I imagine that given that there are already variations that use names that will get blocked by kiddie protection filters and spam filters that block porno mails, that any attempt by MS to sidestep the domain name of WU will soon be nullified by the same people putting out the current variations.
Although I'm aware that many users simply don't know how to patch their systems often or don't care, I am truly amazed at the sheer number of worms that do manage to get through, no matter what. I am even more surprised at MS' rather clumsy responses every time a worm gets through. Oh well.
If anyone has noticed this is not the first time that SCO has railed against the GPL. In their response to the IBM countersuit, they accused IBM of trying to divert attention away from the "real case" and claimed that IBM should idemnify Linux users and move away from the GPL.
This, in conjunction with today's amazing declaration by that lawyer, says to me that SCO is definitely on an anti-GPL agenda. Why? Perhaps because part of IBM's countersuit is an alleged GPL violation by SCO, and given that SCO threats of trying to gain money by billing Linux users and the strange idea of a binary only licence for Linux is clearly against the GPL, SCO is probably scared that they might very well lose this portion of the case.
It might very well be a ploy by Microsoft using SCO as a proxy to demolish the GPL, and given that the large majority of SCO's FUD has been directed against Linux the signs do tend to point in that direction. But that is something for the DOJ to investigate.
More probable is that it is partly an idea based on some lawyer deciding that SCO has a good case in winning the case on derivative works, mixed in with a clever marketing department deciding to use the suit as a tool to push stocks up.
I do however think that the mainstream press is no longer taking SCO's statements as seriously as they did in the beginning. The sheer volume of SCO press releases and the high level of contradictions within those releases pointing towards a strategy being made up as they go along is boring and irritating even the most anti Linux reporters out there. The statements by SCO especially those relating to Linux (no problem in the beginning , then the 1500 letters, then the threat to sue Linus, then the retraction, then the wierd pricing scheme and the binary licence being compliant with the GPL, then the decalration that the GPL is null and void) might frighten some PHBs and encourage some day traders, but it will wear off as time goes on and people tire of SCO's embarassing craziness in public.
SCO's termination of the Sequent-IBM UNIX System V license is self-effectuating and does not require court approval.
WTF? SCO now no longer needs the law? My gut reaction to this would be that SCO is desperately trying to push up the stock price in the face of the IBM/RH countersuits handed out last week, but on second thoughts I noticed that now SCO has finally named the offending code.
This all boils down to the question of what a derivative work is and whether SCO has any control whatsoever over code bought by IBM. It makes me realise that SCO has a better chance in court than we previously thought.
This is the time for the kernel developers to remove the NUMA and RCU code and get cracking on alternatives.
Note: This is not a positive note about him or his posts, so if you love the guy please forgive me.
I don't know whether the GPL will be properly tested under the current circumstances, as it seems that the US legal system is one where your chances of winning are dependant on so many factors that have no real bearing on the core case, such as lawyer quality and quantity, the attitude of the judge and their mood and a jury who is more often than not in no way qualified to give opinion on highly technical matters such as these.
I do however think Andrew Orlowski is an opinionated man with a personal view of what is right and wrong in this world. There's nothing wrong with that but I noticed quite a while ago that his personal opinion was anything but positive towards things that didn't fit in his opinion and he never seems to even attempt to qualify his statements. His op-ed pieces often take the position that HE is right. Point.
I first took notice of him when he was the Reg's resident Mac writer, and he never failed to write scathing attacks on everything Mac and Apple related, be it horrific reviews of the ibook when it came out or sarcastic criticism of Steve Jobs business plan. While it can be refreshing to not have someone who is a mac zealot reviewing Apple stuff, I would point out that both the ibook and Apple's business plans have been success stories in a generaly bleak IT sector. His comments on OSX would have made you think it was 1996 again and Apple was going to die "any day now".
This piece on the marvels of people in the UK ignoring the law as opposed to people in the states being a bunch of sheep is as ridiculous. He has a point in that traditionally in old world countries the power of the individual has been minimal leading to individuals ignoring it, but he so conveniently ignores the fact that the GPL needs to be seen as legally legitimate, no matter where it is implemented, for it to be taken seriously by businesses.
And that applies to the UK, the US and just about anywhere else where businesses enforce their licences through the legal system.
Trolling for pain and financial ruin
on
Mac OS X Power Tools
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
You're already posted this on just about every single Mac article that's been posted here for a fair amount of time, every time as an AC because you're such a chicken. The real basis of your trouble would be due to using the old Mac OS which wasn't capable of true multitasking, although 20 minutes for 16 MB is either some other problem or else just part of your typical, and very dated, MS troll, fuckwad.
I know it's not very practical to suggest that the 95% of computer users running users switch to another system, but this case is something that could be used for at least a small strike in that area. A letter to the BBC and NYTimes showing, in laymans terms, the fact that with a good distro (all unnessesary ports closed/unneeded daemons off by default/regular security patches by distro maker) there would be a significantly lower chance of something like this happening to the user. Hell, even a letter pointing out the obvious vulnerabilities of Outlook and IE as opposed to Mozilla/Eudora etc would be a good thing.
Red hat made no allegations. They simply filed a put up or shut up filing because it is hurting their business. This rejoinder is typical SCO face (and share price) saving doublespeak. SCO will have to start worrying soon because not only are they now being counter sued by two companies but I would not at all be surprised if SuSE doesn't join in.
You're right. I was over the top. I've used the Perl package and it was good enough. My main irritation was that it wasn't easy or intuitive via scripting to do remote authentification and copying etc.
Thanks for the info. I tried toolbox.nlm but what I found really frustrating was that one doesn't seem to be able to do remote authentification with it. But for standard tasks it's actually quite ok.
After having just spent about one year doing Netware admin, I must say that this is good news. The Netware console is so primitive, that there were numerous times when I would have loved being able to have plain old Bash around for simple things like file copying, scripts etc.
The theatrics and plain, blatant, obvious abuse of the "little man" by anyone with a fair amount of money is stunning. I compare a number of things:
Today on slashdot, there was an article on the 20 year old left wing loudmouth who gets a year in jail for linking to a website with bombmaking instructions while the despotic bastard CEO of SCO can make claims and threats about a computer operating system while offering no evidence whatsoever and not only get away with it, but also make a fair amount of money at the same time.
Compare the above to an article in the Washington Post about gangland killings in Washington DC, where gang members, who are all armed and are all involved in criminal activities are hardly prosecuted and the case of Germany, where a legal injunction forced SCO to withdraw it's claims in that country, completely.
I personally think that whatever happens to Linux in the USA in terms of SCO being able to legally enforce payment of licences, those will have no effect outside the USA and I will personally piss in my pants laughing when SCO attempts to do some enforcing in the EU.
Don't worry about it. Given the cluelessness and total lack of vision in solving any of the country's problems as evidnced by the current Bundesrat, I think that switzerland will be forced to join the EU within the next ten years.
Considering that his life will be fucked from now on- imagine trying to find a job after his sentence, he would be better served in fleeing the USA to mexico or canada and requesting political asylum in Brazil, France, Sweden or any country that will respect the fact that he has been heavily sentenced for youthful idiocy.
I agree that most people with a technical background will feel somehow disturbed by this concept of non finite time. Time is something that most civilisations have held dear for millenia as it provides a backbone of structure to the orderly progression of our society and lives. Even our languages have large parts of them devoted to time. What occured to me though, is that all our measurments of time are based on events and sequences thereof - Sunrise, midday, sunset, the arms of a clock moving around a dial, etc. For us, it seems, we have no concept of time itself.
An interesting collolary can be found in the Hopi language of the Hopi indians. As far as I can tell, their language has no concept of time as we know it in ours and seems to perceive everything in their worldview as in a constant state of change.
Re:Su-30 series or Quality/Quantity
on
In-Flight Reboot?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I agree that the Mig-25 is not the state of the art and would be at a loss in a dogfight, but my point was about the pilots, not the aircraft. But, as i said in a post lower down, the Mig-31, which succeded the Mig-25 has done away with most of these problems. It has been exported to China and could theoretically see use there in some war with Taiwan.
For the record, I misquoted the story. Here's a link.
I quote: "Gulf War Experience -
Did you know that a MiG-25PD recorded the only Iraqi air-to-air kill of the Gulf War? It dropped an F-18C on the first night of the war--then went on to fire another missile at an A-6 and buzz an A-7, all while avoiding escorting F-14s and F-15s.
An isolated incident? How about the single Iraqi Foxbat-E that eluded eight sweeping F-15s then tangled with two EF-111As, firing three missiles at the Ravens and chasing them off station. Unfortunately, the Ravens were supporting an F-15E strike, and the EF-111's retreat led to the loss of one of the Strike Eagles to a SAM. Oh BTW, the Foxbat easily avoided interception and returned safely to base.
There's more. When F-15 pilots were fighting for the chance to fly sweeps east of Baghdad late in the war, itching for a chance to get a shot at an Iraqi running for Iran, they weren't expecting the fight that a pair of Foxbats put up. Two Foxbats approached a pair of F-15s, fired missiles before the Eagles could get off shots (the missiles were evaded by the Eagles), then outran those two Eagles, four Sparrows and two Sidewinders fired back at them. Two more Eagles maneuvered to cut the Foxbat's off from their base (four more Eagles tried, but were unable to effect an intercept), and four more Sparrows were expended in vain trying to drop the Foxbats.
The Iraqis had a total of twelve MiG-25PDs at the beginning of the war, of which maybe half were operational at any given time. Imagine what trouble they would have caused if there had been more. The Foxbats, when well flown, proved capable of engaging allied fighters and avoiding them at will. Only the limitations of their weapons proved a problem."
Re:Su-30 series or Quality/Quantity
on
In-Flight Reboot?
·
· Score: 1
A link to a movie of the kulbit. I have no idea how useful this is combat, but it is amazing to watch.
Re:Su-30 series or Quality/Quantity
on
In-Flight Reboot?
·
· Score: 1
That is probably right, I don't know. I just wonder why western aircraft have never displayed similar manouvers at airshows. Most of what I've read claims that there is usually a lot of envy and nitpicking directed towards the Su-27 and later variants at airshows in order to bolster other manufacturers aircraft, and to be honest, I've never heard of any other aircraft performing the kulbit apart from the thrust vectored Su-37 and Su-30MKI variants.
I agree that those are airshow manouvers and probably not of much use in a real dogfight, but they do definitely point to the extreme agility of the plane. As I said, and the point I was trying to make is that the pilot is the key. If the pilot is one of the current crop of Russian pilots for example, who fly so few hours a year that it borders on being dangerous, I doubt they would do much good even if they were flying F-15's, F-22's or JSF's.
As for your comment on the Mig-25, that isn't strictly correct. The Mig-25 redlined at mach 2.8. It had engine control problems at that speed and there was a danger of the engines running out of control. This happened in Mig-25R crossover flights over Israel in 1973 when it was being chased by souped up F-4's and the plane moved up to Mach 3 and after landing in Egypt, had to have its engines replaced. The Mig-25 is no longer in service in Russia in any case, as it has long been replaced by the far more capable Mig-31 (more powerful engines stable at high speed, much higher range, IFR capabilities, lighter and stronger airframe, and an enourmous fixed antenna radar) which has also been exported to China.
Noting that MS is afraid of being sued on pirated code in open source and that SCO is using exactly the same argument is interesting...
Su-30 series or Quality/Quantity
on
In-Flight Reboot?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
By the time this thing ever gets into the air the only probable foes that it will ever face will be either SU-27 derivates or Mig-29 derivates, both of which cost far less than the F-22.
In pure features the Su-27 is an amazing plane. Anyone who has ever seen the Su-27 do the cobra manouver or the thrust vectored Su-30MKI or Su-35 do the 360 degree Kulbit manouver can attest to what these planes can do in close air combat. These are extreme manouvers that western planes cannot do for the simple reason that the engines in western planes receive no air at such high angles of attack and therefore often flame-out or stall. Not only this but the newer radars on the Su-30s and missiles are longer ranging than just about anything the west has with the exception of the F-14's AIM-54 Phoenix. As for stealth, newer Su-30's are coated with radar absorbant paint which reduce the advantages that a dedicated stealth fighter such as the F-22 would have in BVR combat.
In the hands of a good pilot I very much doubt that the Su-30 would automatically lose in combat. That however is the crux of the matter: Pilot training.
This has always been something that has been much better in the west with advanced simulators, top gun style combat training and long hours of aircraft experience. It is and has been a fallacy to believe that more modern high tech will always win the battle. It is almost always the quality of the pilots that decided the battle.
There is a good example of an air combat situation atht happened in the first gulf war. The only western plane to be shot down in air combat was an F-18 on an attack mission that was intercepted by an obviously experienced Iraqi Mig-25 pilot. The Mig-25 was already obsolete then in terms of technology but the sheer speed of the plane (Mach 2.8+) is unmatched by any other fighter. The Mig-25 went on after shooting down the F-18 to buzz an EF-111 raven that was providing ECM for the mission causing the raven to have to manouver to avoid the incoming missiles and drop back from the attack mission which was then unprotected by ECM and subsequently another F-18 was shot down by a SAM. No less than two F-15's and two F-16's all attempted to intercept the Mig-25, two of them firing missiles, but the Mig-25 used it's tremendous speed advantage to easily avoid the interceptors and reach its base.
This shows what a good plane , not necesserally the utterly most modern, can do in the hands of a good pilot. IMO the F-22 is an overexpensive white elephant.
I haven't used ssh over a cellphone but I can immediately see the advantages of being able to do so. While VNC and Windows Terminal services are surely easier to use, in general, with the omnidirectional toggle switch on most phones, the bandwidth is a pig and the small screen obviously doesn't make it easier to use. This would be definitely an emergeancy tool for those services. ssh however, being more lightweight would be very useful for sysadmins on call or other types of similar work.
What would be a real boon without having to tote around a thumbboard or other similar paraphenalia would be an ssh client on the phone where certain keys or kombinations of keys were mapped to often used CLI commands or where the Nokia (and many similar phones) menu key in combination with the omnidirectional toggle could access the commonly used commands. An example:
Start ssh session menu key->toggle key to "netstat" (optionally with switches)-> menu key accept->phone displays network info.
While I personally couldn't give a stuff if something is implemented in C#, C++, C, Java or Brainfuck, if I was an OSS developer I would at least have used some of my grey cells to think about what the real meaning of the SCO FUD and Bill Gate's yakking on about Microsoft patents being in OSS. If Mono ever get's to the point that it or applications built with it threaten any part of Microsoft's server or client market you can be sure that MS will start, at the very least, a FUD campaign warning of MS patent's being used in those applications, thereby torpedoing the market by frightening PHB's into submission.
Slashdot Mirror
I imagine that given that there are already variations that use names that will get blocked by kiddie protection filters and spam filters that block porno mails, that any attempt by MS to sidestep the domain name of WU will soon be nullified by the same people putting out the current variations.
Although I'm aware that many users simply don't know how to patch their systems often or don't care, I am truly amazed at the sheer number of worms that do manage to get through, no matter what. I am even more surprised at MS' rather clumsy responses every time a worm gets through. Oh well.
If anyone has noticed this is not the first time that SCO has railed against the GPL. In their response to the IBM countersuit, they accused IBM of trying to divert attention away from the "real case" and claimed that IBM should idemnify Linux users and move away from the GPL.
This, in conjunction with today's amazing declaration by that lawyer, says to me that SCO is definitely on an anti-GPL agenda. Why? Perhaps because part of IBM's countersuit is an alleged GPL violation by SCO, and given that SCO threats of trying to gain money by billing Linux users and the strange idea of a binary only licence for Linux is clearly against the GPL, SCO is probably scared that they might very well lose this portion of the case.
It might very well be a ploy by Microsoft using SCO as a proxy to demolish the GPL, and given that the large majority of SCO's FUD has been directed against Linux the signs do tend to point in that direction. But that is something for the DOJ to investigate.
More probable is that it is partly an idea based on some lawyer deciding that SCO has a good case in winning the case on derivative works, mixed in with a clever marketing department deciding to use the suit as a tool to push stocks up.
I do however think that the mainstream press is no longer taking SCO's statements as seriously as they did in the beginning. The sheer volume of SCO press releases and the high level of contradictions within those releases pointing towards a strategy being made up as they go along is boring and irritating even the most anti Linux reporters out there. The statements by SCO especially those relating to Linux (no problem in the beginning , then the 1500 letters, then the threat to sue Linus, then the retraction, then the wierd pricing scheme and the binary licence being compliant with the GPL, then the decalration that the GPL is null and void) might frighten some PHBs and encourage some day traders, but it will wear off as time goes on and people tire of SCO's embarassing craziness in public.
SCO's termination of the Sequent-IBM UNIX System V license is self-effectuating and does not require court approval.
WTF? SCO now no longer needs the law? My gut reaction to this would be that SCO is desperately trying to push up the stock price in the face of the IBM/RH countersuits handed out last week, but on second thoughts I noticed that now SCO has finally named the offending code.
This all boils down to the question of what a derivative work is and whether SCO has any control whatsoever over code bought by IBM. It makes me realise that SCO has a better chance in court than we previously thought.
This is the time for the kernel developers to remove the NUMA and RCU code and get cracking on alternatives.
Diamond Inside!
Note: This is not a positive note about him or his posts, so if you love the guy please forgive me.
I don't know whether the GPL will be properly tested under the current circumstances, as it seems that the US legal system is one where your chances of winning are dependant on so many factors that have no real bearing on the core case, such as lawyer quality and quantity, the attitude of the judge and their mood and a jury who is more often than not in no way qualified to give opinion on highly technical matters such as these.
I do however think Andrew Orlowski is an opinionated man with a personal view of what is right and wrong in this world. There's nothing wrong with that but I noticed quite a while ago that his personal opinion was anything but positive towards things that didn't fit in his opinion and he never seems to even attempt to qualify his statements. His op-ed pieces often take the position that HE is right. Point.
I first took notice of him when he was the Reg's resident Mac writer, and he never failed to write scathing attacks on everything Mac and Apple related, be it horrific reviews of the ibook when it came out or sarcastic criticism of Steve Jobs business plan. While it can be refreshing to not have someone who is a mac zealot reviewing Apple stuff, I would point out that both the ibook and Apple's business plans have been success stories in a generaly bleak IT sector. His comments on OSX would have made you think it was 1996 again and Apple was going to die "any day now".
This piece on the marvels of people in the UK ignoring the law as opposed to people in the states being a bunch of sheep is as ridiculous. He has a point in that traditionally in old world countries the power of the individual has been minimal leading to individuals ignoring it, but he so conveniently ignores the fact that the GPL needs to be seen as legally legitimate, no matter where it is implemented, for it to be taken seriously by businesses.
And that applies to the UK, the US and just about anywhere else where businesses enforce their licences through the legal system.
You're already posted this on just about every single Mac article that's been posted here for a fair amount of time, every time as an AC because you're such a chicken. The real basis of your trouble would be due to using the old Mac OS which wasn't capable of true multitasking, although 20 minutes for 16 MB is either some other problem or else just part of your typical, and very dated, MS troll, fuckwad.
I know it's not very practical to suggest that the 95% of computer users running users switch to another system, but this case is something that could be used for at least a small strike in that area. A letter to the BBC and NYTimes showing, in laymans terms, the fact that with a good distro (all unnessesary ports closed/unneeded daemons off by default/regular security patches by distro maker) there would be a significantly lower chance of something like this happening to the user. Hell, even a letter pointing out the obvious vulnerabilities of Outlook and IE as opposed to Mozilla/Eudora etc would be a good thing.
Red hat made no allegations. They simply filed a put up or shut up filing because it is hurting their business. This rejoinder is typical SCO face (and share price) saving doublespeak. SCO will have to start worrying soon because not only are they now being counter sued by two companies but I would not at all be surprised if SuSE doesn't join in.
Darl is "Dissapointed"
You're right. I was over the top. I've used the Perl package and it was good enough. My main irritation was that it wasn't easy or intuitive via scripting to do remote authentification and copying etc.
Thanks for the info. I tried toolbox.nlm but what I found really frustrating was that one doesn't seem to be able to do remote authentification with it. But for standard tasks it's actually quite ok.
I was let go for incompetence??? And you talk about trolls???
After having just spent about one year doing Netware admin, I must say that this is good news. The Netware console is so primitive, that there were numerous times when I would have loved being able to have plain old Bash around for simple things like file copying, scripts etc.
The theatrics and plain, blatant, obvious abuse of the "little man" by anyone with a fair amount of money is stunning. I compare a number of things:
Today on slashdot, there was an article on the 20 year old left wing loudmouth who gets a year in jail for linking to a website with bombmaking instructions while the despotic bastard CEO of SCO can make claims and threats about a computer operating system while offering no evidence whatsoever and not only get away with it, but also make a fair amount of money at the same time.
Compare the above to an article in the Washington Post about gangland killings in Washington DC, where gang members, who are all armed and are all involved in criminal activities are hardly prosecuted and the case of Germany, where a legal injunction forced SCO to withdraw it's claims in that country, completely.
I personally think that whatever happens to Linux in the USA in terms of SCO being able to legally enforce payment of licences, those will have no effect outside the USA and I will personally piss in my pants laughing when SCO attempts to do some enforcing in the EU.
Don't worry about it. Given the cluelessness and total lack of vision in solving any of the country's problems as evidnced by the current Bundesrat, I think that switzerland will be forced to join the EU within the next ten years.
Considering that his life will be fucked from now on- imagine trying to find a job after his sentence, he would be better served in fleeing the USA to mexico or canada and requesting political asylum in Brazil, France, Sweden or any country that will respect the fact that he has been heavily sentenced for youthful idiocy.
I agree that most people with a technical background will feel somehow disturbed by this concept of non finite time. Time is something that most civilisations have held dear for millenia as it provides a backbone of structure to the orderly progression of our society and lives. Even our languages have large parts of them devoted to time. What occured to me though, is that all our measurments of time are based on events and sequences thereof - Sunrise, midday, sunset, the arms of a clock moving around a dial, etc. For us, it seems, we have no concept of time itself.
An interesting collolary can be found in the Hopi language of the Hopi indians. As far as I can tell, their language has no concept of time as we know it in ours and seems to perceive everything in their worldview as in a constant state of change.
I agree that the Mig-25 is not the state of the art and would be at a loss in a dogfight, but my point was about the pilots, not the aircraft. But, as i said in a post lower down, the Mig-31, which succeded the Mig-25 has done away with most of these problems. It has been exported to China and could theoretically see use there in some war with Taiwan.
For the record, I misquoted the story. Here's a link.
I quote: "Gulf War Experience -
Did you know that a MiG-25PD recorded the only Iraqi air-to-air kill of the Gulf War? It dropped an F-18C on the first night of the war--then went on to fire another missile at an A-6 and buzz an A-7, all while avoiding escorting F-14s and F-15s.
An isolated incident? How about the single Iraqi Foxbat-E that eluded eight sweeping F-15s then tangled with two EF-111As, firing three missiles at the Ravens and chasing them off station. Unfortunately, the Ravens were supporting an F-15E strike, and the EF-111's retreat led to the loss of one of the Strike Eagles to a SAM. Oh BTW, the Foxbat easily avoided interception and returned safely to base.
There's more. When F-15 pilots were fighting for the chance to fly sweeps east of Baghdad late in the war, itching for a chance to get a shot at an Iraqi running for Iran, they weren't expecting the fight that a pair of Foxbats put up. Two Foxbats approached a pair of F-15s, fired missiles before the Eagles could get off shots (the missiles were evaded by the Eagles), then outran those two Eagles, four Sparrows and two Sidewinders fired back at them. Two more Eagles maneuvered to cut the Foxbat's off from their base (four more Eagles tried, but were unable to effect an intercept), and four more Sparrows were expended in vain trying to drop the Foxbats.
The Iraqis had a total of twelve MiG-25PDs at the beginning of the war, of which maybe half were operational at any given time. Imagine what trouble they would have caused if there had been more. The Foxbats, when well flown, proved capable of engaging allied fighters and avoiding them at will. Only the limitations of their weapons proved a problem."
A link to a movie of the kulbit. I have no idea how useful this is combat, but it is amazing to watch.
That is probably right, I don't know. I just wonder why western aircraft have never displayed similar manouvers at airshows. Most of what I've read claims that there is usually a lot of envy and nitpicking directed towards the Su-27 and later variants at airshows in order to bolster other manufacturers aircraft, and to be honest, I've never heard of any other aircraft performing the kulbit apart from the thrust vectored Su-37 and Su-30MKI variants.
I agree that those are airshow manouvers and probably not of much use in a real dogfight, but they do definitely point to the extreme agility of the plane. As I said, and the point I was trying to make is that the pilot is the key. If the pilot is one of the current crop of Russian pilots for example, who fly so few hours a year that it borders on being dangerous, I doubt they would do much good even if they were flying F-15's, F-22's or JSF's.
As for your comment on the Mig-25, that isn't strictly correct. The Mig-25 redlined at mach 2.8. It had engine control problems at that speed and there was a danger of the engines running out of control. This happened in Mig-25R crossover flights over Israel in 1973 when it was being chased by souped up F-4's and the plane moved up to Mach 3 and after landing in Egypt, had to have its engines replaced. The Mig-25 is no longer in service in Russia in any case, as it has long been replaced by the far more capable Mig-31 (more powerful engines stable at high speed, much higher range, IFR capabilities, lighter and stronger airframe, and an enourmous fixed antenna radar) which has also been exported to China.
Noting that MS is afraid of being sued on pirated code in open source and that SCO is using exactly the same argument is interesting...
By the time this thing ever gets into the air the only probable foes that it will ever face will be either SU-27 derivates or Mig-29 derivates, both of which cost far less than the F-22.
In pure features the Su-27 is an amazing plane. Anyone who has ever seen the Su-27 do the cobra manouver or the thrust vectored Su-30MKI or Su-35 do the 360 degree Kulbit manouver can attest to what these planes can do in close air combat. These are extreme manouvers that western planes cannot do for the simple reason that the engines in western planes receive no air at such high angles of attack and therefore often flame-out or stall. Not only this but the newer radars on the Su-30s and missiles are longer ranging than just about anything the west has with the exception of the F-14's AIM-54 Phoenix. As for stealth, newer Su-30's are coated with radar absorbant paint which reduce the advantages that a dedicated stealth fighter such as the F-22 would have in BVR combat.
In the hands of a good pilot I very much doubt that the Su-30 would automatically lose in combat. That however is the crux of the matter: Pilot training.
This has always been something that has been much better in the west with advanced simulators, top gun style combat training and long hours of aircraft experience. It is and has been a fallacy to believe that more modern high tech will always win the battle. It is almost always the quality of the pilots that decided the battle.
There is a good example of an air combat situation atht happened in the first gulf war. The only western plane to be shot down in air combat was an F-18 on an attack mission that was intercepted by an obviously experienced Iraqi Mig-25 pilot. The Mig-25 was already obsolete then in terms of technology but the sheer speed of the plane (Mach 2.8+) is unmatched by any other fighter. The Mig-25 went on after shooting down the F-18 to buzz an EF-111 raven that was providing ECM for the mission causing the raven to have to manouver to avoid the incoming missiles and drop back from the attack mission which was then unprotected by ECM and subsequently another F-18 was shot down by a SAM. No less than two F-15's and two F-16's all attempted to intercept the Mig-25, two of them firing missiles, but the Mig-25 used it's tremendous speed advantage to easily avoid the interceptors and reach its base.
This shows what a good plane , not necesserally the utterly most modern, can do in the hands of a good pilot. IMO the F-22 is an overexpensive white elephant.
The man who wrote O'Reilly's "Practical C Programming". Good on him, and his writing style isn't bad either.
I haven't used ssh over a cellphone but I can immediately see the advantages of being able to do so. While VNC and Windows Terminal services are surely easier to use, in general, with the omnidirectional toggle switch on most phones, the bandwidth is a pig and the small screen obviously doesn't make it easier to use. This would be definitely an emergeancy tool for those services. ssh however, being more lightweight would be very useful for sysadmins on call or other types of similar work.
What would be a real boon without having to tote around a thumbboard or other similar paraphenalia would be an ssh client on the phone where certain keys or kombinations of keys were mapped to often used CLI commands or where the Nokia (and many similar phones) menu key in combination with the omnidirectional toggle could access the commonly used commands. An example:
Start ssh session
menu key->toggle key to "netstat" (optionally with switches)-> menu key accept->phone displays network info.
While I personally couldn't give a stuff if something is implemented in C#, C++, C, Java or Brainfuck, if I was an OSS developer I would at least have used some of my grey cells to think about what the real meaning of the SCO FUD and Bill Gate's yakking on about Microsoft patents being in OSS. If Mono ever get's to the point that it or applications built with it threaten any part of Microsoft's server or client market you can be sure that MS will start, at the very least, a FUD campaign warning of MS patent's being used in those applications, thereby torpedoing the market by frightening PHB's into submission.