Every once in a while it is good to get some idea of the state of progress. You also get a bunch of semi-clueless newbies (like me) who need some kind of feel for what's going on.
>>On my Microsoft call, I quickly learned that I knew more about networks in general than the supposed expert I was speaking with, and when I asked specific questions of him at different points, I usually got either the obvious "BS your way out of it" answer, or no answer at all. I found them to be remarkably impolite and of very little help at all.
Why am I not surprised? Wait 'till W2K get tried out under real world loads. Giggle giggle.
You can also install a new NT to a different drive/directory. Warning, the install likes to "upgrade". Don't. The upgrade is a mess of changes from 3.4 to 4.0 and when those changes are done to 4.0 it really make a mess of things. DOS boot disks can help a lot when things go wrong.
If there is more than one, ie TCP/IP, you are probably looking for trouble. To set up some print servers (LAN to Parallel ports) I had use use NETBEUI for one brand and later IPX/SPX for the other. In both cases the system was useable enough to set up the print servers, to TCP/IP, but was wonky enough that I got rid of the excess protocols fast. Microsoft gets confused if it tries to do more than one thing at a time. MS Proxy Server may be a problem. We had it. And junked it. Remember to reapply your latest service pack if you change anmost anything.
Wouldn't help. The differences are more basic than the command-line shell. Like changing bash to csh (I think. Greener than a newbie.) The DOS structures are MS-DOS 5 (reports 5.5 IIRC), but NT will not allow the things that Novell does to DOS (at the ibmbio.com/ibmdos.com (io.sys/msdos.sys for MS) level). Microsoft and Novell networking differ in at least one important aspect. Microsoft networking allows only one set of drive mappings. Novell (also Lantastic) supports a different set of drive mappings per task. This means it is possible to run together several tasks which have conflicting network drives under Novell DOS (Task Switcher!)* or MS Windows for Workgroups. Window 95/98/NT -- doesn't work anymore. If one task has access to a network drive, every task has the same access. Another Microsoft security innovation.
*Actually Novell DOS TaskMgr supports multitasking, but I've never used it.
Incredible, but it works. The knee-jerk reaction of posters and moderators is very anti-patent. The subject matter is very unfamiliar to most slashdotters. (With an MS in Math, I'm lost.) Well done/.
Agreed, it is probably a valid patent. I am somewhat out of my depth here, but trig functions are rather expensive computationally. According to your post, there exist shortcuts that drastically speed up discrete cosine transforms. It looks like he (the inventor) has found (invented) a local optimum which involves relatively few shifts and adds. I seriously doubt that there is anything obvious about his invention. It has to be excruciatingly specific to that problem, to that level of error. As a patent, there is nothing earth-shattering or profound or that cannot be worked around, if not quite as efficiently. Nothing to be alarmed about.
"Generally you should set the IIS server to be a standalone server as this will minimize any possible exposure of domain user accounts." What they don't mention is that this is set during installation of NT Server. The only way to change this is to reinstall.
To nit-pick, SUB CX,AX sets flags based on result in CX If things are case sensitive, Cx would be a valid label. Actually, both ADD and SUB set flags on x86.
Even if you think Assembler is a high level language, you probably do not want to code directly to the bare metal. It is not a nice native VLIW machine code. It is the target for the code morphing layer. It's been a long time since I've even looked at microcode (early low-end IBM 370s were microcoded) but it tends to be obscure, twisted, very unfriendly, and I cannot imagine that it's gotten any better with time. Minor mistakes do very bad things. Only one program is written, the program to read and execute the "higher-level" machine code.
or -6, garbage (connotations of "deep six"). Garbage. Most descriptive term I've seen yet. Not to be confused with "innocent" fun like mmept, first post, trolls, flame wars, etc. Probably do something like not losing moderator points but losing moderator status unless a 2/3 majority of metamoderators are in agreement.
10% gain in harware revenue, 5% gain in services, 1% loss in software, planning to spend $1b this year on Linux. I think IBM does understand the future. Software is necessary to run the hardware. It is expensive to produce, but the money is in being able to use it, not just having it. Oddly enough, it looks like IBM is strengthening its position by lowering the bar for competition, by commoditizing as far as possible, the hardware, software, and support. As this gets more complex and central to core business, vendor lock-in becomes unviable.
I think my main gripe about Microsoft is that they seem to raise mediocrity to an aspiration. This somehow makes technophobes (PHBs and MIS directors) feel more comfortable.
But consider the pansies in the planters in front of the building. They don't put them in the vault overnight. A few things, banks and such, need to be rather secure. For most things, it seems better to depend on a rational and trustworthy populace.
Pigs and chickens mostly I think. Hong Kong eradicated all of its chickens not too long ago I seem to recall due to some sort of influenza outbreak. The one to worry about is pig to human to chicken to pig. Repeat.
Actually global warming (or even normal climatic shifts) are very relevant to the spread of viruses. Very slight shifts are enough to change somethings preferred host, or to squeeze some species out of existence. As an simple example, the Black Death comes from infected fleas on rats. The fleas actually prefer rats to humans, but if the rat dies, the flea settles for second best. The hard thing is to evaluate the degree of risk.
Slashdot Mirror
Every once in a while it is good to get some idea of the state of progress.
You also get a bunch of semi-clueless newbies (like me) who need some kind of feel for what's going on.
>>On my Microsoft call, I quickly learned that I knew more about networks in general than the supposed expert I was speaking with, and when I asked specific questions of him at different points, I usually got either the obvious "BS your way out of it" answer, or no answer at all. I found them to be remarkably impolite and of very little help at all.
Why am I not surprised?
Wait 'till W2K get tried out under real world loads. Giggle giggle.
It was a fiasco. For Mindcraft's credibility. It started rigged. It stayed rigged.
You can also install a new NT to a different drive/directory.
Warning, the install likes to "upgrade". Don't. The upgrade is a mess of changes from 3.4 to 4.0 and when those changes are done to 4.0 it really make a mess of things.
DOS boot disks can help a lot when things go wrong.
Novell has integrity. Microsoft does not.
If there is more than one, ie TCP/IP, you are probably looking for trouble. To set up some print servers (LAN to Parallel ports) I had use use NETBEUI for one brand and later IPX/SPX for the other. In both cases the system was useable enough to set up the print servers, to TCP/IP, but was wonky enough that I got rid of the excess protocols fast.
Microsoft gets confused if it tries to do more than one thing at a time.
MS Proxy Server may be a problem. We had it. And junked it.
Remember to reapply your latest service pack if you change anmost anything.
"ugly stepdaughter" refers to Cinderella, and is probably more applicable to Linux. Berkeley Unix dates from the 70's if I'm not mistaken.
I read the MS rebuttal. Seems to lack something. Like credibility.
This is for IIS 4 on NT4, but may help some poor sap trying to find it.
Microsoft Management Console. (Web server administration)
Start
Programs
Windows NT 4.0 Option Pack
Microsoft Internet Information Server
Internet Server Manager
Wouldn't help. The differences are more basic than the command-line shell. Like changing bash to csh (I think. Greener than a newbie.)
The DOS structures are MS-DOS 5 (reports 5.5 IIRC), but NT will not allow the things that Novell does to DOS (at the ibmbio.com/ibmdos.com (io.sys/msdos.sys for MS) level).
Microsoft and Novell networking differ in at least one important aspect. Microsoft networking allows only one set of drive mappings. Novell (also Lantastic) supports a different set of drive mappings per task. This means it is possible to run together several tasks which have conflicting network drives under Novell DOS (Task Switcher!)* or MS Windows for Workgroups. Window 95/98/NT -- doesn't work anymore. If one task has access to a network drive, every task has the same access. Another Microsoft security innovation.
*Actually Novell DOS TaskMgr supports multitasking, but I've never used it.
Incredible, but it works. /.
The knee-jerk reaction of posters and moderators is very anti-patent. The subject matter is very unfamiliar to most slashdotters. (With an MS in Math, I'm lost.)
Well done
Agreed, it is probably a valid patent. I am somewhat out of my depth here, but trig functions are rather expensive computationally. According to your post, there exist shortcuts that drastically speed up discrete cosine transforms. It looks like he (the inventor) has found (invented) a local optimum which involves relatively few shifts and adds. I seriously doubt that there is anything obvious about his invention. It has to be excruciatingly specific to that problem, to that level of error.
As a patent, there is nothing earth-shattering or profound or that cannot be worked around, if not quite as efficiently. Nothing to be alarmed about.
"Generally you should set the IIS server to be a standalone server as this will minimize any possible exposure of domain user accounts."
What they don't mention is that this is set during installation of NT Server. The only way to change this is to reinstall.
To nit-pick,
SUB CX,AX
sets flags based on result in CX
If things are case sensitive, Cx would be a valid label.
Actually, both ADD and SUB set flags on x86.
Even if you think Assembler is a high level language, you probably do not want to code directly to the bare metal. It is not a nice native VLIW machine code. It is the target for the code morphing layer. It's been a long time since I've even looked at microcode (early low-end IBM 370s were microcoded) but it tends to be obscure, twisted, very unfriendly, and I cannot imagine that it's gotten any better with time. Minor mistakes do very bad things. Only one program is written, the program to read and execute the "higher-level" machine code.
or -6, garbage (connotations of "deep six").
Garbage. Most descriptive term I've seen yet.
Not to be confused with "innocent" fun like mmept, first post, trolls, flame wars, etc.
Probably do something like not losing moderator points but losing moderator status unless a 2/3 majority of metamoderators are in agreement.
10% gain in harware revenue, 5% gain in services, 1% loss in software, planning to spend $1b this year on Linux. I think IBM does understand the future. Software is necessary to run the hardware. It is expensive to produce, but the money is in being able to use it, not just having it. Oddly enough, it looks like IBM is strengthening its position by lowering the bar for competition, by commoditizing as far as possible, the hardware, software, and support. As this gets more complex and central to core business, vendor lock-in becomes unviable.
I think my main gripe about Microsoft is that they seem to raise mediocrity to an aspiration. This somehow makes technophobes (PHBs and MIS directors) feel more comfortable.
But consider the pansies in the planters in front of the building. They don't put them in the vault overnight. A few things, banks and such, need to be rather secure. For most things, it seems better to depend on a rational and trustworthy populace.
Seems to conjure up the right sort of negative connotations.
You just made my day.
CNN. News that WHAT????
Pigs and chickens mostly I think. Hong Kong eradicated all of its chickens not too long ago I seem to recall due to some sort of influenza outbreak.
The one to worry about is pig to human to chicken to pig. Repeat.
Actually global warming (or even normal climatic shifts) are very relevant to the spread of viruses. Very slight shifts are enough to change somethings preferred host, or to squeeze some species out of existence. As an simple example, the Black Death comes from infected fleas on rats. The fleas actually prefer rats to humans, but if the rat dies, the flea settles for second best.
The hard thing is to evaluate the degree of risk.
The objective evidence is strongly against this "better supported" claim. You are witnessing the FUD factor.
Your comments are, very seriously, drivel.