Hmmm, your logic (if you call it that) is interesting. I can't think of anythiong myself? Well considering that was my post, I DID think of it myself, moron. And since you chose to repeat the exact same thing someone else did, I don't see the point in wasting my breath on the ignorant.:)
The rule that 95% of everything is shit also applies to the human race; they can't all be rocket scientists and naturally someone is going to polarize the morons versus the educated... and their are always going to be alot more morons out there.:)
It's obviously an effort to show that they lack intelligence to use even the consumer items that they have purchased. Somewhat ironic.
A more proper show would be to point out how a recent study showed how mostly breeders were voting for Bush and a separate study that showing having children can cause your IQ to drop by 20 points.
Or how about the study that showed that religion and IQ are negatively correlated? I only point this out due to the fact that so many religious people vote for Dubya.
The rule that 95% of everything is shit also applies to the human race; they can't all be rocket scientists and naturally someone is going to polarize the morons versus the educated... and their are always going to be alot more morons out there.:)
It's obviously an effort to show that they lack intelligence to use even the consumer items that they have purchased. Somewhat ironic.
A more proper show would be to point out how a recent study showed how mostly breeders were voting for Bush and a separate study that showing having children can cause your IQ to drop by 20 points.
Or how about the study that showed that religion and IQ are negatively correlated? I only point this out due to the fact that so many religious people vote for Dubya.
The rule that 95% of everything is shit also applies to the human race; they can't all be rocket scientists and naturally someone is going to polarize the morons versus the educated... and their are always going to be alot more morons out there.:)
Considering how many average Americans vote out of raw emotion anyway, expecting them to intelligently dissect the issues is a little beyond their ability. Most of them can't even program the VCR.
And considering the fact that the winner will get to pick 3 supreme court justices (hence setting the tone for laws in our country for the next 20 years), it's no wonder this has degraded into a schoolyard brawl.
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
I see evolution has left you behind. How sad. When you learn what your brain is for, you may realize that Microsoft is about making money... EVENTUALLY!X-box, Microsoft games, CRM, they are all in the red still. Oh you thought red ink was for profits? Come down from the tree sometime monkeyboy, I have a few trciks to show you.
As for it taking too much time, wouldn't creating a new gaming platform take too much time, wouldn't cvreating web TV take too much time? I can go on and on about how your logic fails and yet those neurons of yours still wouldn't fire. Truly amazing.
The fact still remains...
a) Microsoft wants to eat it's own dogfood. b) Microsoft has the ability to eat it's own dogfood c) Cost would not prevent them from eating their dogfood d) Lack of profit would not prevent them from eating their own dogfood e) Their dogfood tastes like shit
So simple even a grub eating, flea picking, knuckle jockey like yourself should be able to figure out... in time. I don't expect miracles after all:)
Your right. It's near 17% when you consider that Netscape is now based on Mozilla code.
And this survey is based on several sources, not just their own stats. I can tell you as a developer for a Microsoft vendor where 98% of our traffic is directly from the Microsoft employees, 5% of Microsoft employees use Mozilla.
So if it's that high even on the MS campus, you can easily expect that 15% elsewhere.
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
Your logic (if that's what you call it) can be applied to yourself in the wrong dept.
Microsoft researchs it's companies well, especially companies that supply it with tech services. The company that they are reselling web hosting through uses only Windows and IIS; it's PART OF THEIR CONTRACT! A contract is a piece of paper that is legally binding in a court of law. You still with me?
They do this with ALL vendors who supply Microsoft with technical services.... ALL VENDORS! Lots of people are willing to supply them with services only on their OS and using only their tools. Microsoft as a client can be a big boost top your company.
So why this one exception? Microsoft is very insistent on eating their own dogfood. You said they don't want a server farm but they have several already and it could easily find use when not being DOS'ed. They could easily do this themselves, they could hire someone else to do this. But they allow it.
Face facts. They can't do it or else they would. If they could hire someone to do this with MS products, they would do that in a split second. But they can't because their product can't.
Give it up already and get back to work Bill.
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
Well considering how last time this happened and it was in all the papers saying that Microsoft was running Linux, they tend not to like that sort of thing... I should know, I'm a webdeveloper for a vendor for Microsoft whose offices are right across the street from them in Redmond.
They switched all their hotmail servers off Linux, they switched all others istes off BSD. They want everything Microsoft running on Microsoft products; it's their motto: eat your own dogfood.
So why is their load distribution being handled by Linux systems? Wouldn't they want to eat their own dogfood? They are doing webhosting now and they don't use Linux, Apache, PHP or mysql... so why allow this?
There is only ONE answer. They can't compete. Having a server farm is ideal for lots of projects. Distributed computing, R and D, render farm, etc. Microsoft already has server farms over there... so what's one more?
Face facts, their software is a system hog with too many openings and opportunities for failure. They aren't doing it because they can't do it.
Re:One of the unfortunate things about Apache...
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
And just to make sure your mouth stays shut and you start redirected your shit out of it's regular hole, how about a nice long list of exploits (with actual show of code used to make said exploit work)
Wow. Windows sure looks secure to me... NOT! Surf around, you can use those code samples all day long exploiting Windows machines. Now how about you give me a sample that is current and none of this outdated exploits bullshit; I gave you exploits that work with current versions of XP and Windows Server 2003... you do the same for current Linux installs.
I'll accept silence as the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
Re:One of the unfortunate things about Apache...
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
Yeah... nice try. Using your logic, 500 traffic tickets for Linux would be equivalent to 50 murders by Windows.
Also try to keep in mind that Microsoft is OFTEN told of these exploits 6 months to a year in advance and they STILL remain out in the wild until someone actually builds the tool to take advantage of the exploit. At which point millions of machines must first suffer before they will take care of the problem.
If there were a prize for talking out your ass, you'd win a blue ribbon, baby.
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
Actually, Microsoft has the money to EASILY handle this themselves. But their OS can't handle it. So what does Microsoft do? Spend money on a bunch of Linux machines themselves (which would REALLY look bad) or pay an outside company to do it? Ding ding! You guessed right!
The fact remains that Microsoft could NOT do this with their own OS. If they could, they would have by now.
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
Yes. LOAD distribution. Notice they don't rely on Windiows servers for that. Why not Windows Servers? Because they can't handle the load. Same thing with DDOS attacks and the like... they keep falling back onto Linux.:)
Re:One of the unfortunate things about Apache...
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Microsofts autoupdate was ever so recently running on Linux as well http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=autoupda te.microsoft.com
Re:One of the unfortunate things about Apache...
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
Here you go... check out all those url's ending in Microsoft and then check what they are running:)
Linux on all of them:)
If that's not what you meant and you just want to see a Windows machine running Apache, they are all over the place. Check out www.proclub.com for starters; they're Microsofts health club and they run Apache.
Re:One of the unfortunate things about Apache...
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
An ALERT is not the same thing as a CRITICAL EXPLOIT... duh! Check my wording more carefully next time. If you think an alert is the same thing as a CRITICAL EXPLOIT, then Microsoft has a huge jumpstart on EVERYONE!
Re:One of the unfortunate things about Apache...
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Yep and I can still name 7 for every one of yours. How about Microsoft huh? Everytime a DDOS attack comes, gues who they duck and cover behind? LINUX and APACHE!!!:)
Do a check on Netcraft for *.microsoft.com sometimes and check the first couple hundred servers for what they are running. If IIS is so damn good, how come Microsoft is always duck and covering behind open source?:)
Um... your point? What beginning project DIDN'T start out fragmented and crapped? Are you saying the first version of Windows was polished? Are you saying IIS was perfect from the start?
Compare the final product... I think you'll see why Apache has and always will have the dominant market share.
Re:One of the unfortunate things about Apache...
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Sorry but IIS has more critical exploits in any given month than Apache has all YEAR! Why do you think Apache owns 70% of the web? Microsoft made a push in 2001 but could only get as high as 35%... at which point it tanked back to it's previous high of about 22%
Maximum Apache Security
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Picked up Maximum Apache Security at Apache-Con last year and it has proven very useful. But any Apache administrator worth his salt knows most of this already. I don't see why you say it's fragmented and hard to find.
Well I see what you mean. You want to have user groups with functions assigned to each and then assign people to the user groups, right? Yeah, this is something each programmer has to figure out.
I myself am working on precisely this using PHP and MySQL in a custom content management system for companies so they a company and it's many brtanches and many depts can manage it's website with each dept handling their own part of the site and each branch manager handling their branch, etc etc.
It's not easy but there are easier solutions. Just simplify the hell out of the process and determine the MUST HAVE needs.
Actually, in web development, there is client side coding and server side coding. That which doesn't have to be run on the server, shouldn't. But because most web server people are constantly worried about security, they like to maintain control.
As for a crashing server having you lose where you were, well a crashed client system wil do the same thing... duh. Imagine that, a client crashing? That NEVER happens does it? Quite honestly, I have clients crash FAR MORE than servers... especially when you aren't there maintaining them like your server.
Oh and sorry to tell you but in a side by side comparison by a third party (Oracle), PHP is faster... even when it is on a Windows machine. Do your research.:)
Instead, you issue a set client a series of cues on how it should interact with your server, which handles data processing as well as flow control.
Ok, and how does this differ from web development? With Apache, XML, SSL, etc, web browsers do the same thing:)
Your problems sound more like a problem with the way the tool was built and the database was optimized. Can't really blame that on web development. And as I was saying, this is NOT THE WAY TO GO, if you plan on building desktop apps, but if you want something to be accessed by people all over the place and be database driven, you still have yet to convince me.
As for using ASP, that explains your problem right there. That stuff is a nightmare of crap. Should have used PHP:)
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm, your logic (if you call it that) is interesting. I can't think of anythiong myself? Well considering that was my post, I DID think of it myself, moron. And since you chose to repeat the exact same thing someone else did, I don't see the point in wasting my breath on the ignorant. :)
The rule that 95% of everything is shit also applies to the human race; they can't all be rocket scientists and naturally someone is going to polarize the morons versus the educated... and their are always going to be alot more morons out there. :)
It's obviously an effort to show that they lack intelligence to use even the consumer items that they have purchased. Somewhat ironic.
:)
A more proper show would be to point out how a recent study showed how mostly breeders were voting for Bush and a separate study that showing having children can cause your IQ to drop by 20 points.
Or how about the study that showed that religion and IQ are negatively correlated? I only point this out due to the fact that so many religious people vote for Dubya.
The rule that 95% of everything is shit also applies to the human race; they can't all be rocket scientists and naturally someone is going to polarize the morons versus the educated... and their are always going to be alot more morons out there.
It's obviously an effort to show that they lack intelligence to use even the consumer items that they have purchased. Somewhat ironic.
:)
A more proper show would be to point out how a recent study showed how mostly breeders were voting for Bush and a separate study that showing having children can cause your IQ to drop by 20 points.
Or how about the study that showed that religion and IQ are negatively correlated? I only point this out due to the fact that so many religious people vote for Dubya.
The rule that 95% of everything is shit also applies to the human race; they can't all be rocket scientists and naturally someone is going to polarize the morons versus the educated... and their are always going to be alot more morons out there.
Considering how many average Americans vote out of raw emotion anyway, expecting them to intelligently dissect the issues is a little beyond their ability. Most of them can't even program the VCR.
And considering the fact that the winner will get to pick 3 supreme court justices (hence setting the tone for laws in our country for the next 20 years), it's no wonder this has degraded into a schoolyard brawl.
I see evolution has left you behind. How sad. When you learn what your brain is for, you may realize that Microsoft is about making money... EVENTUALLY!X-box, Microsoft games, CRM, they are all in the red still. Oh you thought red ink was for profits? Come down from the tree sometime monkeyboy, I have a few trciks to show you.
:)
As for it taking too much time, wouldn't creating a new gaming platform take too much time, wouldn't cvreating web TV take too much time? I can go on and on about how your logic fails and yet those neurons of yours still wouldn't fire. Truly amazing.
The fact still remains...
a) Microsoft wants to eat it's own dogfood.
b) Microsoft has the ability to eat it's own dogfood
c) Cost would not prevent them from eating their dogfood
d) Lack of profit would not prevent them from eating their own dogfood
e) Their dogfood tastes like shit
So simple even a grub eating, flea picking, knuckle jockey like yourself should be able to figure out... in time. I don't expect miracles after all
Your right. It's near 17% when you consider that Netscape is now based on Mozilla code.
And this survey is based on several sources, not just their own stats. I can tell you as a developer for a Microsoft vendor where 98% of our traffic is directly from the Microsoft employees, 5% of Microsoft employees use Mozilla.
So if it's that high even on the MS campus, you can easily expect that 15% elsewhere.
Your logic (if that's what you call it) can be applied to yourself in the wrong dept.
Microsoft researchs it's companies well, especially companies that supply it with tech services. The company that they are reselling web hosting through uses only Windows and IIS; it's PART OF THEIR CONTRACT! A contract is a piece of paper that is legally binding in a court of law. You still with me?
They do this with ALL vendors who supply Microsoft with technical services.... ALL VENDORS! Lots of people are willing to supply them with services only on their OS and using only their tools. Microsoft as a client can be a big boost top your company.
So why this one exception? Microsoft is very insistent on eating their own dogfood. You said they don't want a server farm but they have several already and it could easily find use when not being DOS'ed. They could easily do this themselves, they could hire someone else to do this. But they allow it.
Face facts. They can't do it or else they would. If they could hire someone to do this with MS products, they would do that in a split second. But they can't because their product can't.
Give it up already and get back to work Bill.
Well considering how last time this happened and it was in all the papers saying that Microsoft was running Linux, they tend not to like that sort of thing... I should know, I'm a webdeveloper for a vendor for Microsoft whose offices are right across the street from them in Redmond.
They switched all their hotmail servers off Linux, they switched all others istes off BSD. They want everything Microsoft running on Microsoft products; it's their motto: eat your own dogfood.
So why is their load distribution being handled by Linux systems? Wouldn't they want to eat their own dogfood? They are doing webhosting now and they don't use Linux, Apache, PHP or mysql... so why allow this?
There is only ONE answer. They can't compete. Having a server farm is ideal for lots of projects. Distributed computing, R and D, render farm, etc. Microsoft already has server farms over there... so what's one more?
Face facts, their software is a system hog with too many openings and opportunities for failure. They aren't doing it because they can't do it.
And just to make sure your mouth stays shut and you start redirected your shit out of it's regular hole, how about a nice long list of exploits (with actual show of code used to make said exploit work)
/ index2.htmlB V4/ie_unpatch ed/index.html
http://www.malware.com/
http://www.malware.com
http://www.safecenter.net/UMBRELLAWE
Wow. Windows sure looks secure to me... NOT! Surf around, you can use those code samples all day long exploiting Windows machines. Now how about you give me a sample that is current and none of this outdated exploits bullshit; I gave you exploits that work with current versions of XP and Windows Server 2003... you do the same for current Linux installs.
I'll accept silence as the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
Yeah... nice try. Using your logic, 500 traffic tickets for Linux would be equivalent to 50 murders by Windows.
Also try to keep in mind that Microsoft is OFTEN told of these exploits 6 months to a year in advance and they STILL remain out in the wild until someone actually builds the tool to take advantage of the exploit. At which point millions of machines must first suffer before they will take care of the problem.
If there were a prize for talking out your ass, you'd win a blue ribbon, baby.
Actually, Microsoft has the money to EASILY handle this themselves. But their OS can't handle it. So what does Microsoft do? Spend money on a bunch of Linux machines themselves (which would REALLY look bad) or pay an outside company to do it? Ding ding! You guessed right!
The fact remains that Microsoft could NOT do this with their own OS. If they could, they would have by now.
Yes. LOAD distribution. Notice they don't rely on Windiows servers for that. Why not Windows Servers? Because they can't handle the load. Same thing with DDOS attacks and the like... they keep falling back onto Linux. :)
Microsofts autoupdate was ever so recently running on Linux as well http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=autoupda te.microsoft.com
Here you go... check out all those url's ending in Microsoft and then check what they are running :)
:)
Linux on all of them
If that's not what you meant and you just want to see a Windows machine running Apache, they are all over the place. Check out www.proclub.com for starters; they're Microsofts health club and they run Apache.
An ALERT is not the same thing as a CRITICAL EXPLOIT... duh! Check my wording more carefully next time. If you think an alert is the same thing as a CRITICAL EXPLOIT, then Microsoft has a huge jumpstart on EVERYONE!
Yep and I can still name 7 for every one of yours. How about Microsoft huh? Everytime a DDOS attack comes, gues who they duck and cover behind? LINUX and APACHE!!! :)
:)
Do a check on Netcraft for *.microsoft.com sometimes and check the first couple hundred servers for what they are running. If IIS is so damn good, how come Microsoft is always duck and covering behind open source?
Sorry... in Microsoft FUD deflection mode
Um... your point? What beginning project DIDN'T start out fragmented and crapped? Are you saying the first version of Windows was polished? Are you saying IIS was perfect from the start?
Compare the final product... I think you'll see why Apache has and always will have the dominant market share.
Sorry but IIS has more critical exploits in any given month than Apache has all YEAR! Why do you think Apache owns 70% of the web? Microsoft made a push in 2001 but could only get as high as 35%... at which point it tanked back to it's previous high of about 22%
Picked up Maximum Apache Security at Apache-Con last year and it has proven very useful. But any Apache administrator worth his salt knows most of this already. I don't see why you say it's fragmented and hard to find.
Well I see what you mean. You want to have user groups with functions assigned to each and then assign people to the user groups, right? Yeah, this is something each programmer has to figure out.
I myself am working on precisely this using PHP and MySQL in a custom content management system for companies so they a company and it's many brtanches and many depts can manage it's website with each dept handling their own part of the site and each branch manager handling their branch, etc etc.
It's not easy but there are easier solutions. Just simplify the hell out of the process and determine the MUST HAVE needs.
Well you should always use the tool that fits the need best.
And all web apps can scale, have limited permissions and you can build the GUI to look however you want it to look.
Actually, in web development, there is client side coding and server side coding. That which doesn't have to be run on the server, shouldn't. But because most web server people are constantly worried about security, they like to maintain control.
:)
As for a crashing server having you lose where you were, well a crashed client system wil do the same thing... duh. Imagine that, a client crashing? That NEVER happens does it? Quite honestly, I have clients crash FAR MORE than servers... especially when you aren't there maintaining them like your server.
Oh and sorry to tell you but in a side by side comparison by a third party (Oracle), PHP is faster... even when it is on a Windows machine. Do your research.
Instead, you issue a set client a series of cues on how it should interact with your server, which handles data processing as well as flow control.
:)
:)
Ok, and how does this differ from web development? With Apache, XML, SSL, etc, web browsers do the same thing
Your problems sound more like a problem with the way the tool was built and the database was optimized. Can't really blame that on web development. And as I was saying, this is NOT THE WAY TO GO, if you plan on building desktop apps, but if you want something to be accessed by people all over the place and be database driven, you still have yet to convince me.
As for using ASP, that explains your problem right there. That stuff is a nightmare of crap. Should have used PHP