This sounds like someone making a mountain out of a mole hill. I mean really, what's the big deal?
IP addresses are already controlled regionally, not by the US. Europe and Asia each have their own registries. Theoretically they manage the IP space under rules set by the IANA, but in reality nobody is going to nay-say them if they don't.
Law and regulation? Ha! The US will regulate for the US and anyone who doesn't like that can block our IP addresses at their border. That's not going to change. Get over it.
The DNS root zone? All 62kbytes of it? Shoot. If you don't want to run ICANN's root zone, download it and run your own version. I do.
Or is control of your own counry's top-level zone not good enough for you? Is there some special zone you particularly feel you need to add to the defacto global root zone? No? Then what the hell are you complaining about!
Don't get me wrong, the ICANN is run by a non-accountable bunch of bufoons, many from Verisign, the same company that somehow managed to lose money selling domain names and ssl certificates. If anyone deserves a comeuppance, they do. But that's not the point, the point is: the system as it is now is stable, functional and reasonably cheap.
For me it was a 1-page email from the owner. It said, basically, "For the following list of properties, all copyrights will vest in me directly, not in the company, and I will grant the company an unlimited, non-exclusive license to use them, duplicate them and create derivative works for no additional compensation. For this other list of things, the copyrights will vest in the company and the company grants and will grant me an unlimited non-exclusive right to use them, duplicate them and create derivative works for no additional compensation."
Worked great. When I eventually left, I walked away with rights to some fine network management and email software that I'm using in my current job.
One simple thing to watch for as you write your contract: You can't grant any rights to an intellectual property that does not exist. Thus for anything where the copyright will vest in the company, they can't pre-grant you rights; they can only agree to grant you rights later once it exists. Make sure the contract explicitly says that because a pre-grant statement is void; a court will not and can not read it to mean that they agreed to grant those rights later. Even if you never follow through and get them to sign the rights over, the agreement to do so will make it impossible for them to sue -- which is just as good.
Also note that unless you're a W2 employee, all copyrights automatically vest in you anyway and remain your property until you explicitly sign them over. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but "I signed a contract which says..." is not one of them. If you do your own witholding, you're better off just keeping your mouth shut and letting them think whatever they want. The IP is yours.
David Brin's book "Earth" predicted it in 1990. It has a wacky plot (the characters use gravitational lasers to try to eject a micro-black hole from the center of the earth), but the world in which the story is set becomes more like our own world with each passing year.
I guess this means that Peer Guardian is not so secure after all, if you can't trust the folks who make and host it. But then, I would have thought that hosting it on a site called "methlabs" in the first place would have clued people in.
I'd like to post my ebook collection on my web site and read it on my blackberry. That's when eBooks will really work for me.
I do the first part. I have a password protected section on my web site where I keep all the books I bought from BAEN. I can read them whenever and wherever I feel like it, as long as there is a computer nearby. And in fact, I do.
The second part is more problematic. The blackberry is reasonably comfortable to read them on, but its too fragging slow, much worse than a 56k modem. Multiple-minute breaks between chapters just doesn't work out. I look forward to the next generation of wireless web services that are usably fast.
P.S. For you publishers out there, I also keep books that others have scanned or decrypted where I can get to them and read them. The only difference between your books and the unencumbered books I bought from BAEN is that I paid for the ones from BAEN. I'd pay for yours too if you didn't make it a pain in the ass. But hey, I'm probably the exception. Everybody else would surely pirate them anyway. You just keep telling yourself that.
Dan Zambonini [...] stresses the type of courses I'm taking are, essentially, useless for getting a job. He lists several CS courses useful for a job. Is he right?
That depends on the kind of job you want to get.
If you intend to become Dilbert, he's absolutely right. Go get your degree from ITT Tech, pick up half a dozen certs like an MCSE, and go get a job with the Pointy Haired Boss.
On the other hand, if you want a job where people respect you and value your contribution, where your boss is glad to see you in the morning, Zambonini couldn't be more wrong.
In the good jobs, you're not expected to know far more technology that you could reasonably be trained in and you're expected to rapidly learn new ones as they come up. That requires a solid grounding in computing theory. You can learn XML; you need to have a solid grounding in database theory so you can rapidly understand XML's strengths and weaknesses.
You laugh, but in the early '70s, the US very nearly built the Atlantic Generating Station, a nuke plant in the shallow waters just off Atlantic City, NJ. The Russians are using a very similar design.
If you're running under Windows, get a Microtek scanner. The software and drivers for Windows are simply superior, though you may want to enable expert mode instead of the default "easy" mode. And the hardware is at least as good as the rest. Starts around $80.
And I'm looking for someone with talent. They can learn any missing skills if they have the talent.
You've made a lot of statements that indicate that you're not familiar with large, conservative organizations.
I admit it: I'm only familiar with large progressive organizations.:) If you want to work in a conservative organization you should get your advice from someone else. Perhaps a Minesweeper Consul.. er.. Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer.
Now how would that possibly happen? You're looking for RHCE's and I don't have one. Thanks for the vote of confidence though.;)
It seems pretty clear that you have a very limited range of experience.
Okaaay, I think this discussion has pretty well run its course but there are a couple points I'll still respond to:
by the time you realize they've been boasting about their credentials, you've hired them.
This is why organizations often have a trial period for new employees. Perhaps in your wide range of experience you've heard of the concept.
I think your problems with the LVM, for example, and due to your own LVM misconfiguration.
That's a little like saying the Challenger and Columbia disasters were due to manufacturing errors. Of course they were. But you'll waste your time trying to fix them at that level. The correct answer is that you add greater tolerance to the design so that minor manufacturing errors can't have such a severe impact.
LVM on root is brittle. Minor mistakes break it so that the system won't boot. It proves far more effective to simply not use it that way.
We're talking about system administrators, not developers.
I suppose this is where our experience diverges the most. I see writing glue code as a major part of the sysadmin's job. In case you don't get the reference, those are short programs that get one system to talk to another. Any candidate who can't do it is unqualified.
I don't pay people to repetitively perform tasks they could automate. I hire folks who can handle it. The result is a no-excuses system that by and large does what the customers want.
At least my boss tells me that's why I still get paid.;)
easier to get a friend you worked with to lie on a resume
This isn't high school. If you don't know the material you claim it becomes real obvious real fast. You might be able to fool me, maybe, but you can't fool the computer when the time comes to do your work.
Again, I'd consider NIS obsolete when I studied it three years ago, but people nevertheless still use it today. The fact you seem to think it's dead is indicate of a lack of experience in conservative (read: large) environments.
Yeah, just like like people still use Cobol and Fortran. But hey, you're right: I work for a tiny organization, only 7,000 employees.
Red Hat are futher ahead of most distros when it comes to security, they're the first with a firewall enabled by default, the first with a DAC system, and the first to Kerberize every major service. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Okay, you're wrong. During the past five years, the number of security incidents per installed server has been lower for Debian, Slackware and FreeBSD among others.
But this is an attempt at a straw-man argument. The topic isn't selecting a secure distro, its selecting competent staff. Lets get back to it, shall we?
Teaching a lowest common denominator course would be stupid. We're aiming to teach RHEL, not Solaris.
I could not have given a better reason for discounting the Red Hat cert if I tried. I'm not interested in hiring a Red Hat Administrator. I'm not even interested in hiring a Linux Administrator. I'm interested in hiring a System Administrator with skill in a broad range of systems, including Linux.
What you characterize as "teaching a lowest common denominator" I see as "teaching the fundamentals." Someone well grounded in the fundamentals is vastly more useful to me than a Red Hat specialist -- he comes in ready to learn our system while the specialist wants to change everything to match how he was trained.
Maybe they should learn how the LVM works.
Maybe they should use a technology that's not so fragile. But then, that wouldn't be the Red Hat Way. If we want stability, we should run Debian on our servers. Oh wait, we do.
They know what works, but not the best way to do things. Have you ever noticed that?
Frequently. In fact, the staff I hired based on their certifications often coughed up the vendor solution without any consideration for whether it was the best or even applicable to the current situation. It rarely was. That's why I don't hire them any more.
After all, where are you going to get training in, lets say, how to make a Linux box check passwords against a Domino LDAP server? You're not. In fact, the pam-ldap modules available with Red Hat can't get the job done. Give up? Hell no. A 100 line program from someone who understands the fundamentals of PAM and LDAP is all it takes.
That's what I need from my sysadmin staff, and that's why I don't hire cert-mongers.
So setting up servers is a good test of whether they can setup servers. Agreed?
Only if you're asking them to set up an environment that you didn't just get through training them how to set up. Otherwise its just a test of how well they can follow instructions.
After all, in the real world you're not asking them to set up a machine that's exactly like the last 50. If it was just like the last 50, you'd play out a tarball in the background while doing other work.
Or hell, maybe you wouldn't. Maybe you'd break out the install CD's and spend half a day tweaking. But if you wasted time like that, you wouldn't last long working for me.
[The RHCE is] a hard exam. I think the people that would fail it include both Cliff and you.
I'd probably finish with time to spare but that's beside the point.
If you're that good, the rest of your resume will clue me in and the interview will clinch it. I don't need to see an RHCE to figure it out.
The RHCE cert just tells me that:
A) You were willing to spend a bunch of time and money, probably your employers rather than your own, just so that you could have a piece of paper.
B) You successfully crammed knowledge for a bunch of technologies, half of which will be obsolete in three years.
NIS is dead and if you produced a PAM+LDAP configuration the Red Hat Way then you learned how to do it badly. And of course it goes without saying that the test machines are Red Hat. Good luck solving the same set of problems on Debian or Solaris.
Also, if you put your root partition on LVM then you're just asking for pain. I've watched folks screw this up, over and over again, and I've seen the same kind of thing with CCIE's and MCSE's. The vendor way is often wrong. I'd much rather see someone who figured it out for himself.
Your cert skills are not like the knowledge you'd gain in a good CS degree program. They're not generally applicable computing principles that apply to anything, they're last year's focused knowledge on a moving target.
When I hire for an Open Source guy, certifications are a red-flag for me. Unless you're very junior, the fact that you wasted space in your resume to tell me that you're certified in a dozen meaningless things tells me you're the wrong guy for the job.
I just recently saw a resume with a bunch of certifications on page 1. He had a college degree... listed all the way on page 5. Roundfile. Goodbye.
I didn't buy a Rio for one simple reason: No expandability. I couldn't add a larger memory card. So I got a little Kodak camera/mp3 player instead that could use compact flash.
Its not the manager's job to know technology. That's what he pays you for. His job is:
1. Figure out which of his people know what they're doing and which don't. 2. Find better people to replace the ones that don't. 3. Make sure that your work is coordinated with your colleagues so that all the needed work gets done. 4. Focus your efforts so that they serve the company's actual needs. 5. Keep the cost of your work within the bounds of what the company can afford. 6. Keep you reasonably content so that you continue to come to work and do a good job.
If you want to judge your manager, don't judge him on how well he can do your job. Judge him on how well he does his.
Depended on the machine. The Sequent was billed on CPU time but the Sparcs were billed on connect time. We had 300 "allocation units" for a 12-week quarter and connect time on a Sparc cost 5 AU's per hour. Needless to say, no CS student stayed within their quota; everyone sought and received an increase later in the quarter. We also got dinked for megabyte-days of disk storage. Everyone started with a 2 meg quota, but most CS students got theirs bumped up to 20 megs.
Back in the days when we walked 6 miles in the snow, uphill, both ways.
Yeah, they metered us this way back at college. It was supposed to simulate a "real" computing environment. We got a quota each semester. An hour logged in to a Sun was the same "price" as 1000 pages off the laser printer. I printed a lot of manuals. A LOT of manuals.
Readers can consult the list of search terms provided by the authors, and can see for themselves that, in the vast majority of cases retained (i.e. those with fewer than 1000 results), the results in question are lists and spam.
I don't know which disturbs me more: The possibility that this is the correct explanation for the discrepancy or the possibility that it isn't.
It seems to me that the correct solution to filtering results would be to put the "undesirable" results at the bottom of the list, not get rid of them entirely. One man's trash is another man's treasure after all.
In a nutshell, yes, the Linux trademark about control. Its about preventing unreasonable uses of the name.
But isn't that also what the GPL and other open source licenses are about? We're happing giving away software for free but we don't want some money grubbing company ripping us off and giving nothing back. To that extent, we want to control our software's distribution.
If we didn't care about control there would be no GPL; we'd release all our software as public domain.
BlueArc's Titan sustained a performance level of 12,500 SPECmail messages per minute, or the equivalent of two and a half million SPECmail users, sending 30 million e-mail messages per day.
Check again. I was just quoted $60300 for 10,000 users last week. That's $6.03 per mailbox. Even the generic price on their web page for 200 users is only $23 per mailbox. My understanding is that the price per user only goes down from there.
Unless you were trying to buy a cluster configuration for 1000 users? I suppose you could do that, overkill and all, but if you're investing in the kind of infrastructure clusters take why are you complaining about $30,000?
Slashdot Mirror
This sounds like someone making a mountain out of a mole hill. I mean really, what's the big deal?
IP addresses are already controlled regionally, not by the US. Europe and Asia each have their own registries. Theoretically they manage the IP space under rules set by the IANA, but in reality nobody is going to nay-say them if they don't.
Law and regulation? Ha! The US will regulate for the US and anyone who doesn't like that can block our IP addresses at their border. That's not going to change. Get over it.
The DNS root zone? All 62kbytes of it? Shoot. If you don't want to run ICANN's root zone, download it and run your own version. I do.
Or is control of your own counry's top-level zone not good enough for you? Is there some special zone you particularly feel you need to add to the defacto global root zone? No? Then what the hell are you complaining about!
Don't get me wrong, the ICANN is run by a non-accountable bunch of bufoons, many from Verisign, the same company that somehow managed to lose money selling domain names and ssl certificates. If anyone deserves a comeuppance, they do. But that's not the point, the point is: the system as it is now is stable, functional and reasonably cheap.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
For me it was a 1-page email from the owner. It said, basically, "For the following list of properties, all copyrights will vest in me directly, not in the company, and I will grant the company an unlimited, non-exclusive license to use them, duplicate them and create derivative works for no additional compensation. For this other list of things, the copyrights will vest in the company and the company grants and will grant me an unlimited non-exclusive right to use them, duplicate them and create derivative works for no additional compensation."
Worked great. When I eventually left, I walked away with rights to some fine network management and email software that I'm using in my current job.
One simple thing to watch for as you write your contract: You can't grant any rights to an intellectual property that does not exist. Thus for anything where the copyright will vest in the company, they can't pre-grant you rights; they can only agree to grant you rights later once it exists. Make sure the contract explicitly says that because a pre-grant statement is void; a court will not and can not read it to mean that they agreed to grant those rights later. Even if you never follow through and get them to sign the rights over, the agreement to do so will make it impossible for them to sue -- which is just as good.
Also note that unless you're a W2 employee, all copyrights automatically vest in you anyway and remain your property until you explicitly sign them over. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but "I signed a contract which says..." is not one of them. If you do your own witholding, you're better off just keeping your mouth shut and letting them think whatever they want. The IP is yours.
David Brin's book "Earth" predicted it in 1990. It has a wacky plot (the characters use gravitational lasers to try to eject a micro-black hole from the center of the earth), but the world in which the story is set becomes more like our own world with each passing year.
I guess this means that Peer Guardian is not so secure after all, if you can't trust the folks who make and host it. But then, I would have thought that hosting it on a site called "methlabs" in the first place would have clued people in.
I'd like to post my ebook collection on my web site and read it on my blackberry. That's when eBooks will really work for me.
I do the first part. I have a password protected section on my web site where I keep all the books I bought from BAEN. I can read them whenever and wherever I feel like it, as long as there is a computer nearby. And in fact, I do.
The second part is more problematic. The blackberry is reasonably comfortable to read them on, but its too fragging slow, much worse than a 56k modem. Multiple-minute breaks between chapters just doesn't work out. I look forward to the next generation of wireless web services that are usably fast.
P.S. For you publishers out there, I also keep books that others have scanned or decrypted where I can get to them and read them. The only difference between your books and the unencumbered books I bought from BAEN is that I paid for the ones from BAEN. I'd pay for yours too if you didn't make it a pain in the ass. But hey, I'm probably the exception. Everybody else would surely pirate them anyway. You just keep telling yourself that.
CentralNIC is a second-level domain owner. They can do whatever their customers will let them do with *.uk.com.
The outrage at Verisign was over their misappropriation of a root-level domain space where they were merely the custodian.
Dan Zambonini [...] stresses the type of courses I'm taking are, essentially, useless for getting a job. He lists several CS courses useful for a job. Is he right?
That depends on the kind of job you want to get.
If you intend to become Dilbert, he's absolutely right. Go get your degree from ITT Tech, pick up half a dozen certs like an MCSE, and go get a job with the Pointy Haired Boss.
On the other hand, if you want a job where people respect you and value your contribution, where your boss is glad to see you in the morning, Zambonini couldn't be more wrong.
In the good jobs, you're not expected to know far more technology that you could reasonably be trained in and you're expected to rapidly learn new ones as they come up. That requires a solid grounding in computing theory. You can learn XML; you need to have a solid grounding in database theory so you can rapidly understand XML's strengths and weaknesses.
You laugh, but in the early '70s, the US very nearly built the Atlantic Generating Station, a nuke plant in the shallow waters just off Atlantic City, NJ. The Russians are using a very similar design.
If you're running under Windows, get a Microtek scanner. The software and drivers for Windows are simply superior, though you may want to enable expert mode instead of the default "easy" mode. And the hardware is at least as good as the rest. Starts around $80.
Get Ironports for the front end SMTP processing and spam/virus filtering. Then get a Communigate Pro cluster for the back end with a SAN for storage.
It'll cost you about a third of what Exchange does and its so, so painless, even for 1M accounts.
I'm looking for someone with skills.
:) If you want to work in a conservative organization you should get your advice from someone else. Perhaps a Minesweeper Consul.. er.. Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer.
And I'm looking for someone with talent. They can learn any missing skills if they have the talent.
You've made a lot of statements that indicate that you're not familiar with large, conservative organizations.
I admit it: I'm only familiar with large progressive organizations.
I wouldn't work for you, you'd work for me.
;)
;)
Now how would that possibly happen? You're looking for RHCE's and I don't have one. Thanks for the vote of confidence though.
It seems pretty clear that you have a very limited range of experience.
Okaaay, I think this discussion has pretty well run its course but there are a couple points I'll still respond to:
by the time you realize they've been boasting about their credentials, you've hired them.
This is why organizations often have a trial period for new employees. Perhaps in your wide range of experience you've heard of the concept.
I think your problems with the LVM, for example, and due to your own LVM misconfiguration.
That's a little like saying the Challenger and Columbia disasters were due to manufacturing errors. Of course they were. But you'll waste your time trying to fix them at that level. The correct answer is that you add greater tolerance to the design so that minor manufacturing errors can't have such a severe impact.
LVM on root is brittle. Minor mistakes break it so that the system won't boot. It proves far more effective to simply not use it that way.
We're talking about system administrators, not developers.
I suppose this is where our experience diverges the most. I see writing glue code as a major part of the sysadmin's job. In case you don't get the reference, those are short programs that get one system to talk to another. Any candidate who can't do it is unqualified.
I don't pay people to repetitively perform tasks they could automate. I hire folks who can handle it. The result is a no-excuses system that by and large does what the customers want.
At least my boss tells me that's why I still get paid.
easier to get a friend you worked with to lie on a resume
This isn't high school. If you don't know the material you claim it becomes real obvious real fast. You might be able to fool me, maybe, but you can't fool the computer when the time comes to do your work.
Again, I'd consider NIS obsolete when I studied it three years ago, but people nevertheless still use it today. The fact you seem to think it's dead is indicate of a lack of experience in conservative (read: large) environments.
Yeah, just like like people still use Cobol and Fortran. But hey, you're right: I work for a tiny organization, only 7,000 employees.
Red Hat are futher ahead of most distros when it comes to security, they're the first with a firewall enabled by default, the first with a DAC system, and the first to Kerberize every major service. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Okay, you're wrong. During the past five years, the number of security incidents per installed server has been lower for Debian, Slackware and FreeBSD among others.
But this is an attempt at a straw-man argument. The topic isn't selecting a secure distro, its selecting competent staff. Lets get back to it, shall we?
Teaching a lowest common denominator course would be stupid. We're aiming to teach RHEL, not Solaris.
I could not have given a better reason for discounting the Red Hat cert if I tried. I'm not interested in hiring a Red Hat Administrator. I'm not even interested in hiring a Linux Administrator. I'm interested in hiring a System Administrator with skill in a broad range of systems, including Linux.
What you characterize as "teaching a lowest common denominator" I see as "teaching the fundamentals." Someone well grounded in the fundamentals is vastly more useful to me than a Red Hat specialist -- he comes in ready to learn our system while the specialist wants to change everything to match how he was trained.
Maybe they should learn how the LVM works.
Maybe they should use a technology that's not so fragile. But then, that wouldn't be the Red Hat Way. If we want stability, we should run Debian on our servers. Oh wait, we do.
They know what works, but not the best way to do things. Have you ever noticed that?
Frequently. In fact, the staff I hired based on their certifications often coughed up the vendor solution without any consideration for whether it was the best or even applicable to the current situation. It rarely was. That's why I don't hire them any more.
After all, where are you going to get training in, lets say, how to make a Linux box check passwords against a Domino LDAP server? You're not. In fact, the pam-ldap modules available with Red Hat can't get the job done. Give up? Hell no. A 100 line program from someone who understands the fundamentals of PAM and LDAP is all it takes.
That's what I need from my sysadmin staff, and that's why I don't hire cert-mongers.
So setting up servers is a good test of whether they can setup servers. Agreed?
Only if you're asking them to set up an environment that you didn't just get through training them how to set up. Otherwise its just a test of how well they can follow instructions.
After all, in the real world you're not asking them to set up a machine that's exactly like the last 50. If it was just like the last 50, you'd play out a tarball in the background while doing other work.
Or hell, maybe you wouldn't. Maybe you'd break out the install CD's and spend half a day tweaking. But if you wasted time like that, you wouldn't last long working for me.
[The RHCE is] a hard exam. I think the people that would fail it include both Cliff and you.
I'd probably finish with time to spare but that's beside the point.
If you're that good, the rest of your resume will clue me in and the interview will clinch it. I don't need to see an RHCE to figure it out.
The RHCE cert just tells me that:
A) You were willing to spend a bunch of time and money, probably your employers rather than your own, just so that you could have a piece of paper.
B) You successfully crammed knowledge for a bunch of technologies, half of which will be obsolete in three years.
NIS is dead and if you produced a PAM+LDAP configuration the Red Hat Way then you learned how to do it badly. And of course it goes without saying that the test machines are Red Hat. Good luck solving the same set of problems on Debian or Solaris.
Also, if you put your root partition on LVM then you're just asking for pain. I've watched folks screw this up, over and over again, and I've seen the same kind of thing with CCIE's and MCSE's. The vendor way is often wrong. I'd much rather see someone who figured it out for himself.
Your cert skills are not like the knowledge you'd gain in a good CS degree program. They're not generally applicable computing principles that apply to anything, they're last year's focused knowledge on a moving target.
I want people who can think for themselves.
When I hire for an Open Source guy, certifications are a red-flag for me. Unless you're very junior, the fact that you wasted space in your resume to tell me that you're certified in a dozen meaningless things tells me you're the wrong guy for the job.
I just recently saw a resume with a bunch of certifications on page 1. He had a college degree... listed all the way on page 5. Roundfile. Goodbye.
I didn't buy a Rio for one simple reason: No expandability. I couldn't add a larger memory card. So I got a little Kodak camera/mp3 player instead that could use compact flash.
Is this anything like the frightening shortage of Cobol programmers? 'Cause I think business should demand more Cobol in the CS curriculum too.
Its not the manager's job to know technology. That's what he pays you for. His job is:
1. Figure out which of his people know what they're doing and which don't.
2. Find better people to replace the ones that don't.
3. Make sure that your work is coordinated with your colleagues so that all the needed work gets done.
4. Focus your efforts so that they serve the company's actual needs.
5. Keep the cost of your work within the bounds of what the company can afford.
6. Keep you reasonably content so that you continue to come to work and do a good job.
If you want to judge your manager, don't judge him on how well he can do your job. Judge him on how well he does his.
Depended on the machine. The Sequent was billed on CPU time but the Sparcs were billed on connect time. We had 300 "allocation units" for a 12-week quarter and connect time on a Sparc cost 5 AU's per hour. Needless to say, no CS student stayed within their quota; everyone sought and received an increase later in the quarter. We also got dinked for megabyte-days of disk storage. Everyone started with a 2 meg quota, but most CS students got theirs bumped up to 20 megs.
Back in the days when we walked 6 miles in the snow, uphill, both ways.
Yeah, they metered us this way back at college. It was supposed to simulate a "real" computing environment. We got a quota each semester. An hour logged in to a Sun was the same "price" as 1000 pages off the laser printer. I printed a lot of manuals. A LOT of manuals.
Readers can consult the list of search terms provided by the authors, and can see for themselves that, in the vast majority of cases retained (i.e. those with fewer than 1000 results), the results in question are lists and spam.
I don't know which disturbs me more: The possibility that this is the correct explanation for the discrepancy or the possibility that it isn't.
It seems to me that the correct solution to filtering results would be to put the "undesirable" results at the bottom of the list, not get rid of them entirely. One man's trash is another man's treasure after all.
In a nutshell, yes, the Linux trademark about control. Its about preventing unreasonable uses of the name.
But isn't that also what the GPL and other open source licenses are about? We're happing giving away software for free but we don't want some money grubbing company ripping us off and giving nothing back. To that extent, we want to control our software's distribution.
If we didn't care about control there would be no GPL; we'd release all our software as public domain.
BlueArc's Titan sustained a performance level of 12,500 SPECmail messages per minute, or the equivalent of two and a half million SPECmail users, sending 30 million e-mail messages per day.
The math seems a little off...
12,500 messages/minute * 60 minutes/hour * 24 hours/day = 18M messages/day, not 30M.
That having been said, CGPro is fast as all heck so I can believe it topped the previous record.
Excuse me, but how does a decision to change suppliers of future purchases make currently owned equipment "of no use?"
Its called "support." Its a funny thing that governments and other large organizations do, and its tends to cost a lot more than the hardware itself.
Check again. I was just quoted $60300 for 10,000 users last week. That's $6.03 per mailbox. Even the generic price on their web page for 200 users is only $23 per mailbox. My understanding is that the price per user only goes down from there.
Unless you were trying to buy a cluster configuration for 1000 users? I suppose you could do that, overkill and all, but if you're investing in the kind of infrastructure clusters take why are you complaining about $30,000?