A better solution would be for Browsers to display a helpful message to their users when a domain cannot be found.
MS has leveraged MSIE to display a custom message from MSN when it can't find a domain, which is sneaky and underhanded.
This action by Verisign is even MORE sneaky and underhanded than that.
Protocols should be used as they're designed to be used. If users are getting "confusing error messages", it's the browser (or user-agent)'s fault. The Registry has no need to intervene, other than feeling it wanted to out-Microsoft Microsoft.
This means you can't, for example, simply download the newest Apache from apache.org, compile it and run it. You have to twiddle with config files to get the new Apache to locate all the existing files, or you have to move/link the existing files to where Apache group thinks they should be.
Actually, you can. The Apache./config file has an option for a "layout bundle" or something. "./configure --with-layout=RedHat" will change the default locations to the RH standard.
Actually, I think it would be nice for the next rev of./configure to allow for that as a configurable parameter. For the big few distros that put things in odd places, make "with-layout" standard.
Exactly -- given that the RAIDb itself sits elsewhere, I can't imagine it would be that hard to take the source itself and make a Perl DBD::Module out of it.
Sitting here at work, I must say that the only thing I really wish I could get would be a live cable feed of some of the news conferences.
All the opinions, perspectives, and breaking news information I could ever want is available online, with the help of places like Slashdot, Fark.com, and of course... Matt Drudge.
Nice in theory but in practice, in my best ellen feiss tone, "huh?" I have a mac in my office, and sure enough there is a list of rendevous printers available, all with names like "hplj542502260123" -- as if I'm supposed to know which one is where...
That's one of the important differences between Mac-oriented and PC-oriented networks. Anyone who's somewhat experienced with AppleTalk knows that the first thing you do is give your computers and printers and devices memorable (and hopefully, but not necessarily logical) names. Printing to "Marketing Dept's 5si" or "Tenjou Utena" (if you've got a system going on) is more useful than a humorless string of vendor letters.
Allowing users to browse for services by name (in English) is a long-standing tradition in Mac networks; not as much in PC networks where everything it set up by someone in an ivory tower somewhere. That's why Mac-trained admins take the time to set their services and devices up properly.
Empower the user, foo.
Re:I don't think that spam is the reason -- OOPS
on
Spammers Busted
·
· Score: 1
do not have the authority to take it away - should read - do not have the authority to take it away without due process, just like taking away the right to life, liberty, etc...
In fact, you could say that the "right to travel" is one of the meanings of the right of "liberty".
Re:I don't think that spam is the reason
on
Spammers Busted
·
· Score: 1
Driving is not a right. It is a priviledge. Read your driver's regulation booklet.
Not that I'm necessarily agreeing with them, but I believe the argument these folks are putting forth is that the "right to travel" IS a basic (inalienable) right and that the states do not have the authority to take it away -- therefore, the administrative regulations from your state's DMV are unconstitutional.
It's certainly a basic right in terms of walking or use of unmotorized vehicles (you didn't need a "horse-rider's permit" or a buggy permit 200 years ago, nor do you need a train-rider's permit, etc... The argument therefore becomes that in today's world, a motor vehicle is as much a mandatory part of daily existance as a horse was back then. Ergo, unless someone is proven to be an unsafe driver or danger to society, people have a basic right to travel using a motor vehicle.
the days of multi terrabyte storage systems for the home is a little further off. Unless someone comes out with more justification for that much space
When virtual reality (fully 3d, immersed environments) start to appear and be used in the home, there'll be a need for this kind of storage. Combined with processor advances to do the massive crunches needed for such an interface/game/devetool/whatever... the average home user will finally have the ability to experience it.
Given the advances in OS engineering, i'd put the initial uses of this (at home) in six years or less.
I don't think we'll be at $1/TB for a decade though (10 years ago we were at $1000/GB). And I agree, we don't need storage space to be *quite* that low for VR itself to take off.
You are. Apple uses cc to build some of it's software. Just because it comes with the OS, doesn't mean Apple uses it to build the entire OS.
Hmm.. I'm not so sure about that. Apple's been feeding a LOT back into the GCC source, and from what I heard most of those patches/fixes/improvements were based on work it did internally when optomizing its own compilations with it.
Something you're missing is that he's not referring to Mac OS X, but to "classic" Mac OS (9.2.2 and lower). All the standard buffer overflow problems are irrelevant on Mac OS classic because the vast majority of apps (and the OS itself) don't use the "standard" libs used everywhere else.
A buffer overflow in zlib means nothing... there was no OS-standard compression library until OS 8.5, and that didn't use anything zlib related (MacBinary+BinHex).
A BSD TCP/IP stack problem is irrelevent as well. Classic Mac OS used a STREAMS-based stack that was then heavily modified. Much better (according to SustWorks.com) and immune to BSD security holes.
Although I appreciate the engineering effort that went into Mac OS X, the classic Mac OS environment still has some signinficant things going for it, some of which were listed in this parent's parent (which isn't Flamebait =( ).
Third, unfortunately, for backwards compatibility there are two different kinds of soft links on a mac. One is the usual unix soft link and the other is the "alias" function of the OS. The OS is smart enough to recognize the unix links and treat them as file aliases in the GUI. But the reverse is not true. Generally you are better off using the unix soft links.
Great post, but I have to take issue with this one. MacOS aliases are far superior to symlinks IMHO. By storing the file ID and other meta-information about the original file (creation date/time, modification date/time, file name, size, creator, type, etc...), the alias has a much higher chance of identifying the proper file should the original file move.
In fact, you can do pretty much anything to a file you want (short of moving it to another volume and deleting the original) and chances are the alias will still be able to track it down (and update itself) when you double-click it.
It's an old-school MacOS concept that Unix geeks would do well to learn from.
We've all heard stories about Google and it's 10,000 CPU cluster of Linux boxes in distributed data centers doing crunching and querying. Any idea what their TCO would be switching to a single mainframe, or if this would be a candidate at all for something Mainframe-level?
Anyway, a bunch of recording industry giants, specifically Apple Records, if I'm not mistaken, got all upset because they though the inclusion of a microphone would begin to undermine the musical industry.
Almost, but not quite right.
Apple earlier had been sued by Apple Records (which owned the Beatles' songs) for trademark infringement over the name "Apple". The lawsuit was settled when Apple (computer) said it wouldn't enter the field of "music production" software or hardware.
When Apple decided to introduce "multimedia equipped computers with advanced music and audio generation capabilities" (for the time) Apple Records started waving red flags. As usual, Apple was far ahead of PC's in this regard (16-bit audio, etc...). In addition, Apple included several new system sounds, including one named "Xylophone". I don't recall specifically whether this was the result of an actual suit, or a threat of a suit, but someone in Apple System Software engineering decided to rename the "Xylophone" sound to "Sosumi" in protest. =)
For the record, this was when LC and IIsi were released. They were the newer generation of 32-bit color, 16-bit audio, cheap (relatively), and CD-ROM-equipped machines.
In real life we toss things in the trash and the sanitation dept picks it up. If we threw out something we needed most of us just ACCEPT that its gone. We don't go digging through the local landfill.
Yes, that's why it's called the Trash Can or Wastebasket (or Recycle Bin if you think MS invented the Desktop interface). The point is that this is a place files go *before* they're picked up by the sanitation department and lost forever. Are you saying you've never tossed a paper into a basket by your desk only to take a second look at it 10 minutes later?
Also, it's worth pointing out that the original Desktop interface (Mac's System 6 and earlier), the contents of the Trash only survived until you launched the next app or rebooted (except for Multifinder). Once you put a file in there, it was on its death nell. Different from System 7+ and MS Windows where files stay in the Trash/Recycle Bin indefinitely until you manually Empty (the) Trash.
you might want to try ultraedit. not free, but supposedly well worth the price.
A friend of mine suggested that, but I found it too "clunky" to use (and kind of slow). For now, I've settled on TextPad as a decent enough replacement. I can dream though.... =)
A little trickier. I have yet to find a really good text editor under OS X that I like.
Try BB Edit (Lite = free, Pro = commercial). It's generally considered to be the BEST text editor for the Mac. I wish something like it was available for the PC.
I used to use the Remote Desktop feature of MS's Netmeeting. Now I use VNC and the OS X VNCThing client to access my Windows desktop.
Not sure if that's the same as MS's Terminal Server Client, but if so, MS just released a freeware version of that for the Mac as well.
Slashdot Mirror
A better solution would be for Browsers to display a helpful message to their users when a domain cannot be found.
MS has leveraged MSIE to display a custom message from MSN when it can't find a domain, which is sneaky and underhanded.
This action by Verisign is even MORE sneaky and underhanded than that.
Protocols should be used as they're designed to be used. If users are getting "confusing error messages", it's the browser (or user-agent)'s fault. The Registry has no need to intervene, other than feeling it wanted to out-Microsoft Microsoft.
Congratulations.
That's because you shouldn't be querying them directly, all they tell you is what server(s) deal with ".com" or ".net" (or ".tv", etc...)
Try using A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET instead, foo.
(Side note: *.root-servers.net is operated by the NSI Registry division, not the Registrar division.)
The only effect would be for Microsoft to hope that its MS Home products positively affect people's ability to spell.
This means you can't, for example, simply download the newest Apache from apache.org, compile it and run it. You have to twiddle with config files to get the new Apache to locate all the existing files, or you have to move/link the existing files to where Apache group thinks they should be.
Actually, you can. The Apache
Actually, I think it would be nice for the next rev of
Oh well..
Exactly -- given that the RAIDb itself sits elsewhere, I can't imagine it would be that hard to take the source itself and make a Perl DBD::Module out of it.
If only I had the spare time...
Sitting here at work, I must say that the only thing I really wish I could get would be a live cable feed of some of the news conferences.
All the opinions, perspectives, and breaking news information I could ever want is available online, with the help of places like Slashdot, Fark.com, and of course... Matt Drudge.
Nice in theory but in practice, in my best ellen feiss tone, "huh?" I have a mac in my office, and sure enough there is a list of rendevous printers available, all with names like "hplj542502260123" -- as if I'm supposed to know which one is where...
That's one of the important differences between Mac-oriented and PC-oriented networks. Anyone who's somewhat experienced with AppleTalk knows that the first thing you do is give your computers and printers and devices memorable (and hopefully, but not necessarily logical) names. Printing to "Marketing Dept's 5si" or "Tenjou Utena" (if you've got a system going on) is more useful than a humorless string of vendor letters.
Allowing users to browse for services by name (in English) is a long-standing tradition in Mac networks; not as much in PC networks where everything it set up by someone in an ivory tower somewhere. That's why Mac-trained admins take the time to set their services and devices up properly.
Empower the user, foo.
do not have the authority to take it away
- should read -
do not have the authority to take it away without due process, just like taking away the right to life, liberty, etc...
In fact, you could say that the "right to travel" is one of the meanings of the right of "liberty".
Driving is not a right. It is a priviledge. Read your driver's regulation booklet.
Not that I'm necessarily agreeing with them, but I believe the argument these folks are putting forth is that the "right to travel" IS a basic (inalienable) right and that the states do not have the authority to take it away -- therefore, the administrative regulations from your state's DMV are unconstitutional.
It's certainly a basic right in terms of walking or use of unmotorized vehicles (you didn't need a "horse-rider's permit" or a buggy permit 200 years ago, nor do you need a train-rider's permit, etc... The argument therefore becomes that in today's world, a motor vehicle is as much a mandatory part of daily existance as a horse was back then. Ergo, unless someone is proven to be an unsafe driver or danger to society, people have a basic right to travel using a motor vehicle.
That's the argument.
the days of multi terrabyte storage systems for the home is a little further off. Unless someone comes out with more justification for that much space
When virtual reality (fully 3d, immersed environments) start to appear and be used in the home, there'll be a need for this kind of storage. Combined with processor advances to do the massive crunches needed for such an interface/game/devetool/whatever... the average home user will finally have the ability to experience it.
Given the advances in OS engineering, i'd put the initial uses of this (at home) in six years or less.
I don't think we'll be at $1/TB for a decade though (10 years ago we were at $1000/GB). And I agree, we don't need storage space to be *quite* that low for VR itself to take off.
IMHO.
I dunno, I've always thought of it as more of an 8:5 ratio.
Arrgh... I *know* I'm not the only person here who had "band camp" pop into their head when they read that! =)
-jc
You are. Apple uses cc to build some of it's software. Just because it comes with the OS, doesn't mean Apple uses it to build the entire OS.
Hmm.. I'm not so sure about that. Apple's been feeding a LOT back into the GCC source, and from what I heard most of those patches/fixes/improvements were based on work it did internally when optomizing its own compilations with it.
Something you're missing is that he's not referring to Mac OS X, but to "classic" Mac OS (9.2.2 and lower). All the standard buffer overflow problems are irrelevant on Mac OS classic because the vast majority of apps (and the OS itself) don't use the "standard" libs used everywhere else.
A buffer overflow in zlib means nothing... there was no OS-standard compression library until OS 8.5, and that didn't use anything zlib related (MacBinary+BinHex).
A BSD TCP/IP stack problem is irrelevent as well. Classic Mac OS used a STREAMS-based stack that was then heavily modified. Much better (according to SustWorks.com) and immune to BSD security holes.
Although I appreciate the engineering effort that went into Mac OS X, the classic Mac OS environment still has some signinficant things going for it, some of which were listed in this parent's parent (which isn't Flamebait =( ).
13. Pitfalls
Third, unfortunately, for backwards compatibility there are two different kinds of soft links on a mac. One is the usual unix soft link and the other is the "alias" function of the OS. The OS is smart enough to recognize the unix links and treat them as file aliases in the GUI. But the reverse is not true. Generally you are better off using the unix soft links.
Great post, but I have to take issue with this one. MacOS aliases are far superior to symlinks IMHO. By storing the file ID and other meta-information about the original file (creation date/time, modification date/time, file name, size, creator, type, etc...), the alias has a much higher chance of identifying the proper file should the original file move.
In fact, you can do pretty much anything to a file you want (short of moving it to another volume and deleting the original) and chances are the alias will still be able to track it down (and update itself) when you double-click it.
It's an old-school MacOS concept that Unix geeks would do well to learn from.
We've all heard stories about Google and it's 10,000 CPU cluster of Linux boxes in distributed data centers doing crunching and querying. Any idea what their TCO would be switching to a single mainframe, or if this would be a candidate at all for something Mainframe-level?
I want to note that in all these years no group has been able to completely replace dos.
- www.freedows.org doesn't even work anymore
Gee.. maybe if you spelled the URL right!
It's http://www.freedos.org/, and they appear to be doing just fine.
Anyway, a bunch of recording industry giants, specifically Apple Records, if I'm not mistaken, got all upset because they though the inclusion of a microphone would begin to undermine the musical industry.
Almost, but not quite right.
Apple earlier had been sued by Apple Records (which owned the Beatles' songs) for trademark infringement over the name "Apple". The lawsuit was settled when Apple (computer) said it wouldn't enter the field of "music production" software or hardware.
When Apple decided to introduce "multimedia equipped computers with advanced music and audio generation capabilities" (for the time) Apple Records started waving red flags. As usual, Apple was far ahead of PC's in this regard (16-bit audio, etc...). In addition, Apple included several new system sounds, including one named "Xylophone". I don't recall specifically whether this was the result of an actual suit, or a threat of a suit, but someone in Apple System Software engineering decided to rename the "Xylophone" sound to "Sosumi" in protest. =)
For the record, this was when LC and IIsi were released. They were the newer generation of 32-bit color, 16-bit audio, cheap (relatively), and CD-ROM-equipped machines.
I think the planting of the American flag kind of served that point... though granted it's probably not visible from the Earth.
(pet peeve)
"MAC" = ethernet address
"Mac" = abbreviation for "Macintosh"
Other than that, I agree with you
Yet if you look at their full product range they have products such as...
They even owned WordPerfect for a while, too!
Why the hell would you make your Grandma use vi?! At least let the non-nerds use Pico.
In real life we toss things in the trash and the sanitation dept picks it up. If we threw out something we needed most of us just ACCEPT that its gone. We don't go digging through the local landfill.
Yes, that's why it's called the Trash Can or Wastebasket (or Recycle Bin if you think MS invented the Desktop interface). The point is that this is a place files go *before* they're picked up by the sanitation department and lost forever. Are you saying you've never tossed a paper into a basket by your desk only to take a second look at it 10 minutes later?
Also, it's worth pointing out that the original Desktop interface (Mac's System 6 and earlier), the contents of the Trash only survived until you launched the next app or rebooted (except for Multifinder). Once you put a file in there, it was on its death nell. Different from System 7+ and MS Windows where files stay in the Trash/Recycle Bin indefinitely until you manually Empty (the) Trash.
you might want to try ultraedit. not free, but supposedly well worth the price.
A friend of mine suggested that, but I found it too "clunky" to use (and kind of slow). For now, I've settled on TextPad as a decent enough replacement. I can dream though.... =)
A little trickier. I have yet to find a really good text editor under OS X that I like.
Try BB Edit (Lite = free, Pro = commercial). It's generally considered to be the BEST text editor for the Mac. I wish something like it was available for the PC.
I used to use the Remote Desktop feature of MS's Netmeeting. Now I use VNC and the OS X VNCThing client to access my Windows desktop.
Not sure if that's the same as MS's Terminal Server Client, but if so, MS just released a freeware version of that for the Mac as well.
I posted it above, but take a look at the Copland article in Apple's develop Tech Journal.