I recently attended a web seminar (webinar) Novell hosted about SuSe Enterprise Server 9 security. They talked a lot about the security certificaitons Suse has been awarded, and how even Micrososft has not been granted the highest level of security for it's 2003 server line. They then presented a poll for the attendees, "Which is more secure open source, proprietary, or a combination of open and proprietary software"? As predicted the combination response won. I think the correct answer to which is more secure Open Source or Closed Source depends totally on what programs are being discussed and where they are applied. Remember just because the source is open doesn't mean it's audited and the people that find security holes necessarily want to fix them. With great power comes great responsibility, as Stan Lee so wisely put.
Novell said in an internal study they found that open source tends to be more secure in popular applicaitons, so Apache is more secure then IIS (as if we needed them to tell us that!), but they found out that in obscure programs proprietary tended to be more secure. This is probably the main idea behinds Novell's recently annouced both source stance. Granted they have financial reasons for not wanting to open source parts of their product line, but this rational does seem logical. Though it would offend the stallmanites.
NOOO you missed the beginning totally. Steve Jobs will build a different building in a different part of the world. Bill will steal the blueprints, and after the engineers redesign the whole thing, it will work out pretty much like you laid out above.
As good as my ergonomic mouse/keyboard combo is, less body movement is still a better replacement.
I don't know about you, but this seems like it would get very tiring. I mean I can't flare my nostrils all day, the muscles in my nose start to get sore. What about people that have twitches, tics, or whatever you like to call it. Not to mention the sneezes (I know somebody already mentioned it in an earlier thread).
The geek in me does really want to try this though, unless you have a disablility though it's definitely a novelty.
... they spent so many years focusing on the Itanium future that they're really starting to hurt from the fact that nobody wants Itaniums.
Itanium was a joint effort with HP, and from my understanding a majority of its developement, promotion, and general market push is coming from HP. I doubt that Intel is being hampered *THAT* bad, by its failure.
Intel's second-string is big and fast enough to keep pace with the rest of the industry, but things like this show that they really are having to make a huge effort to do so.
Things like a random analyst's unproven, untested, hypothesis about what Intel may or may not have been hiding? Intel has already stated that the megahertz was is over, and they are abandoning the Pentium 4 for what most analysts believe is a non mobile version of the Pentium M. I can guarantee they already have developement versions of this chip in R&D. If the future is dual core you can bet money on Intel attempting to make this chip dual core. Why would it be such a stretch for them to apply that in a demo? Perhaps they have not hyped it more because it is at such an early state. AMD's dual core is probably far more presentable at this stage, and Intel would not want rumours to come out saying how much better AMD's design is this early in the game.
At this point I think the only thing to do is wait till the smoke, FUD, and general crap clears. Soon enough you'll get the hard facts. I for one can't wait to see what AMD, Intel, and IBM have up their sleeves.
Re:I'm not convinced of VoIP yet...
on
VoIP Questioned
·
· Score: 0
I was under the impression SRTP is only supported under the authentication mechanisms for SIP networks, and all voice transmissions are still unencrypted. Most people I deal with have gotten past this with stunnel and IPSec, but that is hardly a solution.
Re:I'm not convinced of VoIP yet...
on
VoIP Questioned
·
· Score: 1
Not "anyone" can eavesdrop a GSM phone or a DECT cordsless phone. Or VOIP over IPSec, for that matter.
Not true, GSM is very hackable (warning PowerPoint document). However, you do need to know the targets SIM id but once you clone that, you're basically homefree.
VOIP is totally insecure unless your either don't use the SIP protocol, or tunnel through IPSec or stunnel etc.. The obvious disadvantage of the latter is both sides need that tunnelling and in the real world that will rarely happen.
Re:I'm not convinced of VoIP yet...
on
VoIP Questioned
·
· Score: 1
What amazes me is the lack of talk regarding the security of these devices...
It's a standards issue, the SIP standard does not support encryption beyond the authentication framework (only in some cases). All transmissions are clear and open.
This is a serious issue for me, and it's one of the reasons SKYPE is so attractive (even with it's proprietary nature). What we need is a new verioun of SIP that allows for end to end encryption and some layer for backwards compatibility. Gaim-encryption has a nice framework for this stuff it'd be smart to learn from that, since it's already had to deal with transparently encrypting some devices while leaving others open.
Isn't this similar to how passwords were handled in Johnny Mnemonic? With the 3 random screen captures. I realize that this is different in that the user remembers which ones to pick, but isn't it the same principle?
... more applications use LDAP than eDirectory, and with openLdap you have no vendor lock in, and the management tools are getting better every day.
True, but i was referring more to native client access.. WIndows machines don't really have a native LDAP authentication layer which Novell's tools provide (NMAS). Also Novell's LDAP authentication to eDirectory is completely compliant with the LDAP standards X.500, which means that LDAP enabled appliations can directly authenticate to Netware's LDAP.
If Novell would have started the migration off of NetWare to UnixWare (seemed insane at the time), then they would be in a far better position now to migrate to Linux.
This is also very true, and a good observation, but as you sad at the time it seemed insane. I was just saying that at the time I probably would have been in favor of axing the project just like I would have been opossed to axing WordPerfect even though both of my opinions would have been negative in the long term. I guess that puts Novell's future prediction batting average at about 500 hehe.
You sound like a current Novell customer, and you are definately more up on modern NetWare than I am. Are you planning on switching to SuSe?
We use a lot of Linux around here, but not really for clients yet (it's in the works). We can't really make the move to a full Linux environment because the manageability Novell brings enables us to do so much with so little (2000 Workstations, 25 Servers, 4 IT Staff members). We had been looking at Mandrake primarily for our desktops, but with Novell's aquisition of Suse we are probably going to try to standardize all our linux machines around Suse.
When Novell does ship Open Enterprise System (probably based around Suse Enterprise Server) then we will be using that with the Linux kernel, not the Netware kernel. We would be using NTerprise Services for Linux if it had full functionality (but it's missing some vital components so far). Groupwise on Linux should be interesting I think, I wonder if they would leverage traditional MTA's and such or if they would still port GWIA. Currently we use Groupwise on an internal domain with postfix, spamasssassin, and amavisd-new to filter viruses and spam before our domain. Works very well so far.
Novell has had a horrible past of switching directions. I could list multiple examples, but perhaps UnixWare and WordPerfect say it best.
Yes Unixware, but if I were them I would have switched as well considering how fast it was eating their money with little to no chance of rewards. Wordperfect on the other hand was one of the biggest mistakes they made, and they're still paying for that one (as in wishing they hadn't abandoned it). It's abandonement in the long term is actually beneficial because it allows them to focus on OpenOffice though (which Ximian is a prime contributor of), but they couldn't possibly have known that when they axed it.
As for switching directions I can see a few examples, but they are also very true to products. Look at Netware interoperability, you can tie Netware 3 servers into Netware 6.5 networks for gods sake, and they are making upgrade utilities that support 4-5 revisions back. That's impressive if you ask me.
The people in Cal wanted to dump IPX with NetWare 4, and wanted to migrate to their UnixWare stuff, but the boys in Utah saw life diffently, and they won.
Abandoning IPX in Netware 4 would have been incredibly stupid. There was way too many things that relied upon it, it would have alienated core segments of their market. A lot of people with huge networks had considerable money tied into IPX (databases that won't communicate IP Btrieve and the like). Netware 4.11 was IPX because that was what people wanted, Netware 5 - 6.5 is Mixed (you can do TCP/IP only, IPX only, or TCP/IP and IPX for compatibility, heck you can even do IPX encapsulated in TCP/IP), and Netware 7 (or Novell Open Enterprise System) will still support IPX, but only on the Netware Kernel not the Linux kernel. It is a slow road and people are still mad. There was a guy at the conference really upset that Netware 7 would not have IPX support in the Linux kernel. When you don't focus on small networks (microsoft) you need to be really worried about which customers you piss off, IE losing Ford could really hurt their bottom line;).
I would hope that it is not in their long term plans to replace ReiserFS or EXT2/3 with NFS.
I assume you meant NSS. I don't think they would replace ReiserFS, and I'm also not sure NSS will be open sourced or available to more then just Novell's Server OS. They can't use ReiserFS or Ext2/3 because it has to be compatible with the rights system from other netware servers in your mixed environment. Frankly, they've supported lots of file systems for a long time, what's one more? If you were thinking of using NSS for your desktop I would think that'd be a bit overkill. I would like to see it opensourced and commited to seriously though by other distributions for servers. Maybe IBM would drop JFS in support of NSS.
You mentioned them being too different, well that doesn't really matter either if it's their server line that is offering this stuff. They already offer services on that line you can't get in other distributions. It's the differences that help customers decide who to buy. I do hope more of it becomes open though (but I'm not sure they're probably scared of RedHat I know I would be).
what value does your software (besides SuSe), provide me over open source alternatives.
LDAP vs eDirectory = Manageability, Interoperability (with native authentication), custom applications to leverage those directories to do thinks like distribute security policies, distributed applications, etc..
FreeEmail Vs GroupWise = Collaboration Utilities galore (actually your comparison would probably be better between NetMail and FreeEmail since NetMail is more just the mail side as GroupWise does more of Exchange's functionality (only non crappy))
The cost will not be cheap probably, I really have no idea how expensive.
One things for sure things will be interesting soon.. I can't wait to play with all the new stuff, and I hope they stay smart about what they're doing. It sounds good so far.
... Next they will be creating their version of IPX for it
They did say at the conference that they will *NOT* be including IPX for Linux. They weren't sure if you would be able to use Linux's native IPX stack to authenticate NCP or not, I doubt it.
...and of course some 100MB client that replaces all the normal native stuff and slows your machine down to a crawl.
Actually, they did say that they will *NOT* be focusing on a Netware client for Linux. The reason is they are trying to get rid of the client totally, even in windows land. They said they are developing a new authentication framework that bolts onto the existing operating systems authentication scheme.. (read pam_nds). Basically, it's a native port of NMAS, and they also announced they will no longer sell NMAS as it will be the new authentication scheme.
Hope this helps you out, I should have done a more thorough post to begin with:)
I'm replying to myself because I also forgot to mention that Novell said that NSS has already been ported internally to Linux and will be available in Novell Open Enterprise System (Netware 7) with the linux kernel.
They did not say if non Novell server distros would have the ability to run NSS or whether it would be Open Source'd.
The full netware rights system will be there though, which is a good thing for me.
That is very odd, I think I will email Jim with the business card from the novell presenter. There really should be dialog between them if this thing is a reality. They probably developed it all in house, but they did say they were working carefully within the LTSP framework to insure their changes would be compatible with future iterations.
It is GPL'd the beta is closed for internal novell testing, I'd hope that any updates to LTSP are open, but i could see some calls to zenworks and such being closed.
Oh and where were you sitting in the room, I have a feeling I know who you are:)
I attended this same conference, and I was asking a question about LTSP and EDirectory authentication. The presenter took my information and said this is called Project Sundance and he would email me with additional information the closed beta is supposed to start in the next 6 months.
If you get a GOOD LCD you won't get much of that. Monitors run DVI with a 16 ms response time are prime, but of course that will run you more money, you might want to look into contrast ratios as well though the benefits of high contrast ratios are debatable.
The Dell Solution will be upgradeable between makes if other manufacturers standardize on the dell proposal. It is not intended to be proprietary RTFA.
What about that Ximian purchase? I guess it was just for Mono.
The Ximian purchase was for a number of reasons most importantly Mono and Red Carpet. Novell hopes to leverage RedCarpet into Zenworks for Linux. If you aren't familiar with Zenworks you should read up, because that is what will catalyst large scale Enterprise client rollouts (that aren't terminal based).
There was an article a few weeks ago about how Microsoft can't find 8GB harddrives anymore and has to pack in larger drives. This is why they can't get the cost of the Xbox down over time and is also why they're looking at not including a harddrive for the Xbox 2.
The Xbox hasn't been shipping with 8GB drives for quite some time now. Most are now coming with 10 GB drives. Ask any modders about it and they'll confirm (xbox-scene.com) I know mine included a 10GB Seagate. Also, I believe the 10GB drives are actually 20 or 30 GB drives with the extra platters disabled refurbised drives are probably a good bet on this.
As far as why the Xbox 2 will not have a hard drive, lack of 8 GB drives is definitely *NOT* the reason. Hard drives below size X become a commodity, and thus an 8 GB drive isn't necessarily more expensive then a 20 GB in 2 years etc.. so drive size is not the reason. I'm not sure but it probably has to do with the modding scene (it is harder to for any real use something without permanent storage), increases in flash storage size and speed is probably a factor as well, and/or size and heat concerns.
-- Caldera started by disgruntled Novell employees
Robert Love founded Caldera and was not disgruntled at Novell he mearly thought Novell should be moving to Linux and was not so he moved without them. He took several people with him he thought were competent, and kept good corporate ties to Novell through the duration of Caldera (before SCO).
--MS finances Caldera/SCO to sue IBM
I don't know if this is the correct timeline, but at this point Robert Love had departed SCO after realizing they weren't focusing on Linux and were focusing on Unix instead.
--IBM induces Novell to register UNIX copyrights (after waiting 10 years to get around to it).
Novell had registered Unix copyrights previously, but had passed parts of the ownership off in a licensing scheme to SCO (a deal brokered by Robert Love who did not know what that would lead to).
--Novell Buys SuSe
Yep.
--SCO sues Novell
SCO sued Novell and Novell sued SCO and blah blah back and forth disputing ownership of Unix. Typical corporate legal wrangling and positioning.
--Now IBM pours money into Novell
IBM's investment into Novell is an investment against MS and probably *NOT* to help Novell against SCO. After all IBM is fighting them too and SCO does have a hard case to make. Novell has been aiming at taking down Microsoft for a long time and finally has all the pieces necessary to do it. IBM is rewarding that and encouraging it (they have something against MS as well you might remember OS/2 and Dos even).
Short of a corporate takeover/merger I don't really see how Novell could be a satellite for IBM. They currently hold all the cards. What does IBM hold?
a) find a company to make a powerpoint alternative which saves to html files
OpenOffice can save to HTML and Flash files from Presentations.
Even if they accomplished that, people's stupidity and ignorance has proven time and time again that whether microsoft's software is better, worse, or just as good as its competitors- people will buy microsoft's software instead of others. Look at openoffice.org, mozilla (most people use ie)/opera/konquer/galeon/netscape/etc, linux, amd a bunch of other superior software.
People buy Microsoft software because they are a.) not familiar with the competitors b.) worried about compatibility with the rest of their microsoft software c.) do not want to retrain staff d.) need feature X which competition lacks e.) work for Microsoft or are otherwise affiliated with them. f.) do not trust an unproven product (in their eyes) and don't want to be the guinea pigs
Point being, as other software matures it will be harder and harder for Microsoft to release sub par software and expect a solid buy in. If you look at Mozilla it's growing speed very fast now, I know a number of Windows users that aren't even very technical that use FireFox and/or Mozilla. Look at OpenOffice, Microsoft is killing themselves with their own Doc standard. They can't move future iteratios of Office to abandon or morph the compatiblity of.doc too much or they break compatiblity with themselves, and this allows the competition to reverse engineer and support those standards.
As far as Opera's voice operated browser goes I think this is great, especially for disabled and handicapped people. I also think there's a certain appeal to be in front of a board and say Next slide to your openoffice html/flash presentation and have it progress. I mean what a way to impress.
Soudns very reasonable, except, you're forgetting that Martians moved the bulk of their atmoshpere to Earth which they then terraformed into a habitable planet. Of course this was a long long time ago, and the martian overlords have since progressed on leaving us to wonder why we're here.
Come to think of it this sounds an awful lot like Scientology. Oh god! They're right! On second thought I think I might listen to too much Clutch.
Uhh, last I checked the Axim was a PDA, the iPod a portable music player.
Perhaps you meant the Dell DJ, which IS their iPod clone.
I mean the Dell Axim as an example of engineering, it was a list. Dell Axim, Ipod Clone, Laptops, etc.. are all examples of Dell Engineering. I calld the Dell DJ an IPod Clone because I couldn't think of its name. Thanks for the reminder.
1.) AMD64 is better for games. 2.) Intel Northwood P4 3.4 is good for general use 3.) Intel's new Prescott is better then Northwood for general use/video encoding especially with SSE3 in the future, but it runs too hot. 4.) Wait 45 days for new mobo's with new sockets and PCI Express.
Slashdot Mirror
I recently attended a web seminar (webinar) Novell hosted about SuSe Enterprise Server 9 security. They talked a lot about the security certificaitons Suse has been awarded, and how even Micrososft has not been granted the highest level of security for it's 2003 server line. They then presented a poll for the attendees, "Which is more secure open source, proprietary, or a combination of open and proprietary software"? As predicted the combination response won. I think the correct answer to which is more secure Open Source or Closed Source depends totally on what programs are being discussed and where they are applied. Remember just because the source is open doesn't mean it's audited and the people that find security holes necessarily want to fix them. With great power comes great responsibility, as Stan Lee so wisely put.
Novell said in an internal study they found that open source tends to be more secure in popular applicaitons, so Apache is more secure then IIS (as if we needed them to tell us that!), but they found out that in obscure programs proprietary tended to be more secure. This is probably the main idea behinds Novell's recently annouced both source stance. Granted they have financial reasons for not wanting to open source parts of their product line, but this rational does seem logical. Though it would offend the stallmanites.
NOOO you missed the beginning totally. Steve Jobs will build a different building in a different part of the world. Bill will steal the blueprints, and after the engineers redesign the whole thing, it will work out pretty much like you laid out above.
As good as my ergonomic mouse/keyboard combo is, less body movement is still a better replacement.
I don't know about you, but this seems like it would get very tiring. I mean I can't flare my nostrils all day, the muscles in my nose start to get sore. What about people that have twitches, tics, or whatever you like to call it. Not to mention the sneezes (I know somebody already mentioned it in an earlier thread).
The geek in me does really want to try this though, unless you have a disablility though it's definitely a novelty.
... they spent so many years focusing on the Itanium future that they're really starting to hurt from the fact that nobody wants Itaniums.
Itanium was a joint effort with HP, and from my understanding a majority of its developement, promotion, and general market push is coming from HP. I doubt that Intel is being hampered *THAT* bad, by its failure.
Intel's second-string is big and fast enough to keep pace with the rest of the industry, but things like this show that they really are having to make a huge effort to do so.
Things like a random analyst's unproven, untested, hypothesis about what Intel may or may not have been hiding? Intel has already stated that the megahertz was is over, and they are abandoning the Pentium 4 for what most analysts believe is a non mobile version of the Pentium M. I can guarantee they already have developement versions of this chip in R&D. If the future is dual core you can bet money on Intel attempting to make this chip dual core. Why would it be such a stretch for them to apply that in a demo? Perhaps they have not hyped it more because it is at such an early state. AMD's dual core is probably far more presentable at this stage, and Intel would not want rumours to come out saying how much better AMD's design is this early in the game.
At this point I think the only thing to do is wait till the smoke, FUD, and general crap clears. Soon enough you'll get the hard facts. I for one can't wait to see what AMD, Intel, and IBM have up their sleeves.
SRTP rfc: http://zvon.org/tmRFC/RFC3711/Output/index.html
I was under the impression SRTP is only supported under the authentication mechanisms for SIP networks, and all voice transmissions are still unencrypted. Most people I deal with have gotten past this with stunnel and IPSec, but that is hardly a solution.
Not "anyone" can eavesdrop a GSM phone or a DECT cordsless phone. Or VOIP over IPSec, for that matter.
Not true, GSM is very hackable (warning PowerPoint document). However, you do need to know the targets SIM id but once you clone that, you're basically homefree.
VOIP is totally insecure unless your either don't use the SIP protocol, or tunnel through IPSec or stunnel etc.. The obvious disadvantage of the latter is both sides need that tunnelling and in the real world that will rarely happen.
What amazes me is the lack of talk regarding the security of these devices...
It's a standards issue, the SIP standard does not support encryption beyond the authentication framework (only in some cases). All transmissions are clear and open.
This is a serious issue for me, and it's one of the reasons SKYPE is so attractive (even with it's proprietary nature). What we need is a new verioun of SIP that allows for end to end encryption and some layer for backwards compatibility. Gaim-encryption has a nice framework for this stuff it'd be smart to learn from that, since it's already had to deal with transparently encrypting some devices while leaving others open.
Isn't this similar to how passwords were handled in Johnny Mnemonic? With the 3 random screen captures. I realize that this is different in that the user remembers which ones to pick, but isn't it the same principle?
Sci-Fi becomes reality once again.
... more applications use LDAP than eDirectory, and with openLdap you have no vendor lock in, and the management tools are getting better every day.
True, but i was referring more to native client access.. WIndows machines don't really have a native LDAP authentication layer which Novell's tools provide (NMAS). Also Novell's LDAP authentication to eDirectory is completely compliant with the LDAP standards X.500, which means that LDAP enabled appliations can directly authenticate to Netware's LDAP.
If Novell would have started the migration off of NetWare to UnixWare (seemed insane at the time), then they would be in a far better position now to migrate to Linux.
This is also very true, and a good observation, but as you sad at the time it seemed insane. I was just saying that at the time I probably would have been in favor of axing the project just like I would have been opossed to axing WordPerfect even though both of my opinions would have been negative in the long term. I guess that puts Novell's future prediction batting average at about 500 hehe.
You sound like a current Novell customer, and you are definately more up on modern NetWare than I am. Are you planning on switching to SuSe?
We use a lot of Linux around here, but not really for clients yet (it's in the works). We can't really make the move to a full Linux environment because the manageability Novell brings enables us to do so much with so little (2000 Workstations, 25 Servers, 4 IT Staff members). We had been looking at Mandrake primarily for our desktops, but with Novell's aquisition of Suse we are probably going to try to standardize all our linux machines around Suse.
When Novell does ship Open Enterprise System (probably based around Suse Enterprise Server) then we will be using that with the Linux kernel, not the Netware kernel. We would be using NTerprise Services for Linux if it had full functionality (but it's missing some vital components so far). Groupwise on Linux should be interesting I think, I wonder if they would leverage traditional MTA's and such or if they would still port GWIA. Currently we use Groupwise on an internal domain with postfix, spamasssassin, and amavisd-new to filter viruses and spam before our domain. Works very well so far.
Novell has had a horrible past of switching directions. I could list multiple examples, but perhaps UnixWare and WordPerfect say it best.
;).
Yes Unixware, but if I were them I would have switched as well considering how fast it was eating their money with little to no chance of rewards. Wordperfect on the other hand was one of the biggest mistakes they made, and they're still paying for that one (as in wishing they hadn't abandoned it). It's abandonement in the long term is actually beneficial because it allows them to focus on OpenOffice though (which Ximian is a prime contributor of), but they couldn't possibly have known that when they axed it.
As for switching directions I can see a few examples, but they are also very true to products. Look at Netware interoperability, you can tie Netware 3 servers into Netware 6.5 networks for gods sake, and they are making upgrade utilities that support 4-5 revisions back. That's impressive if you ask me.
The people in Cal wanted to dump IPX with NetWare 4, and wanted to migrate to their UnixWare stuff, but the boys in Utah saw life diffently, and they won.
Abandoning IPX in Netware 4 would have been incredibly stupid. There was way too many things that relied upon it, it would have alienated core segments of their market. A lot of people with huge networks had considerable money tied into IPX (databases that won't communicate IP Btrieve and the like). Netware 4.11 was IPX because that was what people wanted, Netware 5 - 6.5 is Mixed (you can do TCP/IP only, IPX only, or TCP/IP and IPX for compatibility, heck you can even do IPX encapsulated in TCP/IP), and Netware 7 (or Novell Open Enterprise System) will still support IPX, but only on the Netware Kernel not the Linux kernel. It is a slow road and people are still mad. There was a guy at the conference really upset that Netware 7 would not have IPX support in the Linux kernel. When you don't focus on small networks (microsoft) you need to be really worried about which customers you piss off, IE losing Ford could really hurt their bottom line
I would hope that it is not in their long term plans to replace ReiserFS or EXT2/3 with NFS.
I assume you meant NSS. I don't think they would replace ReiserFS, and I'm also not sure NSS will be open sourced or available to more then just Novell's Server OS. They can't use ReiserFS or Ext2/3 because it has to be compatible with the rights system from other netware servers in your mixed environment. Frankly, they've supported lots of file systems for a long time, what's one more? If you were thinking of using NSS for your desktop I would think that'd be a bit overkill. I would like to see it opensourced and commited to seriously though by other distributions for servers. Maybe IBM would drop JFS in support of NSS.
You mentioned them being too different, well that doesn't really matter either if it's their server line that is offering this stuff. They already offer services on that line you can't get in other distributions. It's the differences that help customers decide who to buy. I do hope more of it becomes open though (but I'm not sure they're probably scared of RedHat I know I would be).
what value does your software (besides SuSe), provide me over open source alternatives.
LDAP vs eDirectory = Manageability, Interoperability (with native authentication), custom applications to leverage those directories to do thinks like distribute security policies, distributed applications, etc..
FreeEmail Vs GroupWise = Collaboration Utilities galore (actually your comparison would probably be better between NetMail and FreeEmail since NetMail is more just the mail side as GroupWise does more of Exchange's functionality (only non crappy))
The cost will not be cheap probably, I really have no idea how expensive.
One things for sure things will be interesting soon.. I can't wait to play with all the new stuff, and I hope they stay smart about what they're doing. It sounds good so far.
Their 'cluster management' is for clusters of webmin servers, not true 'clusters' in this context.
:).
Webmin has modules that support true clusters and of course clusters of webmin servers. I think you need to look into it more
They did say at the conference that they will *NOT* be including IPX for Linux. They weren't sure if you would be able to use Linux's native IPX stack to authenticate NCP or not, I doubt it.
Actually, they did say that they will *NOT* be focusing on a Netware client for Linux. The reason is they are trying to get rid of the client totally, even in windows land. They said they are developing a new authentication framework that bolts onto the existing operating systems authentication scheme.. (read pam_nds). Basically, it's a native port of NMAS, and they also announced they will no longer sell NMAS as it will be the new authentication scheme.
Hope this helps you out, I should have done a more thorough post to begin with
I'm replying to myself because I also forgot to mention that Novell said that NSS has already been ported internally to Linux and will be available in Novell Open Enterprise System (Netware 7) with the linux kernel.
They did not say if non Novell server distros would have the ability to run NSS or whether it would be Open Source'd.
The full netware rights system will be there though, which is a good thing for me.
That is very odd, I think I will email Jim with the business card from the novell presenter. There really should be dialog between them if this thing is a reality. They probably developed it all in house, but they did say they were working carefully within the LTSP framework to insure their changes would be compatible with future iterations.
http://www.ltsp.org/license.txt
:)
It is GPL'd the beta is closed for internal novell testing, I'd hope that any updates to LTSP are open, but i could see some calls to zenworks and such being closed.
Oh and where were you sitting in the room, I have a feeling I know who you are
I attended this same conference, and I was asking a question about LTSP and EDirectory authentication. The presenter took my information and said this is called Project Sundance and he would email me with additional information the closed beta is supposed to start in the next 6 months.
If you get a GOOD LCD you won't get much of that. Monitors run DVI with a 16 ms response time are prime, but of course that will run you more money, you might want to look into contrast ratios as well though the benefits of high contrast ratios are debatable.
The Dell Solution will be upgradeable between makes if other manufacturers standardize on the dell proposal. It is not intended to be proprietary RTFA.
What about that Ximian purchase? I guess it was just for Mono.
The Ximian purchase was for a number of reasons most importantly Mono and Red Carpet. Novell hopes to leverage RedCarpet into Zenworks for Linux. If you aren't familiar with Zenworks you should read up, because that is what will catalyst large scale Enterprise client rollouts (that aren't terminal based).
There was an article a few weeks ago about how Microsoft can't find 8GB harddrives anymore and has to pack in larger drives. This is why they can't get the cost of the Xbox down over time and is also why they're looking at not including a harddrive for the Xbox 2.
The Xbox hasn't been shipping with 8GB drives for quite some time now. Most are now coming with 10 GB drives. Ask any modders about it and they'll confirm (xbox-scene.com) I know mine included a 10GB Seagate. Also, I believe the 10GB drives are actually 20 or 30 GB drives with the extra platters disabled refurbised drives are probably a good bet on this.
As far as why the Xbox 2 will not have a hard drive, lack of 8 GB drives is definitely *NOT* the reason. Hard drives below size X become a commodity, and thus an 8 GB drive isn't necessarily more expensive then a 20 GB in 2 years etc.. so drive size is not the reason. I'm not sure but it probably has to do with the modding scene (it is harder to for any real use something without permanent storage), increases in flash storage size and speed is probably a factor as well, and/or size and heat concerns.
I'll take it point by point
-- Caldera started by disgruntled Novell employees
Robert Love founded Caldera and was not disgruntled at Novell he mearly thought Novell should be moving to Linux and was not so he moved without them. He took several people with him he thought were competent, and kept good corporate ties to Novell through the duration of Caldera (before SCO).
--MS finances Caldera/SCO to sue IBM
I don't know if this is the correct timeline, but at this point Robert Love had departed SCO after realizing they weren't focusing on Linux and were focusing on Unix instead.
--IBM induces Novell to register UNIX copyrights (after waiting 10 years to get around to it).
Novell had registered Unix copyrights previously, but had passed parts of the ownership off in a licensing scheme to SCO (a deal brokered by Robert Love who did not know what that would lead to).
--Novell Buys SuSe
Yep.
--SCO sues Novell
SCO sued Novell and Novell sued SCO and blah blah back and forth disputing ownership of Unix. Typical corporate legal wrangling and positioning.
--Now IBM pours money into Novell
IBM's investment into Novell is an investment against MS and probably *NOT* to help Novell against SCO. After all IBM is fighting them too and SCO does have a hard case to make. Novell has been aiming at taking down Microsoft for a long time and finally has all the pieces necessary to do it. IBM is rewarding that and encouraging it (they have something against MS as well you might remember OS/2 and Dos even).
Short of a corporate takeover/merger I don't really see how Novell could be a satellite for IBM. They currently hold all the cards. What does IBM hold?
a) find a company to make a powerpoint alternative which saves to html files
.doc too much or they break compatiblity with themselves, and this allows the competition to reverse engineer and support those standards.
OpenOffice can save to HTML and Flash files from Presentations.
Even if they accomplished that, people's stupidity and ignorance has proven time and time again that whether microsoft's software is better, worse, or just as good as its competitors- people will buy microsoft's software instead of others. Look at openoffice.org, mozilla (most people use ie)/opera/konquer/galeon/netscape/etc, linux, amd a bunch of other superior software.
People buy Microsoft software because they are
a.) not familiar with the competitors
b.) worried about compatibility with the rest of their microsoft software
c.) do not want to retrain staff
d.) need feature X which competition lacks
e.) work for Microsoft or are otherwise affiliated with them.
f.) do not trust an unproven product (in their eyes) and don't want to be the guinea pigs
Point being, as other software matures it will be harder and harder for Microsoft to release sub par software and expect a solid buy in. If you look at Mozilla it's growing speed very fast now, I know a number of Windows users that aren't even very technical that use FireFox and/or Mozilla. Look at OpenOffice, Microsoft is killing themselves with their own Doc standard. They can't move future iteratios of Office to abandon or morph the compatiblity of
As far as Opera's voice operated browser goes I think this is great, especially for disabled and handicapped people. I also think there's a certain appeal to be in front of a board and say Next slide to your openoffice html/flash presentation and have it progress. I mean what a way to impress.
Soudns very reasonable, except, you're forgetting that Martians moved the bulk of their atmoshpere to Earth which they then terraformed into a habitable planet. Of course this was a long long time ago, and the martian overlords have since progressed on leaving us to wonder why we're here.
Come to think of it this sounds an awful lot like Scientology. Oh god! They're right! On second thought I think I might listen to too much Clutch.
Uhh, last I checked the Axim was a PDA, the iPod a portable music player.
Perhaps you meant the Dell DJ, which IS their iPod clone.
I mean the Dell Axim as an example of engineering, it was a list. Dell Axim, Ipod Clone, Laptops, etc.. are all examples of Dell Engineering. I calld the Dell DJ an IPod Clone because I couldn't think of its name. Thanks for the reminder.
Just an update:
1.) AMD64 is better for games.
2.) Intel Northwood P4 3.4 is good for general use
3.) Intel's new Prescott is better then Northwood for general use/video encoding especially with SSE3 in the future, but it runs too hot.
4.) Wait 45 days for new mobo's with new sockets and PCI Express.