There are two factors holding IPV6 back: lack of concensus from those that make the decisions in the networking world that IPV6 solves any problems that need to be solved at anything like a reasonable cost. And lack of push from Cisco for implementation. There are thousands of other facets to the discussion, but let's face it: if Cisco had said a year ago that "oh, IOS 12.x now supports IPV6 and we think you should start using it" the world would have fallen in line. They haven't, which makes you wonder what they know that we don't. The story is that "customers aren't demanding it yet", but that didn't stop them from introducing the router when no one was demanding them, did it?
The manufacturer of a circular saw does not own the rights to every piece of furniture or house built with that saw. Once a tool is sold what is done with it is out of the manufacturer's hands.
Again, don't disagree with your general conclusions. But note that at this time the most widespread midrange apps (e.g. Great Plains, Macola) ran on either Btrieve or Gupta databases - both of which were native to Netware.
These "musts" are not going to end up in a US law any more than the "musts" in the DHCP spec ended up in a law.
I would have to disagree with that a little bit. First, if formalized this RFC would very quickly find itself written into RFP's for large software purchases. From there it would work its way into contract law.
Second, if vendors see an opportunity to combine an "industry standard" with the DMCA to stifle dissent, then they will grab it. It's only a short step from there to having Hollings introduce the combination as law, with 20 year prison terms to follow.
It usually works like that right up until step 5. Here's what really happens: 5. Denial. The vendor denies the flaw really exists, setting his best PR guys on the job. 6. Demonstration. The Reporter creates exploit code to prove to the vendor that not only does it exist, but it is serious and should be fixed.
That's an excellent description of what actually happens. May I urge you to submit this as a comment to the authors of the Draft? It is something that needs to be addressed in any potential RFC.
I was wondering about that "long-timers" line too, and was about to post a witty (yeah right) retort.
No offense intended. As always haste is the enemy of clarity. Probably it would have been better to say "old timers who understood the history of Netware and who had a lot of experience building stable 2.x/3.x networks" or something like that.
But I was a bit shocked myself when I realized how long ago it was that Windows 95 was released.
Actually, I don't disagree with either your points or your conclusion. However, similar blunders somehow failed to do in Microsoft and its adventures. 3+Open anyone? MS LANMan 1.1? For some reason, with a worse product and more angry customers Microsoft managed to keep their product in the market long enough to outlast everyone else. I personally think that has just a little bit to do with (a) cross-subsidization from a monopoly product (b) select manipulation of the Windows APIs. Again, you can't convince me it was just a coincidence that every Office 97 service pack just happened to damage some critical function of Netware - functions which had been industry standard for 10 years.
Netware 4? Speaking as someone who was forced into installing 4.00 (no, not 4.01 - 4.00. The one that ran at 100% utilization all day and randomly deleted files) - yeah, it had problems. Why were we forced into 4.00? Well, we were already running the 1000 user version of 3.11 + NNS (one of the few who ever received the former from Novell or used the latter) and we needed more license space. So I guess there was some enterprise demand there after all.
NDS (now eDirectory I guess) also tends to work, like most Novell products. I recently moved from a Novell shop to an NT shop, and I scream in frustration every time I fire up User Manager for Domains!
No. Thier platform RAN on MS-DOS until version 5. It was even pretty stable.
A few (tired) points:Novell Netware used MS-DOS as a bootloader, since Intel x86 systems typically do not have a ROM monitor. Since Netware was under development before MS-DOS hit the streets it would be hard for Netware to have been dependent on MS-DOS.
Novell invented MS-DOS networking. If not for Novell, there would have been no usable networks in the Wintel world (here come the Vines flames!) and the Wintel sales juggernaut would have been slowed down quite a bit.
Long-timers can remember MS-Office 97 Service Pack 2, or, The Service Pack That Ate Novell. That innocuous SP broke all the Windows networking conventions (which Novell had invented!!) and rendered Netware uninstallable on W95 for about 4 months until a patch was developed. I am sure that Microsoft had no such intent when it released that patch. Very sure.We'll see.
I think factories will be the first to buy these, goto any big factory and you will see a lot of the same looking bikes
Actually, I just received this month's copy of Boring Warehouse Stuff magazine (that's not really the title but you get the point) and someone (presumably Segway's PR agency) is already pumping them in the warehouse trade rags for exactly that purpose. I have to think that was their primary market from the beginning...
So are you saying that you could move more people with one Cadillac than 50 Yugo's
Excellent analogy. Yugos were cheap, and it appeared that they could replace more expensive cars. Then they started coming apart on the highway at speed, leading to a less than 100% chance of arriving at one's destination alive, much less on time, if using a Yugo. So they disappeared from the market in favor of more expensive, but more reliable and serviceable, cars.
If I worked for a major "research" organisation which couldn't even find out simple stuff like the short term future of the microprocessor industry then I would want to remain anonymous too.
One sees this comment in every Ask Slashdot thread. It is not only tiresome, it is wrong as well. Seeking multiple opinions from diverse sources is certainly part of research, similar to skimming all the current trade and academic publications.
Sorting out the meaningful comments from the slush is part of good research.
First, you are assuming that Itanium will succeed and drive all other choices from the market. At the moment, this is far from clear, and even Intel is said to be hedging their bets with a P4 follow-on.
Second, what will drive the price of the Itanium down? Historically, Intel have announced that their latest superchip is "targeted at servers, not desktops" about a week before releasing a flood of them into the desktop marketplace (usually the ones that didn't pass spec at the higher speed level), thus driving down the price of the server chips to where no one else could compete. What will be the driver this time? Businesses aren't buying desktops, and when they do start buying again it will be pure commodity: there is zero appeal for Itanium on a business desktop. And treble for home desktops.
Which leaves high-end servers. I don't think that any datacentre manager worth his pay is going to pull out $100,000 HP N-Class boxes in favor of $2,000 Intel clones. There's a bit more that goes into a server than the CPU.
As for the legal fees: typically they're covered in the suit. Damages plus legal fees.
Assuming you win - which is a big if - that is one possible outcome. Another possible outcome is "actual damages only", which may not amount to a lot. Or "reasonable attorneys' fees" - which may not equal what you have already been billed.
just look at how the Steve Jackson Games incident turned out.
Laughs indeed. I was a high school student when Mr. Jackson's business was seized. If my wife and I had let the boys run with the neighborhood dudes I could have been a grandfather by the time the case was resolved. Mr. Jackson's business was destroyed, he never received any significant compensation from the government, and the DA maintains to this day that he did nothing wrong (note that the LA DA recently tried to have a defendent put in jail for speaking honestly about her plea bargain after the sentencing - but apparently its OK for the DA to state directly contradict a court order).
Oh - and it is the next thing to impossible to sue a district attorney for malicious prosecution.
And for B, I guarantee, you Mr. Conspiracy Theorist, that I have not broken 50-100 laws this morning, unless Congress has passed a law against skipping breakfast. We (at least I presume you do as well) live in the United States of America, not Communist Russia, where anything worth doing was illegal
I don't go in for conspiracy theories much, myself. Although there clearly are powerful groups of people in the world who enjoy power/money for its own sake.
As for your comment about not breaking any federal laws, clearly you haven't read the US Code (or the Federal Register, since the Supreme Court ruled that administrative regulations have the force of law) lately. Flush the leftover pills from a prescription down the toilet and and the question is not if you have broken FDA and EPA regulations but how many. ill you be prosecuted for that? Probably not - unless someone decides you have something they need. What's that? One of the customers for your database consultancy is the local mosque? Hmmm...
Before you flame back, please spend a few hours at your local library scanning through a couple weeks' Federal Registers.
To you other points: countersuits are a nice idea, unless you are facing an opponent with 100,000 times your resources. Then you are screwed, because even if you win your $10,000 award will not cover your $500,000 in legal fees. And it is nice to think that the feds only go after "bad guys", but the definition of "bad guy" can change quite rapidly. Just ask Mr. Ashcroft.
I try avoid being a toady for big corporate interests, even when they are signing my paycheck. However, this statement ignores three basic facts: (a) in the United States, anyone can be sued at any time for anything (b) in the United States, anyone can be indicted at any time for anything a District Attorney thinks it worthwhile to indict him for (and I guarantee that even you, Mr. Honest, broke 50-100 federal laws already this morning) (c) a good lawyer can take any conversation, even the most innocent, and twist it into evidence of a sinister conspiracy.
(b) and (c) are the most dangerous when combined, because the usual Fed tactic is to bring a massive prosecution against someone, use that prosecution to dig up charges of "obstruction of justice", then actually convict on the "obstruction" charges. And absolutely anything you say can be twisted into evidence of "obstruction".
So it is not so black and white as you would have it appear.
You need to look at what this is targeted at. It's not really for hiding anything illegal, most large companies would have used some form of crypto (having used PGP's Outlook plugin, you can't get much easier).
Most large organizations handle the illegal stuff face-to-face among a limited group, usually off-site (there's a reason for all those "athletic club" memberships you know). It never gets put on paper.
Back in the distant mists of time, when we had cc:mail in house, messages were deleted from the server after 15 days. Since it was not pop3 and all messages were kept right on the server instead of downloaded to your hard drive, it meant that after 15 days it was gone for good
cc:Mail's "Archive" function could be redirected to a floppy disk, where is would store the messages in a more-or-less plaintext format. Can't remember offhand if the Administrator could disable the Archive function though.
cc:Mail was a nice program - simple, easy to use, did exactly what it was designed to do and no more. Too bad it is gone.
Reminds me of the color photographs from the mid-1800's reprinted in National Geographic last year.
And a shiny new nickel to the first person who describes how to obtain stereo sound from Edison wax cylinders recorded around 1900! Yes - it is possible!
Is there anyone out there who doesn't think that the settlement has already been decided? The only thing that is going on now is that it is being packaged to minimize outcry and the possibility of a challenge. But the deed is done...
But is the government going to send these huge paper copies out to these computerless individuals? No, of course not. These documents will be available for review in public places - courthouses, public libraries, etc.
Very true, but federal documents pretty much back to the Jamestown settlement are available at the library. What are the odds that whatever CD-ROM format you pick to use today will be readable in 2302? We can be pretty sure that paper will still be readable then, since it has already been proved [1].
sPh
[1] Yes, I know the Federal Register is printed on high-acid toilet paper. I am assuming they print one good copy on rag bond. I could be wrong about that.
Slashdot Mirror
sPh
sPh
sPh
sPh
sPh
sPh
Second, if vendors see an opportunity to combine an "industry standard" with the DMCA to stifle dissent, then they will grab it. It's only a short step from there to having Hollings introduce the combination as law, with 20 year prison terms to follow.
sPh
sPh
But I was a bit shocked myself when I realized how long ago it was that Windows 95 was released.
sPh
Netware 4? Speaking as someone who was forced into installing 4.00 (no, not 4.01 - 4.00. The one that ran at 100% utilization all day and randomly deleted files) - yeah, it had problems. Why were we forced into 4.00? Well, we were already running the 1000 user version of 3.11 + NNS (one of the few who ever received the former from Novell or used the latter) and we needed more license space. So I guess there was some enterprise demand there after all.
NDS (now eDirectory I guess) also tends to work, like most Novell products. I recently moved from a Novell shop to an NT shop, and I scream in frustration every time I fire up User Manager for Domains!
Good luck!
sPh
Novell invented MS-DOS networking. If not for Novell, there would have been no usable networks in the Wintel world (here come the Vines flames!) and the Wintel sales juggernaut would have been slowed down quite a bit.
Long-timers can remember MS-Office 97 Service Pack 2, or, The Service Pack That Ate Novell. That innocuous SP broke all the Windows networking conventions (which Novell had invented!!) and rendered Netware uninstallable on W95 for about 4 months until a patch was developed. I am sure that Microsoft had no such intent when it released that patch. Very sure.We'll see.
sPh
sPh
sPh
sPh
Sorting out the meaningful comments from the slush is part of good research.
sPh
Second, what will drive the price of the Itanium down? Historically, Intel have announced that their latest superchip is "targeted at servers, not desktops" about a week before releasing a flood of them into the desktop marketplace (usually the ones that didn't pass spec at the higher speed level), thus driving down the price of the server chips to where no one else could compete. What will be the driver this time? Businesses aren't buying desktops, and when they do start buying again it will be pure commodity: there is zero appeal for Itanium on a business desktop. And treble for home desktops.
Which leaves high-end servers. I don't think that any datacentre manager worth his pay is going to pull out $100,000 HP N-Class boxes in favor of $2,000 Intel clones. There's a bit more that goes into a server than the CPU.
sPh
sPh
Oh - and it is the next thing to impossible to sue a district attorney for malicious prosecution.
Ha ha.
sPh
As for your comment about not breaking any federal laws, clearly you haven't read the US Code (or the Federal Register, since the Supreme Court ruled that administrative regulations have the force of law) lately. Flush the leftover pills from a prescription down the toilet and and the question is not if you have broken FDA and EPA regulations but how many. ill you be prosecuted for that? Probably not - unless someone decides you have something they need. What's that? One of the customers for your database consultancy is the local mosque? Hmmm...
Before you flame back, please spend a few hours at your local library scanning through a couple weeks' Federal Registers.
To you other points: countersuits are a nice idea, unless you are facing an opponent with 100,000 times your resources. Then you are screwed, because even if you win your $10,000 award will not cover your $500,000 in legal fees. And it is nice to think that the feds only go after "bad guys", but the definition of "bad guy" can change quite rapidly. Just ask Mr. Ashcroft.
sPh
(b) and (c) are the most dangerous when combined, because the usual Fed tactic is to bring a massive prosecution against someone, use that prosecution to dig up charges of "obstruction of justice", then actually convict on the "obstruction" charges. And absolutely anything you say can be twisted into evidence of "obstruction".
So it is not so black and white as you would have it appear.
sPh
sPh
cc:Mail was a nice program - simple, easy to use, did exactly what it was designed to do and no more. Too bad it is gone.
sPh
sPh
sPh
sPh
[1] Yes, I know the Federal Register is printed on high-acid toilet paper. I am assuming they print one good copy on rag bond. I could be wrong about that.