I went out of my way to find a local independent* DSL ISP. DSL gets a bad rap because you need to be close to the pop for decent link speeds and sure, it doesn't come with "speedboost", but I'll take the constant 12Mbps I get over a capped link that only seems to hit advertised rates when using SpeedTest.net (and seems to slow down when my neighbors all pile on) any day.
* of course, it's only as independent as the next guy in the telco chain -- which happens to be AT&T.:(
The F700 was announced in Feburary 2007 at Mobile World Congress, after the iPhone was announced in January at MacWorld. It also relied on a slide-out keyboard, so in usage they are not very similar at all. And the appearance of the UI is very different, it doesn't have the design features which were the subject of this lawsuit.
Show's how little you know
You need to consider each patent separately. The UI with four icons has nothing to do with the patent on the physical design. Nor does the four icon layout have anything to do with the slide to unlock patent.
I have no opinion on the design patent question beyond it just seems silly to my non-designer mind. As an actual software developer I do take issue with the software patents and as a member of the human race I take issue with the concept of "owning" ideas in general.
But what really gets me is the litigation apologists who selectively treat these patents as either severable or not depending on the direction the wind is blowing in order to rationalize the desertification the intellectual commons.
Such a hoot you losers are. You do understand these are facts don't you? And you mod down FACTS?
Suck it up commies.
Huh? Only one bit was actually numbers (actually somewhat interesting numbers, if true). The rest was opinion -- some of it conflicting. E.g., so does the writer think the speech was a rehash being overly praised, or a strong performance? I can't tell, both are stated.
Anywho, it doesn't matter as it has nothing to do with SuSE. It should be down-moded, as should yours as well as mine. If you want to be a dipshit political nonsense troll, go over to WaPo forums or the DailyKos. You'll have more fun over there and/. readers will enjoy their afternoons free of numbskulls that don't even know their target audience (victims) well enough to know that there needs to be an Apple, Google or MS tie-in.
E.g., Have you noticed how RNC podium was rectangular with rounded corners but the DNC podium was not. Makes you think... I know for sure I won't be voting for the anti-IP "Google" party.
The interesting thing is how the OSS allows Valve to tweak or examine the driver code on the fly to find out how to optimize performance.
Anyone who *actually* games wants to know who the fuck cares about underpowered Intel video card drivers. Oh, it will be able to play 5 year old Valve games? WHOOPTY-FUCKING-DOO.
Perhaps you forgot about the time, years ago, when the FOSS crowd courted ATI, saying "Release your specs! The FOSS community will do the rest!" What did ATI do? They released the specs. An opensource driver was born, and it's an unstable, slow piece of shit. When these FOSS folks realized they weren't technically competent enough to actually create a driver for a modern GPU architecture, they went back to demonizing ATI for not releasing their proprietary driver under a free license.
What's the moral of the story here? Just because something is open source doesn't mean "the community" is going to be able to do shit about it. Intel wants to point and say, "Look! Intel GPU can play 5 year old valve games!" Valve wants to say, "Look, Linux is a viable gaming platform!" At the end of the day, it's totally irrelevant to people who want to play new games on modern GPU's.
You are clearly not a big picture person. What this means is that a multi-million dollar company is saving time by using open source. Time saved is money saved, and, using political algebra, every dollar saved is 30 jobs. What did Intel lose? Nothing. Meanwhile, the economy as a whole gains GDP and everyone wins.
But, absolutely, you're right, and the other guy is wrong: this is all useless because you don't like Valve's game line-up.
The company I work for has the best of both worlds. They go out and buy a $500,000 piece of Enterprise Software*, forgo the expensive contractors and dump the setup and configuration on 2 or 3 in-house developers, a project manager (who is usually an outside contractor who happens to be friends with an executive -- a budget locust, if you will) and an IT manager. After about a year the esteemed project manager moves on to the next project, the manager in charge gets promoted, the software is blamed for the lack of results and a new $500,000 purchase is made.
*For those that haven't used the stuff, Enterprise Software doesn't actually work out of the box. It's much like a do-it-yourself plane kit with lots of manuals on FAA regulations, a glossy guide full of pictures of planes "other customers" have built and a box full of parts (with a few random parts missing) but no actual assembly instructions.
I've been around long enough to remember the Turbo Button - it slowed the CPU to 8Mhz to be compatible with some games.
I believe it actually slowed the ISA bus down to be compatible with a slower standard and the CPU was clocked at a fixed multiplier so, as a side-effect, it too slowed.
Anyway, I just enjoyed it 'cause it was an actual button on my PC. I wired the PC speaker through it to allow me to enable/disable to bleeper if it got out of control. (I changed the turbo setting using the keyboard lock.)
Is the 2.0 designation deserved? I suppose that depends on your perspective. At the risk of veering into a largely irrelevant philosophical rumination on the ontological significance of version numbers, I feel inclined to point out that the implications of version numbers vary greatly between various open source projects. In some cases, there is a well-established nomenclature and version numbers can be used to infer all sorts of useful things about the nature and status of a build. In other cases, it may simply be an arbitrary value selected for the sole purpose of making it possible to distinguish between builds. For Firefox, it doesn't seem like there is a fully consistent version numbering model yet. Rather than expressing disappointment about the lack of new features in the upcoming 2.0 release, users should remember that Firefox release numbers aren't always going to be a helpful medium for establishing expectations.
Sheesh... Judging by the above paragraph it also comes with a thesaurus.
I know it was supposed to be over the top, but your example doesn't seem too far off from what I'm used to seeing at election time.
Instead of:
"Representative Hogan is out of touch with America. He voted against a law that would prohibit minors from visiting MySpace.com in public libraries. Does that sound like the kind of guy you'd want in office?"
try this:
"Representative Hogan is out of touch with America. He voted against a law that would protect minors from online predators in public libraries. Does that sound like the kind of guy you'd want in office?"
If I make mistakes, or allow too many novices on board, or allow a novice on board that do not happen to have a sufficient desire to learn or to perform due diligence...someone literally suffers. Somewhere someone will recieve a poor medical outcome, or fail to get a home loan, or watch their startup fail for lack of a quality tool, or labor unneccessarily in the absence of a timely product, etc.
What, you have no unit testing? No QA? That's your failure, not the novice's.
You develop freaking SOFTWARE. No more, no less.
Personally, I'd rather develop software, AND people, but maybe that's just me.
So, you see, even after considering the tax benefits, one does not magically wind up with more money after donating than if they didn't.
But, you know - if reality were different, I guess maybe you would have a point.
Honestly, what individual who cares about their financial future *doesn't* need that information
Do you really need it that often, or are you constantly checking to see if you've made an extra $0.25 today? I own stocks. I check my gmail account daily. I use Google to search for stuff daily. I don't go to Yahoo finance daily.
It's a good joke, but I think it's also a good idea.
My original reaction to this was "Good God! Don't teach them anything!!!" Nothing is more frustrating than when you've got some VP of something-or-other screaming: "What do you mean it takes more than two weeks to develop an online financial service center!!!" Followed by, "I could do it in 2 days in ASP!!!"
Or worse, someone up your own chain of command cobbling something together in the middle of the night and saying, "Here, I got the hard part done. Just fill in the details" as he passes over the biggest pile of spaghetti code ever devised.
In a small course you're never going to be able to get them to understand the true value of good design methodology, so perhaps an understanding of unreasonable expectations would suffice as an alternative.
If it's a head control language or something you might in trouble, but if it's simply an image being sent you should be able to figure it out eventually.
The best way to reverse engineer a graphics format is to use a collection of sample images to get a high level idea of what is going on. Choose the images in a way that will give you the most information.
Make sure the printouts always the same size, layout, color depth, margins, etc. It does no good to compare an A4 grayscale image to a color letter sized one.
If you're operating under the assumption that it's a simple bitmap, the following may work.
1. Is it compressed?
Print out a page with some dots on a colored background.
Print out a page with more dots on it.
Are they the same size?
If so, most it's most likely a bitmap.
If not, it's probably compressed.
What type of compression is it?
Print out a page which is half white, half another color.
Print out another page which is checkered (with *very* small squares) half white, half the other color.
Is one smaller than the other, if so it may be compressed. If it is, it *could* be Jim-Bobs compression algorithm, but programmers are lazy so it's most likely something off-the-shelf.
If it's the half-and-half print that is smaller, it's either RLE or something like JPG (most likely RLE as JPG is lossy -- compare a gradient print to find out if it's RLE or not).
If it's the checkered print then it's probably LZW.
If neither is smaller, re-evaluate your compression assessment.
2. Create a decompresser to test your decompression theory.
Print a colored page.
Print a second colored page a couple of changes.
If you can't create two data dumps of (relatively) equal size from the input data, you're probably wrong about the compression algorithm.
If they are the same size you may be going in the right direction. (If they're exactly the same size be very happy).
3. Guestimate packing.
Print a cyan* page, a yellow page, a magenta page and a white page. Take a look at the first four bytes or 16 bit words. If you've got clearly observable patterns (ff 0 0 0; 0 ff 0 0; 0 0 ff 0; etc.) you're in luck. If not try to work out the packing order. Just keep in mind, if it's a bitmap, and you've got the decompression down, and the page is one color *eventually* you will find a repeating pattern that represents that color.
4. Visualize the decompressed data.
The best way from this point is to find a way to visualize what you've got. In the past I had stock BMP code that I would use to generate a new displayable image, but I've also created custom apps to display it.
If the resulting image looks right but is a funky color, it's packing.
If the resulting image looks like it *could* be close but has a lot of shear, play with your assumed width and height.
If it looks like static and you've previously determined that you're dealing with 16 bit values, try changing the byte order and try again.
5. Lather, rinse and repeat.
Despite what the nay-sayers want you to do. Don't give up. Figuring out someone's attempt to hide data from you is a reward you give yourself. Even if it takes days or weeks, when the light goes on and you think, "Ah ha! I've got you now you bastard!", it makes the time worth it -- at least for me it always did.
Besides, if you do get it working, you can release it and make Open Source better by your efforts.
I disagree. Hoegaarden is a fine beer. It's perhaps a bit subtler than Chimay (depending on which one you've been drinking). It's also a completely different style, which Hoegaarden is a revival of. The brewer, Pierre Celis, has had breweries in Texas and I believe he's now working out of Michigan.
I believe that the Celis brand no longer has anything to do with the Celis family. Michigan Brewing Company bought the brand, recipes and swag from Miller Brewing Company's microbrew division..
The reason stack protection stuff isn't being widely used isn't because it's got an obscure name or something simple like that. It's because not everyone can agree whether it's effective or just lures people into a false sense of security. There have been a couple of "discussions" of this on the Linux Kernel Mailing List and the end result is always a
stalemate.
Wasn't Bresnan laying cable all over the place up there? I had "BresnanLink" cable modem service in Houghton back in late '97. True, Houghton-Hancock is one of the of the UP's "metropolitan" areas, but didn't they have some sort initiative to hook up all of the K12 schools (and therefore all communities)?
The biggest problem is that the Outlook schema isn't totally documented (at least that I've found when I on and off look for it) -- the LDIF won't give that to you so you will have trouble importing it.
You don't need all of the details from the tree. You really only need the dn, cn, firstname, surname and SMTP address. Pull those out, tweak the dn to match your tree and put it into the LDIF. Disable schema check on the LDAP server and import the data.
The site here describes how to create an Exchange replacement. If you want to use RADIUS you can probably find a PAM-RADIUS module to substitute for PAM-LDAP, or conversely replace your Radius server with a FreeRADIUS instance which can be backed by the LDAP server.
For moving users, enable the LDAP directory service on the Exchange server and you should be able to script (or find) some LDAP-to-LDAP migration tools. At worst, do a full directory search and massage the data into an LDIF file to be imported. Moving the mail data would be harder but I imagine something could be rigged up using the Exchange IMAP service, fetchmail, procmail and the Cyrus deliver command.
If you can find a BackOffice resource CD you should be able to create a way to access the Exchange store without even going through the LDAP and IMAP services.
Users consider Exchange's calendaring to be a critical feature. While there are many free competetitors, they are all of extremely poor - unusable, really - quality.
While I would agree that finding a direct replacement for Exchange calendaring would be difficult, I wouldn't agree that the alternatives are unusable. Even using KOrganizer and KMail to mail around iCal files can pass as a reasonable scheduling system.
If they've already chosen to move away from Exchange, they must've considered this and found and alternative they considered better than "extremely poor."
yada.. yada... yada..(no disrespect, I just don't feel like copying the content)
The key is that OS X may be arbitrarily close to Unix, but enough of it is hidden, inaccessible, or just not there entirely. Technically, Windows is POSIX compliant, does that make it Unix? Obviously not. Windows can also have an X server, does that make it Unix? Nope. Unix is more than just a kernel. It's the filesystem layout, it's where you go to tweak the system, it's where your devices are and how they behave. Cygwin on Win2k is a bad ass system. Windows 2000 without Cygwin is too. My NeXTStation is great. My cow-orkers Titanium laptop is even better... but all of those system are missing features that my Indy, SPARC, Linux box and OpenBSD box all have in common.. and that's Unix "way". Yeah, there are differences between them, but (for good or bad) they all stick to the "way" enough that deduction and past experiences are enough to figure out where you are and what you need to do.
hmmm... wasn't the point of the article that one shouldnt have to be messing around with config text files etc.?
Actually, the original article was more of a troll than anything... Not only did he hit almost every standard "linux sux because.." line (ironically, he left out the one about having to configure stuff with text files) he also threw in some points that just make no sense.. ie, "Software distribution: All windows software comes in binaries, either with an installer or in a zip file." Duh, if you buy boxed software for any OS, it comes precompiled and ready to go.
So, ignoring the original "article". I was replying instead to the parent proclaiming MacOSX as user friendly Unix. It's not Unix. It's MacOSX. Just like Linux isn't Windows and shouldn't be billed as such (I'm looking at you Mr. Michael Robertson).
Slashdot Mirror
And who owns the pipe your media streams through?
Oh right, Cable Companies
I went out of my way to find a local independent* DSL ISP. DSL gets a bad rap because you need to be close to the pop for decent link speeds and sure, it doesn't come with "speedboost", but I'll take the constant 12Mbps I get over a capped link that only seems to hit advertised rates when using SpeedTest.net (and seems to slow down when my neighbors all pile on) any day.
* of course, it's only as independent as the next guy in the telco chain -- which happens to be AT&T. :(
Must we go though this every time?
The F700 was announced in Feburary 2007 at Mobile World Congress, after the iPhone was announced in January at MacWorld. It also relied on a slide-out keyboard, so in usage they are not very similar at all. And the appearance of the UI is very different, it doesn't have the design features which were the subject of this lawsuit.
Show's how little you know
You need to consider each patent separately. The UI with four icons has nothing to do with the patent on the physical design. Nor does the four icon layout have anything to do with the slide to unlock patent.
I have no opinion on the design patent question beyond it just seems silly to my non-designer mind. As an actual software developer I do take issue with the software patents and as a member of the human race I take issue with the concept of "owning" ideas in general.
But what really gets me is the litigation apologists who selectively treat these patents as either severable or not depending on the direction the wind is blowing in order to rationalize the desertification the intellectual commons.
Such a hoot you losers are. You do understand these are facts don't you? And you mod down FACTS?
Suck it up commies.
Huh? Only one bit was actually numbers (actually somewhat interesting numbers, if true). The rest was opinion -- some of it conflicting. E.g., so does the writer think the speech was a rehash being overly praised, or a strong performance? I can't tell, both are stated.
Anywho, it doesn't matter as it has nothing to do with SuSE. It should be down-moded, as should yours as well as mine. If you want to be a dipshit political nonsense troll, go over to WaPo forums or the DailyKos. You'll have more fun over there and /. readers will enjoy their afternoons free of numbskulls that don't even know their target audience (victims) well enough to know that there needs to be an Apple, Google or MS tie-in.
E.g., Have you noticed how RNC podium was rectangular with rounded corners but the DNC podium was not. Makes you think... I know for sure I won't be voting for the anti-IP "Google" party.
The interesting thing is how the OSS allows Valve to tweak or examine the driver code on the fly to find out how to optimize performance.
Anyone who *actually* games wants to know who the fuck cares about underpowered Intel video card drivers. Oh, it will be able to play 5 year old Valve games? WHOOPTY-FUCKING-DOO.
Perhaps you forgot about the time, years ago, when the FOSS crowd courted ATI, saying "Release your specs! The FOSS community will do the rest!" What did ATI do? They released the specs. An opensource driver was born, and it's an unstable, slow piece of shit. When these FOSS folks realized they weren't technically competent enough to actually create a driver for a modern GPU architecture, they went back to demonizing ATI for not releasing their proprietary driver under a free license.
What's the moral of the story here? Just because something is open source doesn't mean "the community" is going to be able to do shit about it. Intel wants to point and say, "Look! Intel GPU can play 5 year old valve games!" Valve wants to say, "Look, Linux is a viable gaming platform!" At the end of the day, it's totally irrelevant to people who want to play new games on modern GPU's.
You are clearly not a big picture person. What this means is that a multi-million dollar company is saving time by using open source. Time saved is money saved, and, using political algebra, every dollar saved is 30 jobs. What did Intel lose? Nothing. Meanwhile, the economy as a whole gains GDP and everyone wins.
But, absolutely, you're right, and the other guy is wrong: this is all useless because you don't like Valve's game line-up.
The company I work for has the best of both worlds. They go out and buy a $500,000 piece of Enterprise Software*, forgo the expensive contractors and dump the setup and configuration on 2 or 3 in-house developers, a project manager (who is usually an outside contractor who happens to be friends with an executive -- a budget locust, if you will) and an IT manager. After about a year the esteemed project manager moves on to the next project, the manager in charge gets promoted, the software is blamed for the lack of results and a new $500,000 purchase is made.
*For those that haven't used the stuff, Enterprise Software doesn't actually work out of the box. It's much like a do-it-yourself plane kit with lots of manuals on FAA regulations, a glossy guide full of pictures of planes "other customers" have built and a box full of parts (with a few random parts missing) but no actual assembly instructions.
I've been around long enough to remember the Turbo Button - it slowed the CPU to 8Mhz to be compatible with some games.
I believe it actually slowed the ISA bus down to be compatible with a slower standard and the CPU was clocked at a fixed multiplier so, as a side-effect, it too slowed.
Anyway, I just enjoyed it 'cause it was an actual button on my PC. I wired the PC speaker through it to allow me to enable/disable to bleeper if it got out of control. (I changed the turbo setting using the keyboard lock.)
But I shot 'em all.
SELECT grid_id FROM streets WHERE streetname LIKE 'Martin L%';
Damn! How did you know I was going to knck over that 7-Eleven on Martin Landau Boulevard!?
> generally referred to as an "mp3 player"
MP3 player? What's that? Is that like an iPod or something?
Is the 2.0 designation deserved? I suppose that depends on your perspective. At the risk of veering into a largely irrelevant philosophical rumination on the ontological significance of version numbers, I feel inclined to point out that the implications of version numbers vary greatly between various open source projects. In some cases, there is a well-established nomenclature and version numbers can be used to infer all sorts of useful things about the nature and status of a build. In other cases, it may simply be an arbitrary value selected for the sole purpose of making it possible to distinguish between builds. For Firefox, it doesn't seem like there is a fully consistent version numbering model yet. Rather than expressing disappointment about the lack of new features in the upcoming 2.0 release, users should remember that Firefox release numbers aren't always going to be a helpful medium for establishing expectations.
Sheesh... Judging by the above paragraph it also comes with a thesaurus.
I know it was supposed to be over the top, but your example doesn't seem too far off from what I'm used to seeing at election time.
Instead of:
"Representative Hogan is out of touch with America. He voted against a law that would prohibit minors from visiting MySpace.com in public libraries. Does that sound like the kind of guy you'd want in office?"
try this:
"Representative Hogan is out of touch with America. He voted against a law that would protect minors from online predators in public libraries. Does that sound like the kind of guy you'd want in office?"
If I make mistakes, or allow too many novices on board, or allow a novice on board that do not happen to have a sufficient desire to learn or to perform due diligence...someone literally suffers. Somewhere someone will recieve a poor medical outcome, or fail to get a home loan, or watch their startup fail for lack of a quality tool, or labor unneccessarily in the absence of a timely product, etc.
What, you have no unit testing? No QA? That's your failure, not the novice's.
You develop freaking SOFTWARE. No more, no less.
Personally, I'd rather develop software, AND people, but maybe that's just me.
So, you see, even after considering the tax benefits, one does not magically wind up with more money after donating than if they didn't. But, you know - if reality were different, I guess maybe you would have a point.
/ 20051221/AUTO01/512210405
/ 20051221/AUTO01/512210405
So, this article has nothing to do with reality?
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=
And here's a rich guy outright losing money on purpose:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=
I said in another post to this story that my next car would be a VW. Why? Because:
1. Their diesels are very fuel efficient;
2. You can make fuel for diesels in your shed out of renewable vegetable or animal oils.
plus...
3. It's fun replacing O2 sensors.
4. You enjoy mysterious check engine messages.
5. Paying a premium for a plethora of replacement parts is sweet!
This all a bit OT, but, seriously, I haven't been so disapointed with anything in a long time as much as I am with my VW (and I even own a PSP).
I purchased a Jetta GLX and about two weeks later the glove compartment latch fell off. It's been going down hill ever since.
It was a cool car but the quality level has made me bitter about my purchase.
These people also seem a bit peeved:
http://www.myvwlemon.com/
Honestly, what individual who cares about their financial future *doesn't* need that information
Do you really need it that often, or are you constantly checking to see if you've made an extra $0.25 today? I own stocks. I check my gmail account daily. I use Google to search for stuff daily. I don't go to Yahoo finance daily.
It's a good joke, but I think it's also a good idea.
My original reaction to this was "Good God! Don't teach them anything!!!" Nothing is more frustrating than when you've got some VP of something-or-other screaming: "What do you mean it takes more than two weeks to develop an online financial service center!!!" Followed by, "I could do it in 2 days in ASP!!!"
Or worse, someone up your own chain of command cobbling something together in the middle of the night and saying, "Here, I got the hard part done. Just fill in the details" as he passes over the biggest pile of spaghetti code ever devised.
In a small course you're never going to be able to get them to understand the true value of good design methodology, so perhaps an understanding of unreasonable expectations would suffice as an alternative.
If it's a head control language or something you might in trouble, but if it's simply an image being sent you should be able to figure it out eventually.
The best way to reverse engineer a graphics format is to use a collection of sample images to get a high level idea of what is going on. Choose the images in a way that will give you the most information.
Make sure the printouts always the same size, layout, color depth, margins, etc. It does no good to compare an A4 grayscale image to a color letter sized one.
If you're operating under the assumption that it's a simple bitmap, the following may work.
1. Is it compressed?
Print out a page with some dots on a colored background.
Print out a page with more dots on it.
Are they the same size?
If so, most it's most likely a bitmap.
If not, it's probably compressed.
What type of compression is it?
Print out a page which is half white, half another color.
Print out another page which is checkered (with *very* small squares) half white, half the other color.
Is one smaller than the other, if so it may be compressed. If it is, it *could* be Jim-Bobs compression algorithm, but programmers are lazy so it's most likely something off-the-shelf.
If it's the half-and-half print that is smaller, it's either RLE or something like JPG (most likely RLE as JPG is lossy -- compare a gradient print to find out if it's RLE or not).
If it's the checkered print then it's probably LZW.
If neither is smaller, re-evaluate your compression assessment.
2. Create a decompresser to test your decompression theory.
Print a colored page.
Print a second colored page a couple of changes.
If you can't create two data dumps of (relatively) equal size from the input data, you're probably wrong about the compression algorithm.
If they are the same size you may be going in the right direction. (If they're exactly the same size be very happy).
3. Guestimate packing.
Print a cyan* page, a yellow page, a magenta page and a white page. Take a look at the first four bytes or 16 bit words. If you've got clearly observable patterns (ff 0 0 0; 0 ff 0 0; 0 0 ff 0; etc.) you're in luck. If not try to work out the packing order. Just keep in mind, if it's a bitmap, and you've got the decompression down, and the page is one color *eventually* you will find a repeating pattern that represents that color.
4. Visualize the decompressed data.
The best way from this point is to find a way to visualize what you've got. In the past I had stock BMP code that I would use to generate a new displayable image, but I've also created custom apps to display it.
If the resulting image looks right but is a funky color, it's packing.
If the resulting image looks like it *could* be close but has a lot of shear, play with your assumed width and height.
If it looks like static and you've previously determined that you're dealing with 16 bit values, try changing the byte order and try again.
5. Lather, rinse and repeat.
Despite what the nay-sayers want you to do. Don't give up. Figuring out someone's attempt to hide data from you is a reward you give yourself. Even if it takes days or weeks, when the light goes on and you think, "Ah ha! I've got you now you bastard!", it makes the time worth it -- at least for me it always did.
Besides, if you do get it working, you can release it and make Open Source better by your efforts.
* Remember, it's cmyk, not rgb.
I disagree. Hoegaarden is a fine beer. It's perhaps a bit subtler than Chimay (depending on which one you've been drinking). It's also a completely different style, which Hoegaarden is a revival of. The brewer, Pierre Celis, has had breweries in Texas and I believe he's now working out of Michigan.
I believe that the Celis brand no longer has anything to do with the Celis family. Michigan Brewing Company bought the brand, recipes and swag from Miller Brewing Company's microbrew division..
The reason stack protection stuff isn't being widely used isn't because it's got an obscure name or something simple like that. It's because not everyone can agree whether it's effective or just lures people into a false sense of security. There have been a couple of "discussions" of this on the Linux Kernel Mailing List and the end result is always a stalemate.
dan
Wasn't Bresnan laying cable all over the place up there? I had "BresnanLink" cable modem service in Houghton back in late '97. True, Houghton-Hancock is one of the of the UP's "metropolitan" areas, but didn't they have some sort initiative to hook up all of the K12 schools (and therefore all communities)?
The biggest problem is that the Outlook schema isn't totally documented (at least that I've found when I on and off look for it) -- the LDIF won't give that to you so you will have trouble importing it.
You don't need all of the details from the tree. You really only need the dn, cn, firstname, surname and SMTP address. Pull those out, tweak the dn to match your tree and put it into the LDIF. Disable schema check on the LDAP server and import the data.
The site here describes how to create an Exchange replacement. If you want to use RADIUS you can probably find a PAM-RADIUS module to substitute for PAM-LDAP, or conversely replace your Radius server with a FreeRADIUS instance which can be backed by the LDAP server.
For moving users, enable the LDAP directory service on the Exchange server and you should be able to script (or find) some LDAP-to-LDAP migration tools. At worst, do a full directory search and massage the data into an LDIF file to be imported. Moving the mail data would be harder but I imagine something could be rigged up using the Exchange IMAP service, fetchmail, procmail and the Cyrus deliver command.
If you can find a BackOffice resource CD you should be able to create a way to access the Exchange store without even going through the LDAP and IMAP services.
Users consider Exchange's calendaring to be a critical feature. While there are many free competetitors, they are all of extremely poor - unusable, really - quality.
While I would agree that finding a direct replacement for Exchange calendaring would be difficult, I wouldn't agree that the alternatives are unusable. Even using KOrganizer and KMail to mail around iCal files can pass as a reasonable scheduling system.
If they've already chosen to move away from Exchange, they must've considered this and found and alternative they considered better than "extremely poor."
yada.. yada... yada..(no disrespect, I just don't feel like copying the content)
The key is that OS X may be arbitrarily close to Unix, but enough of it is hidden, inaccessible, or just not there entirely. Technically, Windows is POSIX compliant, does that make it Unix? Obviously not. Windows can also have an X server, does that make it Unix? Nope. Unix is more than just a kernel. It's the filesystem layout, it's where you go to tweak the system, it's where your devices are and how they behave. Cygwin on Win2k is a bad ass system. Windows 2000 without Cygwin is too. My NeXTStation is great. My cow-orkers Titanium laptop is even better... but all of those system are missing features that my Indy, SPARC, Linux box and OpenBSD box all have in common.. and that's Unix "way". Yeah, there are differences between them, but (for good or bad) they all stick to the "way" enough that deduction and past experiences are enough to figure out where you are and what you need to do.
hmmm... wasn't the point of the article that one shouldnt have to be messing around with config text files etc.?
Actually, the original article was more of a troll than anything... Not only did he hit almost every standard "linux sux because.." line (ironically, he left out the one about having to configure stuff with text files) he also threw in some points that just make no sense.. ie, "Software distribution: All windows software comes in binaries, either with an installer or in a zip file." Duh, if you buy boxed software for any OS, it comes precompiled and ready to go.
So, ignoring the original "article". I was replying instead to the parent proclaiming MacOSX as user friendly Unix. It's not Unix. It's MacOSX. Just like Linux isn't Windows and shouldn't be billed as such (I'm looking at you Mr. Michael Robertson).