Why don't you sit back, relax, put your feet up and let someone fix you a nice warm cup of HARDEN THE F&*K UP ?
A REAL Unix user would have hacked the keyboard driver by now if it bothered them that much.
Apple has to spend its efforts where it thinks it gets the best pay off, and like it or not, your views, at least at the level of emotion you express are nothing more than a narrow sliver of the bell curve.
I have it on good authority that the process by which you would become "almost pregnant" is far more interesting a concept than getting "near-broadband".
If remote setup is spin, why is it in the documentation that was released for Panther when the OS was released ? See the server administration pdfs.
This isn't a new "exploit" - all previous versions of MacOS X and NeXTStep had this with NetInfo by design - thats for nearly 15 years. However, it requires specific non-default configuration to work ( the network directory does not have precedence over the local directory by default - what is claimed in the original web page announcing the exploit is wrong )
For this to work, someone with local access to the machine has to go and change the directory lookup order for authentication, so that the network directories override local.
This is one of a long list of "exploits" that fall into the category of "If I have local administrator/root access and misconfigure something in a specific way, then I am potentially remotely exploitable".
The UI in MacOS should definately warn you if you tried to make the change, but this really isn't the sort of thing you'd work people day and night to fix.
They can be replaced by quieter fans, thats why Apple had a power supply upgrade program for these machines which replaced the noisy fans with quiet ones.
If you had gone down this path you wouldn't have had the end result problem.
I'm not aware of any vendor who will honour warranty on parts of a machine where an end user has modified them.
Apple are generally pretty good - if you mod something, they'll only void warranty on the parts you modified not the bits you didn't effect.
In your case, you wrecked the CPU, the heat sink and the cooling system, because your ego told you you knew better. Consider the experience a tuition fee, build a bridge and get over it.
given an appropriate allocation of time, money and resources.
There are a number of things that are key:
1) agree with senior management on broad priorities 2) draw up a list of what needs to be done 3) re-order the list in terms of the agreed priorities 4) present the prioritised list to management, and have them agree to the priority 5) Give an honest indication of how far down the list you'll be able to get
Go off and do stuff, and report progress on the list and re-prioritise the list say once a week, with their input.
IF they are half way decent as a manager, they will rapidly understand to either accept the level of capability they have, OR accept the need to increase that level of capability to meet their performance expectations. If they can't arrive at conclusions similar to these, in general you should be looking to work elsewhere.
If they want X to be done, explain what is really needed to achieve X. If some or all of the pre-requisites, give a honest estimate of how that will impact their timelines.
Oh - and plan on, and only commit to, 35-40 hours of real work per week per person, otherwise you'll burn people out, AND have no spare capacity to surge to meet the occasional urgent deadlines.
Another thing that can help, is to help filter the crap out, by getting agreement from management for allocation of resources to issues.
No system is perfect, but if you can demonstrate an understanding of the businesses needs and priorities, and be up front, but constructive, about the implications of meeting those, you can often say no without really saying no.
Whilst MS is probably a player in this, keep in mind that the South Australian State Government's IT is almost totally outsourced to EDS ( who are a ISC member, and a MS solution parter at a very big way ).
EDS's revenues in the SA State Government Cotnract would be impacted by an open source direction , as EDS derives revenue both from selling software and hardware to the government, as well as supporting the systems.
As EDS is a major sized player, one of the ways they derive revenue is by screwing commercial developers down on price, and then selling to their customers at as high a price they can get away with.
Extensive use of OSS/Free software would impact this because they would have reduced capability to pad their revenue.
Of course, you could mean that the pants are merely adjacent to her, or indeed not in her possession or proximity at all, but then I hardly see the point.
If you already have a Naked Natalie Portman (Pat. Pend.) then why do you need to pour hot grits down some pants at all ?
There are easier ways to dispose of the clothing, and frankly, the dissociation of the pants from the owner probably means it would be just as effective to pour them down your own !
Actually, if this was the guy I think it was...
They dug him out and there was a bit of an international incident with various countries claiming ownership of the "noble savage who died tragically", with I think the French, Italians and Swiss all having a go at it.
When the scientists announced they found semen in the stomach contents the Swiss and Italians stopped claiming ownership !
So it may not have been the girlfriend that was the problem...
Of course there a bunch of legitimate explanations of how it got there besides the person in question batting for the other team, but I recall I found it very funny at the time.
( and I should note that I have no intrinsic problem with the recreational consumption of semen by either sex )
Well - I've actually seen this done for the odd recording studio - Cube + 15'' display in the control room with the hard drives removed and they are net-booted off a server which is remote over 100baseT or gig ethernet.
Jay has been quite thorough, and been pretty open about how he has gone about things.
His findings are broadly consistient with a study done at Adelaide University in 1998/1999 looking at iMacs as a potential beowulf cluster nodes.
http://www.dhpc.adelaide.edu.au/reports/065/abs-06 5.html
Their basic conclusion was that the compiler performance was holding the performance back from being competitive ( gcc on PPC being the issue ).
Last time I checked , Apple's changes to gcc made for MacOS X and Altivec hadn't made it back into the main gcc source tree yet, although it can be downloaded from the Darwin site.
By my experience , PPC is typically about 25-30% faster clock for clock at integer, and 50%-100% at floating point. G4 will do better again if you can vectorise your code. That assumes a bunch of things like having enough memory bandwidth , not thrashing caches etc.
I've worked either as a consultant , contractor or an employee at a number of different support organisations, and a number of different rules applied. Note also that this was in Australia, where employment conditions are generally a tad more enlightened ( or socialist if you prefer ) than the US.
Organisation 1.
Company with a 3 Letter Name who does IT services globally
Employees who were on call and carried a pager or mobile were had specific response times to call back on being contacted, and were not allowed to drink etc when on call. There were also response times requried to arrive on site, so this imposed defacto how far you could venture away from the urban area.
These guys were paid a retainer for carrying the means of contact for being on call, but were not paid for being called out, there was a formula of time in lieu leave based on how long they were called out for.
Note that these guys had a second tier call out person as well , who had LONGER response times, and recieved a lower retainer. If they were activated because the on call person was commited to a job, they got the higher rate pro rata.
Organisation 2
Different company with a 3 letter name that delivers IT services globally
Conditions were somewhat similar to the above, except they didn't have the second string backup person. The support services these guys provided attracter a per hour charge on a call out , paid by the client.
These guys paid a similar rate to the first Organisation, but rather than time in lieu, if you were called out, you were paid an hourly rate over and above salary. Suffice to say that the company made about twice as much per hour than the employee if they were called out.
Organisation 3
Small IT consulting Firm
Carrying the on call device attracted a retainer based on the percieved likelyhood of a callout. Staff on call for organisations percieved as having a high call out risk got a HIGHER retainer, and those on call for a lower call out risk got a lower retainer. In addition, the employee would fill out an after hours work form, and had the option of an hourly rate, or time off in lieu calculated by a formula. Generally the clients whose after hours support was frequent, and had the higher fixed retainer, attracted a lower per hour payment and less leave, and the clients whose call outs were rare, had a higher per hour rate and more leave. Note that even for clients who payed a flat fee for support, and didn't pay a per hour rate for after hours , the employees still were compensated, but then time in lieu was the only option.
Stuff that I think can be learned from this:
The company giving people time off for call outs can be a low cost win-win situation, because people who have been awake for 4 days straight shouldn't be handling your companies business critical systems.
If being on call is part of a position, then the base salary or hourly rate can be loaded so that is reflective that you are on call for a certain proportion of your time. If your call out availability periods are on a less rigid roster, and it can be more random who gets it, then a per callout period payment is probably more fair to all.
When I was a team leader in once of the organisations, I had the authority to approve leave, and I would be giving people time off if they worked excessive hours because of call outs . For example if a guy worked all day in the office, and then was up most of the night on a call out, in addition to his bonus hourly rate, he got time off the next day as well, so that he either turned up that day or the next in a fit state to accomplish useful work. Basically if the junior managers are given sufficient discretion, they can come up with quite fair and equitable schemes.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't think there were any recorded instances of a Rolls-Royce requiring non-scheduled maintenance ....
"Apple putting their framework on Linux would be akin to putting a Ferrari body around a Lada engine."
You appear to forget that even Lamborghini make tractors.
Why don't you sit back, relax, put your feet up and let someone fix you a nice warm cup of HARDEN THE F&*K UP ?
A REAL Unix user would have hacked the keyboard driver by now if it bothered them that much.
Apple has to spend its efforts where it thinks it gets the best pay off, and like it or not, your views, at least at the level of emotion you express are nothing more than a narrow sliver of the bell curve.
Actually it depends on the Mac - there are about 4 or 5 dates they can reset to:
1904, 1956, 1976 , 1984, 2001, depending on the machine.
This was a "Stump the Experts" Question at the 2003 world wide develoepr conference.
I have it on good authority that the process by which you would become "almost pregnant" is far more interesting a concept than getting "near-broadband".
If remote setup is spin, why is it in the documentation that was released for Panther when the OS was released ? See the server administration pdfs.
.
This isn't a new "exploit" - all previous versions of MacOS X and NeXTStep had this with NetInfo by design - thats for nearly 15 years. However, it requires specific non-default configuration to work ( the network directory does not have precedence over the local directory by default - what is claimed in the original web page announcing the exploit is wrong )
For this to work, someone with local access to the machine has to go and change the directory lookup order for authentication, so that the network directories override local.
This is one of a long list of "exploits" that fall into the category of "If I have local administrator/root access and misconfigure something in a specific way, then I am potentially remotely exploitable"
The UI in MacOS should definately warn you if you tried to make the change, but this really isn't the sort of thing you'd work people day and night to fix.
They can be replaced by quieter fans, thats why Apple had a power supply upgrade program for these machines which replaced the noisy fans with quiet ones.
If you had gone down this path you wouldn't have had the end result problem.
I'm not aware of any vendor who will honour warranty on parts of a machine where an end user has modified them.
Apple are generally pretty good - if you mod something, they'll only void warranty on the parts you modified not the bits you didn't effect.
In your case, you wrecked the CPU, the heat sink and the cooling system, because your ego told you you knew better. Consider the experience a tuition fee, build a bridge and get over it.
as a point of comparison, a 17 MB file copy over a 100baseT connection takes less than a minute.
Thats from a G4/466 to a G4 1.25 , both of which are substantially slower than the G5 you are referring to.
and the iPod works fine during it.
You would appear to have some other issues.
given an appropriate allocation of time, money and resources.
:
There are a number of things that are key
1) agree with senior management on broad priorities
2) draw up a list of what needs to be done
3) re-order the list in terms of the agreed priorities
4) present the prioritised list to management, and have them agree to the priority
5) Give an honest indication of how far down the list you'll be able to get
Go off and do stuff, and report progress on the list and re-prioritise the list say once a week, with their input.
IF they are half way decent as a manager, they will rapidly understand to either accept the level of capability they have, OR accept the need to increase that level of capability to meet their performance expectations. If they can't arrive at conclusions similar to these, in general you should be looking to work elsewhere.
If they want X to be done, explain what is really needed to achieve X. If some or all of the pre-requisites, give a honest estimate of how that will impact their timelines.
Oh - and plan on, and only commit to, 35-40 hours of real work per week per person, otherwise you'll burn people out, AND have no spare capacity to surge to meet the occasional urgent deadlines.
Another thing that can help, is to help filter the crap out, by getting agreement from management for allocation of resources to issues.
No system is perfect, but if you can demonstrate an understanding of the businesses needs and priorities, and be up front, but constructive, about the implications of meeting those, you can often say no without really saying no.
Whilst MS is probably a player in this, keep in mind that the South Australian State Government's IT is almost totally outsourced to EDS ( who are a ISC member, and a MS solution parter at a very big way ).
EDS's revenues in the SA State Government Cotnract would be impacted by an open source direction , as EDS derives revenue both from selling software and hardware to the government, as well as supporting the systems.
As EDS is a major sized player, one of the ways they derive revenue is by screwing commercial developers down on price, and then selling to their customers at as high a price they can get away with.
Extensive use of OSS/Free software would impact this because they would have reduced capability to pad their revenue.
If she has pants then she's not naked.
Of course, you could mean that the pants are merely adjacent to her, or indeed not in her possession or proximity at all, but then I hardly see the point.
If you already have a Naked Natalie Portman (Pat. Pend.) then why do you need to pour hot grits down some pants at all ?
There are easier ways to dispose of the clothing, and frankly, the dissociation of the pants from the owner probably means it would be just as effective to pour them down your own !
Actually, if this was the guy I think it was ...
They dug him out and there was a bit of an international incident with various countries claiming ownership of the "noble savage who died tragically", with I think the French, Italians and Swiss all having a go at it.
When the scientists announced they found semen in the stomach contents the Swiss and Italians stopped claiming ownership !
So it may not have been the girlfriend that was the problem ...
Of course there a bunch of legitimate explanations of how it got there besides the person in question batting for the other team, but I recall I found it very funny at the time.
( and I should note that I have no intrinsic problem with the recreational consumption of semen by either sex )
Well - I've actually seen this done for the odd recording studio - Cube + 15'' display in the control room with the hard drives removed and they are net-booted off a server which is remote over 100baseT or gig ethernet.
Jay has been quite thorough, and been pretty open about how he has gone about things. His findings are broadly consistient with a study done at Adelaide University in 1998/1999 looking at iMacs as a potential beowulf cluster nodes. http://www.dhpc.adelaide.edu.au/reports/065/abs-06 5.html
Their basic conclusion was that the compiler performance was holding the performance back from being competitive ( gcc on PPC being the issue ).
Last time I checked , Apple's changes to gcc made for MacOS X and Altivec hadn't made it back into the main gcc source tree yet, although it can be downloaded from the Darwin site.
By my experience , PPC is typically about 25-30% faster clock for clock at integer, and 50%-100% at floating point. G4 will do better again if you can vectorise your code. That assumes a bunch of things like having enough memory bandwidth , not thrashing caches etc.
I've worked either as a consultant , contractor or an employee at a number of different support organisations, and a number of different rules applied. Note also that this was in Australia, where employment conditions are generally a tad more enlightened ( or socialist if you prefer ) than the US. Organisation 1. Company with a 3 Letter Name who does IT services globally Employees who were on call and carried a pager or mobile were had specific response times to call back on being contacted, and were not allowed to drink etc when on call. There were also response times requried to arrive on site, so this imposed defacto how far you could venture away from the urban area. These guys were paid a retainer for carrying the means of contact for being on call, but were not paid for being called out, there was a formula of time in lieu leave based on how long they were called out for. Note that these guys had a second tier call out person as well , who had LONGER response times, and recieved a lower retainer. If they were activated because the on call person was commited to a job, they got the higher rate pro rata. Organisation 2 Different company with a 3 letter name that delivers IT services globally Conditions were somewhat similar to the above, except they didn't have the second string backup person. The support services these guys provided attracter a per hour charge on a call out , paid by the client. These guys paid a similar rate to the first Organisation, but rather than time in lieu, if you were called out, you were paid an hourly rate over and above salary. Suffice to say that the company made about twice as much per hour than the employee if they were called out. Organisation 3 Small IT consulting Firm Carrying the on call device attracted a retainer based on the percieved likelyhood of a callout. Staff on call for organisations percieved as having a high call out risk got a HIGHER retainer, and those on call for a lower call out risk got a lower retainer. In addition, the employee would fill out an after hours work form, and had the option of an hourly rate, or time off in lieu calculated by a formula. Generally the clients whose after hours support was frequent, and had the higher fixed retainer, attracted a lower per hour payment and less leave, and the clients whose call outs were rare, had a higher per hour rate and more leave. Note that even for clients who payed a flat fee for support, and didn't pay a per hour rate for after hours , the employees still were compensated, but then time in lieu was the only option. Stuff that I think can be learned from this: The company giving people time off for call outs can be a low cost win-win situation, because people who have been awake for 4 days straight shouldn't be handling your companies business critical systems. If being on call is part of a position, then the base salary or hourly rate can be loaded so that is reflective that you are on call for a certain proportion of your time. If your call out availability periods are on a less rigid roster, and it can be more random who gets it, then a per callout period payment is probably more fair to all. When I was a team leader in once of the organisations, I had the authority to approve leave, and I would be giving people time off if they worked excessive hours because of call outs . For example if a guy worked all day in the office, and then was up most of the night on a call out, in addition to his bonus hourly rate, he got time off the next day as well, so that he either turned up that day or the next in a fit state to accomplish useful work. Basically if the junior managers are given sufficient discretion, they can come up with quite fair and equitable schemes.