If the two options are either to stop the Solaris project because it's generating so big losses, or continue it with paid updates, which one is better? Sure suddenly starting to pay for updates might suck a bit, but it's better than not getting those updates at all.
This is no way extortion. You bought the current version of Solaris. That's what they're legally obligated to give you. Then you made sure you also have future support for the product.. you did that, right? And it's in your contract, right? right?
But it's open source. Doesn't that mean people can fix it since they have the code? So what's the problem really? That's how FOSS works, for both of its advantage and disadvantage.
I'm quite certain they did understood all of it and weren't just nitpicking like you. While I personally think it's good to use space as thousand separator and period as decimal point ("18 000 000 cpus in 6 400 000 systems is on AVERAGE 2.812 CPUs"), I didn't even notice that thing and perfectly understood what he meant.
It's perfectly valid to difference cloud based hosting and dedicated servers and so on. It's just an issue when some companies do it badly or customers don't understand what it really is. After all, it's just a network of servers who work on-demand. In addition it should offer backups and such, but these are always just per-contract service details and shouldn't be assumed.
Wikipedia has a good diagram on why "cloud computing" term makes sense. I really can't think of any better one.
In some cases it makes sense to offload the performance, hard drive, memory and bandwidth balancing to other people, in this case Amazon or other service. Sure you could buy new servers and do all of that yourself, but it's not always the best solution.
Like any tool, use it correctly when it makes sense.
Have you ever fired up an IRC client as Root on a *nix box? I have. I got a message that effecetively said, "HEY STUPID! ONLY MORONS RUN IRC AS ROOT!" Windows needs exactly that sort of in-your-face security messages.
Can you see Microsoft flashing those sort of messages on screen? I can't. Instead, Clippy is likely to come up, and say, "I see you're trying to subvert the system securty - may I help you?"
You do understand that this is only because the irc clients to do so? Unix/Linux kernel has nothing to do with that behavior. I also don't see Microsoft flashing those kind of messages on screen because OS can't do it and it's up to programs to decide if they need root/admin or not. It works the same way in Linux too.
Linux servers are being hacked and broken into. Have you never seen those "hacked by" messages on websites? Have you not heard how pirates hack in to high-bandwidth servers and serve warez from them? Have you not heard how wide spread rootkits for Linux are? Linux hacking and malware already is and has been for years commonplace.
Also, you do not need root/admin. I'm still wondering why so many people believe so. Trojans/botnets/whatever run just fine under an user account too.
It took Mozilla a month to fix this and before the warning they were still going to keep the fix out of non-dev version until 30th. If Mozilla lacks so much in providing a fix for a serious exploitable vulnerability, I think it's in place to warn users. Maybe it even got Mozilla rethinking their strategy and release the fix early now.
It is "bloated" in the sense of feeling slow to begin with. XUL and XML based GUI is probably the worst idea ever. If you've ever used Opera, you know just how fast and snappy the UI feels. This is what has always put me off from Firefox - it just doesn't feel good.
A sad day on Slashdot when someone saying "programming correctly is the right response" and he's ridiculed by at least 4 replies and modded +3 Funny. What the hell happened to this place?
It's the blind fanboyism. When it's about Firefox it doesn't matter because they patched it! (ignoring the fact that it took them a month and were constantly under pressure to do it). But when it's about Microsoft, then they should had got it correctly in the first place and no one will *ever* use Windows again because of this!
Some people here really seem to lack objective thinking and are blindfolded by their fanfare.
Just days before the start of a hacking contest set to target Web browser vulnerabilities, Mozilla has patched its flagship Firefox browser....
Mozilla had been under pressure to fix the bug, after it was included by Russian security researcher Evgeny Legerov last month in his VulnDisco hacking tool, which is sold as an add-on to the Canvas penetration testing kit.
What did you say about reaction time with importance again?
Yeah it's stupid to replace to own post, but here is latest list of subsidiaries of Google Inc. Like you can see their jurisdiction is marked for every one of those countries, and they are actually established in them.
They are registered companies and maintain offices in every country, authorized by and affiliated with Google, and not branding or anything like Microsoft Partners. Because they're registered companies in every country, they must obey those laws too. For example in Sweden they are "Google Sweden AB" and have same kind of naming scheme for companies in other countries.
Because you don't just suddenly know when someone is starting to exploit it. When Firefox doesn't offer the auto-update dialog to update your version most users won't know about it. What if Slashdot's homepage got hacked and the newly created exploit was put on it. Can Mozilla magically push out the update to everyone in a few seconds? What if it's exploited on smaller websites but a someone capable to research it hasn't noticed? What if it's being used as a targeted attack against single persons or companies? And so on.. just because it's not common known news yet doesn't mean it couldn't be used by someone. The vulnerability is published anyway.
When has Microsoft delayed a patch for two years? And, what is the difference between FOSS project delaying a patch for their users and Microsoft delaying a patch for their users?
Even if I disagree with something it doesn't mean I need to stop using the whole thing. World isn't black and white. Are you saying there should not be any criticism over any thing in the world but anyone should just stop using whatever they're criticizing?
Oh come on, when it's about Firefox there is no rush, but when its just the same with Microsoft they are the Satan itself, root of evil and the reason for all the problems in the world. If you're going to defend the other one for not having any rush because you don't know it's not exploited, then do the same for both.
And how does one know it's not being exploited on small scale? It only hits news when its huge.
You can remove IE in every Windows version after XP. mshtml.dll is usually left in the system because thousands of applications use its rendering engine and it would break all those programs. If you wish, you can delete that yourself too.
But Google also maintains its own offices in many other countries. Should they work under US law or the local law? What about their websites, like google.se? Wouldn't it make more sense if the local Google companies would work under those countries laws?
You're linking to old articles, other one from 2007 and other one from beginning of 2009. Things have changed since then, like this ballot screen shows now.
The later article didn't explain what illegal tying, but did you know Google also pays people to tie their products in - almost all of Firefox revenue is coming from Google and in turn they set Google as the default search engine. Same thing for Opera and other browsers and even some manufacturers (I think HP)
The point is that both countries have their own view on what is allowed and what is not. The difference is that China only restricts it inside it's own country, while US tries to enforce their view all over the world (with ACTA too). It maybe doesn't make it OK, but in my view it's still a lot better when you aren't trying to enforce your views to people of other countries.
Slashdot Mirror
If the two options are either to stop the Solaris project because it's generating so big losses, or continue it with paid updates, which one is better? Sure suddenly starting to pay for updates might suck a bit, but it's better than not getting those updates at all.
This is no way extortion. You bought the current version of Solaris. That's what they're legally obligated to give you. Then you made sure you also have future support for the product.. you did that, right? And it's in your contract, right? right?
OpenSolaris is that project.
CentOS is bad example because it's actually a separate branch from Red Hat. Fedora is what you're looking for, and it's usually quite up to date.
But it's open source. Doesn't that mean people can fix it since they have the code? So what's the problem really? That's how FOSS works, for both of its advantage and disadvantage.
I'm quite certain they did understood all of it and weren't just nitpicking like you. While I personally think it's good to use space as thousand separator and period as decimal point ("18 000 000 cpus in 6 400 000 systems is on AVERAGE 2.812 CPUs"), I didn't even notice that thing and perfectly understood what he meant.
It's perfectly valid to difference cloud based hosting and dedicated servers and so on. It's just an issue when some companies do it badly or customers don't understand what it really is. After all, it's just a network of servers who work on-demand. In addition it should offer backups and such, but these are always just per-contract service details and shouldn't be assumed.
Wikipedia has a good diagram on why "cloud computing" term makes sense. I really can't think of any better one.
In some cases it makes sense to offload the performance, hard drive, memory and bandwidth balancing to other people, in this case Amazon or other service. Sure you could buy new servers and do all of that yourself, but it's not always the best solution.
Like any tool, use it correctly when it makes sense.
Have you ever fired up an IRC client as Root on a *nix box? I have. I got a message that effecetively said, "HEY STUPID! ONLY MORONS RUN IRC AS ROOT!" Windows needs exactly that sort of in-your-face security messages.
Can you see Microsoft flashing those sort of messages on screen? I can't. Instead, Clippy is likely to come up, and say, "I see you're trying to subvert the system securty - may I help you?"
You do understand that this is only because the irc clients to do so? Unix/Linux kernel has nothing to do with that behavior. I also don't see Microsoft flashing those kind of messages on screen because OS can't do it and it's up to programs to decide if they need root/admin or not. It works the same way in Linux too.
Linux servers are being hacked and broken into. Have you never seen those "hacked by" messages on websites? Have you not heard how pirates hack in to high-bandwidth servers and serve warez from them? Have you not heard how wide spread rootkits for Linux are? Linux hacking and malware already is and has been for years commonplace.
Also, you do not need root/admin. I'm still wondering why so many people believe so. Trojans/botnets/whatever run just fine under an user account too.
And it took German government to warn against Firefox for them to do it. Otherwise they would had waited that 30th.
It took Mozilla a month to fix this and before the warning they were still going to keep the fix out of non-dev version until 30th. If Mozilla lacks so much in providing a fix for a serious exploitable vulnerability, I think it's in place to warn users. Maybe it even got Mozilla rethinking their strategy and release the fix early now.
It is "bloated" in the sense of feeling slow to begin with. XUL and XML based GUI is probably the worst idea ever. If you've ever used Opera, you know just how fast and snappy the UI feels. This is what has always put me off from Firefox - it just doesn't feel good.
A sad day on Slashdot when someone saying "programming correctly is the right response" and he's ridiculed by at least 4 replies and modded +3 Funny. What the hell happened to this place?
It's the blind fanboyism. When it's about Firefox it doesn't matter because they patched it! (ignoring the fact that it took them a month and were constantly under pressure to do it). But when it's about Microsoft, then they should had got it correctly in the first place and no one will *ever* use Windows again because of this!
Some people here really seem to lack objective thinking and are blindfolded by their fanfare.
And the fact that the vulnerability has been in the wild for a month.
Just days before the start of a hacking contest set to target Web browser vulnerabilities, Mozilla has patched its flagship Firefox browser. ...
Mozilla had been under pressure to fix the bug, after it was included by Russian security researcher Evgeny Legerov last month in his VulnDisco hacking tool, which is sold as an add-on to the Canvas penetration testing kit.
What did you say about reaction time with importance again?
Yeah it's stupid to replace to own post, but here is latest list of subsidiaries of Google Inc. Like you can see their jurisdiction is marked for every one of those countries, and they are actually established in them.
They are registered companies and maintain offices in every country, authorized by and affiliated with Google, and not branding or anything like Microsoft Partners. Because they're registered companies in every country, they must obey those laws too. For example in Sweden they are "Google Sweden AB" and have same kind of naming scheme for companies in other countries.
Because you don't just suddenly know when someone is starting to exploit it. When Firefox doesn't offer the auto-update dialog to update your version most users won't know about it. What if Slashdot's homepage got hacked and the newly created exploit was put on it. Can Mozilla magically push out the update to everyone in a few seconds? What if it's exploited on smaller websites but a someone capable to research it hasn't noticed? What if it's being used as a targeted attack against single persons or companies? And so on.. just because it's not common known news yet doesn't mean it couldn't be used by someone. The vulnerability is published anyway.
When has Microsoft delayed a patch for two years? And, what is the difference between FOSS project delaying a patch for their users and Microsoft delaying a patch for their users?
Even if I disagree with something it doesn't mean I need to stop using the whole thing. World isn't black and white. Are you saying there should not be any criticism over any thing in the world but anyone should just stop using whatever they're criticizing?
He said the US, which refers to the country, not Google.
Oh come on, when it's about Firefox there is no rush, but when its just the same with Microsoft they are the Satan itself, root of evil and the reason for all the problems in the world. If you're going to defend the other one for not having any rush because you don't know it's not exploited, then do the same for both.
And how does one know it's not being exploited on small scale? It only hits news when its huge.
You can remove IE in every Windows version after XP. mshtml.dll is usually left in the system because thousands of applications use its rendering engine and it would break all those programs. If you wish, you can delete that yourself too.
But Google also maintains its own offices in many other countries. Should they work under US law or the local law? What about their websites, like google.se? Wouldn't it make more sense if the local Google companies would work under those countries laws?
You're linking to old articles, other one from 2007 and other one from beginning of 2009. Things have changed since then, like this ballot screen shows now.
The later article didn't explain what illegal tying, but did you know Google also pays people to tie their products in - almost all of Firefox revenue is coming from Google and in turn they set Google as the default search engine. Same thing for Opera and other browsers and even some manufacturers (I think HP)
The point is that both countries have their own view on what is allowed and what is not. The difference is that China only restricts it inside it's own country, while US tries to enforce their view all over the world (with ACTA too). It maybe doesn't make it OK, but in my view it's still a lot better when you aren't trying to enforce your views to people of other countries.
Well Firefox is getting some heat in Europe too, as Germany is warning users not to use Firefox.
Of course Opera is the true European browser as it's being developed in Norway.