Uhhh...no. MSN has been revenue positive for about a year now. It makes money the same way the Google does -- by selling targeted ads. In fact, as it has moved away from supporting Overture, MSN has become more profitable, not less.
Acquiring AOL actually does two things: hurt Google, but, more importantly, help MSN. I realize the fanbois here and on Wall Street want to think of everything being about killing GOOG, but there are other, better, reasons to buy AOL. Those eyeballs would be worth cash money to MS.
No. Developers are strongly advised not to look at GPL'ed code, for the obvious reason that they might, unconsciously, copy that code. That code carries a license under which the company cannot operate, and it, therefore, takes steps to avoid being bound by it. That restriction is not contractual.
Only about 1 employee in six is a developer; there are a lot of us who don't write shipping code. We are perfectly free to look at GPL'ed code if we want.
Here's a useful statistic for you: there are about 2 million aspx pages out there, about 6 million jsp pages out there, and about 150 million PHP pages out there.
[wait for it]
And there are almost 600 million asp pages in the catalog.
Remember that paying customers build dynamic pages, not static pages. I don't know about you, but owning 75% of the dynamic pages out there doesn't sound like being beaten.
Well, I see that the slashbots irony filters are still Windows-based. I think you might want to go to windowsupdate.microsoft.com and get patch M$05-MORON (sorry about the name, but their indices are base64 encoded these days.)
For what it's worth, though, the French Quarter was the area where the wealthy Acadians settled. The poorer ones always settled in the swamps, where they decreased the poverty level by dying in every Mississippi flood. But don't let history get in your way.
My experience with (post Second World War) government technologists is that they come in three flavors: marginal contributors overseeing military projects, top-flighters working on basic research through some of the many Vandemar Bush partnerships, or administrators who come back to government after long careers as bench scientists or the equivalent.
Hubble supports only the first of these groups -- the star technologists and administrators have already moved on to other projects. Currently, Hubble is an expensive distraction for NASA's national security missions, both military and civilian.
Yeah, and we could go there every July Fourth to celebrate Grant's successful crossing of the Mississippi in 1864! What an awesome idea -- celebrate the other half of the great victory at Gettysburg.
Of course, for some reason, I don't think that the locals would look at that kind of celebration with such zest.
You don't know what you're talking about. The only things which are binary in the W2K3 XML format are graphics objects, spell check data, and OLE control initialization data.
If you can command $100K in Seattle/Redmond/Edmonds, then you can command $80K in Charlotte, NC, where a house costs much less. A 1900 sq. ft. house in Redmond on a 1/6 acre lot will run you half a million dollars. That same money will buy you a 5000 sq. ft. place in Charlotte with five acres.
He's not poking fun at conservatives -- he's poking fun at people who pretend to be scientists in order to cloud and befuddle public debate. To be sure, there have been a lot more pseudoscientists on the right currently than there are on the left right now, but there are plenty of kooks on the left, too. (Noam Chomsky, anyone? A brilliant linguist...but a lousy economist.)
Actually, they aren't "computers" in the sense you describe. They're actually virtual machines running inside 1U rack mounted servers.
And they don't have monitors. So, if you're sitting in front of them doing "nothing", then you're just watching the lights on the panel blinkulate and flashify.
Actually, it isn't his. It dates back to 1997, when two teams, one at Microsoft and the other at IBM-Tom Watson developed it simultaneously and independently.
Well, what do you mean by "working"? Without LSASS, your task bar doesn't fill. Without winlogon, you can't log off without shutting the system down, and you can't log in at all. Yes, you can start Explorer, but only until the various cached user objects start to age out; at some point, that will stop working, I suspect.
In short, they're both right: for a while after you do this, the system will "mostly work" with only a few glitches. However, it won't "really work".
Not exactly. The "readme.exe" attack can be mitigated by not running as root or Administrator. The USB attack grabs a driver, and so already has full kernel access.
Please, somebody mod the parent up. When a Fortune 500 company makes a major IT move, they spend months prepping for it, looking at edge cases. What if the node to which we're deploying is unreliably connected? What if we run out of disk half way through? Will the changes roll back if the moron user turns the box off during a dritical phase when it looks like nothing's happening? etc., etc., etc. They depend on the vendor having already tested the main execution path has been thoroughly tested.
Sorry, puppy, but you make three factual claims in your post...and all three of them are wrong.
(1) The "brokenness" of Microsoft's kerberos implementation is an extension using a field that is designed to support extensions. If you don't need authorization data, just ignore that field. It's standards compliant and everything -- it's the Unix implementations which are broken. Hint: if the standard says "this field is provided for implementation-based extensions. Its contents should be ignored when they are not undersood." it's a good idea to follow the standard.
(2) No, for normal ldap, you need to open the correct port on the AD server. WSS uses a more efficient and expressive wire protocol, so is superior, but, if you want LDAP, it's got LDAP.
(3) Both MIT Kerberos and Heimdal Kerberos (neither of which is the base for Microsoft's implementation; it's clean room) have had significant remote access bugs in the last year (MIT's in the last week). Microsoft's implementation has *never* had an exploitable bug, even though it's been widely deployed in the field for six years now.
So help me here, dude. You do realize that AD supports a full implementation of LDAP, don't you? And that it has built-in Kerberos (which, unlike the MIT version, doesn't keep sprouting inconvenient security holes)? So what is there in LDAP/Kerberos that hasn't been in AD for ten years?
Oh, sorry -- those are facts. And you don't like facts. Never mind...back to your sandboxes.
Actually (speaking as a MS employee), you'd have just given the best possible answer to the question -- but you'd damned well better be prepared to hold up your end of the discussion.
Seriously.
The point of the puzzle questions isn't to show how clever you are, it's to watch you think. There may be several different right answers -- and being able to prove that you can figure that out is MUCH more important than finding any one of them.
So "I'd question the business case for moving Fuji" is a damned good answer. But, be aware that your interviewer will smile slyly, lean back in his or her chair, and say "OK. Why would you question it? What's the basis for your conclusion? What alternatives can you see, and how would you market them?"
AOL isn't even really an ISP sinc eit [sic] only services [sic] the average person
I have a hard time understanding how AOL, which is the largest ISP in the world, bar none, isn't "really an ISP". Similarly, MSN (which doesn't use SendMail), and is the second largest ISP in the world, must "not really be an ISP".
Sendmail is not a real player among MTAs any more, and it hasn't been in the best part of a dacade.
large ISPs that provide carrier grade mail services
You mean, like, um...BT? Which runs (wait for it) Exchange. A majority of all email seats in large organizations (those with more than 2000 mailboxes) are serviced by Exchange. The largest government agencies in the world run Exchange.
By contrast, no major ISP runs sendmail. Google runs a proprietary MTA based on a heavily modified Linux kernel. Hotmail runs a proprietary MTA based on a Windows 2003 server kernel. Yahoo, proprietary, FreeBSD. AOL, proprietary, Solaris. None of these MTA's is derived from Sendmail: each of them shreds the incoming mail and stores it in a database, indexing the items in multiple ways. Google runs a content indexing service against the shredded document.
Three of the seven divisions are very profitable (Office, Client, and Server), MSN has been profitable for three of the last four quarters, and will be profitable for the fiscal year, Home and Entertainment was profitable for the first time in Q2 (which ended in December), but won't be steadily profitable for another few months yet, MED is break-even, and is spending money on marketing and growth rather than on turning a profit. The only division which is hurting in the business software division (Navision, Fargo, etc.), which is quite new.
Bear in mind that NT didn't make a profit for a decade -- now it makes between seven and ten billion dollars a year of profit, depending how you count it.
Slashdot Mirror
Acquiring AOL actually does two things: hurt Google, but, more importantly, help MSN. I realize the fanbois here and on Wall Street want to think of everything being about killing GOOG, but there are other, better, reasons to buy AOL. Those eyeballs would be worth cash money to MS.
No. Developers are strongly advised not to look at GPL'ed code, for the obvious reason that they might, unconsciously, copy that code. That code carries a license under which the company cannot operate, and it, therefore, takes steps to avoid being bound by it. That restriction is not contractual.
Only about 1 employee in six is a developer; there are a lot of us who don't write shipping code. We are perfectly free to look at GPL'ed code if we want.
Are you thinking treasonous thoughts, troubleshooter?
Report immediately to the clone activation center for replacement activation.
Thank you. The computer is your friend.
Here's a useful statistic for you: there are about 2 million aspx pages out there, about 6 million jsp pages out there, and about 150 million PHP pages out there.
[wait for it]
And there are almost 600 million asp pages in the catalog.
Remember that paying customers build dynamic pages, not static pages. I don't know about you, but owning 75% of the dynamic pages out there doesn't sound like being beaten.
Well, I see that the slashbots irony filters are still Windows-based. I think you might want to go to windowsupdate.microsoft.com and get patch M$05-MORON (sorry about the name, but their indices are base64 encoded these days.)
For what it's worth, though, the French Quarter was the area where the wealthy Acadians settled. The poorer ones always settled in the swamps, where they decreased the poverty level by dying in every Mississippi flood. But don't let history get in your way.
Nah -- we'll just build one fewer bridge to nowhere in Alaska, and that'll free up the money to fix the levees.
Of course, leave it to the French to settle in a swamp below sea level, anyway. So it's all your fault, no matter what.
Your father's right.
My experience with (post Second World War) government technologists is that they come in three flavors: marginal contributors overseeing military projects, top-flighters working on basic research through some of the many Vandemar Bush partnerships, or administrators who come back to government after long careers as bench scientists or the equivalent.
Hubble supports only the first of these groups -- the star technologists and administrators have already moved on to other projects. Currently, Hubble is an expensive distraction for NASA's national security missions, both military and civilian.
Yeah, and we could go there every July Fourth to celebrate Grant's successful crossing of the Mississippi in 1864! What an awesome idea -- celebrate the other half of the great victory at Gettysburg.
Of course, for some reason, I don't think that the locals would look at that kind of celebration with such zest.
You don't know what you're talking about. The only things which are binary in the W2K3 XML format are graphics objects, spell check data, and OLE control initialization data.
If you can command $100K in Seattle/Redmond/Edmonds, then you can command $80K in Charlotte, NC, where a house costs much less. A 1900 sq. ft. house in Redmond on a 1/6 acre lot will run you half a million dollars. That same money will buy you a 5000 sq. ft. place in Charlotte with five acres.
He's not poking fun at conservatives -- he's poking fun at people who pretend to be scientists in order to cloud and befuddle public debate. To be sure, there have been a lot more pseudoscientists on the right currently than there are on the left right now, but there are plenty of kooks on the left, too. (Noam Chomsky, anyone? A brilliant linguist...but a lousy economist.)
Actually, they aren't "computers" in the sense you describe. They're actually virtual machines running inside 1U rack mounted servers.
And they don't have monitors. So, if you're sitting in front of them doing "nothing", then you're just watching the lights on the panel blinkulate and flashify.
Graham is a poseur.
They used the money for the torpedoes to fit lasers on the heads of the frikken sharks.
Well, what do you mean by "working"? Without LSASS, your task bar doesn't fill. Without winlogon, you can't log off without shutting the system down, and you can't log in at all. Yes, you can start Explorer, but only until the various cached user objects start to age out; at some point, that will stop working, I suspect.
In short, they're both right: for a while after you do this, the system will "mostly work" with only a few glitches. However, it won't "really work".
Not exactly. The "readme.exe" attack can be mitigated by not running as root or Administrator. The USB attack grabs a driver, and so already has full kernel access.
Please, somebody mod the parent up. When a Fortune 500 company makes a major IT move, they spend months prepping for it, looking at edge cases. What if the node to which we're deploying is unreliably connected? What if we run out of disk half way through? Will the changes roll back if the moron user turns the box off during a dritical phase when it looks like nothing's happening? etc., etc., etc. They depend on the vendor having already tested the main execution path has been thoroughly tested.
An untested and unofficial MSI? I don't think so
Sorry, puppy, but you make three factual claims in your post...and all three of them are wrong.
(1) The "brokenness" of Microsoft's kerberos implementation is an extension using a field that is designed to support extensions. If you don't need authorization data, just ignore that field. It's standards compliant and everything -- it's the Unix implementations which are broken. Hint: if the standard says "this field is provided for implementation-based extensions. Its contents should be ignored when they are not undersood." it's a good idea to follow the standard.
(2) No, for normal ldap, you need to open the correct port on the AD server. WSS uses a more efficient and expressive wire protocol, so is superior, but, if you want LDAP, it's got LDAP.
(3) Both MIT Kerberos and Heimdal Kerberos (neither of which is the base for Microsoft's implementation; it's clean room) have had significant remote access bugs in the last year (MIT's in the last week). Microsoft's implementation has *never* had an exploitable bug, even though it's been widely deployed in the field for six years now.
So help me here, dude. You do realize that AD supports a full implementation of LDAP, don't you? And that it has built-in Kerberos (which, unlike the MIT version, doesn't keep sprouting inconvenient security holes)? So what is there in LDAP/Kerberos that hasn't been in AD for ten years?
Oh, sorry -- those are facts. And you don't like facts. Never mind...back to your sandboxes.
Actually (speaking as a MS employee), you'd have just given the best possible answer to the question -- but you'd damned well better be prepared to hold up your end of the discussion.
Seriously.
The point of the puzzle questions isn't to show how clever you are, it's to watch you think. There may be several different right answers -- and being able to prove that you can figure that out is MUCH more important than finding any one of them.
So "I'd question the business case for moving Fuji" is a damned good answer. But, be aware that your interviewer will smile slyly, lean back in his or her chair, and say "OK. Why would you question it? What's the basis for your conclusion? What alternatives can you see, and how would you market them?"
Better still, people working at Microsoft are true artists, but people working on Linux aren't.
How terribly appropriate.
Sendmail is not a real player among MTAs any more, and it hasn't been in the best part of a dacade.
By contrast, no major ISP runs sendmail. Google runs a proprietary MTA based on a heavily modified Linux kernel. Hotmail runs a proprietary MTA based on a Windows 2003 server kernel. Yahoo, proprietary, FreeBSD. AOL, proprietary, Solaris. None of these MTA's is derived from Sendmail: each of them shreds the incoming mail and stores it in a database, indexing the items in multiple ways. Google runs a content indexing service against the shredded document.
Sheesh! Insightful? How about "totally false"?
Three of the seven divisions are very profitable (Office, Client, and Server), MSN has been profitable for three of the last four quarters, and will be profitable for the fiscal year, Home and Entertainment was profitable for the first time in Q2 (which ended in December), but won't be steadily profitable for another few months yet, MED is break-even, and is spending money on marketing and growth rather than on turning a profit. The only division which is hurting in the business software division (Navision, Fargo, etc.), which is quite new.
Bear in mind that NT didn't make a profit for a decade -- now it makes between seven and ten billion dollars a year of profit, depending how you count it.