This is simply unproven for all the reasons outlined in your post. Until you see *UNIX widely deployed as a "desktop" OS, all claims that UNIX is inherently more secure than Windows are nothing but untested theories.
Which is exactly the point we were trying to make about Vista SP2, in a previous thread. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
At least *nix variants have been around longer. And I can say from my own experience that since switching to *nix, my uptime and productivity have greatly increased.
I'm sure though that symantec will find a botnet on linux as soon as they have a product that works on linux desktop systems.
According to Cassatt's director of product management Ken Oestreich, powering down servers can be a safe, viable activity. Moreover, the company practices what it preaches. "We've got several hundred servers here that we're power managing that are turned on and off several times a day. We've had no failures for three or four years," he said.
Okay, you've got several hundred servers and had no failures in 3 or 4 years. I'm calling bullshit on this one.
Otherwise I want to know what exactly you are running, because I have never heard of this type of reliability.
A number of places I know of just replace 1/3 of their systems out of service every 3 years and they still have failures.
I'm sure our uptime could be increased by increasing the quality of our parts. But the latest quote I received indicated that increasing the quality was going to cost us about $200 to $250 per system.
And spending extra money across the board isn't going to solve all our issues, even the top vendors have bad lots.
So I like another poster would like to see hard evidence from a trusted source (Dell and HP saying its so, isn't going to cut it. I think their results have a tinge of conflict of interest).
But based on my experience, I have seen computers constantly running in the on state for 5 years. Whereas I see computers not on UPS systems, just surge protection, failing after every power outage.
My other experience within Manufacturing where we shutdown systems when not in use, we found that our uptime increased by 30% on equipment that was constantly in use. (Not computers, but systems with a large number of electronic parts and computer controllers).
So I would like to see better evidence, from sources other than the ones who are selling computers and those that are trying to sell me software to shut down my computers.
I always heard it as:
Pilot and Copilot in a plane are lost in the clouds.
They drop down and see a building and can see the people inside.
They write on a piece of paper and ask "Where are we?".
They circle around the building and see a piece of paper on the building window with the message " Your in an airplane."
The pilot turns to the copilot and tells him to return to altitude and turn to 165.
The copilot asks him how he knows where they are.
The pilot replies "We're in Redmond, Washington and that's the Microsoft headquarters."
" I could tell because their answer was technically correct, but it was of no use to us."
If every time you jumped into a cab the ceiling lights would blink and the cab driver would ask you random questions increasing in difficulty as you drove along. And if you got them right you'd get money.
Another reason that ships are going slower, is that there is less cargo to haul.
They are now looking at wet docking and dry docking a large number of vessels, in numbers comparable to the 70's.
So if there is less cargo to haul, then the more they need to make off of every passage.
Plus there is an added cost of bringing ships in and out of mothball state. Once they start docking these ships in large numbers, then you know we are in for long stretch of bad economic times.
So, in reality there is very little incentive for them to start refitting ships yet. They would also have a concern about a kite falling into the ocean and entangling itself with the prop. Yes this probably is the best time to test out a new technology, but until someone brings a larger incentive and have proven the technology they just aren't going to. The people who own these ships are not about to jump over to a new technology when the one they have is working fine. Consider this, you are a multi-billionaire. You think you're just going to up and change how things are being done just because you are going to make a few dollars more. Until they see clear cut advantages without pitfalls, they aren't going to change.
So you mean that, although MS is creating a lot of congestion in Redmond traffic. They are not offering to help pay for a bridge to relieve the congestion.
So it's okay for government officials to seek people who are using their first amendment right and not talking in a way which they agree with?
So it's alright to out CIA agents and such who have different political views than those in power?
This is just plain abuse of power and privilege and the Congressman should at the very least be censored if not taken out of his post.
If the person was committing a libelous or slanderous act, then yes. But as a government official a third party should be called in to determine if the action was or is such an act and then pursue finding them.
For a member of government to do such a thing is crossing the bounds of the intent of the Constitution (The Human Rights Amendments).
He should be whacked upside the head with a baseball bat.
When it comes to individuals or ordinary citizens, then it becomes a different matter. But in either case, a third party (preferably judicial) should be called in to mediate, whether the actions are libelous and/or slanderous or that the person needs to be contacted to prove that the actions are not libelous or slanderous.
I think that the later case would give pause, because if the action was not found to be libelous or slanderous, then basically it is confirming that the blogger/anonymous person is telling the truth.
I would suggest that everyone write him a non-anonymous email and ask him to resign. Especially Democrats.
I'd like for it to be just plain simpler to tell which comment someone else is commenting about. I try to read the comments before commenting and find it difficult to determine who is replying to what.
If that doesn't tee it up for a funny post, well they just ain't trying.
Yeah, but you've also got to remember that we have users.
My users demanded that they have access to backups. So they could access files they just deleted or that Office corrupted.
So basically now I have a third backup, which they can't get to or access. But it wasn't easy to sneak that into the budget.
I'll verify both of these and add that insurance companies aren't much better.
I never knew why I'd go into stores and see cans for donations for so and so because they need this medical procedure. It took us over a month to get my brother moved over to a new group in Medicare and it was almost impossible to get care from the insurance companies for my Mother.
After endless hours on phones, driving to doctors offices, filling out forms, you begin to wonder if that can thing will work.
After dealing with all of this crap, I am solidly totally in favor of a National Healthcare system.
My preference is that is would have the same amenities , no more and no less, that members of congress get. Then if the system gets broke they can and will fix it.
But you have to remember that these people would have to look up this command on the Web.
And since they are primarily using IE, their computer is usually hosed, so they can't get to the web to look for the information.
That's why they have all these point and clicky things in their servers and support phone lines that charge by the hour.
But for right now, I'm still ahead of the curve, I support Linux servers and only linux servers. Those guys working on MS servers work to hard and know less about what they are doing usually.
I for one am glad they still have command line interfaces. Makes it look like I'm doing something complicated. And I am by their standards, I actually read up on what I am doing.
What I am saying is that top democrats/leading democrats appear to have taken this "crisis" as an opportunity to push their agenda and "sell" it to the public using fear
It's kind of like having a couple of airplanes hit some building and using that as an excuse for doing whatever you want.
I think that something is very wrong with the security features of these apps or the OS on which they were run.
I'd like to see a browser stabilized so that more work can be done on the security. I always wonder, how can they may a secure browser if they are constantly adding features to it?
What else do we need for a browser to do?
I'm serious, what else do we really need a browser to do? Can we stop for awhile and work on making one more secure?
Slashdot Mirror
This is simply unproven for all the reasons outlined in your post. Until you see *UNIX widely deployed as a "desktop" OS, all claims that UNIX is inherently more secure than Windows are nothing but untested theories.
Which is exactly the point we were trying to make about Vista SP2, in a previous thread. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
At least *nix variants have been around longer. And I can say from my own experience that since switching to *nix, my uptime and productivity have greatly increased.
I'm sure though that symantec will find a botnet on linux as soon as they have a product that works on linux desktop systems.
According to Cassatt's director of product management Ken Oestreich, powering down servers can be a safe, viable activity. Moreover, the company practices what it preaches. "We've got several hundred servers here that we're power managing that are turned on and off several times a day. We've had no failures for three or four years," he said.
Okay, you've got several hundred servers and had no failures in 3 or 4 years. I'm calling bullshit on this one.
Otherwise I want to know what exactly you are running, because I have never heard of this type of reliability.
A number of places I know of just replace 1/3 of their systems out of service every 3 years and they still have failures.
I'm sure our uptime could be increased by increasing the quality of our parts. But the latest quote I received indicated that increasing the quality was going to cost us about $200 to $250 per system.
And spending extra money across the board isn't going to solve all our issues, even the top vendors have bad lots.
So I like another poster would like to see hard evidence from a trusted source (Dell and HP saying its so, isn't going to cut it. I think their results have a tinge of conflict of interest).
But based on my experience, I have seen computers constantly running in the on state for 5 years. Whereas I see computers not on UPS systems, just surge protection, failing after every power outage.
My other experience within Manufacturing where we shutdown systems when not in use, we found that our uptime increased by 30% on equipment that was constantly in use. (Not computers, but systems with a large number of electronic parts and computer controllers).
So I would like to see better evidence, from sources other than the ones who are selling computers and those that are trying to sell me software to shut down my computers.
I always heard it as:
Pilot and Copilot in a plane are lost in the clouds. They drop down and see a building and can see the people inside.
They write on a piece of paper and ask "Where are we?".
They circle around the building and see a piece of paper on the building window with the message " Your in an airplane."
The pilot turns to the copilot and tells him to return to altitude and turn to 165.
The copilot asks him how he knows where they are.
The pilot replies "We're in Redmond, Washington and that's the Microsoft headquarters."
" I could tell because their answer was technically correct, but it was of no use to us."
If every time you jumped into a cab the ceiling lights would blink and the cab driver would ask you random questions increasing in difficulty as you drove along. And if you got them right you'd get money.
Just a thought, might be entertaining.
Thanks, you've explained Fox news.
So you're saying that being gay is a bad thing.
Finally, something more fun than the car analogy.
That's the truth.
Just load up your system with it and write back how many apps you got installed before the system went kurplunk.
I don't think that Anonymous Coward cares what he gets modded.
He seems to always be spouting drivel and trash.
Another reason that ships are going slower, is that there is less cargo to haul.
They are now looking at wet docking and dry docking a large number of vessels, in numbers comparable to the 70's.
So if there is less cargo to haul, then the more they need to make off of every passage.
Plus there is an added cost of bringing ships in and out of mothball state. Once they start docking these ships in large numbers, then you know we are in for long stretch of bad economic times.
So, in reality there is very little incentive for them to start refitting ships yet. They would also have a concern about a kite falling into the ocean and entangling itself with the prop. Yes this probably is the best time to test out a new technology, but until someone brings a larger incentive and have proven the technology they just aren't going to. The people who own these ships are not about to jump over to a new technology when the one they have is working fine. Consider this, you are a multi-billionaire. You think you're just going to up and change how things are being done just because you are going to make a few dollars more. Until they see clear cut advantages without pitfalls, they aren't going to change.
So you mean that, although MS is creating a lot of congestion in Redmond traffic. They are not offering to help pay for a bridge to relieve the congestion.
Those inconsiderate bastards.
See, I've been telling everyone that the level of education in America is slumping.
If it is a government official, then it becomes a completely different issue. completely different
To pursue finding someones anonymous identity may require breaking laws. If a law is broken (civil/criminal), then yes they can call the police.
So it's okay for government officials to seek people who are using their first amendment right and not talking in a way which they agree with?
So it's alright to out CIA agents and such who have different political views than those in power?
This is just plain abuse of power and privilege and the Congressman should at the very least be censored if not taken out of his post.
If the person was committing a libelous or slanderous act, then yes. But as a government official a third party should be called in to determine if the action was or is such an act and then pursue finding them.
For a member of government to do such a thing is crossing the bounds of the intent of the Constitution (The Human Rights Amendments).
He should be whacked upside the head with a baseball bat.
When it comes to individuals or ordinary citizens, then it becomes a different matter. But in either case, a third party (preferably judicial) should be called in to mediate, whether the actions are libelous and/or slanderous or that the person needs to be contacted to prove that the actions are not libelous or slanderous.
I think that the later case would give pause, because if the action was not found to be libelous or slanderous, then basically it is confirming that the blogger/anonymous person is telling the truth.
I would suggest that everyone write him a non-anonymous email and ask him to resign. Especially Democrats.
I did. Democrat Texas
It's not that we are number one in science and math, it's that we are number one in marketing.
With regards to our leadership. We also have a doctrine of anybody can be President and people like to be shown that it's true.
I'd like for it to be just plain simpler to tell which comment someone else is commenting about. I try to read the comments before commenting and find it difficult to determine who is replying to what.
If that doesn't tee it up for a funny post, well they just ain't trying.
Yeah, but you've also got to remember that we have users.
My users demanded that they have access to backups. So they could access files they just deleted or that Office corrupted.
So basically now I have a third backup, which they can't get to or access. But it wasn't easy to sneak that into the budget.
Well there is no point in that. Most of the population is going to be told that anyway.
To bad Rush didn't get involved.
I would have loved knowing that the bathroom on the space station was named after Rush Limbaugh.
Naming it Serenity, really sucks though, because eventually it will burn up.
But then again they were always fixing Serenity and getting her to fly again.
The most important thing is that you love her.
"Hey, what was that?"
So what we need are more octo-mom's.
So this is why the last administration didn't want to spend money on sex education, it was their big plan to save SS.
I'll verify both of these and add that insurance companies aren't much better.
I never knew why I'd go into stores and see cans for donations for so and so because they need this medical procedure. It took us over a month to get my brother moved over to a new group in Medicare and it was almost impossible to get care from the insurance companies for my Mother.
After endless hours on phones, driving to doctors offices, filling out forms, you begin to wonder if that can thing will work.
After dealing with all of this crap, I am solidly totally in favor of a National Healthcare system.
My preference is that is would have the same amenities , no more and no less, that members of congress get. Then if the system gets broke they can and will fix it.
No way, they're going to put these on IIS servers. I mean how much more secure could they get.
In reality though, the data will get stolen and then they'll tell people it's okay, because really what have you got to hide.
I can't wait though to gain access to all those SS numbers. Kind of like a government bailout plan for hackers.
But you have to remember that these people would have to look up this command on the Web.
And since they are primarily using IE, their computer is usually hosed, so they can't get to the web to look for the information.
That's why they have all these point and clicky things in their servers and support phone lines that charge by the hour.
But for right now, I'm still ahead of the curve, I support Linux servers and only linux servers. Those guys working on MS servers work to hard and know less about what they are doing usually.
I for one am glad they still have command line interfaces. Makes it look like I'm doing something complicated. And I am by their standards, I actually read up on what I am doing.
What I am saying is that top democrats/leading democrats appear to have taken this "crisis" as an opportunity to push their agenda and "sell" it to the public using fear
It's kind of like having a couple of airplanes hit some building and using that as an excuse for doing whatever you want.
I think that something is very wrong with the security features of these apps or the OS on which they were run.
I'd like to see a browser stabilized so that more work can be done on the security. I always wonder, how can they may a secure browser if they are constantly adding features to it?
What else do we need for a browser to do?
I'm serious, what else do we really need a browser to do? Can we stop for awhile and work on making one more secure?