I love Linux. But more specifically, I love Unix. Solaris for those who have used it is simply more matured, and more hardened with years of development under its belt. Linux is no joke, it may have changed the world. But Solaris is where I'll be once it is set free.
It all comes down to your software needs. I have to run SCO OpenServer 5.04e on a box because that is all the software vendor will support me with. I have to have Solaris 8 running on a SparcStation for the same reason. I have to run Windows to play the latest game (I wouldn't know, but you get the idea).
The point is, I run Linux where it makes sense (notice I did not say I run it where I can). If the ABC operating system makes better sense than Linux for my specific application, or I am otherwised forced, I am running ABC. No different with programming languages. If I can whip out some mega code with MentorProDB or DataFlex, why spend 10x the effort to code in C? If I must code in Perl because the existing development on a project is in that language, I don't start coding in Ruby or Python.
I am anxious to see Sun make a comeback in the systems market, and think this is a bright move for them. I have been less than pleased with my past run-ins with Solaris/86, and am ready to give it another look.
Needle in the haystack issue. Too much communication happens online- certainly they can have boxes report back a copy of all of the traffic from some ISP, or even all of the traffic out of / into an ISP, but to give analysis of that data is not something I'd like to be tasked with.
Our government has gimps locked away that will sift through all that. Just like this chump.
I went to a company that cabled about 100 drops. When certain network items did not work properly, they tried everything to figure out what the problem was. Finally, one device was plugged in and did not work at all. It turns out that the cabling was wired with "just the same colors on one end as the other". The installers actually created an elaborate mapping on paper saying, wire 1: red, red/white, blue, blue/white, brown, brown/white, green/white, green. They would look up each cable on this run sheet before punching down the other end. The device that did not work evidently was not "looked up" correctly, and so there were no valid pairings. If this had been POE, something would have been fried.
Another company I worked with found out that their cable guys simply wired everything with 2 pairs only. They would punch down 1,2,3,6 and then cut the remaining wires completely. POE wouldn't work there either.
It is amazing how some companies attempt to save money by getting monkeys to install cables.
How does Microsoft deal with spy/mal/ad ware internally?
Well, I deal with many companies that run Windows, asking the same thing. Eventhough I am there just to work with their Unix stuff, I give the best answer I can. Education is the best defense against these malicious pieces of software. Companies that build policies and educate their users about the potential risks involved with computer use have the lowest occurance of problems. I know of one company with approximately 500 machines where there are no non-standard screen savers, backgrounds, and programs, and no one opens suspicious emails. That company has never had a problem. Moving over to company B with approximately fifty computers -- everyone with their own backgrounds, screen savers, mouse pointers, Weather bug, different toolbars in the browser, and tons of joke swapping via email. They have a service person in their weekly reinstalling the operating system. I think most of this stuff is self-inflicted, but perhaps it is not the user's fault.
There was a time when I needed to pay for some computer support. When I was told that the problem could have been avoided and that I should have not did what I did, I changed my ways. I educated myself and instituted policies to ensure that I would not have a repeated problem. Companies need to start holding their employees to a higher standard. I mean, if you have Little Susie needing her OS reinstalled once a month, while Little Johnny has been working fine for a year, something is wrong with Little Susie. Sure, the operating system has problems, but the user is the issue here. You see, a knife can be a tool for cutting or a good way to kill yourself -- it is all in how you use it.
For those interested, check out the Virus Source Code Database. As for the article, I don't think that making virus authoring easier is any concern. Why not make the software impervious to virus attack in the first place? I mean, the design of DOS, Windows, and now Windows XP does little to stop malware, viruses, trojans, spyware, etc.
What most people talk about Linux, they are referring to the "system", not just the kernel. For an accurate count on the number of lines of source code for Linux, you need to wc -l all the text of the source CDs for your distribution. When Microsoft mentions the number of lines of code XP is, they are referring to the overall system with all its utilities. The Windows kernel is just as small an instruction file as the one for Linux.
Another note: this still does not derive some explanation for bugs. If I have a 20-line program with two bugs, can I extrapolate that software will have one bug per every ten lines? Also, remember that Microsoft has many source licensing and backward compatibility issues. They have bugs that exist simply because they improve beyond the capabilities of older software. I don't mean to come off as a Microsoftee, but this is just a slam Microsoft article, and for once it is unfounded.
This is one of the reasons I don't listen to most people's opinions unless it's pretty clear they're experts.... Or maybe it's more like a Ferrari. Lottery winners will abuse their high performance cars and then complain when something goes wrong ("stupid imported piece of junk!"). In fact this is so common many long-time Ferrari owner's have a name for these type of people: gold-chainers.
I used to fight with the older Linux systems do perform something very powerful and efficient, being mocked by those around me because of the difficulties involved. I understand this all too well. I have heard more computer "nerds" around here put down Unix simply because they could not figure it out or had known-incompatible hardware.
So, we get issued key fobs for RSA authentication via Cisco VPN and guess what happens: three users have already taped their PIN to the back of the fob so they won't need to remember it. One wrote it with a metallic silver Sharpie!
Are you aware that the bible was written before english as a language even existed? One of the more common translations in use today was done in the early 1600s? (King James versions) Translators often have to pick how to map some concept to something else. It isn't the fault of the bible that the translators decided overall the meaning of "insect" best mapped the 4 legged bug they were describing. (and 400 years ago insect didn't mean what it does today)
Then the same could be said for the number of years someone lived. If it says so-and-so lived to be 700 years old, how do we know that did not mean months or some period less than that? You cannot consider the numbers in the Bible accurate because there are too many contradictions within their own passages (this book says the person is 20, this other says he is 40; this passage claims 10,000 people died, this other one says 30,000). I am just saying that when the Bible claims Joe Bob lived to be 500 years old, you cannot say, "People lived that to be that old in the Bible days."
The Bible is rife with problems and cannot be an accurate account for numbers, dates, places, or anything else. Consider the following:
We are told the Bible has no scientific errors, yet it says the batis a bird (Lev. 11:13,19), hares chew the cud (Lev. 11:5-6), and some fowl (Lev. 11:20-21) and insects (Lev. 11:22-23) have four legs. Matt. 27:9-10 quotes a prophecy made by Jeremy the prophet. Heaven is supposed to be a perfect place. Yet, it experienced a war(Rev. 12:7). How can there be a war in a perfect place?
How can 2 Kings 8:26, which says Ahaziah began to rule at age 22,be reconciled with 2 Chron. 22:2, which says he was 42? How can Ex. 33:20, which says no man can see God's face and live, be squared with Gen. 32:30, which says a man saw God's face and his life was preserved?
Did Solomon have 40,000 stalls for his horses (1 Kings 4:26) or 4,000(2 Chron. 9:25)? Did Solomon's house contain 2,000 baths (1 Kings 7:26) or 3,000 (2 Chron. 4:5)?
For anyone interested, check out the Virus Source Code Database. For historic reasons, it is worth taking a look at, whether you are into Assembly, Pascal, C, or others on Unix, DOS, Windows, Mac, etc.
I have always wondered about this from a handwriting perspective. I have a strange writing style which is very dissimiliar line by line. some slants back from the top, some goes forward, some cursive, some print, some all-upper, etc. I write some characters starting at the top, some at the bottom, sometimes not the same word to word. I am sure art is even worse based on the artist's mood, experience, medium, etc. Anyone here had their handwriting analyzed?
Re:Easy of Linux vs Complexity of Windows Updates
on
Point and Click Linux
·
· Score: 1
Set up your computer to have anti-spy protection. You have antivirus protection and a firewall don't you?
No, I don't. I don't run Windows -- at home or at work. But, I see people all the time that cannot figure out why their systems simply have stopped working the way they used to. They find out that they clicked the wrong thing, and *poof*, the system now sucks.
It is amazing to me that sometimes just hooking up a piece of equipment to a computer sends it over the edge. There is no explanation you can give to Windows users regarding the problems they encounter when they ask, "I installed X software and now my machine is slow or locks up." This appears to be a Microsoft-only phenomenon. When I install something on another operating system, I get anticipated results. When something is amiss, you can easily backtrack to fix the problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably wrong too. Perhaps it should be Linux/970 with GNU utilities. I mean, following the examples of Solaris/86, OS/400, and others.
It all comes down to your software needs. I have to run SCO OpenServer 5.04e on a box because that is all the software vendor will support me with. I have to have Solaris 8 running on a SparcStation for the same reason. I have to run Windows to play the latest game (I wouldn't know, but you get the idea).
The point is, I run Linux where it makes sense (notice I did not say I run it where I can). If the ABC operating system makes better sense than Linux for my specific application, or I am otherwised forced, I am running ABC. No different with programming languages. If I can whip out some mega code with MentorProDB or DataFlex, why spend 10x the effort to code in C? If I must code in Perl because the existing development on a project is in that language, I don't start coding in Ruby or Python.
I am anxious to see Sun make a comeback in the systems market, and think this is a bright move for them. I have been less than pleased with my past run-ins with Solaris/86, and am ready to give it another look.
Our government has gimps locked away that will sift through all that. Just like this chump.
Another company I worked with found out that their cable guys simply wired everything with 2 pairs only. They would punch down 1,2,3,6 and then cut the remaining wires completely. POE wouldn't work there either.
It is amazing how some companies attempt to save money by getting monkeys to install cables.
Here is a photo of the perp, I think.
I am ashamed. Everyone knows that a Torrent link can only be used for illegal transmission. Get with the program!
Well, I deal with many companies that run Windows, asking the same thing. Eventhough I am there just to work with their Unix stuff, I give the best answer I can. Education is the best defense against these malicious pieces of software. Companies that build policies and educate their users about the potential risks involved with computer use have the lowest occurance of problems. I know of one company with approximately 500 machines where there are no non-standard screen savers, backgrounds, and programs, and no one opens suspicious emails. That company has never had a problem. Moving over to company B with approximately fifty computers -- everyone with their own backgrounds, screen savers, mouse pointers, Weather bug, different toolbars in the browser, and tons of joke swapping via email. They have a service person in their weekly reinstalling the operating system. I think most of this stuff is self-inflicted, but perhaps it is not the user's fault.
There was a time when I needed to pay for some computer support. When I was told that the problem could have been avoided and that I should have not did what I did, I changed my ways. I educated myself and instituted policies to ensure that I would not have a repeated problem. Companies need to start holding their employees to a higher standard. I mean, if you have Little Susie needing her OS reinstalled once a month, while Little Johnny has been working fine for a year, something is wrong with Little Susie. Sure, the operating system has problems, but the user is the issue here. You see, a knife can be a tool for cutting or a good way to kill yourself -- it is all in how you use it.
At the Victoria Linux Enthusiasts recently we posted some old code in "dead" languages. Fairly interesting code posted, and worth a look.
Another note: this still does not derive some explanation for bugs. If I have a 20-line program with two bugs, can I extrapolate that software will have one bug per every ten lines? Also, remember that Microsoft has many source licensing and backward compatibility issues. They have bugs that exist simply because they improve beyond the capabilities of older software. I don't mean to come off as a Microsoftee, but this is just a slam Microsoft article, and for once it is unfounded.
I used to fight with the older Linux systems do perform something very powerful and efficient, being mocked by those around me because of the difficulties involved. I understand this all too well. I have heard more computer "nerds" around here put down Unix simply because they could not figure it out or had known-incompatible hardware.
That's pretty damn secure! I have been trying own root on your box all morning with "oceans12"....
I think it is the same price to stay the night in either one.
Then the same could be said for the number of years someone lived. If it says so-and-so lived to be 700 years old, how do we know that did not mean months or some period less than that? You cannot consider the numbers in the Bible accurate because there are too many contradictions within their own passages (this book says the person is 20, this other says he is 40; this passage claims 10,000 people died, this other one says 30,000). I am just saying that when the Bible claims Joe Bob lived to be 500 years old, you cannot say, "People lived that to be that old in the Bible days."
We are told the Bible has no scientific errors, yet it says the batis a bird (Lev. 11:13,19), hares chew the cud (Lev. 11:5-6), and some fowl (Lev. 11:20-21) and insects (Lev. 11:22-23) have four legs. Matt. 27:9-10 quotes a prophecy made by Jeremy the prophet. Heaven is supposed to be a perfect place. Yet, it experienced a war(Rev. 12:7). How can there be a war in a perfect place?
How can 2 Kings 8:26, which says Ahaziah began to rule at age 22,be reconciled with 2 Chron. 22:2, which says he was 42? How can Ex. 33:20, which says no man can see God's face and live,
be squared with Gen. 32:30, which says a man saw God's face and his life was preserved?
Did Solomon have 40,000 stalls for his horses (1 Kings 4:26) or 4,000(2 Chron. 9:25)? Did Solomon's house contain 2,000 baths (1 Kings 7:26) or 3,000 (2 Chron. 4:5)?
You could go on and on...
No, I don't. I don't run Windows -- at home or at work. But, I see people all the time that cannot figure out why their systems simply have stopped working the way they used to. They find out that they clicked the wrong thing, and *poof*, the system now sucks.
It is amazing to me that sometimes just hooking up a piece of equipment to a computer sends it over the edge. There is no explanation you can give to Windows users regarding the problems they encounter when they ask, "I installed X software and now my machine is slow or locks up." This appears to be a Microsoft-only phenomenon. When I install something on another operating system, I get anticipated results. When something is amiss, you can easily backtrack to fix the problem.