I like the analogy, but, you need a license to get a gun. This means you must have a certain baseline amount of gun knowledge to own a gun. Since a baseline precedent has already been set, it could be adjusted higher if necessary, to the point where a gun owner would definitely know if his gun was fired.
Computer's have no such license requirement, and as such, no baseline requirement. Since there is no baseline, imposing one would be very difficult. Especially imposing a baseline knowledge requirement high enough for a user to detect hacker activities.
Many people in my Windows-based office walk past my Gentoo desktop, wondering what I'm running. When they see how well it works (no viruses, no reboots, lots of tools available), they want to know how hard it is to install. Of course, Gentoo is not for the beginner. But, I've been handing out Knoppix CDs left and right. People love it!
But the Dell implementation would have these costs as well. Miranet, Sysadmins, porgrammers, etc..
Redundant power is "cheap" in comparison, but even so, is it strictly necessary in a fault-tolerant cluster/grid? Of course, this assumes that the cluster is fault tolerant, which it should be to a certain extent.
Comparing apples to oranges would be bad, true, but since these pieces are common, they can be removed, and leave the comparison as apples to dells.
If only HTML validation were as simple as submitting pages to the proper emulator, and viewing the results.
<rant>
Should be even simpler than this
-- if you code XHTML, then all XHTML compliant browsers should render the same.
-- if you code CSS, then all CSS compliant browsers should render the same.
-- if you code XYZ, then all XYZ compliant apps should do the same thing.
Isn't this what standards are all about?
Imagine if different electric companies supplied different types of power, while all "be standards compliant"
Image if different car companies produced cars that did not comply to "the standard road" or "the standard gas pump"
Do I have to test my public-access TV show on multiple channels, on multiple different TVs, just to make sure it works on all of them?
I am intrigued by your statement, which makes me wonder: Then why spend the time trying to create a "pretty" user interface? Are they just trying to "dumb it down" for Windows admins?
*Disclaimer* I am a Windows admin myself, but prefer the comfort of a GNU/Linux or FreeBSD desktop.
That is true -- Linus/Linux is not out to attack the MS monopoly. But RedHat, Mandrake, Suse, $FAVORITE_DISTRO are. RedHat, for example, has already recognized this issue, and started attacking it with 'BlueCurve'.
I think it has already been said, (-1 redundant), but it needs to be empasized (+1 intereting) -- get some form of insurance, or a contract that keeps you from being liable. For example, many small companies' employees store their "important" documents in one place -- their personal hard drive. What if you are running a routine scandisk, and the machine flops? Well, whether it is your fault or not, "you" just lost the company's only copy of (bill|contract|policy).
While it may seem more *elegant* to have a native version, what is wrong with the X version? It runs great for me -- would there be better functionality from a native version?
Definitely true -- the home user will not be running enterprise software. However, Microsoft has created a general purpose OS, used as both Workstation and Server, in large and small environments. This single OS is used in many many ways, with many different types of Microsoft supplied software, in many combinations.
To cover all possible combinations -- a home user *might* be running Visual Studio, or IIS -- a single "audit and patch tool" that covers the full range of Microsoft products in necessary.
I use MBSA extensively on my servers, but it does nothing more than alert you to a problem. As a sys-admin, that is fine. But a home user needs something that gives the option to fix all of those problems.
1) WindowsUpdate needs to become MicrosoftUpdate. This would scan and offer patches for all MS software (OS, Exchange, SQL, IIS, Office, Visual Studio,....). Also extend SUS to do the same.
2) Critical Update notification should be done the way OSX does it (with a little configging) -- instead of a tiny little innocuos icon in the system tray, put an obnoxious pop-up in the middle of the screen, with a big "Go Ahead and Install" button, with lots of skull & cross-bone icons.
3) Create patches using their own packaging structure: MSI. This allows for much simpler deployment and management, via Active Directory. No need to pay for SMS simply for patch deployment.
4) Supply MUCH MORE documentation to end users, discussing the importance of keeping one's machine patched.
Normally I agree with you -- however, if I have to chose between 150 years looking for a proof, or <150 days of brute force, I would have to admit that the brute force approach was better.....
Of course there is a market for plane calculators -- anything that can perform math on planes is pretty slick! Of course, plain calculators may die off.....
You know -- sometimes you hear an idea so simple, so basic, that you smack yourself in the head and shout 'Doh!! -- why didn't I think of that already!?!' Thanks for the tip!
Only for servers -- since the original poster references pre-2k and XP, it sounds like workstations are in question here, and I have not found a RDP server for 2k Pro.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, how 'bout it -- Eclipse vs Netbeans? I'm looking to hear from people that have actually used both.
I like the analogy, but, you need a license to get a gun. This means you must have a certain baseline amount of gun knowledge to own a gun. Since a baseline precedent has already been set, it could be adjusted higher if necessary, to the point where a gun owner would definitely know if his gun was fired.
Computer's have no such license requirement, and as such, no baseline requirement. Since there is no baseline, imposing one would be very difficult. Especially imposing a baseline knowledge requirement high enough for a user to detect hacker activities.
But Hotmail is not similar to their company name......
Many people in my Windows-based office walk past my Gentoo desktop, wondering what I'm running. When they see how well it works (no viruses, no reboots, lots of tools available), they want to know how hard it is to install. Of course, Gentoo is not for the beginner. But, I've been handing out Knoppix CDs left and right. People love it!
But the Dell implementation would have these costs as well. Miranet, Sysadmins, porgrammers, etc..
Redundant power is "cheap" in comparison, but even so, is it strictly necessary in a fault-tolerant cluster/grid? Of course, this assumes that the cluster is fault tolerant, which it should be to a certain extent.
Comparing apples to oranges would be bad, true, but since these pieces are common, they can be removed, and leave the comparison as apples to dells.
This is a new feature -- Google has to stay ahead of MSN /somehow/! ;)
Blue Screen of Light-Cycle?
Simple -- use:
<rant> == <rant>
Escape characters
Now this post was tricky to do !
If only HTML validation were as simple as submitting pages to the proper emulator, and viewing the results.
<rant>
Should be even simpler than this
-- if you code XHTML, then all XHTML compliant browsers should render the same.
-- if you code CSS, then all CSS compliant browsers should render the same.
-- if you code XYZ, then all XYZ compliant apps should do the same thing.
Isn't this what standards are all about?
Imagine if different electric companies supplied different types of power, while all "be standards compliant"
Image if different car companies produced cars that did not comply to "the standard road" or "the standard gas pump"
Do I have to test my public-access TV show on multiple channels, on multiple different TVs, just to make sure it works on all of them?
It's NUTZ! </rant>
But where would you store your CVS file? ;)
Erm -- I'm talking about just the kernel -- ... yeah, that's it ...
I am intrigued by your statement, which makes me wonder:
Then why spend the time trying to create a "pretty" user interface? Are they just trying to "dumb it down" for Windows admins?
*Disclaimer* I am a Windows admin myself, but prefer the comfort of a GNU/Linux or FreeBSD desktop.
That is true -- Linus/Linux is not out to attack the MS monopoly. But RedHat, Mandrake, Suse, $FAVORITE_DISTRO are. RedHat, for example, has already recognized this issue, and started attacking it with 'BlueCurve'.
I think it has already been said, (-1 redundant), but it needs to be empasized (+1 intereting) -- get some form of insurance, or a contract that keeps you from being liable.
For example, many small companies' employees store their "important" documents in one place -- their personal hard drive. What if you are running a routine scandisk, and the machine flops? Well, whether it is your fault or not, "you" just lost the company's only copy of (bill|contract|policy).
While it may seem more *elegant* to have a native version, what is wrong with the X version? It runs great for me -- would there be better functionality from a native version?
Definitely true -- the home user will not be running enterprise software. However, Microsoft has created a general purpose OS, used as both Workstation and Server, in large and small environments. This single OS is used in many many ways, with many different types of Microsoft supplied software, in many combinations.
To cover all possible combinations -- a home user *might* be running Visual Studio, or IIS -- a single "audit and patch tool" that covers the full range of Microsoft products in necessary.
I use MBSA extensively on my servers, but it does nothing more than alert you to a problem. As a sys-admin, that is fine. But a home user needs something that gives the option to fix all of those problems.
1) WindowsUpdate needs to become MicrosoftUpdate. This would scan and offer patches for all MS software (OS, Exchange, SQL, IIS, Office, Visual Studio, ....). Also extend SUS to do the same.
...
2) Critical Update notification should be done the way OSX does it (with a little configging) -- instead of a tiny little innocuos icon in the system tray, put an obnoxious pop-up in the middle of the screen, with a big "Go Ahead and Install" button, with lots of skull & cross-bone icons.
3) Create patches using their own packaging structure: MSI. This allows for much simpler deployment and management, via Active Directory. No need to pay for SMS simply for patch deployment.
4) Supply MUCH MORE documentation to end users, discussing the importance of keeping one's machine patched.
5) Stop producing such buggy software! =}8v)
Just my $0.02
Normally I agree with you -- however, if I have to chose between 150 years looking for a proof, or <150 days of brute force, I would have to admit that the brute force approach was better.....
Where do you see that?
... remove the port if I have it installed, since my post Nov 7 cvsup will remove the port from my ports directory?
Gee -- shouldn't somebody moderate this guy *redundant*?
Of course there is a market for plane calculators -- anything that can perform math on planes is pretty slick!
Of course, plain calculators may die off.....
You know -- sometimes you hear an idea so simple, so basic, that you smack yourself in the head and shout 'Doh!! -- why didn't I think of that already!?!'
Thanks for the tip!
Only for servers -- since the original poster references pre-2k and XP, it sounds like workstations are in question here, and I have not found a RDP server for 2k Pro.