In other words, there may be a shift to non-mp3 formats (AAC or say, ogg) for more players, and possible waning of MP3 domination due to incompatibility on players that don't support MP3 to keep cost down. The network effect is going to make sure that mp3 remains the dominant format for the foreseeable future.
Only Microsoft can integrate native support for your protocol in windows. So you're saying OpenAFS doesn't exist? Admittedly it's overkill but it's an example of an independant open network filesystem which has both clients and servers for Windows.
NFS: Not appropriate outside the data center/on windows because of security model. Coda: No native Windows client. Looks like development stalled a couple of years ago. No XP/Vista. Intermezzo: No Windows client. Lustre: No Windows client. OpenAFS: Windows client, including Vista, 64bit, OSX free... But the Windows AFS server code is experimental
Yeah, OpenAFS is the closest existing an open network file system. However it's decidedly non trivial to install and configure, both on the client and server. It's really unsuitable for small sites, even for medium sized sites it's overkill. What's needed is Install -> Add shares/files -> add user accounts allowed.
such that the Kernel can efficiently make access control decisions and everything else it needs to do? In exactly the same way you would with any file system.
You can only use it in a remotely secure fashion when you have complete control of both the client and server. i.e. only within the datacenter, if a client is out on the shop floor, it's insecure.
SMB it seems may be patent encumbered, which leaves the rather unpalatable alternative that there is a need for a ground up free, open standard network filesystem which can be implemented on all platforms.
Thing is, that's the problem. It seems that MS are essentially blackmailing people who use "their" technology in Samba. What they've done is destroy any trust that the SMB and CIFS technology can be used without being sued into oblivion...
With an independently controlled and standard network file system that wouldn't be the case.
Write a free cross platform client and server network filesystem which runs on Windows, OSX, Unix, Linux and which uses an open standard for locking, authentication, encryption, ACLs etc.
Leaving file serving in MS's control simply leaves you open to patent infringement etc.
Add an FTP connection, it'll appear on the desktop as a volume (and in Network Servers), treat it like any other folder. Bookmark it like any other location to remember the settings.
A user choosing not to put documents on the desktop is not a valid reason for a system to be better. Of course it is, it's completely unintuitive. Hell, even the My Documents folder in Windows is hidden away in the file browser by default instead of right there on the desktop... You have to manually link it to the desktop. Which means you have to know how to link it... Which makes it harder to use than Linux or OSX. Then there's all the application links cluttering the desktop, what's that all about? And the applications are under Start-> All Programs > then they're organised by vendor (doh!) rather than purpose.
In Linux, your documents are in Documents, right there on the desktop, the applications are in Applications, organised by purpose.
Face it, Windows is now the hardest to use of the three. It's desktop metaphor is fubar, the applications are hidden away by vendor so you have to know who makes the sofware you want to use to work.
Ubuntu is plug and play. Actually using it is easier than Windows. For some reason, on windows everything is about the applications, they get in the way, thrusting their way forward to try to be the center of attention and, in the process they make the system less usable. The documents have been relegated to files which have to be opened to use an application.
OSX and Ubuntu, the applications get out of the way, the key is the document, not the application. I don't want to use a word processor, I want to write a letter, it just so happens that I need a word processor to do it. So instead of clicking on the Office icon to start the word processor and then opening a file, I click on the document on my desktop and the relevant application (whatever it is) starts. If you look at a typical Windows desktop, there will be dozens of icons for starting applications and relatively few documents or files, it's completely backwards.
Pity they're so badly set by default. Unix could do with allowing groups within groups. It would allow admins to add group permissions to a resource and then add user groups to the resource group. Its sort of possible using NIS, but then you're stuck with NIS. The simplicity of Unix permissions is handy, but you can have that same simplicity using Windows just by managing the acls properly.
Still, the fact that Unix permissions are still around, being used and adequate for most people is a testament to the concept.
The British jails are full. They're letting rapists, paedophiles and murderers out because they've nowhere to put them. You think a spammer is going to get any time?
So what's the problem? The problem is that we have academics shouting that we need more CS graduates in a time when there's already over supply of CS and IT services. If they keep shouting, the government will step in to "do the right thing" and encourage even more people into the sector.
but each infected machine sent out two copies (and each was opened), we would have a steady state of fresh infections I think we can take it as read that the number of mailings and openings are related to the size of the addressbook and human psychology respectively. Both of which will be comparatively constant. Even with a mass mailing the effect would be massively reduced. You go from an explosion to a trickle.
People aren't interested because the pay is crap compared to a few years ago. Simple. It's not a desirable profession. And the reason the pay is crap is because there is an oversupply of IT services to the market. That oversupply pushes down the salary. The oversupply is typically coming from developing countries; India etc.
businesses need to be able to share documents with their business partners and clients, thusly, they must support the same file formats as their business partners and clients. That simply means you need standardised file formats, you don't need the same software.
As you can see, the chance of successfully propagating beyond the current system drops off rapidly. It's the fact that so many people out there choose to run Microsoft Office that viruses and trojans can propagate so easily. If there were several different but compatible office suites which could share the same file formats we wouldn't have nearly the problem we have with security.
OLPC is a very useful tool to education: being able to Google or Wikipedia for farming information Would that be over the 1gbit fibre that the African telcos are running out to the farming villages?
Slashdot Mirror
IE 7 is better, but the support for Cascading Style Sheets is still shite.
I've been looking at the existing alternatives,
NFS: Not appropriate outside the data center/on windows because of security model.
Coda: No native Windows client. Looks like development stalled a couple of years ago. No XP/Vista.
Intermezzo: No Windows client.
Lustre: No Windows client.
OpenAFS: Windows client, including Vista, 64bit, OSX free... But the Windows AFS server code is experimental
Yeah, OpenAFS is the closest existing an open network file system. However it's decidedly non trivial to install and configure, both on the client and server. It's really unsuitable for small sites, even for medium sized sites it's overkill. What's needed is Install -> Add shares/files -> add user accounts allowed.
You can only use it in a remotely secure fashion when you have complete control of both the client and server. i.e. only within the datacenter, if a client is out on the shop floor, it's insecure.
SMB it seems may be patent encumbered, which leaves the rather unpalatable alternative that there is a need for a ground up free, open standard network filesystem which can be implemented on all platforms.
Thing is, that's the problem. It seems that MS are essentially blackmailing people who use "their" technology in Samba. What they've done is destroy any trust that the SMB and CIFS technology can be used without being sued into oblivion...
With an independently controlled and standard network file system that wouldn't be the case.
Write a free cross platform client and server network filesystem which runs on Windows, OSX, Unix, Linux and which uses an open standard for locking, authentication, encryption, ACLs etc.
Leaving file serving in MS's control simply leaves you open to patent infringement etc.
Places -> Connect to server
Add an FTP connection, it'll appear on the desktop as a volume (and in Network Servers), treat it like any other folder. Bookmark it like any other location to remember the settings.
In Linux, your documents are in Documents, right there on the desktop, the applications are in Applications, organised by purpose.
Face it, Windows is now the hardest to use of the three. It's desktop metaphor is fubar, the applications are hidden away by vendor so you have to know who makes the sofware you want to use to work.
Ubuntu is plug and play. Actually using it is easier than Windows. For some reason, on windows everything is about the applications, they get in the way, thrusting their way forward to try to be the center of attention and, in the process they make the system less usable. The documents have been relegated to files which have to be opened to use an application.
OSX and Ubuntu, the applications get out of the way, the key is the document, not the application. I don't want to use a word processor, I want to write a letter, it just so happens that I need a word processor to do it. So instead of clicking on the Office icon to start the word processor and then opening a file, I click on the document on my desktop and the relevant application (whatever it is) starts. If you look at a typical Windows desktop, there will be dozens of icons for starting applications and relatively few documents or files, it's completely backwards.
Who would love this feature.
Pity they're so badly set by default. Unix could do with allowing groups within groups. It would allow admins to add group permissions to a resource and then add user groups to the resource group. Its sort of possible using NIS, but then you're stuck with NIS. The simplicity of Unix permissions is handy, but you can have that same simplicity using Windows just by managing the acls properly.
Still, the fact that Unix permissions are still around, being used and adequate for most people is a testament to the concept.
What do they imagine they're getting for that? Yeah yeah, I know, it's the status symbol of being able to blow $5,000 on a bit of $600 hardware.
The British jails are full. They're letting rapists, paedophiles and murderers out because they've nowhere to put them. You think a spammer is going to get any time?
People aren't interested because the pay is crap compared to a few years ago. Simple. It's not a desirable profession. And the reason the pay is crap is because there is an oversupply of IT services to the market. That oversupply pushes down the salary. The oversupply is typically coming from developing countries; India etc.
What would be the chance of successful propagation?
1st transmission: 100%
2nd: 50%
3rd: 25%
4th: 12%
5th: 6%
As you can see, the chance of successfully propagating beyond the current system drops off rapidly. It's the fact that so many people out there choose to run Microsoft Office that viruses and trojans can propagate so easily. If there were several different but compatible office suites which could share the same file formats we wouldn't have nearly the problem we have with security.
This isn't news. Sure feel free to get up in arms about marketing companies knowing what an anonymous hashed identity is watching.
Please note, that the supermarkets do exactly the same thing. Why do you think loyalty cards exist?
I keep forgetting about it.