Windows server is still a weak envrironment that needs lots of support to keep running
As someone who builds and maintains Windows server environments professionally, I would have agreed with you about 10 years ago, but now not so much. Really the only two heartburns are older installations still in operation well past their EOL date, and forced Windows updates.
To be honest, nothing would give me more satisfaction to say that Windows Server is dogshit, but it really isn't. Stability and resource usage has improved drastically since Server 2012.
Windows' *own* scripts often fail. I had the pleasure of migrating a SBS2003 system to SBS2011. I had to intervene and do some of the migration scripts' jobs manually, bcause they kept falling over. The logs told me the failure point (e.g. line 118), but not *why*.
Listen, I've been using Linux since kernel 1.2.13 on slackware 3. I could regale you with stories about how debian refused to take input from a PS/2 keyboard after a dist-upgrade, or how redhat wouldn't install grub properly so would fail to even boot after installing, or how it was a real pain in the ass trying to get a parallel port zip drive to work in any distribution, but I won't, because I understand that citing a software failure migrating a 14 year old system to a 7 year old system (SBS 2011 was released in 2010) isn't very helpful in depicting the state of the software today.
The vast majority of systems administration work doesn't require or can't be automated, because in 2017 the things that needed to be automated are already done by the system itself.
There are many Microsoft "engineers" simply due to Windows being easier to use, but many of those people couldn't script themselves out of a paper-bag.
Why do you say this like it's a bad thing? Why is being easier to use bad? Why should I, as an administrator, have to script **anything**? Why do I need to script to get file shares, directory services, or email to work? Why the actual fuck should I have to write a script to bring up a NIC, or to install a printer, or to setup a client access VPN?
It's 2017 dude, the mouse was invented 53 fucking years ago. For some things a CLI is great, but for the vast majority of systems administration work a GUI is superior.
No, it really isn't. The universe is math. Nature is math. You may not think it is because we've adapted and evolved to intuit a lot of it, but almost every problem is mathematical at its core.
When the problem being solved is mathematical in nature, you're going to need to know some math, or else you're not going to be able to solve it, be it on a piece of paper or in code.
Huge waste of resources backporting when it would be easier to just upgrade to the latest kernels. Either way you have to test them, so why bother backporting?
Do you buy a Dell or an HP to use Windows, not Dell _!Windows, or HP %!Win!_Pop. Why does System76 feel they need to "own" the user experience to such a degree? Do people buy System76 machines to run Linux, or to run Pop!_OS?
All Shield TVs used to come with a controller. What they're doing now is dropping the $60 controller but only giving you a $20 break on the price. Not worth it.
As a Shield TV owner I'm really happy with the quality and performance of the hardware. The problem is the damn this is crippled by only running Android TV so can only get Android TV apps without much fiddling, and generally speaking there's not a lot of software available for it.
Bullshit semantics are bullshit when their claims of durability cannot stand up to a longer warranty, which is more than justified when most people are forced into a 2-year cellular contract.
Business doesn't work that way. You have development costs, capital costs, and marginal costs. In aggregate, you need to be able to cover all these costs to have a viable business, but an individual sale only has to cover the marginal costs to be profitable.
No. This is what the modern business industry wants you to believe. It's all smoke and mirrors to justify millions of MBAs, CPAs, financial lawyers, analysts, etc. jobs. All of this is crap. If you make more money then you spend, you are profitable. I don't give a shit about CAPEX, OPEX, maginal this, derivitive that, it's all crap. If you make more than you spend you are profitable.
I thought Tesla was profitable. Looking at their financial statements has made me realize they're not. They are selling their products at a loss.
To do that, you need to find a way to price differentiate, and convince enough of your customers to pay a premium.
No. That is one way to do it. The other way would be to not sell your products at a loss so that they cover your costs.
You say that as if it would be sold at the lower price were it not true.
If Tesla can sell the same hardware at different price points and still make a profit then the higher price point is simply profiteering. I would rather they sell it at a fair price.
Do you also think it's wrong that a software company charges a business for each user, even though they may only provide a single image to copy from?
This is not analogous, but I will answer. If you sell software I think it's fair to come up with your own business model on how it's licensed. Per site, per user, per device, etc. What I don't think is fair is selling the software, and then adding on additional costs to use it. For example: Microsoft likes to sell you a server, and then sell you client access licenses on top of that, and I think that is profiteering. Either sell the software at a fixed price, or sell it at a fixed per user price, and maybe even give the customer the option between the two, but not both at the same time.
I've read TFA, I know the particulars of the case. I was explaining how in Canada, unlike in some other countries or US states, when you buy a car regardless of if it's financed you still own it. There are many places where you don't get the title until the car is paid off completely.
You're in such a rush to one up someone by telling them they're wrong that you didn't even bother to understand what the conversation was about.
In Canada, if you buy a car, even finance it, the car is yours, you hold the title. However the lender has a lien on it which prevents you from selling it without their consent, and allows them to sue to recoup costs (usually the car) if the account goes into arrears.
I have no idea how remote disabling devices are even legal unless it was agreed to in the contract.
Have an Ryzen 7 1700 that was affected by the segfault issue. Contacted AMD, they wanted a pic of my case to make sure it wasn't a thermal issue. Then asked me to try some different vcore/vsoc voltages and retest. When I still had the problem they shipped me out a brand new in box CPU, and it's been working perfectly.
If it's a mistake, then lowe's shouldn't be held to the mistake. This is a clerical error.
Remember, companies are legal persons. If you ask me to send you something for free, and I do by mistake, do I have recourse to come after you after the fact for what I sent you? Also, would it be a crime?
The problem is the so called "mistake" was deliberately exploited by people who knew damn well they were taking advantage of a defect in the ordering process and thus damn well that lowes had no intention of giving its stuff away.
So at what point does it become someones responsibility to make sure their process is working properly?
Suppose I setup an automated system where if you email a special address I setup asking for a nickel, I will send you a nickel. The system will then send a notification to me when anyone emails it requesting a nickel. I advertise this nickel sending service and people start emailing it. My system has a bug though, if anyone whose last name begins with the letter X requests a nickel, my system will actually send me a notification to send them a gold bar.
Now suppose I honor every request, including sending out gold bars. Can I then go back after a month and make people send the gold bars back? I never advertised the service as sending out gold bars, I never intended to send out gold bars. Also, would this be a crime?
If I can't do it, why can Lowes? We're both equal under the law, right?
That's Lowe's problem, or at least it should be. If a company is like a person then there's no excuse. If you ask a person to ship you free things, and they do, then I fail to see how this is a crime.
Slashdot Mirror
As someone who builds and maintains Windows server environments professionally, I would have agreed with you about 10 years ago, but now not so much. Really the only two heartburns are older installations still in operation well past their EOL date, and forced Windows updates.
To be honest, nothing would give me more satisfaction to say that Windows Server is dogshit, but it really isn't. Stability and resource usage has improved drastically since Server 2012.
Listen, I've been using Linux since kernel 1.2.13 on slackware 3. I could regale you with stories about how debian refused to take input from a PS/2 keyboard after a dist-upgrade, or how redhat wouldn't install grub properly so would fail to even boot after installing, or how it was a real pain in the ass trying to get a parallel port zip drive to work in any distribution, but I won't, because I understand that citing a software failure migrating a 14 year old system to a 7 year old system (SBS 2011 was released in 2010) isn't very helpful in depicting the state of the software today.
The vast majority of systems administration work doesn't require or can't be automated, because in 2017 the things that needed to be automated are already done by the system itself.
Why do you say this like it's a bad thing? Why is being easier to use bad? Why should I, as an administrator, have to script **anything**? Why do I need to script to get file shares, directory services, or email to work? Why the actual fuck should I have to write a script to bring up a NIC, or to install a printer, or to setup a client access VPN?
It's 2017 dude, the mouse was invented 53 fucking years ago. For some things a CLI is great, but for the vast majority of systems administration work a GUI is superior.
No, it really isn't. The universe is math. Nature is math. You may not think it is because we've adapted and evolved to intuit a lot of it, but almost every problem is mathematical at its core.
And how do you do math? By doing push ups?
When the problem being solved is mathematical in nature, you're going to need to know some math, or else you're not going to be able to solve it, be it on a piece of paper or in code.
Huge waste of resources backporting when it would be easier to just upgrade to the latest kernels. Either way you have to test them, so why bother backporting?
Do you buy a Dell or an HP to use Windows, not Dell _!Windows, or HP %!Win!_Pop. Why does System76 feel they need to "own" the user experience to such a degree? Do people buy System76 machines to run Linux, or to run Pop!_OS?
All Shield TVs used to come with a controller. What they're doing now is dropping the $60 controller but only giving you a $20 break on the price. Not worth it.
As a Shield TV owner I'm really happy with the quality and performance of the hardware. The problem is the damn this is crippled by only running Android TV so can only get Android TV apps without much fiddling, and generally speaking there's not a lot of software available for it.
... just Barracuda wrote a blog about it.
Nobody is forced to own a cell phone.
I don't agree. Consciousness is the act of being aware. Autonomic actions are, by definition, not signs of consciousness.
Nobody is forced in to any cellular contract.
No. This is what the modern business industry wants you to believe. It's all smoke and mirrors to justify millions of MBAs, CPAs, financial lawyers, analysts, etc. jobs. All of this is crap. If you make more money then you spend, you are profitable. I don't give a shit about CAPEX, OPEX, maginal this, derivitive that, it's all crap. If you make more than you spend you are profitable.
I thought Tesla was profitable. Looking at their financial statements has made me realize they're not. They are selling their products at a loss.
No. That is one way to do it. The other way would be to not sell your products at a loss so that they cover your costs.
Don't kid yourself. Tesla is making a profit on every battery pack sold. They'd be out of business if they weren't.
If Tesla can sell the same hardware at different price points and still make a profit then the higher price point is simply profiteering. I would rather they sell it at a fair price.
This is not analogous, but I will answer. If you sell software I think it's fair to come up with your own business model on how it's licensed. Per site, per user, per device, etc. What I don't think is fair is selling the software, and then adding on additional costs to use it. For example: Microsoft likes to sell you a server, and then sell you client access licenses on top of that, and I think that is profiteering. Either sell the software at a fixed price, or sell it at a fixed per user price, and maybe even give the customer the option between the two, but not both at the same time.
The amount of people who do it doesn't make it right.
Pepperidge Law remembers.
I've read TFA, I know the particulars of the case. I was explaining how in Canada, unlike in some other countries or US states, when you buy a car regardless of if it's financed you still own it. There are many places where you don't get the title until the car is paid off completely.
You're in such a rush to one up someone by telling them they're wrong that you didn't even bother to understand what the conversation was about.
In Canada, if you buy a car, even finance it, the car is yours, you hold the title. However the lender has a lien on it which prevents you from selling it without their consent, and allows them to sue to recoup costs (usually the car) if the account goes into arrears.
I have no idea how remote disabling devices are even legal unless it was agreed to in the contract.
If this were true then CBC would be open to a libel suit. Pretty sure CBC did their homework on this one and that isn't the case.
Have an Ryzen 7 1700 that was affected by the segfault issue. Contacted AMD, they wanted a pic of my case to make sure it wasn't a thermal issue. Then asked me to try some different vcore/vsoc voltages and retest. When I still had the problem they shipped me out a brand new in box CPU, and it's been working perfectly.
AMD support is bloody stellar.
Remember, companies are legal persons. If you ask me to send you something for free, and I do by mistake, do I have recourse to come after you after the fact for what I sent you? Also, would it be a crime?
So at what point does it become someones responsibility to make sure their process is working properly?
Suppose I setup an automated system where if you email a special address I setup asking for a nickel, I will send you a nickel. The system will then send a notification to me when anyone emails it requesting a nickel. I advertise this nickel sending service and people start emailing it. My system has a bug though, if anyone whose last name begins with the letter X requests a nickel, my system will actually send me a notification to send them a gold bar.
Now suppose I honor every request, including sending out gold bars. Can I then go back after a month and make people send the gold bars back? I never advertised the service as sending out gold bars, I never intended to send out gold bars. Also, would this be a crime?
If I can't do it, why can Lowes? We're both equal under the law, right?
That's Lowe's problem, or at least it should be. If a company is like a person then there's no excuse. If you ask a person to ship you free things, and they do, then I fail to see how this is a crime.
You mean just giving computers to kids doesn't make them smarter? You actually still have to teach them and get them engaged in learning?
Well I'll be...