Being able to secure boxes highly depends on what type of users you have. If you give users an inch of slack, they will hang the kernel.
Sometimes it's not possible/practical to lock user accounts down, and if you don't, you are largely dependant on them not do something stupid, like open an attachment. Add to that problem people who take laptops to and from work and home, hooking up to who knows what kind of networks, and doing who know what on them.
Most people who use Windows will get a lot of viruses. Mac users will still probably get viruses, just fewer and less deadly ones.
I'd rate the IE/ActiveX vulnerability problem at #3 in why Windows has SOOO many viruses, with the "Windows is insanely popular" being slightly above it.
Everyone runs (most) everything in Windows as the administrator(no root exploit needed!)
Windows is popular(especially with "technically challenged" people)
Using IE/ActiveX is like F#$%ing without a condom
Every OS has root exploits and shody programs with securoty holes, but Windows and IE have to take the cake. You gotta love that in IE 5.5 SP2 they removed all plugin support except for ActiveX, yeesh.
Since they are going to break a lot of stuff in XP SP2 maybe they will make it possible for a normal person to use Windows without being an administrator all the time, although I doubt it. They will probably declare Windows XP invulnerable, since it can't have buffer overflows exploits.
reimplementing all programs in C++ after you write it in C# is silly.
I started thinking about it, and what does "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" even mean?
It's that "otherwise" that could make this mean "We made some stuff royalty-free, but we used the RAND terms for the rest of it. Aren't we great for giving some of it away, we will be billing you shortly."
Just some healthy paranoia, you have to admit the wording is strange.
The legalality of Mono needs to be established before I'll touch it. I doubt this issue will be put to bed anytime soon, I would say it warrants a "doomed" label in my book.
Implementions of the.Net API isn't guaranteed to be free, only RAND "Reasonable and non-discriminatory", Microsoft can charge people for implementing it.
Can someone point to where Microsoft has said that.NET/C# and all associated patents are royalty-free?(message boards don't count) I'm not going to trust Microsoft not to start charging a non-discriminatory fee for implementing.NET, as it seems they have the right to.
I'm not sure if Java has these same problems, but it doesn't matter(as much) because you can get SUN's JVM for Linux w/ source, it's not GPL compatible, but frankly, I don't care. Java is legally available for almost every platform.
I haven't seen any sync problems in my setup, but that is nice.
I have an old Matrox G200-TV I'm considering putting back into action as a PVR card, It has a built-in MJPEG encoder for the video, although the file-size is much bigger. It's quality is excellent, I've been using it to get video off tapes to put on DVDs.
I'm wondering is I'll get the same low CPU utilization as those PVR cards.
G200-TV's are cheap, I picked up mine for $50 about a year ago, I was going to use it with MythTv, but there wasn't a transcoder back the. MythTV has such a nice transcoder now, It does seem a shame not to use it.
It may be because only 2 out of the 150+ Systems tested were running Linux. Since this is a price/performance test, having lots of different configurations would help.
It seems the 2 Linux systems were pretty high-end, which are going to have a worse price/performance ratio. Linux did win the TPC-C performance tests.
My Athon XP 2100+ is totally maxxed out when I am encoding 2 MPEG4 streams, however the quality is pretty damn good(I encode at 480x480), and the video eats up less than 240KB/s, which means you can use it over wireless networks without other people on the network even noticing. I also don't have to have my machine re-encode the video afterwards.
That said, I may switch over to using a PVR 350 because I have ended up playing Unreal tournament on this same computer and not being able to play when my shows record sucks ass. Also, having another really nice video-out would be nice.
Those are sweet, but still cost to much. I have yet to track down a sub $500 itx computer that would work for PVR duty.
I realllllly hope the Playstation 3 has a PVR built into it. I would just have to buy one then... It's probably a lot more likely that the PS3 will have a PVR builtin than be able to play PS2 games.
Those languages are all pretty open standards that aren't changed often. With a more proprietary API like.NET or DirectX it generally does speak the death of the third-party one. A good example is the nv XFree86 driver vs the Nvidia driver.
I doubt Microsoft will be releasing.Net for Linux. I'm more worried people adopt Mono/.NET and Microsoft then decides Mono is violating it's Patents(which it probably is).
Java is a perfectly good solution that could have been tailored to suit the needs that.NET is now going to do because Java remains shackled by SUN.
Mono is shackled by Microsoft, Sun has at least blessed the open-source version of Java with a legit licence to use the API, I doubt Mono will ever get that.
I learned Java before C++ and operator overloading seems to me like such an ugly hack to me. 90% of the time there is no good use for overloading any of them. It's not readily apparent that you can't do 'int+YourObject' but you can do 'YourObject+int'.
I vastly perfer Java's convention of using functions like toString() and compareTo().
While I agree with you on every point, I don't see any of those as being very big problems.
I still give Java the upper hand overall because it's licence. Unless Microsoft blesses Mono with a licence to use the full API, I can't see using it. Mono keeping the APIs they may not have a licence for in a seperate code-base is not enough for me.
The only modern language that is wide-spread and licenced sanely is Java.
Yes, but not all Drives work with iDVD/iMovie, check out Mac Drive compatability Database. I have the Panasonic DVR-106D DVD+-RW drive in a external USB/Firewire enclosure I bought for $200 about 6 months ago, works great on my iMac and Linux boxen, I don't have anything that runs Windows, but I bet it would work there to.
only an idiot would use such a setup over a standalone DVD player due to the loss of quality.
Actually Linux has some very nice solutions to this problem. The loss of quality on most video cards is caused by a number of factors, but mainly it's just because they use cheap hacks to get a NTSC signal from the VGA signal.
Matrox G200/G400 cards are pretty inexpensive and have really nice TV-Out. I have a Geforce4MX and a G200 in my system, both have TV-Out and it's night and day with the picture quality.
A cheap hardware DVD PCI card can get picture quality to rival most anything, although this will cost you a bunch of CPU time. I know a lot of FreeVO people use these cards.
I keep seeing the Dell comercials for the $499 with the "free" memory upgrade. Evidently they are shipping the system with a default of 128MB and doubling that for free. I guess they are trying to get rid of a bunch of 128MB modules.
And, yes, they do sell this same system without the special with only 128MB of RAM and still put Windows XP on it.
Odd, when I was looking for PVR software, I only considered Linux based solutions.
I've probably spent way to much time setting up MythTV, but I have some odd requirements. I live on ETSU's campus and getting channel listings was pretty hard, but probably would have been impossible with any other PVR software. Also, I have the frontend running on the TV-out of my video card controlled by a remote while still having a totally seperate monitor for the computer.
MythTV has the slickest web interface I've seen and has a REALLLY nice interface for using on a TV you can navigate easily with a remote.
It's not that difficult to install MythTV as long as you have prepackaged binaries for the distro. The hardest thing you will run into is if your TV-card isn't auto-detected, it's about as idiot proof as it's going to get. I started using it at version 0.9 and it's come a long way since then.
Slashdot Mirror
I've installed a stabel base and then upgraded to unstable over dialup. It took it about 12 hours to get the packages I wanted.
check out sarc.com's latest vulnerabilities, none of them require people to open attachments to get infected.
If you are using Windows for day to day activity you will almost certainly get a virus no matter what you do.
Sometimes it's not possible/practical to lock user accounts down, and if you don't, you are largely dependant on them not do something stupid, like open an attachment. Add to that problem people who take laptops to and from work and home, hooking up to who knows what kind of networks, and doing who know what on them.
Most people who use Windows will get a lot of viruses. Mac users will still probably get viruses, just fewer and less deadly ones.
What kind of company do you work for?
Every OS has root exploits and shody programs with securoty holes, but Windows and IE have to take the cake. You gotta love that in IE 5.5 SP2 they removed all plugin support except for ActiveX, yeesh.
Since they are going to break a lot of stuff in XP SP2 maybe they will make it possible for a normal person to use Windows without being an administrator all the time, although I doubt it. They will probably declare Windows XP invulnerable, since it can't have buffer overflows exploits.
I started thinking about it, and what does "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" even mean?
It's that "otherwise" that could make this mean "We made some stuff royalty-free, but we used the RAND terms for the rest of it. Aren't we great for giving some of it away, we will be billing you shortly."
Just some healthy paranoia, you have to admit the wording is strange.
The legalality of Mono needs to be established before I'll touch it. I doubt this issue will be put to bed anytime soon, I would say it warrants a "doomed" label in my book.
Implementions of the .Net API isn't guaranteed to be free, only RAND "Reasonable and non-discriminatory", Microsoft can charge people for implementing it.
check out this thread in "C is dead"
Can someone point to where Microsoft has said that .NET/C# and all associated patents are royalty-free?(message boards don't count) I'm not going to trust Microsoft not to start charging a non-discriminatory fee for implementing .NET, as it seems they have the right to.
I'm not sure if Java has these same problems, but it doesn't matter(as much) because you can get SUN's JVM for Linux w/ source, it's not GPL compatible, but frankly, I don't care. Java is legally available for almost every platform.
I have an old Matrox G200-TV I'm considering putting back into action as a PVR card, It has a built-in MJPEG encoder for the video, although the file-size is much bigger. It's quality is excellent, I've been using it to get video off tapes to put on DVDs.
I'm wondering is I'll get the same low CPU utilization as those PVR cards.
G200-TV's are cheap, I picked up mine for $50 about a year ago, I was going to use it with MythTv, but there wasn't a transcoder back the. MythTV has such a nice transcoder now, It does seem a shame not to use it.
and then I get modded Insightful, this is F$@#ing great!
Is this just a troll, or can someone point to these test?
Is there just no way to do this with GPL software?
It seems the 2 Linux systems were pretty high-end, which are going to have a worse price/performance ratio. Linux did win the TPC-C performance tests.
The better joke is that this got modded informative, damn moderators.
My Athon XP 2100+ is totally maxxed out when I am encoding 2 MPEG4 streams, however the quality is pretty damn good(I encode at 480x480), and the video eats up less than 240KB/s, which means you can use it over wireless networks without other people on the network even noticing. I also don't have to have my machine re-encode the video afterwards.
That said, I may switch over to using a PVR 350 because I have ended up playing Unreal tournament on this same computer and not being able to play when my shows record sucks ass. Also, having another really nice video-out would be nice.
I realllllly hope the Playstation 3 has a PVR built into it. I would just have to buy one then... It's probably a lot more likely that the PS3 will have a PVR builtin than be able to play PS2 games.
I doubt Microsoft will be releasing .Net for Linux. I'm more worried people adopt Mono/.NET and Microsoft then decides Mono is violating it's Patents(which it probably is).
Mono is shackled by Microsoft, Sun has at least blessed the open-source version of Java with a legit licence to use the API, I doubt Mono will ever get that.
Where?
I vastly perfer Java's convention of using functions like toString() and compareTo().
I still give Java the upper hand overall because it's licence. Unless Microsoft blesses Mono with a licence to use the full API, I can't see using it. Mono keeping the APIs they may not have a licence for in a seperate code-base is not enough for me.
The only modern language that is wide-spread and licenced sanely is Java.
That's Fing hilarious on many levels
Not really, I've tried running iDVD on my G3 400Mhz, I couldn't get it installed. It is a reallly nice program though, worth getting a new Mac for.
Yes, but not all Drives work with iDVD/iMovie, check out Mac Drive compatability Database. I have the Panasonic DVR-106D DVD+-RW drive in a external USB/Firewire enclosure I bought for $200 about 6 months ago, works great on my iMac and Linux boxen, I don't have anything that runs Windows, but I bet it would work there to.
Matrox G200/G400 cards are pretty inexpensive and have really nice TV-Out. I have a Geforce4MX and a G200 in my system, both have TV-Out and it's night and day with the picture quality.
A cheap hardware DVD PCI card can get picture quality to rival most anything, although this will cost you a bunch of CPU time. I know a lot of FreeVO people use these cards.
And, yes, they do sell this same system without the special with only 128MB of RAM and still put Windows XP on it.
I've probably spent way to much time setting up MythTV, but I have some odd requirements. I live on ETSU's campus and getting channel listings was pretty hard, but probably would have been impossible with any other PVR software. Also, I have the frontend running on the TV-out of my video card controlled by a remote while still having a totally seperate monitor for the computer.
MythTV has the slickest web interface I've seen and has a REALLLY nice interface for using on a TV you can navigate easily with a remote.
It's not that difficult to install MythTV as long as you have prepackaged binaries for the distro. The hardest thing you will run into is if your TV-card isn't auto-detected, it's about as idiot proof as it's going to get. I started using it at version 0.9 and it's come a long way since then.