You are right, I probably don't know what you correctly define bandwidth to be. But I knew what I defined it to be when I composed the message, and I daresay that most readers can figure out what I mean based on the context of the message.
To be more precise, i suppose I meant that bandwidth is the total quantity of data transferred in relationship to the maximum potentially transferred at that bandwidth level.
Another thing about this metered whatever-you-want-to-call-it service: what will they consider to be "billable units of data delivered?" In other words, will they charge me for activity not related to any request made at my end? You know, stuff like traffic generated by them probing for open ports, checking to see what ports answer back, etc...and how about data transmitted as a result of retransmits due to capacity problems that are out of my control? And how about things like pop-unders and spam html email? Will they inform customers who utilize their web-based email front end that if those customers read their email via the web, then pop the same messages again via their mail client, they'll be charged twice for the same data? Also, will they provide a mechanism that will allow me to store data that rarely changes but is frequently resent due to poorly implemented caching mechanisms, etc. (specifically, things like the slashdot icons, logos, etc. that haven't changed for a long time)? How about cases in which certain users have tweaked their systems to up the number of simultaneous requests sent to web servers (above and beyond the 4 for http 1 and 2 for http 1.1) which may cause time-outs and retransmits for those of use who haven't touched those settings? Will they being to offer IMAP as a way to avoid the aforementioned "double transfer and useless data tranfer" inherent to their hybrid "web-based email/POP email" solutions? Will they consider upping each users storage capacity on their systems to something more reasonable like 100MB instead of stupidly low 10MB or 5MB limitations for email and personal web pages?
Okay, word mavens, here's another one for you to properly define for those of use who "obviously do not know the true meaning of (expletive deleted)...
is it 2400 baud or 2400bps? or is it really that 300baud is 1200bps...
lastly, let's all cheer the seemingly single item existing on the planet that has somehow remained a standard in a world filled with competing non-standard standards... the 3-prong power cable. And yes, being the ignorant American that is my patriotic duty to be, I do probably mean what is sometimes referred to as "British North America" or the US and Canadia anytime I use the word "world." Sosumi sushi.
We'll be even closer to a paperless bathroom once the world hears about the latest greatest thing that will revolutionize the world and create peace and tranquility to any dwelling containing dreaded roommates:
Downloadable toilet paper ($300 specialized pattern scanner and printer not included...)...and modernized for the new century by being rechristened "TPoIP". This product alone will save the lives of countless millions and guarantee a better life for everyone willing to buy into it.
Oh how quickly people forget the early days of being online...text based bbs software, arcane keywords and CompuServe with tiered access pricing: 300 baud 6.50/hr 2400 baud 14.50/hr (prices are in 1982 dollars, so let's say roughly double for 2002 dollars?) Sign me up!
Then the world was invaded by the likes of PCLink, the Commodore 64 version of PCLink and the Mac based version which bore the same name that these three companies were known as once they merged in the mid 80s...AOL. Now downloading new artwork at 2400 baud, only 30 minutes left to go...but aint it pretty!
Hey, at least they aren't rolling out METERED BANDWIDTH pricing... at least yet...
And funny how they chose 3Mbps for the enhanced services...similar to RCN in it's fiber network markets...however, RCN didn't raise its price one cent. Still appx. $40/mo in my bundle from them...that includes modem rental.
However, I daresay that AT&T may have difficulties consistently delivering the higher speeds as their digital network nodes are already overcrowded causing traffic jams and more general angst in the world....
Please, feel free to flame away and tell me how ignorant I am. but don't forget that I already know how ignorant I am, so perhaps you should just focus on answering the question...
and the question is this:
given the solutions that currently exist to run an OS on a virtual machine (i.e. VMware and Virtual PC - even thought VPC won't run under Linux --at least not yet.) one could say that the solution could be to do the following...
Use one container file to be the system drive. use another to be the data drive, and ensure that both are always separate. Create a virutal environment once every month that includes all of the known patches for the OS you run on the OS container. Do all of this offline. Then, save the OS container file to a CD and stick it in a vault.) Using your real OS (the host, in this case) figure out a way to have the host monitor the data being pumped from the guest. If the guest becomes compromised, pull the real machine offline, can the process that is the virutal machine, delete the OS container file, copy the good one from the vault, restart the process that is the guest OS and you're back in business in a pretty short time. Without having to take the actual machines in question down to reformat, reinstall, etc. Because the OS running on the real machines has never been compromised. ) So if you need to run IIS and thus Windows, do it in a virutal machine running under a less crackable OS.
Granted, this doesn't not solve the problem of the virtual server being infected, but it does seem to be a way to have the best of both worlds without the gooey mess.
Plus, running XP under a virutal machine is a way to prevent sudden burps from Microsoft's licensing scheme. You will have to connect to the net ONCE or even have to call their 800 number ONCE while you set up the Virtual machine environment before you make your master copy of the OS container file, and as long as you don't mess with the parameters of the virtual machine, you should be okay. I've not tried XP under VirtualPC or VMware, so I don't know if this is possible. And please, buy the damn copy of XP because you respect intellectual property, even if it is owned by idiots. You will still be abiding by the license agreement because you are only running the operating system on one machine, that being the virtual one.
Okay, let the flaming begin. At least it is an idea and quite a bit fresher than the last 50 or so posts in this thread.
This one thread probably reflects the state of the OS wars better than any other. Its amazing how similar these battles are in relationship to what is happening with mainstream religions (by religion I mean the organized dogma created by humans who share similar thoughts of spirituality, something entirely different.)
We all know how similar most protestant religions are. Some of the major ones (at least in the US) have recognized this too and have decided to merge (or re-merge, as they may have once been unified in the past) The thought is that perhaps it is not important how each one intreprets some arcane symbolism and which intrepretation is better. What is important is that they both have essentially the same message and the same goal. (Forgive my oversimplication of this, and sorry if I don't even remember what the names of the two religions are that I referred to earlier.)
Likewise with the various flavors of what is essentially Unix. You've all mentioned what your favorite method of software distribution is and have stated why this is so. Perhaps someday you'll see how pointless it is to bicker about the subtle differences and you'll work towards a common goal of reunifying the factions into a cohesive force which will probably be called Unix. Through this process, perhaps you will learn how similar it is and that by only focusing on the differences, you are forgetting your common goal and your original message. Quite frankly, I don't know what your message is, because I am relatively new to this world, having dabbled with these wickedly time consuming things we call computers since appx. 1980. I can say one thing: those working on the UI aspect of *nix seem to have a more clearly stated goal and have more successfully avoided the traps of constant infighting that seems typical of you plumbing guys. You could learn from them.
So, in some ways, these discussions are one way to essentially recognize that what makes you different is actually what makes you similar, and therein lies your power. Just don't lose sight of your common goal, whatever it might be.
More to the point of this discussion, I have probably dabbled with everything that has been discussed here. My most successful experiment as been Gentoo Linux, but that's only because I took the time to actually read the instructions on what to do, and was able to overcome the incredibly stupid mistakes that were made in the documentation that so many have stated isn't rocket science. Rocket science is useless if the rocket you build can't get off the ground. What good is it if you end up putting wheels on it and use it to drive from San Francisco to LA?
Debian's apt-get is fabulous but quite frankly the whole Debian thing reminds me too much of Scientology. No, actually it reminds me more of Amway. Of course apt-get is simple and the only way because that is what you get with Debian. No negativity here. You agreed to the Debian Social Contract, and therefore you must abide by that agreement. There is no other way.
Conectiva Linux has to be the best distribution to co-opt the structured order of Debian with the freewheeling rpm methodology. I think it is closes to realizing that you can have your cake and eat it too. Naturally, if there is a way to override rpm's safeguards, then don't give some poor new user such hell because they forced a package in. Afterall, you gave them the tool to do it by leaving in a back door. Conectiva has probably figured out that human nature is what it is, so help them by giving a bit more order to their "sin." The alternative is frustration on the users part, so why not just realize that to sin IS the norm and people will be people. I think what they have done is said there are more ways to achieve the same thing, and most users don't give a crap about any of them. They just want the end result, no sermon, no dogma, no eternal pain and suffering. Just give them what they want with minimum frustration and be happy that their systems are still stable and functional. Let them have the goddess, just call her Mary and incorporate her into your dogma. Let them have their midwinter rituals and their multiple deities. Just split your one diety into three different ones (God the father, God the son, and God the holy ghost). There is room for all of it, but always remember why you are here and not there. Otherwise, you won't be anywhere pretty quickly.
Sorry, this message has meandered everywhere across the map and often off of it entirely. But, I also want to take a minute to thank each and every one of you. This entire movement, whether you call it the FSF, GNU/Linux, KDE, Gnome, whatever. I am in awe of the energy and talent that has brought you this far in such a short time. No company can possibly ever hope to accomplish this in the same manner. Let it be both a compliement and warning to you that IBM and other biggies have recognized this. Just remember: the devil knows the bible frontwards and backwards.
My hats off to all of you. Keep those flames agoin and keep the fire hot!
I haven't followed this whole thread, but I've heard the floppy/trash thing for years, and I"m pretty surprised that most people forget the other function for which the "drag it to the trash" event was intended. That is simply to unmount removable media (floppies, cds, jaz drives, etc.)or even to dismount fixed media/hard drive partitions if you deem it necessary. The command key to eject any inserted media is Command-Y. The menu item name for Command-Y changes based on what is receiving the action, but the concepts are similar. That menu item is either "Eject xxxmedia" or "Put Away". If you have a document that you recently dragged onto your desktop, performing Command-Y on it will put it back to wherever it was prior to being moved to the desktop (or any folder.) The exception, of oourse, is if the place where it was prior is no longer mounted or if that item was created in the folder where it currently resides.) If you stop and think of the desktop paradigm in a more simple manner, this menu item and these actions make sense. You temporarily bring you documents from whereever they were, your work on them, then you put them away. This is easily extended to removable media, because most likely you aren't intending on having them there forever. So when your're done, you also tell it to be "Put Away" (even though the menu does change to "eject" for removable media, the idea was consistent.) I'll admit that choosing the trash can to be the vehicle for both destroying stuff and putting stuff away (god knows that's how I've cleaned up my room since I was 8) but I think there's also a historical context to dragging stuff to the trash. If I remember correctly, Steve Jobs was adamant that everything be performed by the mouse. No key Word Perfect Alt-F-10-Shft-Escape key combinations in order to get words bold on the Mac! Just use the mouse, and choose "Bold" from the menu. I don't even think he was happy at ALL that the original Mac team even gave stuff command-key equivalents. I think the Mac team softa kept them there, and I"m sure they suffered the consequences of daring to deface his art.
So maybe to Steve Jobs, it was worth the unfortunate association of the trash can serving double duty, because it kept things pure and it was still NOTHING like what people had to deal with with PCs. Drag was cool and hip and ART, even if it was straight into the trash.
The Macintosh trash can has been quite the celebrity, at times being the only reason to play with the machine (remember Oscar the Grouch and I Love Trash?) Who cares if you dragged everything INTO that trash can then emptied it, that would make Oscar come out and sing again! Computers ARE fun, mommy!) Besides, you could also say that putting the floppy into the trash WAS NOT DELETING it,because to delete the thing you'd have to EMPTY THE TRASH. Those floppies just had the habit of popping right out before you even got the chance to empty the trash. Smart little floppies. See, no guilt! no more angst! We can all live on, because art survives and we are not the horrible people we thought we were dragging those poor disks into the trash.
I think the real point of this is that all paradigms (or methaphors) we've used for our GUIs break down quickly when you try to extend their feature set beyond the original intent. The inconsistencies of the Macintosh trash can from its inception shows you that it is WAY time for us to move away from the desktop metaphor.
Okay, who's gonna yell at me first. Yell on, baby, I'm in the trasn with Oscar anyway and we like it!
Jack
Slashdot Mirror
Don't anthropomorphize computers....they hate it.
You are right, I probably don't know what you correctly define bandwidth to be. But I knew what I defined it to be when I composed the message, and I daresay that most readers can figure out what I mean based on the context of the message.
To be more precise, i suppose I meant that bandwidth is the total quantity of data transferred in relationship to the maximum potentially transferred at that bandwidth level.
Another thing about this metered whatever-you-want-to-call-it service: what will they consider to be "billable units of data delivered?" In other words, will they charge me for activity not related to any request made at my end? You know, stuff like traffic generated by them probing for open ports, checking to see what ports answer back, etc...and how about data transmitted as a result of retransmits due to capacity problems that are out of my control? And how about things like pop-unders and spam html email? Will they inform customers who utilize their web-based email front end that if those customers read their email via the web, then pop the same messages again via their mail client, they'll be charged twice for the same data? Also, will they provide a mechanism that will allow me to store data that rarely changes but is frequently resent due to poorly implemented caching mechanisms, etc. (specifically, things like the slashdot icons, logos, etc. that haven't changed for a long time)? How about cases in which certain users have tweaked their systems to up the number of simultaneous requests sent to web servers (above and beyond the 4 for http 1 and 2 for http 1.1) which may cause time-outs and retransmits for those of use who haven't touched those settings? Will they being to offer IMAP as a way to avoid the aforementioned "double transfer and useless data tranfer" inherent to their hybrid "web-based email/POP email" solutions? Will they consider upping each users storage capacity on their systems to something more reasonable like 100MB instead of stupidly low 10MB or 5MB limitations for email and personal web pages?
okay, done.
Okay, word mavens, here's another one for you to properly define for those of use who "obviously do not know the true meaning of (expletive deleted)...
is it 2400 baud
or 2400bps?
or is it really that 300baud is 1200bps...
lastly, let's all cheer the seemingly single item existing on the planet that has somehow remained a standard in a world filled with competing non-standard standards... the 3-prong power cable. And yes, being the ignorant American that is my patriotic duty to be, I do probably mean what is sometimes referred to as "British North America" or the US and Canadia anytime I use the word "world." Sosumi sushi.
Jack
We'll be even closer to a paperless bathroom once the world hears about the latest greatest thing that will revolutionize the world and create peace and tranquility to any dwelling containing dreaded roommates:
...and modernized for the new century by being rechristened "TPoIP". This product alone will save the lives of countless millions and guarantee a better life for everyone willing to buy into it.
Downloadable toilet paper ($300 specialized pattern scanner and printer not included...)
thank you
Oh how quickly people forget the early days of being online...text based bbs software, arcane keywords and CompuServe with tiered access pricing:
... at least yet...
300 baud 6.50/hr 2400 baud 14.50/hr (prices are in 1982 dollars, so let's say roughly double for 2002 dollars?) Sign me up!
Then the world was invaded by the likes of PCLink, the Commodore 64 version of PCLink and the Mac based version which bore the same name that these three companies were known as once they merged in the mid 80s...AOL. Now downloading new artwork at 2400 baud, only 30 minutes left to go...but aint it pretty!
Hey, at least they aren't rolling out METERED BANDWIDTH pricing
And funny how they chose 3Mbps for the enhanced services...similar to RCN in it's fiber network markets...however, RCN didn't raise its price one cent. Still appx. $40/mo in my bundle from them...that includes modem rental.
However, I daresay that AT&T may have difficulties consistently delivering the higher speeds as their digital network nodes are already overcrowded causing traffic jams and more general angst in the world....
Please, feel free to flame away and tell me how ignorant I am. but don't forget that I already know how ignorant I am, so perhaps you should just focus on answering the question...
and the question is this:
given the solutions that currently exist to run an OS on a virtual machine (i.e. VMware and Virtual PC - even thought VPC won't run under Linux --at least not yet.) one could say that the solution could be to do the following...
Use one container file to be the system drive. use another to be the data drive, and ensure that both are always separate. Create a virutal environment once every month that includes all of the known patches for the OS you run on the OS container. Do all of this offline. Then, save the OS container file to a CD and stick it in a vault.) Using your real OS (the host, in this case) figure out a way to have the host monitor the data being pumped from the guest. If the guest becomes compromised, pull the real machine offline, can the process that is the virutal machine, delete the OS container file, copy the good one from the vault, restart the process that is the guest OS and you're back in business in a pretty short time. Without having to take the actual machines in question down to reformat, reinstall, etc. Because the OS running on the real machines has never been compromised. ) So if you need to run IIS and thus Windows, do it in a virutal machine running under a less crackable OS.
Granted, this doesn't not solve the problem of the virtual server being infected, but it does seem to be a way to have the best of both worlds without the gooey mess.
Plus, running XP under a virutal machine is a way to prevent sudden burps from Microsoft's licensing scheme. You will have to connect to the net ONCE or even have to call their 800 number ONCE while you set up the Virtual machine environment before you make your master copy of the OS container file, and as long as you don't mess with the parameters of the virtual machine, you should be okay. I've not tried XP under VirtualPC or VMware, so I don't know if this is possible. And please, buy the damn copy of XP because you respect intellectual property, even if it is owned by idiots. You will still be abiding by the license agreement because you are only running the operating system on one machine, that being the virtual one.
Okay, let the flaming begin. At least it is an idea and quite a bit fresher than the last 50 or so posts in this thread.
This one thread probably reflects the state of the OS wars better than any other. Its amazing how similar these battles are in relationship to what is happening with mainstream religions (by religion I mean the organized dogma created by humans who share similar thoughts of spirituality, something entirely different.)
We all know how similar most protestant religions are. Some of the major ones (at least in the US) have recognized this too and have decided to merge (or re-merge, as they may have once been unified in the past) The thought is that perhaps it is not important how each one intreprets some arcane symbolism and which intrepretation is better. What is important is that they both have essentially the same message and the same goal. (Forgive my oversimplication of this, and sorry if I don't even remember what the names of the two religions are that I referred to earlier.)
Likewise with the various flavors of what is essentially Unix. You've all mentioned what your favorite method of software distribution is and have stated why this is so. Perhaps someday you'll see how pointless it is to bicker about the subtle differences and you'll work towards a common goal of reunifying the factions into a cohesive force which will probably be called Unix. Through this process, perhaps you will learn how similar it is and that by only focusing on the differences, you are forgetting your common goal and your original message. Quite frankly, I don't know what your message is, because I am relatively new to this world, having dabbled with these wickedly time consuming things we call computers since appx. 1980. I can say one thing: those working on the UI aspect of *nix seem to have a more clearly stated goal and have more successfully avoided the traps of constant infighting that seems typical of you plumbing guys. You could learn from them.
So, in some ways, these discussions are one way to essentially recognize that what makes you different is actually what makes you similar, and therein lies your power. Just don't lose sight of your common goal, whatever it might be.
More to the point of this discussion, I have probably dabbled with everything that has been discussed here. My most successful experiment as been Gentoo Linux, but that's only because I took the time to actually read the instructions on what to do, and was able to overcome the incredibly stupid mistakes that were made in the documentation that so many have stated isn't rocket science. Rocket science is useless if the rocket you build can't get off the ground. What good is it if you end up putting wheels on it and use it to drive from San Francisco to LA?
Debian's apt-get is fabulous but quite frankly the whole Debian thing reminds me too much of Scientology. No, actually it reminds me more of Amway. Of course apt-get is simple and the only way because that is what you get with Debian. No negativity here. You agreed to the Debian Social Contract, and therefore you must abide by that agreement. There is no other way.
Conectiva Linux has to be the best distribution to co-opt the structured order of Debian with the freewheeling rpm methodology. I think it is closes to realizing that you can have your cake and eat it too. Naturally, if there is a way to override rpm's safeguards, then don't give some poor new user such hell because they forced a package in. Afterall, you gave them the tool to do it by leaving in a back door. Conectiva has probably figured out that human nature is what it is, so help them by giving a bit more order to their "sin." The alternative is frustration on the users part, so why not just realize that to sin IS the norm and people will be people. I think what they have done is said there are more ways to achieve the same thing, and most users don't give a crap about any of them. They just want the end result, no sermon, no dogma, no eternal pain and suffering. Just give them what they want with minimum frustration and be happy that their systems are still stable and functional. Let them have the goddess, just call her Mary and incorporate her into your dogma. Let them have their midwinter rituals and their multiple deities. Just split your one diety into three different ones (God the father, God the son, and God the holy ghost). There is room for all of it, but always remember why you are here and not there. Otherwise, you won't be anywhere pretty quickly.
Sorry, this message has meandered everywhere across the map and often off of it entirely. But, I also want to take a minute to thank each and every one of you. This entire movement, whether you call it the FSF, GNU/Linux, KDE, Gnome, whatever. I am in awe of the energy and talent that has brought you this far in such a short time. No company can possibly ever hope to accomplish this in the same manner. Let it be both a compliement and warning to you that IBM and other biggies have recognized this. Just remember: the devil knows the bible frontwards and backwards.
My hats off to all of you. Keep those flames agoin and keep the fire hot!
Jack Greenwood
San Francisco
I haven't followed this whole thread, but I've heard the floppy/trash thing for years, and I"m pretty surprised that most people forget the other function for which the "drag it to the trash" event was intended. That is simply to unmount removable media (floppies, cds, jaz drives, etc.)or even to dismount fixed media/hard drive partitions if you deem it necessary. The command key to eject any inserted media is Command-Y. The menu item name for Command-Y changes based on what is receiving the action, but the concepts are similar. That menu item is either "Eject xxxmedia" or "Put Away". If you have a document that you recently dragged onto your desktop, performing Command-Y on it will put it back to wherever it was prior to being moved to the desktop (or any folder.) The exception, of oourse, is if the place where it was prior is no longer mounted or if that item was created in the folder where it currently resides.) If you stop and think of the desktop paradigm in a more simple manner, this menu item and these actions make sense. You temporarily bring you documents from whereever they were, your work on them, then you put them away. This is easily extended to removable media, because most likely you aren't intending on having them there forever. So when your're done, you also tell it to be "Put Away" (even though the menu does change to "eject" for removable media, the idea was consistent.) I'll admit that choosing the trash can to be the vehicle for both destroying stuff and putting stuff away (god knows that's how I've cleaned up my room since I was 8) but I think there's also a historical context to dragging stuff to the trash. If I remember correctly, Steve Jobs was adamant that everything be performed by the mouse. No key Word Perfect Alt-F-10-Shft-Escape key combinations in order to get words bold on the Mac! Just use the mouse, and choose "Bold" from the menu. I don't even think he was happy at ALL that the original Mac team even gave stuff command-key equivalents. I think the Mac team softa kept them there, and I"m sure they suffered the consequences of daring to deface his art. So maybe to Steve Jobs, it was worth the unfortunate association of the trash can serving double duty, because it kept things pure and it was still NOTHING like what people had to deal with with PCs. Drag was cool and hip and ART, even if it was straight into the trash. The Macintosh trash can has been quite the celebrity, at times being the only reason to play with the machine (remember Oscar the Grouch and I Love Trash?) Who cares if you dragged everything INTO that trash can then emptied it, that would make Oscar come out and sing again! Computers ARE fun, mommy!) Besides, you could also say that putting the floppy into the trash WAS NOT DELETING it ,because to delete the thing you'd have to EMPTY THE TRASH. Those floppies just had the habit of popping right out before you even got the chance to empty the trash. Smart little floppies. See, no guilt! no more angst! We can all live on, because art survives and we are not the horrible people we thought we were dragging those poor disks into the trash.
I think the real point of this is that all paradigms (or methaphors) we've used for our GUIs break down quickly when you try to extend their feature set beyond the original intent. The inconsistencies of the Macintosh trash can from its inception shows you that it is WAY time for us to move away from the desktop metaphor.
Okay, who's gonna yell at me first. Yell on, baby, I'm in the trasn with Oscar anyway and we like it!
Jack