WinBlows admin utilities, but if you wanted to migrate away from Micro$oft products you were able to, with a little bit of effrot.
Yea, the alternative was there, but at a diminished capacity compared to NetWare using Windows servers. IMHO, NetWare blows Active Directory out of the water for functioanlity but that just wasn't available before. So what's different now is that NetWare can fully be used w/those *nix systems (well, assuming you've got right distro).
Actually, I think this would have been a smart move for Novell two years ago, maybe even four years ago.
I remember the big push by Microsoft to use Active Directory in enterprise networks, upgrading from NT to 2K and using Active Directory to manage everything. Just like today, no one else really had a solution for massive infrastructures (using a client-server setup) with a central system for administration. Sure, NetWare was/is available, but it requires Windows to be utilized completely. This new functionality now makes it possible to have a massive server-clinet network with a non-Windows client OS and still retain the central point of administration.
Novell + Linux = an alternative for Active Directory. Had this possbility been available before Active Directory was proven/accepted, we would be seeing a more competive enterprise business.