It will be up to a judge to make that definition. In the environment we live in today you might find that a search of personal effects -- especially in a federal target area -- is considered reasonable.
And your still employed? If the company policy is clear and you are abusing a corporate resource (i.e.: using their bandwidth for non-business use) you should be out of there.
Similar to if you made long distance calls on your company phone for non-work purposes. Perhaps a warning but then a "goodbye" is justified. The company is tracking every long distance call you make -- just as they track every web site you visit.
Since when? IIS is not neccessary for TS -- the advanced client for TS works on an IIS page but you only need one web server which can allow you to access any TS server in your environment -- in other words don't run IIS on your Data Center server -- it doesn't need it.
Frankly by this logic I shouldn't invest in any dist. of Linux made in Germany. After all Hitler was from Germany, Germany was a major site of the Holocost and as such Germany is evil and always will be.
Perhaps your boss should inquire of you why you should ask your bank to support your 1% of the desktop... i.e.: why not do what businesses do -- support your business requirement.
If your incapable of doing it internally I'm sure their are other admins that could be hired to do it or consulting companies that would be happy to.
on W2K or NT type "ipconfig" and "ipconfig/?" if you need the parameters to it
on previous versions of windows try "winipconfig" and it's graphical...
Of course, real men use the registry directly (very easy).
still easier -- amazing, your willing to edit a file in Linux but not the command line in W2K/NT -- seems like you never mastered the OS but moved on to another alternative.
if you let every W2k user in as root -- fire all the old ones.
That's the same logic that would have you rolling out Linux with every user as root -- it is a huge mistake to roll out any os when the tools exist to deploy it the right way.
Umm... about 6.5 years ago many university Mac labs were completely overrun -- shut down -- because of fast spreading viruses that moved like wildfire. I remember watching a lab shut down within 15 minutes (25 machines). Cleaned by the next day and then shut down again in another 15 minutes.
The Mac is not invulnerable. Far from it. Webstar hasn't been hacked yet -- congratulations! That's good news and the developers deserve thanks.
Of course if the Mac were in any way a significant platform for web serving it might make more of an impact. Right now it isn't nor does it look like it will be in the near future. As a matter of fact it is an extremely tiny server platform.
The reasons that the Mac is a marginal platform for servers are many but center around a few significant facts. In the past they have not been built as true servers that can compete on a price/performance module -- not the cpu but the entire system. The development platforms for open source (Linux, etc.) and NT (IIS/ASP/etc.) implementations are easy, powerful and productive -- the Mac is not really superior and in some areas doesn't come close to the base functionality of either Linux or NT/2000.
Frankly the Mac is a marginal system. Always has been. May always be. To move away from marginality it needs to present a compelling technical ability (i.e.: price/performance must soundly trounce the competition), an ability to deliver solutions swiftly and/or an ability to deliver web solutions that no other platform can do.
The argument comes back to -- I can have the cadillac office product for the same or less than the Open Source alternative -- why did I want the Open Source one (business reason please cause that's what drives the bottom line)?
Ok.. lets' add that up then... Three days of training to be consistent for 95 users -- average class size of 15 let's say -- which means we have 21 days of training we need. At $75 an hour that runs to $12,600 plus travel and expenses for the training. Add in $95,000 for the lost work time (average 1,000 per user in lost time to training -- probably quite fair on average) and the total cost of an alternative office suite is only $107,600 total.
At best you end up with a break even in the best of times. Not only that you get the opportunity to contribute to open source! Great, you too can waste your time contributing to a profitless venture while watching your real business dry up.
but for another reason altogether -- right now if you asusm 95% of the world is based on MS Office so 95% of your potential employees knows it -- so you need to train 5% of your potential staff.
The alternative -- an open office product -- will require training 99% of users at a cost of 1,000 to 2,000 per user for the class plus 2 to 5 working days (add another 1,000 for a low estimate. On this model -- the free product cost about 2,000 to 3,000. Sounds like $600 or so for full MS Office is cheap.
Take it out further -- if you are a 100 person company (user base for office product suite) this means MS Office costs 100 x 600 -- $60,000 plus 5 users out to training (those not already trained) $15,000 -- which means that MS Office cost you $75,000 -- not a small chunk of change. Of course the alternative will cost you $297,000 and the skills are not usefull for your workers in later life.
Of course this all assumes that you will be able to find the training -- not an easy task.
What about the savings in hardware? I'd argue their is little to none now-adays. A business would be foolish to buy less than 500mhz machines which are more than adequate for W2K/XP today. I'm writing this from a 350mhz box and it flies quite nicely with W2K. Kinda slow when running StarOffice under a default X install though (Redhat).
The OS install price and support price are arguably not an issue today either -- most 100 user offices will have at least one mission critical application requiring a windows system -- so your on the hook for licensing anyway (read it carefully...).
Choose an open office product? Risk your job for what appears to be a negative payback in the business world? Why are we advocating this again?
by a classical defintion -- first release of Netscape was technically challenged. No release of Mozilla exists -- it exists on beta only. The time since the last code release of Netscape is growing ever longer.
It is a disaster today. Until they *RELEASE* a product they have no product. Waiting for perfection is not the answer -- MS does at lease one thing right -- they ship.
Re:Have you read the Yahoo! Message Boards?
on
Handling the Loads
·
· Score: 1
Not only that -- but don't they do significantly more volume than Slashdot?
Yep, The Washington Post was and that explains the cache corruption that thousands hit up against (i.e.: reading the wrong story when they clicked on a front page link -- completely unrelated).
Slashdot Mirror
and you have the right to start you own business.
You don't have the right to demand that you have a job from cradle to grave in the USA. Nor should you.
It will be up to a judge to make that definition. In the environment we live in today you might find that a search of personal effects -- especially in a federal target area -- is considered reasonable.
And your still employed? If the company policy is clear and you are abusing a corporate resource (i.e.: using their bandwidth for non-business use) you should be out of there.
Similar to if you made long distance calls on your company phone for non-work purposes. Perhaps a warning but then a "goodbye" is justified. The company is tracking every long distance call you make -- just as they track every web site you visit.
Partially right:
NT4 TSE had 256 colors.
W2K TS supports auto printer and drive mapping (drive mapping is via a tool provided for free from MS in the resource kit...)
XP sounds like it makes Citrix that much more marginal....
Since when? IIS is not neccessary for TS -- the advanced client for TS works on an IIS page but you only need one web server which can allow you to access any TS server in your environment -- in other words don't run IIS on your Data Center server -- it doesn't need it.
NO -- Microsoft is a corporation who's primary job is to generate value for it's shareholders.
Nothing more. Nothing less.
And a fairly efficient one at that.
Can you say moral high horse?
Frankly by this logic I shouldn't invest in any dist. of Linux made in Germany. After all Hitler was from Germany, Germany was a major site of the Holocost and as such Germany is evil and always will be.
Funny logic.
Perhaps if a viable alternative existed it would be use.
Stop whining and produce real usable software -- then Linux will truly have a slot in the market.
Never ascribe to malice...
Me thinks you give MS way too much credit -- or else your acknowledging that the normal Linux user is much to small minded.
I think you will find that it is not 50% of the design -- it is how it happened in 99% of cases and how it stays.
Your choice -- either they are an evil empire or their human.
Perhaps your boss should inquire of you why you should ask your bank to support your 1% of the desktop... i.e.: why not do what businesses do -- support your business requirement.
If your incapable of doing it internally I'm sure their are other admins that could be hired to do it or consulting companies that would be happy to.
open a command prompt...
/?" if you need the parameters to it
on W2K or NT type "ipconfig" and "ipconfig
on previous versions of windows try "winipconfig" and it's graphical...
Of course, real men use the registry directly (very easy).
still easier -- amazing, your willing to edit a file in Linux but not the command line in W2K/NT -- seems like you never mastered the OS but moved on to another alternative.
What system are you on? X is more unstable in 90% of the install's I've seen than Windows 3.1
Because they did fix it -- located bug and fixed it. Where's the issue here?
if you let every W2k user in as root -- fire all the old ones.
That's the same logic that would have you rolling out Linux with every user as root -- it is a huge mistake to roll out any os when the tools exist to deploy it the right way.
Can you say Terminal Services for W2K? It works! And is every bit as effective!
At least their not Unix wanna-be's who believe open source is the "force".
It's not religion -- if it is for you I'd suggest you find a life. Used to be buy a life but sadly few can afford them anymore.
Umm... about 6.5 years ago many university Mac labs were completely overrun -- shut down -- because of fast spreading viruses that moved like wildfire. I remember watching a lab shut down within 15 minutes (25 machines). Cleaned by the next day and then shut down again in another 15 minutes.
The Mac is not invulnerable. Far from it. Webstar hasn't been hacked yet -- congratulations! That's good news and the developers deserve thanks.
Of course if the Mac were in any way a significant platform for web serving it might make more of an impact. Right now it isn't nor does it look like it will be in the near future. As a matter of fact it is an extremely tiny server platform.
The reasons that the Mac is a marginal platform for servers are many but center around a few significant facts. In the past they have not been built as true servers that can compete on a price/performance module -- not the cpu but the entire system. The development platforms for open source (Linux, etc.) and NT (IIS/ASP/etc.) implementations are easy, powerful and productive -- the Mac is not really superior and in some areas doesn't come close to the base functionality of either Linux or NT/2000.
Frankly the Mac is a marginal system. Always has been. May always be. To move away from marginality it needs to present a compelling technical ability (i.e.: price/performance must soundly trounce the competition), an ability to deliver solutions swiftly and/or an ability to deliver web solutions that no other platform can do.
Doesn't look good for the Mac.
? Upgrade costs are never what the retail costs for purchase are...
Perhaps if you said:
Since 1994:
Office 6.0: $60,000
Office 95: $20,000
Office 97: $20,000
Office 2000: $20,000
Office XP: $20,000
Total: $140,000
The argument comes back to -- I can have the cadillac office product for the same or less than the Open Source alternative -- why did I want the Open Source one (business reason please cause that's what drives the bottom line)?
Actually when I hear Newsforge I think of a forge -- used of old to create iron and steal in the heat of the forge... you get the idea.
Foregery may have a similar root but the use of Forge here seems pretty strong -- a good name if ever I've seen one.
At best you end up with a break even in the best of times. Not only that you get the opportunity to contribute to open source! Great, you too can waste your time contributing to a profitless venture while watching your real business dry up.
Exchange is NOT a pop server. It is not an IMAP server -- it is much , much more by design.
Good design or bad? I don't know. But it is different.
The alternative -- an open office product -- will require training 99% of users at a cost of 1,000 to 2,000 per user for the class plus 2 to 5 working days (add another 1,000 for a low estimate. On this model -- the free product cost about 2,000 to 3,000. Sounds like $600 or so for full MS Office is cheap.
Take it out further -- if you are a 100 person company (user base for office product suite) this means MS Office costs 100 x 600 -- $60,000 plus 5 users out to training (those not already trained) $15,000 -- which means that MS Office cost you $75,000 -- not a small chunk of change. Of course the alternative will cost you $297,000 and the skills are not usefull for your workers in later life.
Of course this all assumes that you will be able to find the training -- not an easy task.
What about the savings in hardware? I'd argue their is little to none now-adays. A business would be foolish to buy less than 500mhz machines which are more than adequate for W2K/XP today. I'm writing this from a 350mhz box and it flies quite nicely with W2K. Kinda slow when running StarOffice under a default X install though (Redhat).
The OS install price and support price are arguably not an issue today either -- most 100 user offices will have at least one mission critical application requiring a windows system -- so your on the hook for licensing anyway (read it carefully...).
Choose an open office product? Risk your job for what appears to be a negative payback in the business world? Why are we advocating this again?
It is a disaster today. Until they *RELEASE* a product they have no product. Waiting for perfection is not the answer -- MS does at lease one thing right -- they ship.
Not only that -- but don't they do significantly more volume than Slashdot?
Yep, The Washington Post was and that explains the cache corruption that thousands hit up against (i.e.: reading the wrong story when they clicked on a front page link -- completely unrelated).