HP is dropping Workstations, which is what I think yo are talking about. Considering that Intel's Itanic (well, this is coming from the Reg, we should use their word) partner is dropping the "volume" machine from their order sheets (volume being very relative here) it kind of says Itanic will be niche only from now on.
This will effectively kill Itanic. You need some volume to make it worthwhile to provide tools. You also need a "low price" (low price also being relative) machine to develop on (I don't think you're gonna get a 64 Itanic machine unde yorur desk). Eventually the Itanic, which was supposed to supplant the x86 as the new everywhere chip, will wither and die.
I can't say "why RH8" but I can give one issue that is sufficient to say "Why not 7.3" (which is one of your options) - g++296. The g++ issue has proven to be a major PITA for RH 7.3. The system compiler is a redhat fork of gcc, is incompatible with everything both before and after it, and 7.3 is already end of lifed, so no support from redhat. You's stuck with a system compiler with absolutely zero support, outside of some guys from Fedora that keep a compat RPM around, that you'd have to backport all their changes into your package because the specfile is different (being a compat package and all).
My belief is that PHP is fine under threads, a lot of the third party stuff is unknown (can be read: probably will break) and the PHP guys don't want to bother with broken 3rd party stuff.
This kind of misses the point. The assumption "why bother with apache 2.0 if it doesn't run in multi-threaded mode" misses all the cool things that have gone into apache 2.0 outside of the threading models. I'ts a lot saner, and has cool things like chaining (output of CGI can go through SSI) and a million other things. The PHP guys should just say "run it in the old MPM mpde and have fun" which is I think the real sticking point.
Social engineering. A lot of viruses are now being sent in encrypted.zip files, to get around email scanners. So to get the virus to spread you have to: download the attachment. apply the password open the zip run the virus.
Not that much different from the above scenario. Not a lot of people are doing this, but enough to make it a headache.
Second, the virus has actually to start up, and Linux binaries don't necessarily work on other systems, unless statically linked. Use only glibc and you'll be fine, at least as far as the virus payload is concerned.
The above two questions do bring up an excellent point as to "why would some user go through all that trouble to open this" though. We have to assume the payload does something that the user wants to see. That probably includes X or something graphical. Maybe the virus just punts, and says something cryptic like "Library foo 2.x or higher not found" and does it's dirty work. How many users will then really investigate the Library error, and how many will just delete it and move on.
Assuming it's statically linked, Linux systems are rather less standard than Windows ones. How does it send mail?...Next, it can perhaps try using the server at localhost. 1) it doesn't need to contact a server at localhost. It can use the local sendmail agent, or the mail/mailx/mutt front ends. The server is required to receive mail, not send it. Even the server is not configured properly, the virus can embed its own SMTP mailer, just like most Windows viruses do. If you can roll an SMTP mailer in VBScript, you can do it in C.
In short, it's not a whole lot harder to do on Linux, it's just the bar to get into Linux is just a bit higher than it is for Windows, so the social engineering side will be less effective.
Not sure how long printers can support them. Right now printing is a fairly mature technology, in some ways even more so than computers. This type of area is perfect for someone with a more efficient manufacturing and distribution model to come in and take over. Dell has already entered the market, stated it will purposely run with a lower margin than HP just to eat away at HP's profits, and will soon cream them here, at least in the low end. Soon HP will have no other high profit center to sustain themselves. I predict bad things for HP, which is sad.
As I'm a lurker in alt.binaries.pictures.wallpapers So that's what you're telling the girlfriend. "Yeah honey, I stay online all the time downloading, ummm, wallpapers... with ummm, bunny rabbits asn cute squirrels.... really"
When I had this problem, I just downloaded Fentun and mapped the.tnf extension to it. Any time I got an evil MS-TNEF mail, I just saved to the dektop as yadda_yadda.tnf, and double clicked it, and poof! converted. Though not invisible, it definitely wasn't a lot of manual effort, with my caveat that I never received that many of these - I was at a UNIX shop at the time and rarely received attachments from people not on UNIX.
Not only that, but think of all websites that are virtual hosted. YOu can't slow down a webstie, but a whole machine. So slow a spammer and all 99 other domains on that machine.
Yes, and it broke things. Things like this tend to get rushed out the door because of the impending emergency, and are therefore highly likely to be buggy. At the time this was released, it caused more damage than good (since the initial worm flood was actually waning(.
Also, did Xerox make any money at all from Parc??? Hmm, ethernet (one time known as DIX Ethernet; DEC, Intel, Xerox) and laserprinters come from PARC? I'm sure they made a buck or two from laser printers, not sure how much (if any) money was made off of ethernet.
Most people think of PARC for the computers, specifically the systems that became our modern GUI a.k.a. W.I.M.P (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer) interface. I read someplace that Apple gave Xerox some stock for them to be able to copy the ideas from the Xerox Star GUI systems, so it negates the "Xerox didn't make any money at all" and "Apple stole it" we've been hearing on the net for years. Xerox just couldn't see how to productize it, so "sold" the rights to Apple.
(Later I discovered that I could drag it out of the way by holding down Alt, but why should I have to?) BTW: this is a feature of your window manager, not the window itself. Alt-Button1 moves, Alt-button2 resizes, well, at least in all window managers that uphold the conventions. There are no rules, but most use these mappings.
Personally, I don't know of anyone who has received an AOL disk in the mail for a couple of years now. I have, a few recently, probably because I moved and they saw a new address.
Q: When is a "site" not a site? A: when it is sites - Virtual Hosting.
Machine A has 100 virtual domains on it, meaning 100 websites and email domains. 1 domain decides to do this inject crap. So we block the IP, and 99 innocent domains get hit, totally clueless as to why.
Remember, this is usually malicious HTML and Cross-Site-Scripting exploits. Are we going to force all hosting companies to now de-obfuscate and inspect every HTML file that can be served from their machines? Manually inspect all CGI, ASP, all generated content to make sure this can't happen, or else every domain hosted on that machine can be killed?
Even if that were possible, how frequently? If I test Saturday, and some joker injects a zero day exploit on my site later that night, should I still be banninated?
This doesn't even account for the possibility of a compromised website, how would you determine whether they did it maliciously or not, though this being/., most people would blame the victim for daring to use IIS (even though there were holes in some Apache installs that allowed people to change site content a while back).
I agree with the above comments, it's not a stability issue, it's an interface issue. I got used to the Mozilla/Seamonkey style (been using moz since Milestone 12 I think). Firefox is a much different interface. On the downsides, Firefox is much snappier, bookmark handling is much improved compared to Moz 1.7, and I'll be giving that up. Looking forward to Mozilla 1.8 so I can ditch firefox.
Random pads with truly random data is unbreakable. The few times it has been broken has been due to human error (reusing the same random data stream). The US tracked some russian spies with this, they reused pads, and we found out there was a mole in the atomic bomb program.
That said, paddign with pseudo-random data is very unsafe. Breaking this type of encryption is typically one of the first homework assignments in cryptography courses. The article is either very fuzzy on this distinction, or plain out wrong, depending on how you read it.
Cringely had an article a while back that mentioned Google liking to use Pentium IIIs in their data center. Yes the Pentium 4s were faster, but if you looked at your datacenter as a whole system, including power, cooling, and space requirements, they were better off with 'old' Pentium IIIs. At the time, I think Google was worried they wouldn't be able to source new machines with P-IIIs, looks like Intel is following them this time. Intel seems to be following a lot lately, the megahertz at any cost mantra sure faded fast.
Anyone know what happened to blue - pink - red?
on
NeXTSTEP To Mac OS X
·
· Score: 1
Back in my more hard-core Mac days I remember their OS roadmap was: System 7, code named Blue Taligent (Joint IBM project, never did anything) - Pink. And there was Red, what the hell was Red? This was supposed to be the real far-out stuff.
I don't think it was Copland, that seemed more of a stopgap from the implosion of Taligent.
Don't forget, Linux, much like Solaris, is completely immune to viruses!
The only virus I ever got on solaris in over 10 years of being on the machines was the Word Macro Virus "Concept-1" that attacked Word running under (the gratefully now dead) WABI.
Slashdot Mirror
The Reg actually has been calling it Itanic since 1999...
HP is dropping Workstations, which is what I think yo are talking about. Considering that Intel's Itanic (well, this is coming from the Reg, we should use their word) partner is dropping the "volume" machine from their order sheets (volume being very relative here) it kind of says Itanic will be niche only from now on.
This will effectively kill Itanic. You need some volume to make it worthwhile to provide tools. You also need a "low price" (low price also being relative) machine to develop on (I don't think you're gonna get a 64 Itanic machine unde yorur desk). Eventually the Itanic, which was supposed to supplant the x86 as the new everywhere chip, will wither and die.
Just hasn't happened yet
I can't say "why RH8" but I can give one issue that is sufficient to say "Why not 7.3" (which is one of your options) - g++296. The g++ issue has proven to be a major PITA for RH 7.3. The system compiler is a redhat fork of gcc, is incompatible with everything both before and after it, and 7.3 is already end of lifed, so no support from redhat. You's stuck with a system compiler with absolutely zero support, outside of some guys from Fedora that keep a compat RPM around, that you'd have to backport all their changes into your package because the specfile is different (being a compat package and all).
My belief is that PHP is fine under threads, a lot of the third party stuff is unknown (can be read: probably will break) and the PHP guys don't want to bother with broken 3rd party stuff.
This kind of misses the point. The assumption "why bother with apache 2.0 if it doesn't run in multi-threaded mode" misses all the cool things that have gone into apache 2.0 outside of the threading models. I'ts a lot saner, and has cool things like chaining (output of CGI can go through SSI) and a million other things. The PHP guys should just say "run it in the old MPM mpde and have fun" which is I think the real sticking point.
Social engineering. A lot of viruses are now being sent in encrypted
download the attachment.
apply the password
open the zip
run the virus.
Not that much different from the above scenario. Not a lot of people are doing this, but enough to make it a headache.
Second, the virus has actually to start up, and Linux binaries don't necessarily work on other systems, unless statically linked.
Use only glibc and you'll be fine, at least as far as the virus payload is concerned.
The above two questions do bring up an excellent point as to "why would some user go through all that trouble to open this" though. We have to assume the payload does something that the user wants to see. That probably includes X or something graphical. Maybe the virus just punts, and says something cryptic like "Library foo 2.x or higher not found" and does it's dirty work. How many users will then really investigate the Library error, and how many will just delete it and move on.
Assuming it's statically linked, Linux systems are rather less standard than Windows ones. How does it send mail?...Next, it can perhaps try using the server at localhost.
1) it doesn't need to contact a server at localhost. It can use the local sendmail agent, or the mail/mailx/mutt front ends. The server is required to receive mail, not send it. Even the server is not configured properly, the virus can embed its own SMTP mailer, just like most Windows viruses do. If you can roll an SMTP mailer in VBScript, you can do it in C.
In short, it's not a whole lot harder to do on Linux, it's just the bar to get into Linux is just a bit higher than it is for Windows, so the social engineering side will be less effective.
Not sure how long printers can support them. Right now printing is a fairly mature technology, in some ways even more so than computers. This type of area is perfect for someone with a more efficient manufacturing and distribution model to come in and take over. Dell has already entered the market, stated it will purposely run with a lower margin than HP just to eat away at HP's profits, and will soon cream them here, at least in the low end. Soon HP will have no other high profit center to sustain themselves. I predict bad things for HP, which is sad.
As I'm a lurker in alt.binaries.pictures.wallpapers
So that's what you're telling the girlfriend. "Yeah honey, I stay online all the time downloading, ummm, wallpapers... with ummm, bunny rabbits asn cute squirrels.... really"
When I had this problem, I just downloaded Fentun and mapped the .tnf extension to it. Any time I got an evil MS-TNEF mail, I just saved to the dektop as yadda_yadda.tnf, and double clicked it, and poof! converted. Though not invisible, it definitely wasn't a lot of manual effort, with my caveat that I never received that many of these - I was at a UNIX shop at the time and rarely received attachments from people not on UNIX.
I'm using 4.1 (its not a production release yet)...
MySQL 4.1 series marked as stable
Not only that, but think of all websites that are virtual hosted. YOu can't slow down a webstie, but a whole machine. So slow a spammer and all 99 other domains on that machine.
Yes, and it broke things. Things like this tend to get rushed out the door because of the impending emergency, and are therefore highly likely to be buggy. At the time this was released, it caused more damage than good (since the initial worm flood was actually waning(.
Also, did Xerox make any money at all from Parc???
Hmm, ethernet (one time known as DIX Ethernet; DEC, Intel, Xerox) and laserprinters come from PARC? I'm sure they made a buck or two from laser printers, not sure how much (if any) money was made off of ethernet.
Most people think of PARC for the computers, specifically the systems that became our modern GUI a.k.a. W.I.M.P (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer) interface. I read someplace that Apple gave Xerox some stock for them to be able to copy the ideas from the Xerox Star GUI systems, so it negates the "Xerox didn't make any money at all" and "Apple stole it" we've been hearing on the net for years. Xerox just couldn't see how to productize it, so "sold" the rights to Apple.
(Later I discovered that I could drag it out of the way by holding down Alt, but why should I have to?)
BTW: this is a feature of your window manager, not the window itself. Alt-Button1 moves, Alt-button2 resizes, well, at least in all window managers that uphold the conventions. There are no rules, but most use these mappings.
depends. AMD has better memory architecture for once. Generally kicks ass on most loads vs. a Xeon.
Yes. It is forward compatible with the x86/ia32 ISA.
Intel tried to go the clean room route with the Itanium, but they then realized how difficult it is to make people change.
Personally, I don't know of anyone who has received an AOL disk in the mail for a couple of years now.
I have, a few recently, probably because I moved and they saw a new address.
Q: When is a "site" not a site?
/., most people would blame the victim for daring to use IIS (even though there were holes in some Apache installs that allowed people to change site content a while back).
A: when it is sites - Virtual Hosting.
Machine A has 100 virtual domains on it, meaning 100 websites and email domains. 1 domain decides to do this inject crap. So we block the IP, and 99 innocent domains get hit, totally clueless as to why.
Remember, this is usually malicious HTML and Cross-Site-Scripting exploits. Are we going to force all hosting companies to now de-obfuscate and inspect every HTML file that can be served from their machines? Manually inspect all CGI, ASP, all generated content to make sure this can't happen, or else every domain hosted on that machine can be killed?
Even if that were possible, how frequently? If I test Saturday, and some joker injects a zero day exploit on my site later that night, should I still be banninated?
This doesn't even account for the possibility of a compromised website, how would you determine whether they did it maliciously or not, though this being
I agree with the above comments, it's not a stability issue, it's an interface issue. I got used to the Mozilla/Seamonkey style (been using moz since Milestone 12 I think). Firefox is a much different interface. On the downsides, Firefox is much snappier, bookmark handling is much improved compared to Moz 1.7, and I'll be giving that up. Looking forward to Mozilla 1.8 so I can ditch firefox.
A million monkeys might eventually write Shakespeare, but how would they recognise it once they had?
They'd use RFC 2795, the Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite of course
Random pads with truly random data is unbreakable. The few times it has been broken has been due to human error (reusing the same random data stream). The US tracked some russian spies with this, they reused pads, and we found out there was a mole in the atomic bomb program.
That said, paddign with pseudo-random data is very unsafe. Breaking this type of encryption is typically one of the first homework assignments in cryptography courses. The article is either very fuzzy on this distinction, or plain out wrong, depending on how you read it.
Interesting read from eWeek, talking about CPU power consumption and California energy woes (which server farms helped contribute to).
Cringely had an article a while back that mentioned Google liking to use Pentium IIIs in their data center. Yes the Pentium 4s were faster, but if you looked at your datacenter as a whole system, including power, cooling, and space requirements, they were better off with 'old' Pentium IIIs. At the time, I think Google was worried they wouldn't be able to source new machines with P-IIIs, looks like Intel is following them this time. Intel seems to be following a lot lately, the megahertz at any cost mantra sure faded fast.
Back in my more hard-core Mac days I remember their OS roadmap was:
System 7, code named Blue
Taligent (Joint IBM project, never did anything) - Pink.
And there was Red, what the hell was Red? This was supposed to be the real far-out stuff.
I don't think it was Copland, that seemed more of a stopgap from the implosion of Taligent.
Don't forget, Linux, much like Solaris, is completely immune to viruses!
The only virus I ever got on solaris in over 10 years of being on the machines was the Word Macro Virus "Concept-1" that attacked Word running under (the gratefully now dead) WABI.
or echo "Wah Hoo\!" you idiot
Not needed if he runs bash (which I do on my 4.9 box)