I didn't say that 99% of the time it was because they didn't have a patch installed. Actually, I would say that accounted for maybe 5% of the calls. Typically, it was a lack of knowledge that got them into trouble. Misconfigurations (Probably 70% of the calls), old BIOS/firmware code causing trouble (5% and yes, it's important to keep those up to date), network issues that they weren't knowledgeable enough to diagnose and fix (7%), poorly configured firewalls(8%), etc.
Again, everything you said is typical reverse FUD. 300MB is extreme since you're adding ALL patches, even the ones that supersede others. I'm not sure if you pay much attention or not, but Linux distributions release a significant amount of patches as well. With regards to testing patches before deploying, I ask you this: Is Linux an exception? Do you not test updates and patches on Linux? During my tenure doing Microsoft support, I saw VERY few patches actually break anything. When they did, Microsoft provided FREE support to get those customers back up and running with a 24/7 phone number. Patch management is actually quite simple. You build up a box and use Windows update to install the windows patches. For any other Microsoft products, install the latest service pack and any post service pack patches (Technet's Bulletin page makes this extremely easy to do). The amount of caution you put into the patch deployment process after the initial setup is up to you, but based off experience, a recent backup is there for worst case scenario and testing isn't worth the time.
I don't mean to slam you, but the anti-windows arguments you present are nothing more than the usual reverse FUD and in my experience are completely untrue. Considering that I supported NT server for Microsoft (Thanks for calling Microsoft NT Server support,......), I'd have to say that I've seen a considerable amount of hosed Microsoft networks. In 99% of the cases, it was due to user error. Administrators that had no clue what they're doing. That other 1% was a different story:grin:. I'm not saying that I don't take Linux seriously, I'm just saying that in a corporate environment, I personally wouldn't risk it without corporate backing like Red Hat. Have you looked at their prices though?
I just thought of the same thing because of the Nokia exec that got a speeding ticket. It was in Finland. I Managed to dig up this article. After all the publicity, the courts lowered the fine to about $5,300.
Actually, in the three years I've been a sysadmin for two companies (Both over 50 workstations and 7-10 servers), I haven't had a single outbreak. I've had one individual computer get infected before the AV defs were available, but they were immediately identified and shut down for the hour or so it took for updated defs to be released.
Well, their controlled study didn't say what kind of ringer it was. There's huge difference between a ringing noise and a three tone piece of shit song that makes you want to yell at the asshole that thinks it's "cute" and "personalized".
Record
1. To set down for preservation in writing or other permanent form.
The key word here is permanent.
A lot of people are reading into this too much and making it seem like more of an issue than it really is. The cops aren't going to bang down your door for saving chat logs. Basically, the law was created to protect privacy. I'd imagine that if the headline read that a law was created saying it's okay for one person to save chat logs (In other words, the exact opposite), these discussion threads would be ranting about how the evil US government will use it to butt rape Slashdot users.
"Other small companies can do this and do it now."
Correction: Other small companies that don't have technophobes that need to be able to work seamlessly with other companies can do this and do it now. And if you're the administrator, be prepared to take full responsibility and be able to tackle every roadblock. There is no Linux Corp. with 4 hour response times for business down situations.
When I'm in a movie, I have my phone in my pocket on vibrate. I simply answer it, whisper for the caller to wait a minute, and walk out to the hallway. Nobody gets disturbed except for me. If people use this jammer, it's going to prevent me from getting calls that would disturb nobody else in the theater.
I'm waiting for a device that logs frequencies nearby that have recently received calls. If the ringer was loud and annoying, you can change their ringer to a loud, annoying song with lyrics to the effect of "I'm an asshole with a stupid ringer and I want everyone to hear my stupid little ringer song when they're trying to eat a pleasant dinner with their girlfriend. Somebody please punch me in the face."
No collateral damage this way.
-Lucas
Re:I've set up a GNU/Linux machine for my kids too
on
A Babe in Tuxland
·
· Score: 1
"A number of the kids' games I've loaded on my XP machine won't run properly unless logged in as admin."
This isn't Windows' fault. There's a LOT of crappy programmers out there that don't really understand computers (CS Grads in it for the money, obsolete old timers that don't like change, etc.). They're used to developing on DOS based OSes and don't understand the concept of security and NT. They make their program with the assumption that the logged in user has full control on all resources.
To get around their crappy programs, usually giving write permissions to the local users group will do the trick. It may be necessary to do the same thing in the registry. Remember that regmon, filemon, and NTs auditing can be your friend. Regmon and filemon are free utilities made by Sysinternals.
Microsoft purchased Great Plains in mid December of 2000. They're integrating that software into their own solution, temporarily called "Microsoft CRM". However, it would have been nice if they brought the quality of support on Great Plains up to their normal standards.
Why Older Games Aren't Played
Talk to people younger than you about movies and you'll realize that they're clueless about movies before their time. I'm 23 and I've talked to several people my own age that never saw Star Wars, ET, Mad Max, and other classics. This is in a country where LOTS of video stores carry a good amount of the older titles in addition to the current ones. Why? Because you can get them all on VHS and a good amount of them on DVD, especially if they're classics. Everyone has at least one of those players in their home so they only have to carry the titles in two formats. Still, only a minority of us are going to seek out the older classic movies. Blame our capitalistic society for breeding people that focus on the latest shiny object. With video games, it's even worse! There's a few dozen different consoles and less gamers than there are movie watchers. Halo was a launch title on the Xbox and you can still rent or buy it anywhere because the Xbox is the current console. Within months after the next generation console coming out, Halo will start to disappear from the shelves. Gamers buy the new systems because the new games come out for the new systems. If it were as cheap to port a GameCube game to the N64 as it is to release a movie on DVD and VHS, it would be done! The point I'm trying to make is that it's unrealistic from a capitalistic standpoint to have a readily available supply of old games and to create new games for old platforms.
The Current Console Race
While throwing down my thoughts, I'd like to give the definitive reasons why the Playstation and the Playstation 2 have done so well and where video games are going. I have yet to be wrong in my predictions on the video game industry. The fight started between Sega and Nintendo. After the 16-bit war, Sega placed their bets on releasing systems with revolutionary changes ahead of the competition. Unfortunately, they executed their ideas poorly and the gamers didn't go for it. System after system flopped including the Dreamcast which I would say is only half a generation ahead of the N64. Despite the half-generation leap, I believe the Dreamcast would have actually made it if they didn't have a poor reputation due to the several failed systems they quickly abandoned in favor of new ventures. Who would want to buy a Sega console when their prior Sega purchases died within a year of launch? Nintendo learned their lesson after the first mistake, the Virtual Boy and didn't follow Sega to the hardware grave. My guess is that these flops scared Nintendo into backing out of the joint venture with Sony on the CD attachment for the SNES. They decided to let Sony run with it and make the Playstation, betting that their tried and true methods would prevail. What they didn't count on was the "AOL CD Effect" that Sony would employ. Playstation came out and swamped the aisles with titles by basically giving developers free range. A one year head start with a solid system and TONS of games gave the appearance that they were the only system in existence. Then the N64 came out and was superior to the playstation. The games didn't just look 3Dish, they were actually rendered in 3D and you could feel the depth. Unfortunately, by the time the N64 came out, everyone and their best friend had gotten sick of waiting and bought a Playstation. With its strong support and not too far behind graphics, it kept the lead. Only those that decided to keep waiting for the N64 or those that could afford multiple gaming systems got the N64. People who were just getting their first system at this point went with what their friends had or were more interested in mature content than the immersive 3D environment that the N64 offered. Nintendo made just enough money to keep moving while Sony took the throne. When the PS2 came out, it was the same story all over again, only this time Microsoft joined Nintendo. You'd think one of them would have learned! Hell, Microsoft didn't even learn from the N64 controller complaint
Yeah, it tells me I should locate his boss's email address and send my resume. If the guy ran into a problem that required nightly reboots and he thinks it's just an inherent problem with SQL that can't be fixed, then he needs to be replaced with a competent admin that can isolate the problem and fix it.
Allow me to correct myself. I hadn't read the story yet and other posts led me to believe that phishers were issuing self-signed certificates. In this case, there is no certificate involved. Plain Text is one of the SSL encryption methods and when used, it doesn't use a certificate. The answer here would be for web browsers to warn the user that the connection is not secure or to reject plain text SSL altogether.
The way it works is this: Your web browser has a list of trusted Certificate Authority (CA) servers. Any certificate that has been signed by them is automatically trusted to be secure and you don't get any prompts. If a certificate has been signed by another CA that your web browser doesn't have listed as a trusted CA, then you get prompted with a warning outlining the problem. What this article is basically saying is that if the encryption method employed by the web server is "Plain text", then your web browser won't warn you if the certificate was signed by one of those CAs that isn't in your list of trusted CAs. Anyone can be their own CA by issuing a self-signed certificate, removing the need for another entity such as "Slime certificate houses."
That totally reminds me of a time my mother broke down in tears on the phone. I was at work and busy and she needed some help doing something. I was walking her through the steps one at a time and all of a sudden she bursts out "I don't mean to be so stupid" and started crying. She had recently gone through a divorce and was going through a lot emotionally so I should have been sensitive to that and used the gentle and calming voice instead of the quick and hurried voice. If it wasn't me walking her through it, she wouldn't have taken my short answers personally. Ever since I built her a new computer with Windows XP, anti-virus software, and a hardware router/firewall, I haven't heard much except updates on her accessory purchases. I showed her how to use Windows Update and Office Update and she knows to install anything the critical updates advertise in her system tray.
"This is just a lease, except that at the end of this lease you have no option to purchase, you surrender all end of contract ownership rights and you lose the tax write off that comes with a lease."
Not true.
Basically, your initial purchase has to add up to so many points in order to enter Open Licensing. The more points you have on the initial purchase, the better the price you get through the open licensing program for that initial purchase and future purchases. Some products have more points than others. With open licening, you're only purchasing a license. You order media, manuals, and tech support as needed. Because this stuff isn't included and because you're buying in bulk, it costs a considerable amount less than retail. You need a few hundred licenses, but just one copy of the media to toss on the file server for distribution. You run your own help desk and anything in the manual can be found online. Anyway, when you purchase a license, you get the option to buy it with Software Assurance. Software assurance lasts two years and gives you access to upgrades. At the end of the two years, you're given the chance to renew the software assurance for another two years. Of course, you're not paying as much for the renewal as you did for the initial purchase because you already own the license.
Another common point of confusion is OEM copies of Microsoft software. Basically, OEM copies can only be sold with an assembled computer or a core component (Motherboard, CPU, case, power supply, etc.). Also, they're permanently stuck to the computer. You can't build yourself a system later and move the license. Technical support is not included with OEM copies.
"c) The moon has tons of resources for constructing weapons, especially new kinds of nuclear weapons. There's no Greenpeace, no protestors, and no life to destroy, so the Military-Industrial complex can do a looooot of things on the moon that they wouldn't stand a chance doing here on Earth."
Yeah, those peace mongers won't give a shit what we do to the moon. *rolls eyes*
Anyone that thinks the primary motive for going to the moon is military dominance should put away their UFO cover up books and read a history book instead. Sure, the military is going to take advantage of whatever technologies they can along the way, but I doubt the thought of putting a laser on the moon is what's driving Bush's push for space exploration. Look at what space exploration did for us in our prior space races. Huge economic gains, confidence, nationalism, technological leaps, and other things we need right now to counter all the negativity and cynicism rampant in this country after a heavily debated war. Not to mention Bush would like to build upon his image as a leader even more to help the upcoming elections.
Is it just me or can I already hear a bunch of negative, cynical Bush haters before I even hit the Submit button?
Both of your comments come from experiences where the bad part wasn't found within the first guess or two. An experienced technician can figure out which part needs to be replaced with the first educated guess 95% of the time. He won't order a replacement part until he confirms that it's bad with a spare working part. The people that take a wild, idiotic guess as to what needs to be replaced and then proceed to file an RMA are not the people I'd like to refer to as talented computer technicians.
The geek in me agrees with you. It's nice to know exactly what went wrong with the defective device. What if the PSU was frying components and you were replacing the components without realizing that the PSU needs to be replaced? Fortunately, typical PC parts are inexpensive. Swapping out parts to make the problem go away is quite practical and efficient with computers, especially when experience helps you pinpoint the correct part to replace within one or two educated guesses. Luckily, most parts have warranties of at least a year (Three years on some of the more expensive parts) and if a part dies after that, a replacement could be cheaply obtained on ebay or through pricewatch since the part has gotten older by a generation or two. The only exception is OEM parts that come with a warranty of just a month or three, but that's the chance you take when you build using OEM parts to save a few bucks or buy a system from a vendor without obtaining a warranty through them.
I should warn that the following applies to the Windows world since that's where my work and the majority of my experience is. I would say that the Macintosh could be added to the section where the NT family is mentioned (Replace "services" and "drivers" with Macintosh "INIT"s) and I don't know enough about the various *NIX flavors to provide much insight.
"from what i could tell by reading the original question is that he wants something that he could easily do several computers relatively quickly (at least more quickly than swapping out all the hardware with stuff you know 'works'...might be easier to have a nice program that checks all this stuff."
I guess I didn't provide a direct answer to the question. My stance is this: How can you trust that any one software package is going to be able to reproduce every event for every combination and feature of every piece of hardware out there? Maintaining such a program is close to impossible. Compare that to the medical industry and you can see many parallels. Some treatments work for some patients, but not others and the ones it works on happen at different degrees of effectiveness. We're all unique just like how there's got to be a few billion possible triggers for a hardware malfunction.
_Most_ of the time, a real hardware failure is obvious and easy to pinpoint with an educated guess using a little past experience. You can then confirm that theory by swapping parts. Again, I say most of the time because there are exceptions. But in most (Maybe 95%) cases when troubleshooting a flakey computer, it's a software problem. Windows 9x/ME are a lost cause because they are the worst pieces of crap for an OS ever created. If it's the NT family, it's usually a driver, service, or resource conflict (From a crappy PCI device) causing issues. In these cases, an all in one diagnostic utility issn't going to help since it's not a hardware problem to begin with.
Good point. I guess I know because all the people I've built computers for are in touch with me and all of them have extremely stable systems. Not a whole lot of people, but there's at least three dozen systems out there. Add onto that two or three routers, a couple RAID cards, two servers that require unusual memory modules, and another dozen or two workstations that got memory upgrades.
Some branded memory I purchased through CDW failed memtest. I replaced it with another brand and was fine. An IBM server had two different designs not designated in the model number. At first, I got the wrong type of memory and it failed. Also, I've mixed all sorts of crap memory in my home systems and found out which combinations worked using memtest.
I guess I can say that I'm highly confident that memtest hasn't failed me yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, everything you said is typical reverse FUD. 300MB is extreme since you're adding ALL patches, even the ones that supersede others. I'm not sure if you pay much attention or not, but Linux distributions release a significant amount of patches as well. With regards to testing patches before deploying, I ask you this: Is Linux an exception? Do you not test updates and patches on Linux? During my tenure doing Microsoft support, I saw VERY few patches actually break anything. When they did, Microsoft provided FREE support to get those customers back up and running with a 24/7 phone number. Patch management is actually quite simple. You build up a box and use Windows update to install the windows patches. For any other Microsoft products, install the latest service pack and any post service pack patches (Technet's Bulletin page makes this extremely easy to do). The amount of caution you put into the patch deployment process after the initial setup is up to you, but based off experience, a recent backup is there for worst case scenario and testing isn't worth the time.
-Lucas
-Lucas
-Lucas
-Lucas
-Lucas
-Lucas
1. To set down for preservation in writing or other permanent form.
The key word here is permanent.
A lot of people are reading into this too much and making it seem like more of an issue than it really is. The cops aren't going to bang down your door for saving chat logs. Basically, the law was created to protect privacy. I'd imagine that if the headline read that a law was created saying it's okay for one person to save chat logs (In other words, the exact opposite), these discussion threads would be ranting about how the evil US government will use it to butt rape Slashdot users.
-Lucas
-Lucas
Correction: Other small companies that don't have technophobes that need to be able to work seamlessly with other companies can do this and do it now. And if you're the administrator, be prepared to take full responsibility and be able to tackle every roadblock. There is no Linux Corp. with 4 hour response times for business down situations.
-Lucas
I'm waiting for a device that logs frequencies nearby that have recently received calls. If the ringer was loud and annoying, you can change their ringer to a loud, annoying song with lyrics to the effect of "I'm an asshole with a stupid ringer and I want everyone to hear my stupid little ringer song when they're trying to eat a pleasant dinner with their girlfriend. Somebody please punch me in the face."
No collateral damage this way.
-Lucas
This isn't Windows' fault. There's a LOT of crappy programmers out there that don't really understand computers (CS Grads in it for the money, obsolete old timers that don't like change, etc.). They're used to developing on DOS based OSes and don't understand the concept of security and NT. They make their program with the assumption that the logged in user has full control on all resources.
To get around their crappy programs, usually giving write permissions to the local users group will do the trick. It may be necessary to do the same thing in the registry. Remember that regmon, filemon, and NTs auditing can be your friend. Regmon and filemon are free utilities made by Sysinternals.
-Lucas
-Lucas
Talk to people younger than you about movies and you'll realize that they're clueless about movies before their time. I'm 23 and I've talked to several people my own age that never saw Star Wars, ET, Mad Max, and other classics. This is in a country where LOTS of video stores carry a good amount of the older titles in addition to the current ones. Why? Because you can get them all on VHS and a good amount of them on DVD, especially if they're classics. Everyone has at least one of those players in their home so they only have to carry the titles in two formats. Still, only a minority of us are going to seek out the older classic movies. Blame our capitalistic society for breeding people that focus on the latest shiny object. With video games, it's even worse! There's a few dozen different consoles and less gamers than there are movie watchers. Halo was a launch title on the Xbox and you can still rent or buy it anywhere because the Xbox is the current console. Within months after the next generation console coming out, Halo will start to disappear from the shelves. Gamers buy the new systems because the new games come out for the new systems. If it were as cheap to port a GameCube game to the N64 as it is to release a movie on DVD and VHS, it would be done! The point I'm trying to make is that it's unrealistic from a capitalistic standpoint to have a readily available supply of old games and to create new games for old platforms.
The Current Console Race
While throwing down my thoughts, I'd like to give the definitive reasons why the Playstation and the Playstation 2 have done so well and where video games are going. I have yet to be wrong in my predictions on the video game industry. The fight started between Sega and Nintendo. After the 16-bit war, Sega placed their bets on releasing systems with revolutionary changes ahead of the competition. Unfortunately, they executed their ideas poorly and the gamers didn't go for it. System after system flopped including the Dreamcast which I would say is only half a generation ahead of the N64. Despite the half-generation leap, I believe the Dreamcast would have actually made it if they didn't have a poor reputation due to the several failed systems they quickly abandoned in favor of new ventures. Who would want to buy a Sega console when their prior Sega purchases died within a year of launch? Nintendo learned their lesson after the first mistake, the Virtual Boy and didn't follow Sega to the hardware grave. My guess is that these flops scared Nintendo into backing out of the joint venture with Sony on the CD attachment for the SNES. They decided to let Sony run with it and make the Playstation, betting that their tried and true methods would prevail. What they didn't count on was the "AOL CD Effect" that Sony would employ. Playstation came out and swamped the aisles with titles by basically giving developers free range. A one year head start with a solid system and TONS of games gave the appearance that they were the only system in existence. Then the N64 came out and was superior to the playstation. The games didn't just look 3Dish, they were actually rendered in 3D and you could feel the depth. Unfortunately, by the time the N64 came out, everyone and their best friend had gotten sick of waiting and bought a Playstation. With its strong support and not too far behind graphics, it kept the lead. Only those that decided to keep waiting for the N64 or those that could afford multiple gaming systems got the N64. People who were just getting their first system at this point went with what their friends had or were more interested in mature content than the immersive 3D environment that the N64 offered. Nintendo made just enough money to keep moving while Sony took the throne. When the PS2 came out, it was the same story all over again, only this time Microsoft joined Nintendo. You'd think one of them would have learned! Hell, Microsoft didn't even learn from the N64 controller complaint
Yeah, it tells me I should locate his boss's email address and send my resume. If the guy ran into a problem that required nightly reboots and he thinks it's just an inherent problem with SQL that can't be fixed, then he needs to be replaced with a competent admin that can isolate the problem and fix it.
-Lucas
-Lucas
-Lucas
-Lucas
Not true.
Basically, your initial purchase has to add up to so many points in order to enter Open Licensing. The more points you have on the initial purchase, the better the price you get through the open licensing program for that initial purchase and future purchases. Some products have more points than others. With open licening, you're only purchasing a license. You order media, manuals, and tech support as needed. Because this stuff isn't included and because you're buying in bulk, it costs a considerable amount less than retail. You need a few hundred licenses, but just one copy of the media to toss on the file server for distribution. You run your own help desk and anything in the manual can be found online. Anyway, when you purchase a license, you get the option to buy it with Software Assurance. Software assurance lasts two years and gives you access to upgrades. At the end of the two years, you're given the chance to renew the software assurance for another two years. Of course, you're not paying as much for the renewal as you did for the initial purchase because you already own the license.
Another common point of confusion is OEM copies of Microsoft software. Basically, OEM copies can only be sold with an assembled computer or a core component (Motherboard, CPU, case, power supply, etc.). Also, they're permanently stuck to the computer. You can't build yourself a system later and move the license. Technical support is not included with OEM copies.
I hope that clears things up!
-Lucas
They're big enough to do it.
I had virtual sex with an 18 year old supermodel on an AS/400 Server. Why would the Slashdot editors reject that article submission?
-Lucas
Yeah, those peace mongers won't give a shit what we do to the moon. *rolls eyes*
Anyone that thinks the primary motive for going to the moon is military dominance should put away their UFO cover up books and read a history book instead. Sure, the military is going to take advantage of whatever technologies they can along the way, but I doubt the thought of putting a laser on the moon is what's driving Bush's push for space exploration. Look at what space exploration did for us in our prior space races. Huge economic gains, confidence, nationalism, technological leaps, and other things we need right now to counter all the negativity and cynicism rampant in this country after a heavily debated war. Not to mention Bush would like to build upon his image as a leader even more to help the upcoming elections.
Is it just me or can I already hear a bunch of negative, cynical Bush haters before I even hit the Submit button?
-Lucas
-Lucas
-Lucas
"from what i could tell by reading the original question is that he wants something that he could easily do several computers relatively quickly (at least more quickly than swapping out all the hardware with stuff you know 'works'...might be easier to have a nice program that checks all this stuff."
I guess I didn't provide a direct answer to the question. My stance is this: How can you trust that any one software package is going to be able to reproduce every event for every combination and feature of every piece of hardware out there? Maintaining such a program is close to impossible. Compare that to the medical industry and you can see many parallels. Some treatments work for some patients, but not others and the ones it works on happen at different degrees of effectiveness. We're all unique just like how there's got to be a few billion possible triggers for a hardware malfunction.
_Most_ of the time, a real hardware failure is obvious and easy to pinpoint with an educated guess using a little past experience. You can then confirm that theory by swapping parts. Again, I say most of the time because there are exceptions. But in most (Maybe 95%) cases when troubleshooting a flakey computer, it's a software problem. Windows 9x/ME are a lost cause because they are the worst pieces of crap for an OS ever created. If it's the NT family, it's usually a driver, service, or resource conflict (From a crappy PCI device) causing issues. In these cases, an all in one diagnostic utility issn't going to help since it's not a hardware problem to begin with.
-Lucas
Some branded memory I purchased through CDW failed memtest. I replaced it with another brand and was fine. An IBM server had two different designs not designated in the model number. At first, I got the wrong type of memory and it failed. Also, I've mixed all sorts of crap memory in my home systems and found out which combinations worked using memtest.
I guess I can say that I'm highly confident that memtest hasn't failed me yet.
-Lucas