Bingo! And make sure that the same port/internet rules apply to the faculty while at school. If you cant't afford high quality commercial products, look into OpenDNS and dd-wrt.
"Don't be a nazi" is not just the most ethical advice, it's also the most practical.
Here's how to defeat any censorship attempts:
1) boot macbook while holding T key and it's connected to another mac via firewire 2) drag home folder / apps and files you care about off your macbook when it shows up as an external FW drive on the other machine 3) launch disk utility on the other machine and reformat the drive on the macbook 4) shut down the macbook and boot it back up using the Leopard install DVD 5) install Leopard 6) migrate your files back and enjoy your new computer
Here's how you REALLY NEED TO HANDLE IT:
IN THE SCHOOL 1) set up port and internet filtering as per state/local law and reasonable requirements. Block chat stuff. 2) walk around frequently to monitor usage 3) make restrictions and penalties for unauthorized usage crystal clear
AT HOME Students are free to do whatever they want with the laptop but parents are on the hook to ensure the students don't do anything the parents don't want. It's not the school's responsibility anymore once it's at home.
Agreed. It is much easier for an average user to manage a handful of windows servers as opposed to UNIX servers. They will manage them like they would a set of discrete desktops and it will keep them fairly busy, but it is do-able. These folks lack the skill to scale that support out due to their dependence on the GUI and a single user mentality. This level of accessibility does not exist in the UNIX world, therefore a certain corresponding level of mediocraty is bypassed completely. Still, to manage either platform at a high level requires top notch skills.
I manage an IT systems engineering group for a large corporation. We currently manage nearly 10,000 servers with a split of 60% Windows and 40% UNIX (Solaris/AIX/Linux). Our Windows servers are managed at a server/admin ratio of 100:1 while the UNIX servers are managed at a ratio of 50:1. The vast majority of our Windows servers are built with an unattended OS install; our UNIX servers are not. Our Windows servers receive software distributions via a centralized TPV product that ties directly in to our Asset Management system; our RISC-based UNIX servers do not. We are working to bring the UNIX environment up to snuff with the levels of efficiency already realized in the Windows environment, and we will. Windows servers can be managed as effectively as UNIX servers and vice versa -- It just depends on who is doing the managing. I agree with the comment above to "hire smart". Just make sure you do it for all platforms your organization supports and not just the ones that don't have a nice GUI. Windows servers are the best fit for many of the needs of our organization, UNIX and Linux are best fit for others. The key is to find the best solution, regardless of platform, and then manage across those platforms in a unified way.
OpenVMS was around in 1977? I mean, it is great that VMS had a rich feature set, but how does that help those of us that manage enterprise environments today? Since the original context of this thread was backup on the Windows server platform, how about something really useful. Check out an OpenVMS based product from PolyServe that actually works on a current day, pertinent OS's with real market share.
This Insight Media review from CES indicates only 10 lumens for this device - good for a 10-15" effective display. Hopefully this technology will improve further.
Everything old is new again
on
NTT Joins OSDL
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Bell Labs develops UNIX as a development environment for next generation telecommunication systems. It grows to encompass a myriad of applications over the years. One day a bright young Finn hacks a derivative to run on commidity computing hardware. This derivative "Linux" is embraced first by hard core geeks for their own use (and as an expression of independence from various monolithic computing behemoths) and eventually, through the coding and evangelizing efforts of this user community, gains acceptance in enterprise level computing environments. Now NTT wants to use Linux as a platform for next generation data/telecomm applications...
Actually, one may or may not have this option. Options for printing, longevity, etc. are configureable - printing may or not may be allowed depending on how the document is published. I can think of a number of situations where this is a desireable feature in my day to day work. None of these situations involve hiding information, but rather restricting the way it can / can't be used.
These concerns are largely unfounded. Any organization that uses a groupware (e.g. Exchange/Outlook) package already has virtually instant messaging through their standard email conduit. Similar predictions were offered when high-speed access to the web came to employee's desktops. As with the web, novelty wears off quickly and everyone still needs to get their job done. In my experience, using IM in the office reduces the impulse for someone to walk to my cube and interrupt me face to face for something "quick" that becomes protracted and a more significant time sync as we converse. I see IM as a filter for "time-suckers".
A lot of the comments on this post seem desktop-centric so this has to be discussed in 2 parts:
Server:Sun/HP/IBM look at Unix as a server solution. In order for Linux to compete with Unix in the enterprise data center, there needs to be a unified support model (RedHat, IBM, HP, etc. are beginning to address this). More SMP support (dozens of processors), memory addressing capabilities, etc. Mostly what it needs is more time and exposure - people will come around.
Desktop:All it needs is to "be there". All other desktop 'unixes' are painful compared to what is available from Gnome, KDE, or Windows Manager.
1) Print your name clearly so we know who you are 2) The teacher is anyone who knows more than you do 3) Your first lesson is free, and you just used it up.
... that when you pass "personal" notes in the classroom, the teacher might just be paying attention and decide to read it to the rest of the class. This is not a violation of privacy, but rather a misunderstanding of the rules.
While ESX server does use a proprietary kernel, many of the basic components (installation process, basic system config, file locations, etc.) are straight out of the Red Hat mold. I have run extensive ESX tests on several platforms including the x440 from IBM. It is a great computing platform in general and runs ESX very well, but not necessarily in a superior manner to similar offerings from Compaq or Dell. I actually ran into a (well documented) bug with ESX on the x440 that had to do with the using the integrated Broadcom NIC as the Console interface.
The upcoming SMP version of ESX Server is a step in the right direction. I am certain VMWare will get it to scale past 2 processors at which point it becomes much more interesting in large-scale, processor-intensive applications.
I am a big advocate of the VMWare technology within my organization and can't wait to see it truly scale past the workstation and departmental server level.
If all you're doing is running desktop apps, then ok - point taken. The delta gets a lot bigger when you factor in an enterprise server app (DB, email, WWW, etc.). This is clearly VMWare's domain
Having run both Connectix's emulation solution and VMWare's true Virtual Machine solution, I can tell you there is no comparison in performance for the Workstation level products -- VMWare is the clear winner. Also VMWare's ESX server platform (based on RH Linux) is the best x86 based, non-specific-HW Platform solution out there for running Windows and non-Windows Operating Systems. VMWare's only real competition from the performance standpoint is Viruozzo from SW-Soft. The caveat with Virtuozzo is that it supports only Linux.
I can roam almost anywhere (and without extra charges) in the US with my cell phone, which is a land mass much larger than Europe. I have experienced this kind of connectivity on Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and Nextel. I used Voicestream (1.9Ghz GSM) for ~ 1 year as well. Great service when I had a signal. Unfortunately, the higher frequency signals really created gaps in coverage. What do we give up with CDMA? For now some of the more advanced data functions, but that will change soon. Bottom line is, I need a phone primarily for voice calls - give me good coverage first, bells and whistles second.
Intels's i960 is a RISC chip. It has been used in many advanced embedded systems for years. It is not x86 compatible and is was never mean't to be the main system processor in a PC.
Slashdot Mirror
Bingo! And make sure that the same port/internet rules apply to the faculty while at school. If you cant't afford high quality commercial products, look into OpenDNS and dd-wrt.
"Don't be a nazi" is not just the most ethical advice, it's also the most practical.
Here's how to defeat any censorship attempts:
1) boot macbook while holding T key and it's connected to another mac via firewire
2) drag home folder / apps and files you care about off your macbook when it shows up as an external FW drive on the other machine
3) launch disk utility on the other machine and reformat the drive on the macbook
4) shut down the macbook and boot it back up using the Leopard install DVD
5) install Leopard
6) migrate your files back and enjoy your new computer
Here's how you REALLY NEED TO HANDLE IT:
IN THE SCHOOL
1) set up port and internet filtering as per state/local law and reasonable requirements. Block chat stuff.
2) walk around frequently to monitor usage
3) make restrictions and penalties for unauthorized usage crystal clear
AT HOME
Students are free to do whatever they want with the laptop but parents are on the hook to ensure the students don't do anything the parents don't want. It's not the school's responsibility anymore once it's at home.
Agreed. It is much easier for an average user to manage a handful of windows servers as opposed to UNIX servers. They will manage them like they would a set of discrete desktops and it will keep them fairly busy, but it is do-able. These folks lack the skill to scale that support out due to their dependence on the GUI and a single user mentality. This level of accessibility does not exist in the UNIX world, therefore a certain corresponding level of mediocraty is bypassed completely. Still, to manage either platform at a high level requires top notch skills.
I manage an IT systems engineering group for a large corporation. We currently manage nearly 10,000 servers with a split of 60% Windows and 40% UNIX (Solaris/AIX/Linux). Our Windows servers are managed at a server/admin ratio of 100:1 while the UNIX servers are managed at a ratio of 50:1. The vast majority of our Windows servers are built with an unattended OS install; our UNIX servers are not. Our Windows servers receive software distributions via a centralized TPV product that ties directly in to our Asset Management system; our RISC-based UNIX servers do not. We are working to bring the UNIX environment up to snuff with the levels of efficiency already realized in the Windows environment, and we will. Windows servers can be managed as effectively as UNIX servers and vice versa -- It just depends on who is doing the managing. I agree with the comment above to "hire smart". Just make sure you do it for all platforms your organization supports and not just the ones that don't have a nice GUI. Windows servers are the best fit for many of the needs of our organization, UNIX and Linux are best fit for others. The key is to find the best solution, regardless of platform, and then manage across those platforms in a unified way.
OpenVMS was around in 1977? I mean, it is great that VMS had a rich feature set, but how does that help those of us that manage enterprise environments today? Since the original context of this thread was backup on the Windows server platform, how about something really useful. Check out an OpenVMS based product from PolyServe that actually works on a current day, pertinent OS's with real market share.
This Insight Media review from CES indicates only 10 lumens for this device - good for a 10-15" effective display. Hopefully this technology will improve further.
Great analogy. In its own way, the i960 has proved to be as universally useful as duct tape.
Tell the pilots of the F117 Stealth Fighter that the i960 is a failure -- they'd have a hard time flying without it.
..."BeOS is very Mac-like (OS9, anyway) in that there's no worries, no configuration, it just goes right out of the box. And it's F A S T."
Sorry, but I don't get the comparison at all
Funny! Someone mod this up!!!
Bell Labs develops UNIX as a development environment for next generation telecommunication systems. It grows to encompass a myriad of applications over the years. One day a bright young Finn hacks a derivative to run on commidity computing hardware. This derivative "Linux" is embraced first by hard core geeks for their own use (and as an expression of independence from various monolithic computing behemoths) and eventually, through the coding and evangelizing efforts of this user community, gains acceptance in enterprise level computing environments. Now NTT wants to use Linux as a platform for next generation data/telecomm applications...
Hasn't this been "just around the corner" for about 5 years?
Actually, one may or may not have this option. Options for printing, longevity, etc. are configureable - printing may or not may be allowed depending on how the document is published. I can think of a number of situations where this is a desireable feature in my day to day work. None of these situations involve hiding information, but rather restricting the way it can / can't be used.
Maybe..... but only if you assume that IRM will prevent these documents from being printed to PDF or hardcopy
The story is the fiction, the science is what "should" make it seem feasible.
These concerns are largely unfounded. Any organization that uses a groupware (e.g. Exchange/Outlook) package already has virtually instant messaging through their standard email conduit. Similar predictions were offered when high-speed access to the web came to employee's desktops. As with the web, novelty wears off quickly and everyone still needs to get their job done. In my experience, using IM in the office reduces the impulse for someone to walk to my cube and interrupt me face to face for something "quick" that becomes protracted and a more significant time sync as we converse. I see IM as a filter for "time-suckers".
Server:Sun/HP/IBM look at Unix as a server solution. In order for Linux to compete with Unix in the enterprise data center, there needs to be a unified support model (RedHat, IBM, HP, etc. are beginning to address this). More SMP support (dozens of processors), memory addressing capabilities, etc. Mostly what it needs is more time and exposure - people will come around.
Desktop:All it needs is to "be there". All other desktop 'unixes' are painful compared to what is available from Gnome, KDE, or Windows Manager.
A notebook that comes without the dreaded "Microsoft Tax" (unless they can come up with a pre-emptive "potential-use" licensing fee.)
The Rules:
1) Print your name clearly so we know who you are
2) The teacher is anyone who knows more than you do
3) Your first lesson is free, and you just used it up.
... that when you pass "personal" notes in the classroom, the teacher might just be paying attention and decide to read it to the rest of the class. This is not a violation of privacy, but rather a misunderstanding of the rules.
If this guy were a trekkie, he'd know the endpoint of his research leads to the Borg...
While ESX server does use a proprietary kernel, many of the basic components (installation process, basic system config, file locations, etc.) are straight out of the Red Hat mold. I have run extensive ESX tests on several platforms including the x440 from IBM. It is a great computing platform in general and runs ESX very well, but not necessarily in a superior manner to similar offerings from Compaq or Dell. I actually ran into a (well documented) bug with ESX on the x440 that had to do with the using the integrated Broadcom NIC as the Console interface.
The upcoming SMP version of ESX Server is a step in the right direction. I am certain VMWare will get it to scale past 2 processors at which point it becomes much more interesting in large-scale, processor-intensive applications.
I am a big advocate of the VMWare technology within my organization and can't wait to see it truly scale past the workstation and departmental server level.
If all you're doing is running desktop apps, then ok - point taken. The delta gets a lot bigger when you factor in an enterprise server app (DB, email, WWW, etc.). This is clearly VMWare's domain
Having run both Connectix's emulation solution and VMWare's true Virtual Machine solution, I can tell you there is no comparison in performance for the Workstation level products -- VMWare is the clear winner. Also VMWare's ESX server platform (based on RH Linux) is the best x86 based, non-specific-HW Platform solution out there for running Windows and non-Windows Operating Systems. VMWare's only real competition from the performance standpoint is Viruozzo from SW-Soft. The caveat with Virtuozzo is that it supports only Linux.
I can roam almost anywhere (and without extra charges) in the US with my cell phone, which is a land mass much larger than Europe. I have experienced this kind of connectivity on Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and Nextel. I used Voicestream (1.9Ghz GSM) for ~ 1 year as well. Great service when I had a signal. Unfortunately, the higher frequency signals really created gaps in coverage. What do we give up with CDMA? For now some of the more advanced data functions, but that will change soon. Bottom line is, I need a phone primarily for voice calls - give me good coverage first, bells and whistles second.
Intels's i960 is a RISC chip. It has been used in many advanced embedded systems for years. It is not x86 compatible and is was never mean't to be the main system processor in a PC.