For those already in the linux groove, this would make sense. From a corp executive view, they never heard of SUSE but everyone knows Novell. The Novell directory system is also Very well thought of, and many larger corps use it over hActive Directory.
With 20/20 hindsight, naming your company and core product the same name may not be the best idea. With RedHat, everyone just thinks "Linux Distro", so it makes marketing other products and services Much harder as you have to break through that mindset. What if they wanted to start selling specialized hardware? What about an email server? (exchange replacement..)
Novell is in that same bind. What they also would not want to happen is what happened to Borland and their failed name change... (Note: I was working in Scotts Valley at the time and saw the name change on the building... I remember thinking - who the hell is Inprise? Some new company that leased the building?)
Features. Like ActiveX. IE integrated into Windows Explorer, OE, Word, the failed concept of "security zones". True they haven't added any features in recent history, but since netscape was stomped into the mud, there was no longer any need to. When designing IE, security obviously took a back seat and still does today. MS is more interested in adding DRM to windows than improving the browser. My bet is that the IE dev team is now at bare maintenance level. It sure isn't getting a comprehensive security audit by MS.
That's why you hide them in a heavy plastic garbage bag. Seriously, when the government makes it Really Difficult and expensive to get rid of this stuff, people ignore the law and dump illegaly.
When I lived in San Jose, nothing took longer than 30 minutes to get picked up. The most bizzare was this little asian guy who loaded up a desk on his bicycle (I shit you not...) The same guy came back later (again on the bike) for an old electric built-in style cook top).
The HPaq boxes with ILO are not that bad. Console available over the network as opposed to a serial line (serial is available too IIRC.) In addition, http://www.linuxbios.org/ and the openbios project. I do like Sun hardware though (my wife was on the Sparc 5 project at Sun.)
Damn. Solaris must be doomed then.:-) Actually, I agree that too many developers can be a bad thing, but my point was that MS has the resources to do it right, yet chooses not to (or is so inept that they are unable to) - putting their 96% market share of users at risk.
Well, it may not be trivial, but MS with it's massive development group, billions in cash, and a "trustworthy computing initiative", they should be able to pull it off correctly. Security always seems to take a back seat to features with MS and that is the core problem with IE. Being integrated to the level it is in the OS means that it drags the security (or lack thereof) of the entire system down with it.
No. It's saying "I have a URI I don't know what to do with." This is how non-http URI's work to launch external views such as real player with RTSP:// and such.
Creating a URI handler to execute shell commands is boneheaded. The Mozilla guys knew this but MS failed to fix it. And now we have more MS apps that don't work around this stupid thing. Any guess as to how much other software doesn't block access to this massive windows security hole?
About the only thing the Mozilla team did wrong is underestimate the stupidity of MS.
That's becaues it's NOT a bug in mozilla, it's a massive security hole in Windows. Mozilla finally decided to patch it for mozilla because MS was too damned lazy to fix it. As we now see, this massive windows hole affects other products too. Of course, NO other platform has this particular security hole (surprise surprise...)
If your flash plugin had a security hole, would you expect Mozilla, Opera, IE, etc to filter certain access so that security hole could't be exploited?
No, MS is responsible for the security of their own products.
IE is used all over windows - not just for web browsing. They really have integrated the damn thing into everything.
Not so sure on the "Ford" analogy, but one I have may be close. I have a Volvo that has a Bose stereo. It had a POS in-dash changer that died. Talked to the dealer and they are notoriously shitty, and are constantly being replaced (for $450 for a refurb unit.) So I go looking for third party replacements. The old bose was a 5 speaker system (center in the dash.) No normal stereo supports that. Fine - I won't use the 5th. Then I find out that the bose "system" has little amps at each speaker so that means I have to replace all the speakers too! Well, this starts getting Very expensive, very invasive, etc. so I end up getting an Alpine changer with FM modulator and keeping the half-broken old bose system because of the tight integration.
This reminds me Very much of IE in Windows. Yes, I can use an alternative browser for some stuff, but the integrated IE is still there and used for other stuff I have no control over (more than just WU.)
The cost depends on a LOT of factors. There are many kinds of incorporation. Many (most) states require annual fees and lots of reporting (taxes, and other crap.) Furthermore, while it's easy to do a Delaware corp, you may still have to file fees and file paperwork in other states that you do business in. You may need a "registered agent" in those states (yet more $$$.) Add on the accountant and lawyer fees to help with all this crap and your own time spent on it and you find that it costs several thousand per year to have that corp. Been there, done that.
Are you SURE you are filing all the proper paperwork and paying all the required fees?
Maybe this is a good time for all those to start badgering "IE Only" web sites (especially financial institutions) to wise up and support other browsers due to the security issues. I'm lucky my bank has already "seen the light" and started supporting any standards compliant browser.
For a while, I have had to have my browser lie to web sites about what it is on too many sites. For the most part, this is no longer needed.
It would Never happen, but if Yahoo, Google, and a few other major sites directed IE users to a page saying something like: "The browser you are using is no longer supported on this site. Please upgrade to blah, or blah blah, or press 'I understand that my browser is an insecure pile of garbage and use may infect my system with malware' to continue with IE."
MS would sue, but we can dream can't we?
Hmm. Well I can start with this on my sites anyway...:-)
This completey misses the point. It's not just the database: it's the software, forms, etc. for insurance companies, law enforcement, DMV, etc. for all cities, states, provinces, countries, etc everywhere in the world. Each of these systems probably validates what is a real VIN so any changes to the current scheme will cause massive problems. Any addition of a new field will be almost as hard.
This is obviosly why they are looking at this issue now, so in 10 - 20 years when the current numbers are gone, software can be ready for any new scheme (cause that's about how long it will take.) Hopefully BECAUSE of all the code rewrites for Y2K, this task will be much easier (many old systems were completely replaced in modern languages with modern coding techniques.)
I've had cell service since way back in the early bag-phone days. I know very well the A/B analog setup. Trust me, my phone was setup for both A and B analog.
The Mom & Pop shops would still cause my phone to show service even if I can't make or receive calls due to contract issues. I've run into this before.
Frankly, I don't give a darn about what the maps show - I care about what WORKS in real life which is all that's important. I've looked at those same maps and I can tell you from personal experience that they show areas they claim has service that do NOT have service.
It's not that there is no service in those states, but the fact that there are significant lengths of interstate (longest was in the 30 mile range) that have no service. The wide-open areas were pretty good (line of sight issues) but the hilly areas teneded to be more problematic.
Yes you can if your work has it's email setup correcly with the SMTP Submission port (587) which is designed EXACTLY for this reason. Trivial to do with most clients and servers (exim on your home gateway and / or work server for example.)
A vulnerability is Can't Possibly change the standard any more than it can paint my house pink. Port 25 is SMTP. That's it. If it's blocked, it's blocked.
That is so true. This case is NOT about the consumer. If you think the lawyers were on your side, trying to right a wrong, punish MS, you are quite naive. It's about greed - lawyers getting rich. Most class-actions are about greed.
Last year, I drove accross the country on I80 & I90 from CA to ME. I had an analog / digital phone (AT&T service with no roaming, no long-distance charges plan) with a car installation kit (external antenna.) I can tell you from first hand experience that there is no cell service at all in many, many remote areas even along the interstate highways (which are covered better than most.) Utah, Wyoming, South Dakota, Nevada, Nebraska, and Iowa were all states that had significant areas with no service. In addition, I found many areas during my travels in California up and down the coast and inland that had no service. Colorado must be special.
Um, the US? Seriously, if you are in a sparse state (most of the states west of the Mississippi, Maine, etc.) cell service is quite spotty especailly in smaller communities where people can't see a Walmart from their doorstep (yes I know, hard to believe, but Walmart isn't everywhere yet...)
My parents are in remote northern Wisconsin, and have been debating (with the local homeowners association) on allowing a cell tower in the area (a 30,000 acre private community encompassing several lakes.) Cell service isn't available until about 5 miles out. The NIMBY folks are pretty vocal however. The area is remote enough (and hilly enough) that the fake pine tree towers won't work.
Slashdot Mirror
For those already in the linux groove, this would make sense. From a corp executive view, they never heard of SUSE but everyone knows Novell. The Novell directory system is also Very well thought of, and many larger corps use it over hActive Directory.
With 20/20 hindsight, naming your company and core product the same name may not be the best idea. With RedHat, everyone just thinks "Linux Distro", so it makes marketing other products and services Much harder as you have to break through that mindset. What if they wanted to start selling specialized hardware? What about an email server? (exchange replacement..)
Novell is in that same bind. What they also would not want to happen is what happened to Borland and their failed name change... (Note: I was working in Scotts Valley at the time and saw the name change on the building... I remember thinking - who the hell is Inprise? Some new company that leased the building?)
Features. Like ActiveX. IE integrated into Windows Explorer, OE, Word, the failed concept of "security zones". True they haven't added any features in recent history, but since netscape was stomped into the mud, there was no longer any need to. When designing IE, security obviously took a back seat and still does today. MS is more interested in adding DRM to windows than improving the browser. My bet is that the IE dev team is now at bare maintenance level. It sure isn't getting a comprehensive security audit by MS.
That's why you hide them in a heavy plastic garbage bag. Seriously, when the government makes it Really Difficult and expensive to get rid of this stuff, people ignore the law and dump illegaly.
When I lived in San Jose, nothing took longer than 30 minutes to get picked up. The most bizzare was this little asian guy who loaded up a desk on his bicycle (I shit you not...) The same guy came back later (again on the bike) for an old electric built-in style cook top).
The HPaq boxes with ILO are not that bad. Console available over the network as opposed to a serial line (serial is available too IIRC.) In addition, http://www.linuxbios.org/ and the openbios project. I do like Sun hardware though (my wife was on the Sparc 5 project at Sun.)
Damn. Solaris must be doomed then. :-) Actually, I agree that too many developers can be a bad thing, but my point was that MS has the resources to do it right, yet chooses not to (or is so inept that they are unable to) - putting their 96% market share of users at risk.
How would this help? It's not the rendering engine that's at fault - it's the deep OS integration and stupid OS level URI handlers/handling (shell:).
Well, it may not be trivial, but MS with it's massive development group, billions in cash, and a "trustworthy computing initiative", they should be able to pull it off correctly. Security always seems to take a back seat to features with MS and that is the core problem with IE. Being integrated to the level it is in the OS means that it drags the security (or lack thereof) of the entire system down with it.
No. It's saying "I have a URI I don't know what to do with." This is how non-http URI's work to launch external views such as real player with RTSP:// and such.
Creating a URI handler to execute shell commands is boneheaded. The Mozilla guys knew this but MS failed to fix it. And now we have more MS apps that don't work around this stupid thing. Any guess as to how much other software doesn't block access to this massive windows security hole?
About the only thing the Mozilla team did wrong is underestimate the stupidity of MS.
It's AMAZING what you can do in 500 bytes... Some of the recent worms are good examples.
That's becaues it's NOT a bug in mozilla, it's a massive security hole in Windows. Mozilla finally decided to patch it for mozilla because MS was too damned lazy to fix it. As we now see, this massive windows hole affects other products too. Of course, NO other platform has this particular security hole (surprise surprise...)
If your flash plugin had a security hole, would you expect Mozilla, Opera, IE, etc to filter certain access so that security hole could't be exploited?
No, MS is responsible for the security of their own products.
I replaced a screen in my Thinkpad. Wasn't all that bad... About 15 screws though. While expensive, it was cheaper than buying a new laptop.
IE is used all over windows - not just for web browsing. They really have integrated the damn thing into everything.
Not so sure on the "Ford" analogy, but one I have may be close. I have a Volvo that has a Bose stereo. It had a POS in-dash changer that died. Talked to the dealer and they are notoriously shitty, and are constantly being replaced (for $450 for a refurb unit.) So I go looking for third party replacements. The old bose was a 5 speaker system (center in the dash.) No normal stereo supports that. Fine - I won't use the 5th. Then I find out that the bose "system" has little amps at each speaker so that means I have to replace all the speakers too! Well, this starts getting Very expensive, very invasive, etc. so I end up getting an Alpine changer with FM modulator and keeping the half-broken old bose system because of the tight integration.
This reminds me Very much of IE in Windows. Yes, I can use an alternative browser for some stuff, but the integrated IE is still there and used for other stuff I have no control over (more than just WU.)
The cost depends on a LOT of factors. There are many kinds of incorporation. Many (most) states require annual fees and lots of reporting (taxes, and other crap.) Furthermore, while it's easy to do a Delaware corp, you may still have to file fees and file paperwork in other states that you do business in. You may need a "registered agent" in those states (yet more $$$.) Add on the accountant and lawyer fees to help with all this crap and your own time spent on it and you find that it costs several thousand per year to have that corp. Been there, done that.
Are you SURE you are filing all the proper paperwork and paying all the required fees?
Maybe this is a good time for all those to start badgering "IE Only" web sites (especially financial institutions) to wise up and support other browsers due to the security issues. I'm lucky my bank has already "seen the light" and started supporting any standards compliant browser.
For a while, I have had to have my browser lie to web sites about what it is on too many sites. For the most part, this is no longer needed.
set of instructions for making changes in I.E.
Don't forget that these "changes" make many sites unusable.
It would Never happen, but if Yahoo, Google, and a few other major sites directed IE users to a page saying something like: "The browser you are using is no longer supported on this site. Please upgrade to blah, or blah blah, or press 'I understand that my browser is an insecure pile of garbage and use may infect my system with malware' to continue with IE."
:-)
MS would sue, but we can dream can't we?
Hmm. Well I can start with this on my sites anyway...
This completey misses the point. It's not just the database: it's the software, forms, etc. for insurance companies, law enforcement, DMV, etc. for all cities, states, provinces, countries, etc everywhere in the world. Each of these systems probably validates what is a real VIN so any changes to the current scheme will cause massive problems. Any addition of a new field will be almost as hard.
This is obviosly why they are looking at this issue now, so in 10 - 20 years when the current numbers are gone, software can be ready for any new scheme (cause that's about how long it will take.) Hopefully BECAUSE of all the code rewrites for Y2K, this task will be much easier (many old systems were completely replaced in modern languages with modern coding techniques.)
I've had cell service since way back in the early bag-phone days. I know very well the A/B analog setup. Trust me, my phone was setup for both A and B analog.
The Mom & Pop shops would still cause my phone to show service even if I can't make or receive calls due to contract issues. I've run into this before.
Frankly, I don't give a darn about what the maps show - I care about what WORKS in real life which is all that's important. I've looked at those same maps and I can tell you from personal experience that they show areas they claim has service that do NOT have service.
It's not that there is no service in those states, but the fact that there are significant lengths of interstate (longest was in the 30 mile range) that have no service. The wide-open areas were pretty good (line of sight issues) but the hilly areas teneded to be more problematic.
Telnet does not use port 25. It uses port 23. BTW, Telnet???? How about using something secure such as ssh?
Yes you can if your work has it's email setup correcly with the SMTP Submission port (587) which is designed EXACTLY for this reason. Trivial to do with most clients and servers (exim on your home gateway and / or work server for example.)
A vulnerability is Can't Possibly change the standard any more than it can paint my house pink. Port 25 is SMTP. That's it. If it's blocked, it's blocked.
That is so true. This case is NOT about the consumer. If you think the lawyers were on your side, trying to right a wrong, punish MS, you are quite naive. It's about greed - lawyers getting rich. Most class-actions are about greed.
Last year, I drove accross the country on I80 & I90 from CA to ME. I had an analog / digital phone (AT&T service with no roaming, no long-distance charges plan) with a car installation kit (external antenna.) I can tell you from first hand experience that there is no cell service at all in many, many remote areas even along the interstate highways (which are covered better than most.) Utah, Wyoming, South Dakota, Nevada, Nebraska, and Iowa were all states that had significant areas with no service. In addition, I found many areas during my travels in California up and down the coast and inland that had no service. Colorado must be special.
Um, the US? Seriously, if you are in a sparse state (most of the states west of the Mississippi, Maine, etc.) cell service is quite spotty especailly in smaller communities where people can't see a Walmart from their doorstep (yes I know, hard to believe, but Walmart isn't everywhere yet...)
My parents are in remote northern Wisconsin, and have been debating (with the local homeowners association) on allowing a cell tower in the area (a 30,000 acre private community encompassing several lakes.) Cell service isn't available until about 5 miles out. The NIMBY folks are pretty vocal however. The area is remote enough (and hilly enough) that the fake pine tree towers won't work.