I don't have direct experience with scaling it (having only set up on my server at home to get a feel for installation and to play with it a bit), but it would seem that if you're having scaling issues, that the MOSS (Formerly SharePoint Portal Server) may be a better fit.
Apparently, there's a fairly decent upgrade path from SharePoint Services to full-on MOSS, but again, I do not state that from experience... just from what I've heard.
Actually, if you are an MS shop and have Microsoft Server 2003, SharePoint Services 3.0 (as opposed to the SharePoint Portal server (now renamed, I believe, to Microsoft Office SharePoint Server) which does indeed cost a packet.
I do a lot of LAMP development, and I'm not the strongest fan of Microsoft for a lot of things, but if you have a MS desktop and MS Office environment, SharePoint services really is quite decent for INTRANET applications. Especially for collaberation. You can set up work flows for check-out/check-in, and it integrates really nicely with some of the more recent MS Office releases. If you connect it to a real MS SQL server on the back end (as opposed to the express edition that it defaults to), you can have full text indexing even with the free SharePoint Services version. Only need for the full blown Portal/MOSS version is if you think you are going to have a large number of sharePoint sites, and want to simplify cross-connecting and management. (At least as far as I can recall)
I'm not saying SharePoint is the way to go, but I'd at least read up on it and consider it IF you have a lot of MS Office stuff that you plan on indexing/sharing.
I'd strongly advise avoiding it if you plan to do Internet-based stuff though... at lest until you get a good enough understanding of the security issues involved that you feel that you really know what you're doing.
I checked out his blog (thanks for the link) and I'm a little concerned for him:
"I delete emails, so discovery is moot."
IANAL, but I could see a situation where someone with enough influence could convince a prosecutor to go after him for deliberate destruction of evidence or obstruction or whatever they want to call it.
Of course, that brings up the question "is the deliberate deletion of logs and/or emails in order to protect anonymity ok?" Obviously, if you are embroiled in a lawsuit or are under investigation, this could be construed as destruction of evidence, but if you do it as a matter of course and are not under some ISP free harbor agreement (we won't hold you responsible for the actions of your users so long as you don't take deliberate actions to destroy logs/emails/whatever and you cooperate with any court orders).
I really don't know the answers, but others might.
Yes, and the over-reaction to his silly crackpot questions will only serve to bolster the opinions of the black-helicopter crowd that they're right... However, if stuff like this keeps on happening, I'm going to start to wonder if they're not right too.
Well, they ~used to be~ academics... they kind of lost their grants after failing to show up for their own lectures because they were too busy playing WarCrack.... And don't mod me down for trolling... I play alliance. ~grin~
Without copyright, would "Fair use" actually have any meaning? That being said, I'm glad to see some folks with big fat checkbooks getting behind the concept. The EFF does great work, but arguably, they're somewhat limited in what they can do by the money (or lack thereof) they have to spend.
oblig. I for one welcome our new Fair Use overlords.
Actually, its simply that the product sells better when the store has a sign with a BIG BOLD price $100 lower than normal and in really tiny print, it says "after mail in rebate"
People buy the product, but due to lazyness or incomplete following of the byzantine rules, fail to properly file for their rebate. Oh yeah, not to mention, almost all rebates require that you rip the UPC off the box the product came in. Guess what? you now can't return the product... period.
Actually, I'm running Windows on several machines and have yet to be infected... the real problem lies between the chair and the keyboard on this one. Stupid people buying crap from SPAMvertized sites, stupid people buying stocks after seeing that SPAMvertized stock tip, and stupid people getting a dozen random greeting card emails in bad English and actually going to some web site where the address is a random IP address in an APNIC block and downloading and running an executable from it.
Microsoft is certainly guilty of many things, but the infected users, the ISPs who allow the infected computers to continue to connect, and the asshats who wrote this thing are the ones to blame.
The reason these things don't hit Linux is because a) the market penetration isn't big enough and b) the users tend to be a LOT more sophisticated and are thus less likely to fall for the social engineering tricks used to get it installed. There are tons of exploits that work against Linux and Unix machines, it's just a question of Windows being the best effort to payoff ratio for their distribution method.
Yep, that's more or less exactly what I was thinking: an index IS a column-based view, so with an RDBMS, you get the best of both worlds.
Generally, I'm suspicious anytime someone declares a widely-used technology obsolete. Look at IPv4... IPv6 may be vastly superior, but millions upon millions of networks still rely on the tried and true. How about all those declarations about how business will be totally paperless. It's an admirable goal - many companies are shifting, but paper's going to be with us for a long time yet.
Same's true for databases. Sure, maybe this approach WILL revolutionize data warehouses, but to me that just means we will be using column-based stuff as yet another tool. I've played around in Object-oriented databases... I know some folks who swear by them... did they completely replace traditional RDBMS? nope... just another tool.
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." --Abraham Maslow
Sounds like the folks at the headend were quite the bunch of jokers.
Actually, I've always figured that any telepresense robot I'd care to use would HAVE TO HAVE some form of manipulator arm. It wouldn't need too much freedom of movement - just enough to allow me to give any system in the computer room the old "single finger salute".
Of course, put a proper arm on there, and you can plug and unplug stuff. mmmm remote BOFH... I love it!
And here all along, I thought that the official definition of a cult was "a small, unpopular religion", and that a religion was "a large, popular cult". Ahh well, live and learn.
In all seriousness though, I looked into your posting history before commenting - you're no troll as some have suggested. It's obvious that you have rather strong religious beliefs, and that one of them is that your religion is right an all others are wrong. That's all well and good, but I gotta say that the kind of fanatical devotion (to whit your rather bizarre definition of a cult) that you display makes my teeth ache as badly as the fanatical, unreasoned devotion the adherents of Co$ have to their beliefs. In summary, you really are making a bad name for Christian types.
You have the right to believe what you want, but please allow others to believe what they want.
Funny how these things that I've been meaning to do get invented by other people. Guess this is a sign to GET OFF MY BUTT and actually do them. Of course, if I did build my telepresence robot, I ~could~ get things done, yet STILL sit on my butt!
"...and the once lucrative album market has been overshadowed by downloaded singles, which mainly benefits Apple"
Seems to me that downloading singles mainly benefits the ~CONSUMER~.. I'm far from being a big Apple fan, but I gotta say that the reason that iTunes is succeeding is that Apple's actually giving the customer what they want. How many times have you heard a song that you liked enough to actually go out and buy the CD, only to be disappointed by all of the other tracks?
I'm no conspiracy monger, but I've had the sneaking suspicion for some time that the music industry wants the artists to have one single song drive the sale of the entire CD, and may even go so far as to have the artists hold back on other potential singles for the next album.
If ALL songs were judged (in a commercial sense) on their individual merit, the music industry probably worries that their sales would go down (cuz nobody'd by the 'filler' crap). However, if the industry was less concerned with protecting their old business model, they'd notice that they'd make up on volume what they lost on bundling, and in the process would have a much more enthusiastic customer base. Apple has kind of figured that out, no?
Wow, I do sound like a conspiracy nut... hmm, maybe the tinfoil hats really will stop the black helicopters from transmitting signals to my brain.:)
Windows 9 had a.REG file that sets Registry entries dynamically when it is invoked from the command lineor by double clicking in Windows Explorer. I imagine that it is still there in Vista.
That certainly works in Win2K / WinXP, so I'm going to agree with you and bet that it should work with Vista too. (I can't confirm because I have done my very best to avoid installing Vista on anything I own.)
So, it would appear that there is potentially a fairly easy solution... the remaining problem would be to figure out how to get it to folks who, by definition, can't get to the Internet to download it. The ISP would have to mail a CD to the affected customers when they call or something, and it seems to me that they're kind of unwilling to help.
may indeed be shutting the door on a possible future paying market. But they may also be preserving the current source of their revenue
I think this is actually the crux of the whole problem. The Music industry's very business model is based on a high barrier to entry. Namely, it used to be nearly impossible for an artist to record, mix, produce, duplicate, market, and sell their music without this huge infrastructure behind them. With really high quality digital recording, mixing, and editing hardware and software available, and with the ability to directly market and sell via the Internet (even producing really professional quality CDs with cover art and labels on demand a-la the former mp3.com, the current Cafe Press, etc...), the music industry is running scared.
So long as the music industry can buy lobbiests and lawyers aplenty (thus buying the courts and politicians, or at least their ears), they're going to do everything in their power to stifle disruptive technologies. Frankly, I think they're going a pretty good job at it too (good as in effective, not as in 'the right thing').
Probably the only way to stop them is to stop buying AND stop downloading music produced by artists and labels working within the established recording industry, and it seems a bit unlikely that the majority of music fans will be willing to go that far... ~sigh~ quandry indeed.
Hmm, and the referenced article even shows the proper registry settings to change in order to fix it.
I usually just manually edit my registry when I need to change something like that, and thus have never had need to write a script or program to do it for me. However, it seems like a couple hours work to come up with a small utility that can toggle the settings on/off. It seems to me that the ISP, Microsoft, or an interested third party could easily provide such a tool.
Of course, without being able to get to the Internet, finding the KB article to know where to go in the registry to fix it, or to download the proposed script may be a bit difficult if you can't get a DHCP setting. In the end, I'd say that the ISP's kind of failing to serve their customers' needs.
Summary: Ten out of ten for standing up for what they believe in, but minus several million for poor customer support.
I remember "back in the day" when spyware was still something you needed a separate scanner (Ad-Aware, Spybot S&D, etc..) for.
My pet theory was that since a lot of the spyware was coming from legit (but questionable) companies, the major antivirus players were afraid of touching it due to the threat of these kinds of lawsuits. Even though spyware and malware has since grown to such a pervasive problem that the big AV firms have gotten on board, I bet they were all watching the outcome of this suit. I for one am really happy that the ruling went in Kaspersky's favor, and shudder to think what would have happened if it hadn't.
Hopefully this ruling will send notice that you can't hide behind "restraint of trade" to keep antivirus / antispam programs from calling a spade a spade.
Of course, trying to keep information secret is a loosing battle. Look at how quickly DRM gets cracked; how no matter what protections get put in place, pirate copies of software and movies are on the streets sometimes before official releases; how strong, open-source encryption went 'round the world despite the US's attempts to stop it; how anyone with the least bit of curiosity knows the very high-level theory of how to make a Uranium gun-type nuke (thankfully, refining enough U235 is rather beyond most country's skills, let alone individuals).
Slashdot Mirror
I read the topic title as "Stealing Cars Via OnStar".
Hmm, well, actually it can't be too long.
All your Cadillac are belong to us.
I don't have direct experience with scaling it (having only set up on my server at home to get a feel for installation and to play with it a bit), but it would seem that if you're having scaling issues, that the MOSS (Formerly SharePoint Portal Server) may be a better fit.
Apparently, there's a fairly decent upgrade path from SharePoint Services to full-on MOSS, but again, I do not state that from experience... just from what I've heard.
Actually, if you are an MS shop and have Microsoft Server 2003, SharePoint Services 3.0 (as opposed to the SharePoint Portal server (now renamed, I believe, to Microsoft Office SharePoint Server) which does indeed cost a packet.
I do a lot of LAMP development, and I'm not the strongest fan of Microsoft for a lot of things, but if you have a MS desktop and MS Office environment, SharePoint services really is quite decent for INTRANET applications. Especially for collaberation. You can set up work flows for check-out/check-in, and it integrates really nicely with some of the more recent MS Office releases. If you connect it to a real MS SQL server on the back end (as opposed to the express edition that it defaults to), you can have full text indexing even with the free SharePoint Services version. Only need for the full blown Portal/MOSS version is if you think you are going to have a large number of sharePoint sites, and want to simplify cross-connecting and management. (At least as far as I can recall)
I'm not saying SharePoint is the way to go, but I'd at least read up on it and consider it IF you have a lot of MS Office stuff that you plan on indexing/sharing.
I'd strongly advise avoiding it if you plan to do Internet-based stuff though... at lest until you get a good enough understanding of the security issues involved that you feel that you really know what you're doing.
Just my $0.02 worth.
I checked out his blog (thanks for the link) and I'm a little concerned for him:
"I delete emails, so discovery is moot."
IANAL, but I could see a situation where someone with enough influence could convince a prosecutor to go after him for deliberate destruction of evidence or obstruction or whatever they want to call it.
Of course, that brings up the question "is the deliberate deletion of logs and/or emails in order to protect anonymity ok?" Obviously, if you are embroiled in a lawsuit or are under investigation, this could be construed as destruction of evidence, but if you do it as a matter of course and are not under some ISP free harbor agreement (we won't hold you responsible for the actions of your users so long as you don't take deliberate actions to destroy logs/emails/whatever and you cooperate with any court orders).
I really don't know the answers, but others might.
Yes, and the over-reaction to his silly crackpot questions will only serve to bolster the opinions of the black-helicopter crowd that they're right... However, if stuff like this keeps on happening, I'm going to start to wonder if they're not right too.
Of course, since Python was named after Monty Python's Flying Circus, maybe it should be one of these:
Something along those lines anyway
umount /dev/work /home
cd
kill -9 splicer
kill -HUP bigBrother
restore -F littleSister
Well, they ~used to be~ academics... they kind of lost their grants after failing to show up for their own lectures because they were too busy playing WarCrack. ... And don't mod me down for trolling... I play alliance. ~grin~
Without copyright, would "Fair use" actually have any meaning? That being said, I'm glad to see some folks with big fat checkbooks getting behind the concept. The EFF does great work, but arguably, they're somewhat limited in what they can do by the money (or lack thereof) they have to spend.
oblig.
I for one welcome our new Fair Use overlords.
OOh, that's cool. Thanks for the info.
Of course I don't see Ultra Edit on the list yet, but it can't be ~that~ far between a U3 version and a PortableApps version.
Actually, its simply that the product sells better when the store has a sign with a BIG BOLD price $100 lower than normal and in really tiny print, it says "after mail in rebate"
People buy the product, but due to lazyness or incomplete following of the byzantine rules, fail to properly file for their rebate. Oh yeah, not to mention, almost all rebates require that you rip the UPC off the box the product came in. Guess what? you now can't return the product... period.
In the Windows world, how about stuff made for U3 memory sticks?
I'd say that PuTTY is also pretty utilitarian - does what it needs without any fancy installs or bloating - BRILLIANT!
Actually, I'm running Windows on several machines and have yet to be infected... the real problem lies between the chair and the keyboard on this one. Stupid people buying crap from SPAMvertized sites, stupid people buying stocks after seeing that SPAMvertized stock tip, and stupid people getting a dozen random greeting card emails in bad English and actually going to some web site where the address is a random IP address in an APNIC block and downloading and running an executable from it.
Microsoft is certainly guilty of many things, but the infected users, the ISPs who allow the infected computers to continue to connect, and the asshats who wrote this thing are the ones to blame.
The reason these things don't hit Linux is because a) the market penetration isn't big enough and b) the users tend to be a LOT more sophisticated and are thus less likely to fall for the social engineering tricks used to get it installed. There are tons of exploits that work against Linux and Unix machines, it's just a question of Windows being the best effort to payoff ratio for their distribution method.
Just wondering if the text will render in FF00CC?
Yep, that's more or less exactly what I was thinking: an index IS a column-based view, so with an RDBMS, you get the best of both worlds.
Generally, I'm suspicious anytime someone declares a widely-used technology obsolete. Look at IPv4... IPv6 may be vastly superior, but millions upon millions of networks still rely on the tried and true. How about all those declarations about how business will be totally paperless. It's an admirable goal - many companies are shifting, but paper's going to be with us for a long time yet.
Same's true for databases. Sure, maybe this approach WILL revolutionize data warehouses, but to me that just means we will be using column-based stuff as yet another tool. I've played around in Object-oriented databases... I know some folks who swear by them... did they completely replace traditional RDBMS? nope... just another tool.
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail." --Abraham Maslow
Sounds like the folks at the headend were quite the bunch of jokers.
... I love it!
Actually, I've always figured that any telepresense robot I'd care to use would HAVE TO HAVE some form of manipulator arm. It wouldn't need too much freedom of movement - just enough to allow me to give any system in the computer room the old "single finger salute".
Of course, put a proper arm on there, and you can plug and unplug stuff. mmmm remote BOFH
And here all along, I thought that the official definition of a cult was "a small, unpopular religion", and that a religion was "a large, popular cult". Ahh well, live and learn.
In all seriousness though, I looked into your posting history before commenting - you're no troll as some have suggested. It's obvious that you have rather strong religious beliefs, and that one of them is that your religion is right an all others are wrong. That's all well and good, but I gotta say that the kind of fanatical devotion (to whit your rather bizarre definition of a cult) that you display makes my teeth ache as badly as the fanatical, unreasoned devotion the adherents of Co$ have to their beliefs. In summary, you really are making a bad name for Christian types.
You have the right to believe what you want, but please allow others to believe what they want.
Funny how these things that I've been meaning to do get invented by other people. Guess this is a sign to GET OFF MY BUTT and actually do them. Of course, if I did build my telepresence robot, I ~could~ get things done, yet STILL sit on my butt!
/silly
PROFIT!
Dude, you do realize that you just killed the thread ~and~ lost, right?
Seems to me that downloading singles mainly benefits the ~CONSUMER~.. I'm far from being a big Apple fan, but I gotta say that the reason that iTunes is succeeding is that Apple's actually giving the customer what they want. How many times have you heard a song that you liked enough to actually go out and buy the CD, only to be disappointed by all of the other tracks?
I'm no conspiracy monger, but I've had the sneaking suspicion for some time that the music industry wants the artists to have one single song drive the sale of the entire CD, and may even go so far as to have the artists hold back on other potential singles for the next album.
If ALL songs were judged (in a commercial sense) on their individual merit, the music industry probably worries that their sales would go down (cuz nobody'd by the 'filler' crap). However, if the industry was less concerned with protecting their old business model, they'd notice that they'd make up on volume what they lost on bundling, and in the process would have a much more enthusiastic customer base. Apple has kind of figured that out, no?
Wow, I do sound like a conspiracy nut... hmm, maybe the tinfoil hats really will stop the black helicopters from transmitting signals to my brain. :)
That certainly works in Win2K / WinXP, so I'm going to agree with you and bet that it should work with Vista too. (I can't confirm because I have done my very best to avoid installing Vista on anything I own.)
So, it would appear that there is potentially a fairly easy solution... the remaining problem would be to figure out how to get it to folks who, by definition, can't get to the Internet to download it. The ISP would have to mail a CD to the affected customers when they call or something, and it seems to me that they're kind of unwilling to help.
I think this is actually the crux of the whole problem. The Music industry's very business model is based on a high barrier to entry. Namely, it used to be nearly impossible for an artist to record, mix, produce, duplicate, market, and sell their music without this huge infrastructure behind them. With really high quality digital recording, mixing, and editing hardware and software available, and with the ability to directly market and sell via the Internet (even producing really professional quality CDs with cover art and labels on demand a-la the former mp3.com, the current Cafe Press, etc...), the music industry is running scared.
So long as the music industry can buy lobbiests and lawyers aplenty (thus buying the courts and politicians, or at least their ears), they're going to do everything in their power to stifle disruptive technologies. Frankly, I think they're going a pretty good job at it too (good as in effective, not as in 'the right thing').
Probably the only way to stop them is to stop buying AND stop downloading music produced by artists and labels working within the established recording industry, and it seems a bit unlikely that the majority of music fans will be willing to go that far... ~sigh~ quandry indeed.
Hmm, and the referenced article even shows the proper registry settings to change in order to fix it.
I usually just manually edit my registry when I need to change something like that, and thus have never had need to write a script or program to do it for me. However, it seems like a couple hours work to come up with a small utility that can toggle the settings on/off. It seems to me that the ISP, Microsoft, or an interested third party could easily provide such a tool.
Of course, without being able to get to the Internet, finding the KB article to know where to go in the registry to fix it, or to download the proposed script may be a bit difficult if you can't get a DHCP setting. In the end, I'd say that the ISP's kind of failing to serve their customers' needs.
Summary: Ten out of ten for standing up for what they believe in, but minus several million for poor customer support.
I remember "back in the day" when spyware was still something you needed a separate scanner (Ad-Aware, Spybot S&D, etc..) for.
My pet theory was that since a lot of the spyware was coming from legit (but questionable) companies, the major antivirus players were afraid of touching it due to the threat of these kinds of lawsuits. Even though spyware and malware has since grown to such a pervasive problem that the big AV firms have gotten on board, I bet they were all watching the outcome of this suit. I for one am really happy that the ruling went in Kaspersky's favor, and shudder to think what would have happened if it hadn't.
Hopefully this ruling will send notice that you can't hide behind "restraint of trade" to keep antivirus / antispam programs from calling a spade a spade.
Of course, trying to keep information secret is a loosing battle. Look at how quickly DRM gets cracked; how no matter what protections get put in place, pirate copies of software and movies are on the streets sometimes before official releases; how strong, open-source encryption went 'round the world despite the US's attempts to stop it; how anyone with the least bit of curiosity knows the very high-level theory of how to make a Uranium gun-type nuke (thankfully, refining enough U235 is rather beyond most country's skills, let alone individuals).
You can never get the djin back in the bottle.