Because I can't imagine them doing this any other wise. As pointed out else where, this is going to take 2 more years. $5.5 mil for iPads, or $13 mil in fuel savings per year. Hmm... Someone help me with the math here.
And in two years, once the Surface 2 gets certified, what happens? Delta is now flying with 2 year old technology... whoopie.
Have you even tried reading wikipedia on PKI? What OP is suggesting is silly, lots of work, prone to failure, more avenues of attack, and just doesn't make sense.
Just sit down and think for a moment (it's unclear if OP is suggesting the cert, or the root cert is the redundant security, but since we have multiple root certs, that is already redundant). You need two certs. One from verisign, one from diginotar, in order for your secure site to work.
Now what? You have to track expiration, configuration and all that shit on *TWO* certs. Sure, that's not much work. For someone running a dinky website. But when you have thousands of certs (I have 10,000+ at work), now what? Managing twice that amount? Making sure everything is coordinated? And what gain do we get? Nothing.
So why do you feel it is OK to make stupid suggestions when you don't know what is going on? When you are at the hospital, do you also wander over to the operating rooms and suggest to the surgeon how they need to operate?
10 years ago, it cost $150k to put your own root into the browsers, each. I'm sure the price has gone up.
The reason wildcard certs aren't offered (actually, you could get them) is because each time you waste a couple of cpu cycles to get another cert signed, they get $$. Why kill the goose that lays dem elegant golden eggs?
And for more security, we can do *THREE* certificates. Count them! *THREE* for additional security.
Super secure sites like banks can do *FOUR* certificates. If any one of the *FOUR* certificates break, then we know we're attacked! Even more secure if those *FOUR* certificates come through 4 different ways...
Are you really suggesting that?! Do you even know how PKI works?
Ahh! Another "yes, we will make it up on volume" guy. The entire sum of money dumped into the XBox would have actually made Microsoft *REAL* money if they invested in T-Bills.
Wake me up when they actually reach ROI, and I'll celebrate when they reach ROI + interest on the total investment as well.
People forget when Microsoft injected cash in Apple when it was going nowhere.
Actually, Apple didn't need Microsoft's money. It was instead a very cavalier move that was meant more as a signal to developers than anyone else - that if Microsoft was investing in Apple, they should too.
It wasn't even that. Jobs called Gates up and said the UI lawsuits were bloody distracting for both companies. Jobs said - you know we will win in the end. Why don't we just call it quits, you throw in some change, a 10 year commitment on Office for the Mac, and we both move on.
Gates thought it over, said OK, and the deal was done.
People forget when Microsoft injected cash in Apple when it was going nowhere.
You mean that $150 million that Microsoft put in when Jobs took over? When they still had $2 billion in the bank? Yeah, that $150million was a real life saver.
So, all those security issues in the base OS is irrelevant? Or shouldn't you say, they are forced to release everything as an app update because their partners screw the customers over by refusing to push updates out.
Slashdot Mirror
I love the smell of burning paper. Or paper flying all around in a depressurized cabin...
Can you please come up with better arguments next time?
Hey, Angry Birds, ya know.
Because I can't imagine them doing this any other wise. As pointed out else where, this is going to take 2 more years. $5.5 mil for iPads, or $13 mil in fuel savings per year. Hmm... Someone help me with the math here.
And in two years, once the Surface 2 gets certified, what happens? Delta is now flying with 2 year old technology... whoopie.
constantly breaking old accessories like apple does
Updating their charger interface *ONE* time in the entire history of iPods is now "constantly"? My my, how the narrative changes with just one word.
It's not like the article provided multiple links that all discuss how the rotting skin happens...
So, the fix for a system receiving smtp traffic is to force the sender to use http in real time?
You understand smtp is a store and forward protocol right? When you "click" send, it may not arrive immediately...
Have you even tried reading wikipedia on PKI? What OP is suggesting is silly, lots of work, prone to failure, more avenues of attack, and just doesn't make sense.
Just sit down and think for a moment (it's unclear if OP is suggesting the cert, or the root cert is the redundant security, but since we have multiple root certs, that is already redundant). You need two certs. One from verisign, one from diginotar, in order for your secure site to work.
Now what? You have to track expiration, configuration and all that shit on *TWO* certs. Sure, that's not much work. For someone running a dinky website. But when you have thousands of certs (I have 10,000+ at work), now what? Managing twice that amount? Making sure everything is coordinated? And what gain do we get? Nothing.
So why do you feel it is OK to make stupid suggestions when you don't know what is going on? When you are at the hospital, do you also wander over to the operating rooms and suggest to the surgeon how they need to operate?
I'm talking about *.com type wildcards, not *.yourcompany.com
10 years ago, it cost $150k to put your own root into the browsers, each. I'm sure the price has gone up.
The reason wildcard certs aren't offered (actually, you could get them) is because each time you waste a couple of cpu cycles to get another cert signed, they get $$. Why kill the goose that lays dem elegant golden eggs?
And for more security, we can do *THREE* certificates. Count them! *THREE* for additional security.
Super secure sites like banks can do *FOUR* certificates. If any one of the *FOUR* certificates break, then we know we're attacked! Even more secure if those *FOUR* certificates come through 4 different ways...
Are you really suggesting that?! Do you even know how PKI works?
You know you don't get credit or paid if you post as AC, right?
AC does not understand the concept of censorship. And posted as AC - so, self censorship in a way.
Pretty sad.
There is a difference between reasoned debate, and trolling. You appear to lump both together.
You are wrong. They are not one and the same.
Ahh, the old variation on "it's who counts the votes that counts" :)
Ahh! Another "yes, we will make it up on volume" guy. The entire sum of money dumped into the XBox would have actually made Microsoft *REAL* money if they invested in T-Bills.
Wake me up when they actually reach ROI, and I'll celebrate when they reach ROI + interest on the total investment as well.
You have never heard of the Appeals court then?
I see. My mistake. So OP will go troll new Android sales news here on slashdot too then?
Actually, Apple didn't need Microsoft's money. It was instead a very cavalier move that was meant more as a signal to developers than anyone else - that if Microsoft was investing in Apple, they should too.
It wasn't even that. Jobs called Gates up and said the UI lawsuits were bloody distracting for both companies. Jobs said - you know we will win in the end. Why don't we just call it quits, you throw in some change, a 10 year commitment on Office for the Mac, and we both move on.
Gates thought it over, said OK, and the deal was done.
What phone is faster than the iPhone 5S?
People forget when Microsoft injected cash in Apple when it was going nowhere.
You mean that $150 million that Microsoft put in when Jobs took over? When they still had $2 billion in the bank? Yeah, that $150million was a real life saver.
My God! Are you sure you're allowed to use common sense on the Internet?!
Since there's more Android phones sold, I'm sure you'll go troll the Android forums too, right?
You must be living on a different planet. As others have stated:
1) You decide whether to upgrade to iOS 7 or not.
2) Others have managed to restore back to iOS 6.
So, how's the weather on your planet?
So, all those security issues in the base OS is irrelevant? Or shouldn't you say, they are forced to release everything as an app update because their partners screw the customers over by refusing to push updates out.
I'm not sure you understand the concept of "forced update" versus "cannot downgrade".