Um, I don't see how shorter names make things easier to remember. Sure I have songs in directory trees, but many titles are longer than 14 characters. With a 14 char limit, you have to start shortening names to the point where they no longer make sense. Even with directories, I still put the artist name in the file name along with the song name. It makes mini-collections much easier.
Here is another example: kernel-source-2.6.5.tar.bz2 It's very descriptive. How would you shorten it? krnsrc-2.6.5.tbz2? Nope, too long. Let's try ksrc2.6.5.tbz2... Ok, is it KDE now??? Oops, now we have the AC patchset for kernel 2.6.6.pre1 in a tar.bz2 file - what do we name that???
Nope. I do not agree that 14 chars is enough. No way, no how. Creating a huge deep tree to get around file name limits is nuts. Makes file name completion that much harder, and navigating by mouse a shortcut to carpel tunnel problems.
If filenames get much longer than that, they take too long to type
That's why every modern shell has filename completion by hitting TAB. Even Windows can have this enabled (although why it's not on by default is a mystery.)
Longer filenames are very useful for things like MP3's. 14 characters is enough for most users? Kinda like 640K of RAM is enough, 540M on the orig IDE spec, 2G file sizes, etc?
System designers really have to start thinking farther and farther ahead. For example - most modern desktop motherboards still have 3-4G memory limits - my older ones have 768M limits even though I have ram chips in hand that could bring that up to a gig if the MB could handle it. In 10 years from now, I can see NV memory modules that could hold 500G - as fast as current off-chip cache, yet big enough to eliminate the need for mechanical storage (disks) for many embedded apps (mp3 players, PVR's, tablet computers, etc.) It sure would be nice to have a module that you could drop into a legacy DIMM slot to bring new life to old boards. Currently, all our systems are designed with built-in obsolecence and artificial limits creating massive financial and environmental waste. Enough is enough.
I think the US courts (and AG's) stance on bad behavior by software companies can be proven by their actions with the MS anti-trust trials. Even the EU's fine was weak (should have been in the 10 billion range to make any impact at all.)
True, but the problem isn't 100% users, it's about 50% software vendors that don't follow the security model correctly. Until they do, 95% of users will have difficulty working with the security model no matter if they want to use the system or not. They keylock analogy doesn't work well to really describe what is going on. Analogies just cloud the issue in this case - they oversimplify it.
I build all my core applications though, for tuning, options, and special patches. If I'm building a mail server for example, I'll build my own SSL, MTA (exim), IMAP / POP servers, etc. configured exactly how I need them. It also allows me to take my source tree and move it to another box that may be RedHat, Debian, Solaris, etc. and mainly do a recompile and things work. I put all MY stuff in/usr/local so upgrades don't break shit. I ALWAYS build my own kernels on Linux however - the vendor binaries are great for getting you up and running but have Way too much bloat for every day use.
If I'm building a web server, ditto for the core apps like Apache, but I may opt to use a vendor binary for email, and just configure it to send everything to / through the smarthost.
In my area we have Verizon, Adelphia, and a regional telco. The RT signed a deal with the city last year to pull fiber to every house, and offer phone, cable, and internet. DirecTV is also supposed to carry local channels in our area this spring when the new sat. goes online. This will give us three viable options for TV, three for internet, and several for phone (other companies offer service over Verizon lines.) The polls show about 50% of Adelphia subscribers are going to switch. After many years of rates increasing about 10% per year, maybe, just maybe, we will see reasonable prices.
Some of us are past puberty and have families. Families are created when you meet a type of human called a woman and have something you may have heard of from your playground friends called "sex". This generally results in smaller humans called "children". They don't all like to watch the same stuff you do.
My local newspaper did some research. Cable subscription rates (percentage of population) is going down while DirecTV is going up at about 1% per year. Cable rates ARE higher than DirecTV. DirecTV is adding local channels in this area this spring. An informal poll showed that 30% of cable subscribers were switching when that happens.
To drive the nail in the coffin, a local telco is wiring the city with fiber over the next 4 years and offering Very high speed internet, digital cable, and phone service. We should FINALLY see some Real competition in all services (phone cable, and internet.)
Cable companies will charge even more for the individual channels in order to recoup the costs of administering the additional choices. Popular channels will go sky high such as CNN, ESPN, HGTV, etc. The channels nobody want's (QVC, HSC) will be free anyway. I wouldn't doubt if channels like QVC actually pay cable companies to carry them. Without those "support" dollars, they will pass on the full true cost (and then some) of those good channels.
If you look at the technical issues, the only way to really do this is with digital TV. Considering the $5 or so / TV cost of the stupid box (plus even more for a remote in many places) that raises prices for households with a bunch of TV's. With old-analog, you could tivo multiple different channels at the same time while watching a third or fourth all on different channels. With digital, I'd need a box for each tivo plus one for each TV. It's easy to pay an additional $25 / month for stupid boxes.
Well, I think that's in line with my comment. It's about ethical behavior at all levels - not just in business relationships. What we don't seem to have today is company executives that have good moral values and ethics. Too many are are after either corporate or personal greed - what's good ($$$) for my company or myself at the expense of everyone else.
If you are an investor, do you REALLY trust a company that will do anything for dollars??? Behind the company are People - if they are willing to do anything "for the company," it's a very small step to do anything for dollars for themselves. I think Adelphia, Enron, Worldcom and others are very good examples of this, and look what happened to their investors... If you look at the earlier successes of those companies, it's clear that at one point they were doing very well but due to the lack of ethics they went down. Having a successful company with a huge salary was not enough...
Yep. Better to blame someone else when you make a mistake. Thank god for underlings and Microsoft... Say, you wouldn't happen to have pointy hair would you?
Yes, your right. CEO's shouldn't have morals. Instead, they should look up to their peers at Adelphia, Enron, Tyco, Worldcom, SCO, Microsoft, etc. Yep. The almighty dollar is number one.
WTF? CEO's DO need to repect the law and they should NOT be doing business with other companies that are practicing extortion / behaving poorly. They have a responsibility as a human being - not just a CEO - to do the right thing.
Yeah, but that's not what these things do.The point of them is to get in your face. People would just ignore them if they were just part of a web page - no different than an animated ad. People just tune them out. This was the whole point of pop-up advertising in the first place. It forces the user to take action. It makes itself known.
I use Exim with the Exiscan patch, and tempfail (4XX) all "positive" viruses. On the downside, if the virus is spread via a normal email relay it continues to retry. On the positive side, I never lose anything due to a local system problem. Many worms have their own SMTP engine which are too stupid to retry so in practice retries due to tempfail hasn't been an issue.
Basic HTML is OK - it's all the extensions that are a problem. This is why you don't just pass the HTML directly to a web browser engine (IE) which Outlook does. You put it through a whitelist filter first that only allows basic HTML tags (Slashdot's "Allowed HTML" for example...)
In anticipation of someone mentioning signed macros: setting up my cert on every computer is no easier than setting the macro security to medium... except that this SOLVES the problem and maintains security. Your answer is to basically disable security, which is a Very poor solution. I suggest you rethink.
I also suggest that you create an in-house CA, and have that cert installed on all machines. This way you can have a secure intranet, signed emails, applications, etc. You can also revoke certs when people leave for example.
good virus scanners do have advanced detection that will understand that something is 'fishy' with a new process that is trying to change executable files on a box
Um, you DO realize that the people writing these viruses have AV software to test against, right?? It's TRIVIAL for viruses to be written so that they don't raise any red flags.
Why do you need windows for email??? If you need some Windows only apps, run VMWare. If you are doing development or support, you should have VMWare anyway. That way you can test under multiple versions of Windows / service packs, etc. and when your software makes the machine go Boom, you just do an instant VM restore from snapshot. Also makes it MUCH MUCH easier to test install scripts. VMWare is dirt cheap when you look at the productivity gains from the improved environment alone.
Email worms that specifically target Outlook / IE and its variants have been around for years now. Everyone keeps thinking that the latest malware will finally convince management that MS email products are just not worth it - the last straw. What they fail to realize is exactly how thick people can be. A company can lose millions of dollars each time they get hit and it STILL doesn't seem to make a difference. They blame the virus writters, their IT department, the phase of the moon, ANYTHING but MS or themselves for using software that they KNOW is problematic. They keep thinking that the latest patchs will solve the issue once and for all or that the "groupware" features are worth all this pain (they are not.)
Frankly, I'm very tired of all the whining from MS users. There is a solution to your problem. You have been told hundreds of times what the solution is. If you refuse to listen, there is nothing I or anyone else can do to help you. If you continue to use MS email products, you WILL get hit again, and again, and again. Are you waiting for malware that formats your hard drive? Maybe one that subtly changes all your documents / spreadsheets? How about another one that spreads your confidential data to your competitors...
While I won't miss the whining, I will miss the humor aspect or watching people wring their hands, run around with their heads cut off, pontificating security "experts", etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, I don't see how shorter names make things easier to remember. Sure I have songs in directory trees, but many titles are longer than 14 characters. With a 14 char limit, you have to start shortening names to the point where they no longer make sense. Even with directories, I still put the artist name in the file name along with the song name. It makes mini-collections much easier.
Here is another example: kernel-source-2.6.5.tar.bz2
It's very descriptive. How would you shorten it? krnsrc-2.6.5.tbz2? Nope, too long. Let's try ksrc2.6.5.tbz2... Ok, is it KDE now??? Oops, now we have the AC patchset for kernel 2.6.6.pre1 in a tar.bz2 file - what do we name that???
Nope. I do not agree that 14 chars is enough. No way, no how. Creating a huge deep tree to get around file name limits is nuts. Makes file name completion that much harder, and navigating by mouse a shortcut to carpel tunnel problems.
Nah, only the close-source Microsoft version. :-)
If filenames get much longer than that, they take too long to type
That's why every modern shell has filename completion by hitting TAB. Even Windows can have this enabled (although why it's not on by default is a mystery.)
Longer filenames are very useful for things like MP3's. 14 characters is enough for most users? Kinda like 640K of RAM is enough, 540M on the orig IDE spec, 2G file sizes, etc?
System designers really have to start thinking farther and farther ahead. For example - most modern desktop motherboards still have 3-4G memory limits - my older ones have 768M limits even though I have ram chips in hand that could bring that up to a gig if the MB could handle it. In 10 years from now, I can see NV memory modules that could hold 500G - as fast as current off-chip cache, yet big enough to eliminate the need for mechanical storage (disks) for many embedded apps (mp3 players, PVR's, tablet computers, etc.) It sure would be nice to have a module that you could drop into a legacy DIMM slot to bring new life to old boards. Currently, all our systems are designed with built-in obsolecence and artificial limits creating massive financial and environmental waste. Enough is enough.
I think the US courts (and AG's) stance on bad behavior by software companies can be proven by their actions with the MS anti-trust trials. Even the EU's fine was weak (should have been in the 10 billion range to make any impact at all.)
This doesn't fix shitty apps that need admin over random registry bits, or the system folder.
True, but the problem isn't 100% users, it's about 50% software vendors that don't follow the security model correctly. Until they do, 95% of users will have difficulty working with the security model no matter if they want to use the system or not. They keylock analogy doesn't work well to really describe what is going on. Analogies just cloud the issue in this case - they oversimplify it.
it may just be faster than using Outlook on my desktop
:-)
If you are using outlook on our desktop, speed is the least of your concerns...
Think less loss in fiber optic cables, better lenses for microscopes / telescopes, etc.
RH9 is about end of life. Enterprise only has source RPM's, no ISO available.
Go read the Whitebox FAQ and you will understand.
Yep. If you want RedHat but don't want to pay the price, look at WhiteBox Linux
I do both as well.
/usr/local so upgrades don't break shit. I ALWAYS build my own kernels on Linux however - the vendor binaries are great for getting you up and running but have Way too much bloat for every day use.
I build all my core applications though, for tuning, options, and special patches. If I'm building a mail server for example, I'll build my own SSL, MTA (exim), IMAP / POP servers, etc. configured exactly how I need them. It also allows me to take my source tree and move it to another box that may be RedHat, Debian, Solaris, etc. and mainly do a recompile and things work. I put all MY stuff in
If I'm building a web server, ditto for the core apps like Apache, but I may opt to use a vendor binary for email, and just configure it to send everything to / through the smarthost.
In my area we have Verizon, Adelphia, and a regional telco. The RT signed a deal with the city last year to pull fiber to every house, and offer phone, cable, and internet. DirecTV is also supposed to carry local channels in our area this spring when the new sat. goes online. This will give us three viable options for TV, three for internet, and several for phone (other companies offer service over Verizon lines.) The polls show about 50% of Adelphia subscribers are going to switch. After many years of rates increasing about 10% per year, maybe, just maybe, we will see reasonable prices.
Some of us are past puberty and have families. Families are created when you meet a type of human called a woman and have something you may have heard of from your playground friends called "sex". This generally results in smaller humans called "children". They don't all like to watch the same stuff you do.
My local newspaper did some research. Cable subscription rates (percentage of population) is going down while DirecTV is going up at about 1% per year. Cable rates ARE higher than DirecTV. DirecTV is adding local channels in this area this spring. An informal poll showed that 30% of cable subscribers were switching when that happens.
To drive the nail in the coffin, a local telco is wiring the city with fiber over the next 4 years and offering Very high speed internet, digital cable, and phone service. We should FINALLY see some Real competition in all services (phone cable, and internet.)
Here's what I see happening.
Cable rates will go up even more.
Cable companies will charge even more for the individual channels in order to recoup the costs of administering the additional choices. Popular channels will go sky high such as CNN, ESPN, HGTV, etc. The channels nobody want's (QVC, HSC) will be free anyway. I wouldn't doubt if channels like QVC actually pay cable companies to carry them. Without those "support" dollars, they will pass on the full true cost (and then some) of those good channels.
If you look at the technical issues, the only way to really do this is with digital TV. Considering the $5 or so / TV cost of the stupid box (plus even more for a remote in many places) that raises prices for households with a bunch of TV's. With old-analog, you could tivo multiple different channels at the same time while watching a third or fourth all on different channels. With digital, I'd need a box for each tivo plus one for each TV. It's easy to pay an additional $25 / month for stupid boxes.
Thanks but no thanks.
Well, I think that's in line with my comment. It's about ethical behavior at all levels - not just in business relationships. What we don't seem to have today is company executives that have good moral values and ethics. Too many are are after either corporate or personal greed - what's good ($$$) for my company or myself at the expense of everyone else.
If you are an investor, do you REALLY trust a company that will do anything for dollars??? Behind the company are People - if they are willing to do anything "for the company," it's a very small step to do anything for dollars for themselves. I think Adelphia, Enron, Worldcom and others are very good examples of this, and look what happened to their investors... If you look at the earlier successes of those companies, it's clear that at one point they were doing very well but due to the lack of ethics they went down. Having a successful company with a huge salary was not enough...
Yep. Better to blame someone else when you make a mistake. Thank god for underlings and Microsoft... Say, you wouldn't happen to have pointy hair would you?
Yes, your right. CEO's shouldn't have morals. Instead, they should look up to their peers at Adelphia, Enron, Tyco, Worldcom, SCO, Microsoft, etc. Yep. The almighty dollar is number one.
WTF? CEO's DO need to repect the law and they should NOT be doing business with other companies that are practicing extortion / behaving poorly. They have a responsibility as a human being - not just a CEO - to do the right thing.
Yeah, but that's not what these things do.The point of them is to get in your face. People would just ignore them if they were just part of a web page - no different than an animated ad. People just tune them out. This was the whole point of pop-up advertising in the first place. It forces the user to take action. It makes itself known.
I use Exim with the Exiscan patch, and tempfail (4XX) all "positive" viruses. On the downside, if the virus is spread via a normal email relay it continues to retry. On the positive side, I never lose anything due to a local system problem. Many worms have their own SMTP engine which are too stupid to retry so in practice retries due to tempfail hasn't been an issue.
Basic HTML is OK - it's all the extensions that are a problem. This is why you don't just pass the HTML directly to a web browser engine (IE) which Outlook does. You put it through a whitelist filter first that only allows basic HTML tags (Slashdot's "Allowed HTML" for example...)
In anticipation of someone mentioning signed macros: setting up my cert on every computer is no easier than setting the macro security to medium ... except that this SOLVES the problem and maintains security. Your answer is to basically disable security, which is a Very poor solution. I suggest you rethink.
I also suggest that you create an in-house CA, and have that cert installed on all machines. This way you can have a secure intranet, signed emails, applications, etc. You can also revoke certs when people leave for example.
good virus scanners do have advanced detection that will understand that something is 'fishy' with a new process that is trying to change executable files on a box
Um, you DO realize that the people writing these viruses have AV software to test against, right?? It's TRIVIAL for viruses to be written so that they don't raise any red flags.
Why do you need windows for email??? If you need some Windows only apps, run VMWare. If you are doing development or support, you should have VMWare anyway. That way you can test under multiple versions of Windows / service packs, etc. and when your software makes the machine go Boom, you just do an instant VM restore from snapshot. Also makes it MUCH MUCH easier to test install scripts. VMWare is dirt cheap when you look at the productivity gains from the improved environment alone.
Email worms that specifically target Outlook / IE and its variants have been around for years now. Everyone keeps thinking that the latest malware will finally convince management that MS email products are just not worth it - the last straw. What they fail to realize is exactly how thick people can be. A company can lose millions of dollars each time they get hit and it STILL doesn't seem to make a difference. They blame the virus writters, their IT department, the phase of the moon, ANYTHING but MS or themselves for using software that they KNOW is problematic. They keep thinking that the latest patchs will solve the issue once and for all or that the "groupware" features are worth all this pain (they are not.)
Frankly, I'm very tired of all the whining from MS users. There is a solution to your problem. You have been told hundreds of times what the solution is. If you refuse to listen, there is nothing I or anyone else can do to help you. If you continue to use MS email products, you WILL get hit again, and again, and again. Are you waiting for malware that formats your hard drive? Maybe one that subtly changes all your documents / spreadsheets? How about another one that spreads your confidential data to your competitors...
While I won't miss the whining, I will miss the humor aspect or watching people wring their hands, run around with their heads cut off, pontificating security "experts", etc.