If the codes for some manufacturer are hard to obtain, shops should not work on those cars. Or charge more. So customers will not buy them. That is how capitalism is supposed to work. Consumers and service shops just need to stand up for the good manufacturers.
Except this is not how it is working. Did you even read the news article? The small garages are being withheld information about the car YOU bought, so they are forced to refer business to the dealer. Who is more than happy to fix it at a lower price than the small guy can charge.
This is campaigning. The money would come from his campaign donors, or the state election fund. The state can't really tell Jesse how best to campaign, and it's not like that earmarked money would be alotted for something else.
I'm all for ripping on Jesse, but at least make sense when you do it.
Also, after reading the article, I'M not so sure I like that pension idea. I've been told that my generation may possibly have to work to age 72 before retirement. The last thing I want to see is taxpayer financed teacher retirements at 57 or earlier, cause I'll be still working to foot the bill.
Tape media is quite expensive in those higher capacities. They arent that useful either unless you are interested in archiving multiple sets of data for long periods.
A better solution would be to set up a cheap drive mirror with a cheap RAID card. Or better yet, put a backup drive in your computer, and use Norton Ghost to save an image of your data drive to it. Set the backup drive to spin down after a short period to save wear on the drive.
Sounds like you are falling into the same trap that the author of this article warned about.
As for Code Red, yeah, well, IIS sucks. To play devils advocate, however, we must remember the only worm to ever bring the Internet to its knees was a UNIX worm.
> saying sircam is a computer virus is FUD it's an Outlook virus
Slashdot even fell into the same trap. (Slashdot's case of FAS is terminal)
If you read the
analysis you find out that this virus spreads with its own SMTP routines, and through network shares. Theoretically, you dont even a mail program to contract this virus if you are hooked up to a LAN.
Arrogance like this is no doubt why the author felt the need to write the article. The "If I dont run Outlook, I won't get viruses" attitude is dangerous. This virus can spread from any Win32 mail client from Outlook to Mozilla. It looks in the Windows address book, but takes addresses from your internet history as well. If you are hooked up to a network, you may have it now... Better go check..... Those could be your documents I keep getting in the mail.
Most servers come with nothing on it. If your server company is making you buy an OS tell them to kiss of, and buy them from Dell, who will gladly sell it to you blank.
Thats a good point, and probably why versions of Windows XP Server will support 'headless' operation. No GUI loaded by default.
If you need to administer the machine through the GUI, you can connect via Terminal services and the GUI is loaded for that session.
The reboot factor is still huge though. I feel this is what keeps Microsoft servers from achieving looks as a mission-critical server OS. They have the stability, headless operation (now), but the reboot frequency is and will continue to a big problem.
On a side note, there is a neat utility called qchain.exe that allows hotfixes to be 'chained' together to prevent the need to reboot after each hotfix. Can be found here I found it helpful.
another way to look at this is... what about costs? and yes, there's the argument that linux costs more to support. i think thats a load of garbage. once linux is up and running and configured. it stays that way. you won't have to deal with your users breaking things all the time, or windows random failures.
And I totally agree. It would be great from a user management perspective. The problem is trying to use Linux where it wont work for your users. Ask yourself if the level of complication will be worth the end result.
Its the same reason I don't use NT for running Apache, MTA's, or DNS. *NIX runs them so fabulously why would I even mess around with it?
Conversly -- why would you try to make Linux run Windows apps, when running Windows works just fine?
I was the local Linux zealot and I did try long and hard to convince myself that:
* We could offer a Linux desktop, with linux-native office apps and browser, and run all 400-odd teaching apps under Wine.
* We could offer a Linux desktop, with linux-native office apps and browser, and run all 400-odd teaching apps under VMware.
* We could offer a Linux desktop, with linux-native office apps and browser, and run all 400-odd teaching apps on a Citrix app server via the linux ICA client.
And the I thought - why?
Why is right, why the heck would you even think of such crazyness?
* Wine runs apps 75% of the time, and thats being forgiving. What happens when someone wants to run an app with unsupported API's. Say 'Too Bad'?
* Just because you have VMWARE doesnt mean you get to run Windows for free, you still need licences. So whats the point? And having to boot that VMware session will go over lovely with users. "You mean I have to boot 2 computers to run Excel!?!!?"
* CITRIX? Do you really want to enter the era of the mainframe again? Citrix has its advantages however. Being cheap is not one of those advantages.
* Staroffice SUCKS ARSE -- Theres no talking anyone out of that. Staroffice better than Microsoft Office? LAUGHABLE! It would be better to use a web-based office like Thinkfree.com.
You need to lose your politics, and figure out what is best for the user, before you lose your job.
They have internet on computers now!?-HOMER SIMPSON
You could wrestle with Sharepoint Portal and spend 3000$ on it and 67$ per CAL. You could also use CVS, and try to put square pegs in round holes.
-BUT-
You could just buy a copy of Office XP and use Office Team Services for free. Comes on the XP resource kit. Works like buttah. You just lose the shell integration crap that you get with Sharepoint.
Not sure how well it works with previous Office versions, but for the price of some of the Document control systems, you could upgrade to XP with a kick ass document control system thrown in to boot. Worth investigationg anyway.
This argument is pretty weak on many sides. Lets break it down:
Though MS didn't write the virus, the existence of the hole combined with the monopoly they have in the OS market are what really caused the problem.
Is this the sole reason? Users who opened the attachment had no responsibility? The virus creator? If you had said BUBBLEBOY, I would have partially agreed with you, as that could be spread simply by viewing the message. But you can blame a program for a well-socially-engineered worm
If somebody wrote a virus for a tiny hole in BeOS would it have affected the world like this one did?
In this example BeOS and Microsoft would have equal responsibility to provide reasonable security. Wouldnt it be true that if BeOs was the most used OS in the world, that 'tiny' hole might not be so tiny anymore?
Incompatible file formats between its own products year after year. I love it when Office97 tells me "Oh, not everyone has Office97, you should save in Office95 format."
File formats and upgrade incompatibilities are a part of computing life. It is not limited to Windows, anyone who says it is, is full of BS. Can I direct you to the following version problems: RPM, GLIBC, IMLIB, GCC, GTK. And these are pretty core components. After that, having your spreadsheet not open seems pretty minimal.
Machines that you expect to have to reboot every day.
Linux is the hands down winner in stability. However 'Every day' is a gross exageration. I've seen W2K servers up months uninterupted.
People hate Windows, we know that...
We do? Just a sentance later it is stated:
But they never blame Microsoft. They never say "I'm not going to use MS products." Because they don't even know that other products exist.
Marketing is important, Mirosoft does a good job of it. You cant blame them for other companies not doing AS good a job. Can you name another manufacturer of chewing gum besides Wrigley?
Just to qualify this, I am not a 'Microsoft Lover' I use many different soultions from many different companies. If anyone else has a better product, bring it on, let the market decide it's fate. However I don't buy into the "If customers only knew about X" argument. If they were that disgusted they would. And frankly, I just dont see that disgust.
-==Civik==-
They have the Internet on computers now!?!
-Homer Simpson
Keeping with the open sourse ethos that if you slap a 'open' on the front of any trademark you can make it your own! We will have news, weather, stock quotes, just like the real thing, but we're 'open'!
Seriously, I understand the argument, but you cant fault them for protecting a valid trademark, especially when the products are basically the same. I would be all for OpenSSH keeping the name if they made refried beans, and not network security tools.
Civik They have Internet on computers now!?!
-Homer Simpson
Slashdot Mirror
If you are going to run NETBIOS across the Internet at least tunnel it. Pickup FreeSWAN and a copy of SSH Sentinel.
Oops..!
Try this instead.
Gotta love it!
Original Microsoft page in all it's glory:
here it is
I hate Passport's integration with XP (although that might be because I hate XP). An Open Source single-sign on would be a real blessing.
Great, trade one set of inflated egos and flawed ethos for another. Was that sarcastic, nawwwww....
If the codes for some manufacturer are hard to obtain, shops should not work on those cars. Or charge more. So customers will not buy them. That is how capitalism is supposed to work. Consumers and service shops just need to stand up for the good manufacturers.
Except this is not how it is working. Did you even read the news article? The small garages are being withheld information about the car YOU bought, so they are forced to refer business to the dealer. Who is more than happy to fix it at a lower price than the small guy can charge.
This is campaigning. The money would come from his campaign donors, or the state election fund. The state can't really tell Jesse how best to campaign, and it's not like that earmarked money would be alotted for something else.
I'm all for ripping on Jesse, but at least make sense when you do it.
Also, after reading the article, I'M not so sure I like that pension idea. I've been told that my generation may possibly have to work to age 72 before retirement. The last thing I want to see is taxpayer financed teacher retirements at 57 or earlier, cause I'll be still working to foot the bill.
The name of Ventura's new video game should be 'Big Man Hunter'
click here if you don't know why that is funny.
Tape media is quite expensive in those higher capacities. They arent that useful either unless you are interested in archiving multiple sets of data for long periods.
A better solution would be to set up a cheap drive mirror with a cheap RAID card. Or better yet, put a backup drive in your computer, and use Norton Ghost to save an image of your data drive to it. Set the backup drive to spin down after a short period to save wear on the drive.
And if you like Tribes 2, Windows or Linux, make sure you write a Nasty-Gram to Sierra for shutting down Dynamix and laying off several developers.
Sounds like you are falling into the same trap that the author of this article warned about.
As for Code Red, yeah, well, IIS sucks. To play devils advocate, however, we must remember the only worm to ever bring the Internet to its knees was a UNIX worm.
> saying sircam is a computer virus is FUD it's an Outlook virus
Slashdot even fell into the same trap. (Slashdot's case of FAS is terminal)
If you read the analysis you find out that this virus spreads with its own SMTP routines, and through network shares. Theoretically, you dont even a mail program to contract this virus if you are hooked up to a LAN.
Arrogance like this is no doubt why the author felt the need to write the article. The "If I dont run Outlook, I won't get viruses" attitude is dangerous. This virus can spread from any Win32 mail client from Outlook to Mozilla. It looks in the Windows address book, but takes addresses from your internet history as well. If you are hooked up to a network, you may have it now... Better go check..... Those could be your documents I keep getting in the mail.
What company are you buying servers from?
Most servers come with nothing on it. If your server company is making you buy an OS tell them to kiss of, and buy them from Dell, who will gladly sell it to you blank.
Thats a good point, and probably why versions of Windows XP Server will support 'headless' operation. No GUI loaded by default.
If you need to administer the machine through the GUI, you can connect via Terminal services and the GUI is loaded for that session.
The reboot factor is still huge though. I feel this is what keeps Microsoft servers from achieving looks as a mission-critical server OS. They have the stability, headless operation (now), but the reboot frequency is and will continue to a big problem.
On a side note, there is a neat utility called qchain.exe that allows hotfixes to be 'chained' together to prevent the need to reboot after each hotfix. Can be found here I found it helpful.
another way to look at this is... what about costs? and yes, there's the argument that linux costs more to support. i think thats a load of garbage. once linux is up and running and configured. it stays that way. you won't have to deal with your users breaking things all the time, or windows random failures.
And I totally agree. It would be great from a user management perspective. The problem is trying to use Linux where it wont work for your users. Ask yourself if the level of complication will be worth the end result.
Its the same reason I don't use NT for running Apache, MTA's, or DNS. *NIX runs them so fabulously why would I even mess around with it?
Conversly -- why would you try to make Linux run Windows apps, when running Windows works just fine?
Thats all I'm saying.
OK, well, you dont seem interested in refuting any of my points.
The political one here is you, judging from a search on this site and Google.
Whats that supposed to mean?
I'll admit that my last line might have been a little over-the-top. Thats what I get for posting without my requisite 3 cups of coffee.
I was the local Linux zealot and I did try long and hard to convince myself that:
* We could offer a Linux desktop, with linux-native office apps and browser, and run all 400-odd teaching apps under Wine.
* We could offer a Linux desktop, with linux-native office apps and browser, and run all 400-odd teaching apps under VMware.
* We could offer a Linux desktop, with linux-native office apps and browser, and run all 400-odd teaching apps on a Citrix app server via the linux ICA client.
And the I thought - why?
Why is right, why the heck would you even think of such crazyness?
* Wine runs apps 75% of the time, and thats being forgiving. What happens when someone wants to run an app with unsupported API's. Say 'Too Bad'?
* Just because you have VMWARE doesnt mean you get to run Windows for free, you still need licences. So whats the point? And having to boot that VMware session will go over lovely with users. "You mean I have to boot 2 computers to run Excel!?!!?"
* CITRIX? Do you really want to enter the era of the mainframe again? Citrix has its advantages however. Being cheap is not one of those advantages.
* Staroffice SUCKS ARSE -- Theres no talking anyone out of that. Staroffice better than Microsoft Office? LAUGHABLE! It would be better to use a web-based office like Thinkfree.com.
You need to lose your politics, and figure out what is best for the user, before you lose your job.
They have internet on computers now!?-HOMER SIMPSON
You could wrestle with Sharepoint Portal and spend 3000$ on it and 67$ per CAL. You could also use CVS, and try to put square pegs in round holes.
-BUT-You could just buy a copy of Office XP and use Office Team Services for free. Comes on the XP resource kit. Works like buttah. You just lose the shell integration crap that you get with Sharepoint.
Not sure how well it works with previous Office versions, but for the price of some of the Document control systems, you could upgrade to XP with a kick ass document control system thrown in to boot. Worth investigationg anyway.
Here is a linkAlso, until very recently, Microsoft did not promote NT/Win2K as an office desktop environment.
NT/2k by definition is Microsoft's business operating system line, always has been, and always promoted that way.
Though MS didn't write the virus, the existence of the hole combined with the monopoly they have in the OS market are what really caused the problem.
Is this the sole reason? Users who opened the attachment had no responsibility? The virus creator? If you had said BUBBLEBOY, I would have partially agreed with you, as that could be spread simply by viewing the message. But you can blame a program for a well-socially-engineered worm
If somebody wrote a virus for a tiny hole in BeOS would it have affected the world like this one did?In this example BeOS and Microsoft would have equal responsibility to provide reasonable security. Wouldnt it be true that if BeOs was the most used OS in the world, that 'tiny' hole might not be so tiny anymore?
Incompatible file formats between its own products year after year. I love it when Office97 tells me "Oh, not everyone has Office97, you should save in Office95 format."File formats and upgrade incompatibilities are a part of computing life. It is not limited to Windows, anyone who says it is, is full of BS. Can I direct you to the following version problems: RPM, GLIBC, IMLIB, GCC, GTK. And these are pretty core components. After that, having your spreadsheet not open seems pretty minimal.
Machines that you expect to have to reboot every day.Linux is the hands down winner in stability. However 'Every day' is a gross exageration. I've seen W2K servers up months uninterupted.
People hate Windows, we know that...We do? Just a sentance later it is stated:
But they never blame Microsoft. They never say "I'm not going to use MS products." Because they don't even know that other products exist.Marketing is important, Mirosoft does a good job of it. You cant blame them for other companies not doing AS good a job. Can you name another manufacturer of chewing gum besides Wrigley?
Just to qualify this, I am not a 'Microsoft Lover' I use many different soultions from many different companies. If anyone else has a better product, bring it on, let the market decide it's fate. However I don't buy into the "If customers only knew about X" argument. If they were that disgusted they would. And frankly, I just dont see that disgust.
-==Civik==- They have the Internet on computers now!?! -Homer Simpson
Please watch my new cable network! OpenCNN.
Keeping with the open sourse ethos that if you slap a 'open' on the front of any trademark you can make it your own! We will have news, weather, stock quotes, just like the real thing, but we're 'open'!
Seriously, I understand the argument, but you cant fault them for protecting a valid trademark, especially when the products are basically the same. I would be all for OpenSSH keeping the name if they made refried beans, and not network security tools.
Civik
They have Internet on computers now!?!
-Homer Simpson