* If you inform Microsoft of a flaw in IE, then Microsoft in turn notifies you of a flaw in Chrome. * Chrome's Windows version actually uses a lot of IE components (ICS stands out, if I remember right), so a flaw in IE could potentially affect Chrome, depending on what the flaw is (e.g. an IE flaw that sets a stealth/fake proxy in IE ICS, which in turn affects Chrome...) * Just because you want your competitors to die or be diminished, doesn't mean you have to be a dick about it.;)
That's even worse, truth be told. Guilt or innocence hasn't even been established yet, and the judge is ordering the defendant to perform activities that may be detrimental to her (even if just perceived) well-being.
Well, according to how Facebook works, the analogy would be akin to the victims walking over to the perp's house to see the flippant remark posted on a piece of paper taped to the front door.
IOW, the victims had to actually go out of their way, and actually go there to see it. How can that be taunting?
Now if the perp was posting to the victim's wall, sending IMs, or suchlike? Okay, you may have had a better argument in that case.
I can't disagree with the logic, but something still stinks about how deeply into one's personal life and activities a judge can go.
Hypothetical extreme example: If you met a girl at a bar, went to bed with her, only to discover later (via arrest) that she was jailbait, and a judge demanded that you get a castration in order to avoid 10-15 years in prison, would you do it? Many (I daresay most) would, while others would not.
Thing is, it's not that it gets you out of jail faster - it's that the punishment itself is unusual, which is constitutionally out-of-bounds. In other words, the judge had no constitutional right or authority to order (let alone enforce) such a thing as punishment.
One other bit: I submit that local judges, far more than state/federal ones, are more prone to viciousness, petty abuses, and vindictiveness - especially in more rural areas, where there is no competition and/or chance of losing one's job to a misconduct charge. If there's going to be judicial abuse, odds are good that it'll happen on the lower levels far easier than the upper ones.
That's because it never got that far - the manufacturers to date simply caved in before it got to court.
OTOH, I can assure you that a metric ton of money is moving in Redmond's direction, and it makes Android just that less of a viable option (plus it forces the makers to make and sell the competing WP-loaded phones).
Here's the trick: Google doesn't need Apple to survive. They do however require the handset makers to keep using Android to make any money (at least in the mobile field). So who would you go after first - a competitor who took out a couple of models from one of your clients over look-and-feel (a design patent issue), or would you go after the guys who are raping the very makers that you need to continue using your products?
Put it this way: would you go after the fox who occasionally gets a chicken from one farm's henhouse, or try and do something about the locust swarm that's currently eating into all of the crops in the county?
It's understandable, but there's a big diff between design patents (which is a huge part of what Samsung got slammed for) and software patents. (if it were a typical hardware patent, Apple would simply do what it has in the past - point to the chip makers and say that said chip makers already covered patent-maintenance, and that Motorola is double-dipping.)
Besides, if they were going to try that angle, wouldn't suing over a non-FRAND patent be a smarter move? Apple likely pays its legal team more than Google/Motorola will see from any compulsory licensing.
I got one of the Allwinner tablets for her. it has a 1-year warranty (but seriously, I suspect it's a literal slow-boat-to-china type of warranty). The only page I have of it now is the cached one, but here's the description:
7" Allwinner A13 Q88 tablet pc 5 point capacitive Screen + android 4.0 + Multi Touch + 1.2GHz 512MB 4GB + Webcam + Wifi
She uses it for minor stuff, and nothing financial - otherwise I'd just have her stick with the (very locked-down) laptop. If it ever became a question of using it for financial stuff, I suspect I could grab a stock ICS image and re-flash the puppy.
"But there is Virtual Machines created on VMWare that can simulate Apple MacOS in regular PCs."
Well, if you fool the EFI/bootloader, write your own drivers (or have someone else write/upload them) for your specific hardware, and don't mind the occasional hiccup or missing feature? Sure... it's (err, almost) the same thing.
Trust me - I'd love to have OSX running as the primary OS on my Samsung RC512, but that's never gonna happen. Why? Because I don't have the time to write drivers to wedge things in, and I want all this crap on my laptop (including the BD-ROM) to work. Besides, in a year or two the plastic top cover is likely going to crack anyway due to all the flexing I see it do every time I open the lid.
One caveat: Bleeding-edge isn't always about bragging rights.
While Apple makes some monster profit percentages, things like Retina Displays, specialized metal (as in, not-plastic) cases that hold up to abuse a little better... these things do tend to cost more, both in the newness of technology (because not everyone has such things tooled-up and ready to rock on relatively large scales), and in having enough R&D put in to make sure you don't end up with a bleeding-edge-but-crap product (which Apple, while better than most, occasionally borks over too - as evidenced by the antenna thingy a couple of years back).
It's like buying the latest server model with all the top-spec goodies in it, as opposed to buying last year's model with somewhat lower specs. Of course they're going to charge you more for it. Question is this: is that extra 'oomph worth it to you or not? Sometimes it is, sometimes it ain't.
(Disclosure? No problem - I bought a brand-new dual G4 PowerMac back in 2004 - cost me bout $2k. I finally put it in the closet for good last year, with no failed parts, and the only system lock-ups coming from serious goofs while writing code. Meanwhile on the PC desktop side, I plowed through six motherboards (two of them because they blew up), four CPUs, four HDDs, two cases, way too much RAM, two copies of Windows (XP and 7 - skipped Vista), and two power supplies. Call it two $1200 upper-end Dell or HP boxen plus parts - just to keep up performance-wise (from look and feel, not necessarily from benchmarks). The only reason I put the Mac away was because the thing was finally too far out of tech (as a PPC box), and new programs/games tended to favor the x86 architecture a bit too much. Overall, I actually saved money on the Mac side. Then again, I don't buy main desktop boxen for the 'ooo - shiny' factor, but for the long haul.)
I guess what I'm saying is, sometimes it ain't for the bragging rights (though I admit I enjoyed whipping that beast out at LAN parties back in the day, only to have one monitor playing a movie while the games --Unreal Tournament and UT2k3&4 mostly-- ran flawlessly on the other).
Hardware will always represent a non-zero cost. However, much of that cost can (eventually?) be absorbed or at least amortized by other budgets. Marketing stands out as a ferinstance (at least on a limited scale), since we already see VARs doing that with higher-priced items to IT managers and other decision-makers ("attend a sales pitch for 500Mbit fiber from Acme Telecom Business Services, and get a free iPad!" - Seriously, once we scored a free IBM ThinkPad for the department that way.)
I bought the same $45 Android tablet for the missus' birthday off of AliExpress; it came with Android 4.0, and shipping cost $20 more. It has (almost) everything the original Kindle Fire had, but with better battery life, and minus the DRM or spamvertising.
I wouldn't expect to get a free tablet for showing up at the local power company's booth at the county fair, but given the increasingly cheap prices? It's not too much of a stretch to see, in a couple of year, a fully functional (and decent!) tablet sitting in the toy section of the local stores, priced about the same as a Barbie Doll, model airplane, or suchlike.
Sorta like watching Stalin go after Hitler. You want Stalin to win, but not win by too much.
Maybe, with little luck, Zynga can get stomped into oblivion (SCO-style would be nice), and EA loses so much money chasing it that they themselves are diminished to the point of leaving an opening for other companies.
But then there's Ubisoft. Is there anyway we can get Ubisoft involved in this too? Then maybe we can pray that they all obliterate each other.
Thinking much the same thing here as well. Even a CA like GoDaddy won't take anything smaller than a 2k cert key.
Most SSL certs we cook up have a 2048 minimum anyway, and some certs we use have a standard of at least 4096 (I work in the banking/financial industry, so we're used to using the bigger keys).
I'm thinking that they stuck with 1024 because most IIS 7.x (Win2k8 Server) allows for a minimum 1024 key size when making CSRs, and (maybe? can't remember) the really old crap (IIS5 or 4?) won't interpret anything bigger, which means enterprises with those old installs will scream bloody murder if they have to re-key but can't meet minimum length.
True, but I can't recall the last time I ever had to call RedHat for anything. At all. Closest I ever came was when a DBA wanted some custom tweaks in RHEL, and some kind soul put the best ones to dig into (with full explanations) on Oracle's KB site (yeah, I know... bet the devil got hypothermia that day too).
Microsoft OTOH, especially for bugs that aren't (yet?) in the KB? hoo-boy.
Dunno - I find it infinitely easier to just restore the VM from snapshot, and failing that, restore from the SAN snapshot, and failing all that, restore that VM straight off of tape (the last bit may be a hair outdated, but it still works).
The days of restoring a server on bare metal ended a long, long time ago for me. Kinda glad to see the $#@%(*! concept dying off.
Slashdot Mirror
Lots of answers:
* If you inform Microsoft of a flaw in IE, then Microsoft in turn notifies you of a flaw in Chrome. ;)
* Chrome's Windows version actually uses a lot of IE components (ICS stands out, if I remember right), so a flaw in IE could potentially affect Chrome, depending on what the flaw is (e.g. an IE flaw that sets a stealth/fake proxy in IE ICS, which in turn affects Chrome...)
* Just because you want your competitors to die or be diminished, doesn't mean you have to be a dick about it.
SEUL?
I remember they had a huge push to put Linux in schools back in 2000 or so. They also run/host Schoolforge.
public:
virtual void Unlock(
sUrine,
nInchesSnow
)
Wait - you're saying that Heathkit provided clay tablets? Since when?
Hell, back in my day, they tattooed the instructions on the flayed skin of an EE intern and sent that.
That's even worse, truth be told. Guilt or innocence hasn't even been established yet, and the judge is ordering the defendant to perform activities that may be detrimental to her (even if just perceived) well-being.
Way out of bounds there.
Well, according to how Facebook works, the analogy would be akin to the victims walking over to the perp's house to see the flippant remark posted on a piece of paper taped to the front door.
IOW, the victims had to actually go out of their way, and actually go there to see it. How can that be taunting?
Now if the perp was posting to the victim's wall, sending IMs, or suchlike? Okay, you may have had a better argument in that case.
I can't disagree with the logic, but something still stinks about how deeply into one's personal life and activities a judge can go.
Hypothetical extreme example: If you met a girl at a bar, went to bed with her, only to discover later (via arrest) that she was jailbait, and a judge demanded that you get a castration in order to avoid 10-15 years in prison, would you do it? Many (I daresay most) would, while others would not.
Thing is, it's not that it gets you out of jail faster - it's that the punishment itself is unusual, which is constitutionally out-of-bounds. In other words, the judge had no constitutional right or authority to order (let alone enforce) such a thing as punishment.
One other bit: I submit that local judges, far more than state/federal ones, are more prone to viciousness, petty abuses, and vindictiveness - especially in more rural areas, where there is no competition and/or chance of losing one's job to a misconduct charge. If there's going to be judicial abuse, odds are good that it'll happen on the lower levels far easier than the upper ones.
That's because it never got that far - the manufacturers to date simply caved in before it got to court.
OTOH, I can assure you that a metric ton of money is moving in Redmond's direction, and it makes Android just that less of a viable option (plus it forces the makers to make and sell the competing WP-loaded phones).
Here's the trick: Google doesn't need Apple to survive. They do however require the handset makers to keep using Android to make any money (at least in the mobile field). So who would you go after first - a competitor who took out a couple of models from one of your clients over look-and-feel (a design patent issue), or would you go after the guys who are raping the very makers that you need to continue using your products?
Put it this way: would you go after the fox who occasionally gets a chicken from one farm's henhouse, or try and do something about the locust swarm that's currently eating into all of the crops in the county?
If that were true, then where are all the lawsuits against Microsoft for the much greater shake-down being performed from that angle?
One would think that going after your biggest fiscal drain first would be the smarter move...
It's understandable, but there's a big diff between design patents (which is a huge part of what Samsung got slammed for) and software patents.
(if it were a typical hardware patent, Apple would simply do what it has in the past - point to the chip makers and say that said chip makers already covered patent-maintenance, and that Motorola is double-dipping.)
Besides, if they were going to try that angle, wouldn't suing over a non-FRAND patent be a smarter move? Apple likely pays its legal team more than Google/Motorola will see from any compulsory licensing.
I like (no, love!) the idea of colonists living in space.
On the other hand, has this man taken even a cursory glance at the spreadsheets before making such pronouncements?
For that many people, we're talking more money than he, Gates, and four other random billionaires combined have.
I got one of the Allwinner tablets for her. it has a 1-year warranty (but seriously, I suspect it's a literal slow-boat-to-china type of warranty). The only page I have of it now is the cached one, but here's the description:
7" Allwinner A13 Q88 tablet pc 5 point capacitive Screen + android 4.0 + Multi Touch + 1.2GHz 512MB 4GB + Webcam + Wifi
She uses it for minor stuff, and nothing financial - otherwise I'd just have her stick with the (very locked-down) laptop. If it ever became a question of using it for financial stuff, I suspect I could grab a stock ICS image and re-flash the puppy.
"But there is Virtual Machines created on VMWare that can simulate Apple MacOS in regular PCs."
Well, if you fool the EFI/bootloader, write your own drivers (or have someone else write/upload them) for your specific hardware, and don't mind the occasional hiccup or missing feature? Sure... it's (err, almost) the same thing.
Trust me - I'd love to have OSX running as the primary OS on my Samsung RC512, but that's never gonna happen. Why? Because I don't have the time to write drivers to wedge things in, and I want all this crap on my laptop (including the BD-ROM) to work. Besides, in a year or two the plastic top cover is likely going to crack anyway due to all the flexing I see it do every time I open the lid.
One caveat: Bleeding-edge isn't always about bragging rights.
While Apple makes some monster profit percentages, things like Retina Displays, specialized metal (as in, not-plastic) cases that hold up to abuse a little better... these things do tend to cost more, both in the newness of technology (because not everyone has such things tooled-up and ready to rock on relatively large scales), and in having enough R&D put in to make sure you don't end up with a bleeding-edge-but-crap product (which Apple, while better than most, occasionally borks over too - as evidenced by the antenna thingy a couple of years back).
It's like buying the latest server model with all the top-spec goodies in it, as opposed to buying last year's model with somewhat lower specs. Of course they're going to charge you more for it. Question is this: is that extra 'oomph worth it to you or not? Sometimes it is, sometimes it ain't.
(Disclosure? No problem - I bought a brand-new dual G4 PowerMac back in 2004 - cost me bout $2k. I finally put it in the closet for good last year, with no failed parts, and the only system lock-ups coming from serious goofs while writing code. Meanwhile on the PC desktop side, I plowed through six motherboards (two of them because they blew up), four CPUs, four HDDs, two cases, way too much RAM, two copies of Windows (XP and 7 - skipped Vista), and two power supplies. Call it two $1200 upper-end Dell or HP boxen plus parts - just to keep up performance-wise (from look and feel, not necessarily from benchmarks). The only reason I put the Mac away was because the thing was finally too far out of tech (as a PPC box), and new programs/games tended to favor the x86 architecture a bit too much. Overall, I actually saved money on the Mac side. Then again, I don't buy main desktop boxen for the 'ooo - shiny' factor, but for the long haul.)
I guess what I'm saying is, sometimes it ain't for the bragging rights (though I admit I enjoyed whipping that beast out at LAN parties back in the day, only to have one monitor playing a movie while the games --Unreal Tournament and UT2k3&4 mostly-- ran flawlessly on the other).
It's not retarded... well, not entirely.
Hardware will always represent a non-zero cost. However, much of that cost can (eventually?) be absorbed or at least amortized by other budgets. Marketing stands out as a ferinstance (at least on a limited scale), since we already see VARs doing that with higher-priced items to IT managers and other decision-makers ("attend a sales pitch for 500Mbit fiber from Acme Telecom Business Services, and get a free iPad!" - Seriously, once we scored a free IBM ThinkPad for the department that way.)
I bought the same $45 Android tablet for the missus' birthday off of AliExpress; it came with Android 4.0, and shipping cost $20 more. It has (almost) everything the original Kindle Fire had, but with better battery life, and minus the DRM or spamvertising.
I wouldn't expect to get a free tablet for showing up at the local power company's booth at the county fair, but given the increasingly cheap prices? It's not too much of a stretch to see, in a couple of year, a fully functional (and decent!) tablet sitting in the toy section of the local stores, priced about the same as a Barbie Doll, model airplane, or suchlike.
Sorta like watching Stalin go after Hitler. You want Stalin to win, but not win by too much.
Maybe, with little luck, Zynga can get stomped into oblivion (SCO-style would be nice), and EA loses so much money chasing it that they themselves are diminished to the point of leaving an opening for other companies.
But then there's Ubisoft. Is there anyway we can get Ubisoft involved in this too? Then maybe we can pray that they all obliterate each other.
It also paints a picture of just how much pr0n, lolcats, and pointless facebook updates actually exist on Earth.
Pretty depressing, isn't it?
Thinking much the same thing here as well. Even a CA like GoDaddy won't take anything smaller than a 2k cert key.
Most SSL certs we cook up have a 2048 minimum anyway, and some certs we use have a standard of at least 4096 (I work in the banking/financial industry, so we're used to using the bigger keys).
I'm thinking that they stuck with 1024 because most IIS 7.x (Win2k8 Server) allows for a minimum 1024 key size when making CSRs, and (maybe? can't remember) the really old crap (IIS5 or 4?) won't interpret anything bigger, which means enterprises with those old installs will scream bloody murder if they have to re-key but can't meet minimum length.
Given the timeframe involved with restoring a snapshot, I bet I can bring it back up before the other DCs even realize it was offline :)
(and with FT on for the first DC in the environment, I don't even have to care that one of the VMs in the pair crashed. )
Yeah it was... but it's damned hard to argue with the logic.
Why not just write the commands first?
Incidentally, I do like PowerShell quite a bit, but it's certainly no bash (let alone tcsh).
True, but I can't recall the last time I ever had to call RedHat for anything. At all. Closest I ever came was when a DBA wanted some custom tweaks in RHEL, and some kind soul put the best ones to dig into (with full explanations) on Oracle's KB site (yeah, I know... bet the devil got hypothermia that day too).
Microsoft OTOH, especially for bugs that aren't (yet?) in the KB? hoo-boy.
What's wrong with option boxes?
As someone that uses both the shell and GUI config options, what's wrong with a choice? Sometimes configuring things through a GUI is faster.
...until you have to do it on 30 servers, in which case you're scripting it anyway. *shrug*
I just write once, run everytime. Easier that way, and doesn't require an RDP session.
Dunno - I find it infinitely easier to just restore the VM from snapshot, and failing that, restore from the SAN snapshot, and failing all that, restore that VM straight off of tape (the last bit may be a hair outdated, but it still works).
The days of restoring a server on bare metal ended a long, long time ago for me. Kinda glad to see the $#@%(*! concept dying off.