Through nmap and telnet, I can see that that algore2000.com uses Linux and Apache. Al Gore has been known to assimilate buzzwords and jargon in a big way (MIT seems to have had his number during commencement on this one). For example, several months ago I recieved a mail from the site claiming it was now "Open Source" when in reality it was nothing of the such and the term wasn't even remotely applicable to anything on the site. How much of your decision to go with Linux/Apache came out of practicality, and how much of it came because they are the trendy things to be running?
Look, you have to change your frame of reference. I see everyone doing cost/benefit analyses, uptime/reboot ratios, etc. for NT4. Why? Windows 2000 is very loosely based on the NT4 codebase. I mean, hell, they actually introduced another 65,000 bugs, so you know that there's a lot of new stuff in there. To be honest, I've found it quite stable, and I'm using Build 2072, which is 100+ builds from the last release candidate. There's probably 130,000 bugs in that version, yet it hasn't crashed for me once. Neither has Linux. In other words, I've found them to be equally stable. Windows and Linux. How's that for strange?
I'm not saying that Win2K is as stable as Sun, and probably not even as stable as Linux in general, but you shouldn't write it off so quickly. I mean that in two ways: first, if you're looking for a good, easy to use server, give 2000 a try, and also, for the rest of us, we need to beware of the threat that Windows 2000 poses. A lot of the shortcomings which inveterate Linux advocates use as cannon fodder aren't there anymore. I've always used Linux because I believe in open standards and Open Source, and it would be a shame to see Windows 2000 gain ground, what with Microsoft's usage of exactly the opposite.
Sorry to disappoint you all, conspiracy theorists, but this binary is kosher, despite what you may wish to the contrary. How about next time, instead of just slathering on the FUD to each post, try doing a little investigation, and you might just keep from sounding like another crazed anti-government wacko. That's what I did, and lo and behold, it doesn't phone home, beam the contents of your hard drive to a secret bunker on the moon, or anything else. Of course, I could just be a minion of the Ministry of Truth myself... in fact, I am! And we're after you, Wilson! But don't take my word for it - trace out the system calls and you'll see that you have nothing to worry about. Try it:
strace -e trace=network./find_ddos -p -y
No system calls for networking are made. I bypassed the full hard drive scan for the sake of time, but I've done that too and you have nothing to fear. So either use the tool or don't - really, I don't care - but please refrain from polluting the message boards up with more anti-government FUD. As if there wasn't enough already.
There's no need; I just 'strace'd the entire thing and it's kosher. It does scan every file on your hard drive, which is kind of annoying, but fair enough they tell you that's what it does in the docs. Of course, I've only used the Linux version, so YMMV on BSD and Solaris, and if you're a real conspiracy theorist then you've got to assume that I downloaded a tainted version as I have not MD5'd it:)
First, I think this is a pretty lame question - I could see it in "Dead Abby" before I could in "Ask Slashdot". The entire point of having morals is to retain your constituition in the face of opposition - not to have Slashdot form them for you. If you have to ask what's right or wrong, then maybe it's not that big of an issue, eh?
Anyways, it really doesn't sound like you have much of a choice. If the domain name could go for millions, what business owner in their right mind is going to turn down the prospect of selling it? You may lose sleep over the underlying philosophical rubbish, but I think you should realize the futility of your position: if everying is as you make it to be, it will be sold. If the owners care about money enough to reorganize the company, then they'll certainly care enough to net a quick couple million at the expense of filing 10 minutes worth of paper work. I guess I fall into the camp of "change what you can, and accept what you can't," so I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
Well this might be painfully apparent, but you'd be amazed how many times I've seen people do stupid things like turn their front page into an.asp script merely to have today's date on it (cron! I tell them). Anyways, make everything static, as much as possible. Stat out what pages are receiving the most hits and endeavor to make them as static as possible. This is what most big sites do - Yahoo recieves well over 100 million hits daily and they sure as hell aren't dynamically creating anything besides search results. Any page that is not immediately created or modifyed based on a user request can be made static when used in combination with scripting.
This being said, don't enslave yourself to Apache. There are lots faster ways to shooting static text over a socket, namely Zeus and khttpd, the kernel http server. It (khttpd) only serves static pages, but by placing it out of user space you get to bypass all the kernel gunk that accompanies a user-level proces. Needless to say, it's really, really fast (especially compared to Apache) and I have no doubt that even on a modest Pentium 1 you could crank out hundreds of thousands of pages a day using static HTML and the khttpd. Also, it can be used in combination with another webserver, so you don't have to sacrifice any dynamic fuctionality. Check Zeus if you need more features. Either way, they're faster than Apache. Other than that, all the obvious apply - put the SQL server on a separate box and make SQL queries as sparingly as possible. If your site is image-laden, consider putting those on a separate box. Or clone your boxes and employ load-balancing. Or just pray for Apache 2 to be released:) Lots of ways to skin the cat here.
The real killerapp for wireless tech will be a bridge, of all things - just a plain old transciever that plugs into any hub, switch, whatever. To date I have found only one such device from Proxim, and it costs over a thousand dollars. Think about it - no interplatform compatiblity issues, true interoperation with existing infrastructure, and no taking up slots in your server for radio equipment that could and should reside outside of it. I can't believe Diamond et al. didn't think of this when they made their home networking push. Carrying a signal over the phone lines is great and really, really convenient - but I am not going to downgrade from 10mbps Ethernet on 6 of my computers to 1.2mbps phone lines on 7 when I add another PC. If I could buy a HomeFree kit and a bridge from phone line -> ethernet into my existing hub, I'd have bought 10 of them months ago. Instead, I'm forced to sacrifice weekends stringing cable to whatever room gets the next PC (7 and counting;). The same goes for any of the electric line packages, etc. Give us the bridges!
You live in Norway, where lifetime blacklisting is both a legal and acceptable business practice. Certainly you had to know that there would be repercussions from releasing DeCSS, yet you did it anyways. There is a very real possiblity that you might find yourself on such a list - despite my and other's opinions to the contrary, quite a few pointy-haired bosses out there think of you as a punk hacker kid who will cost a lot of "honest" businessmen a lot of money.
I chanced upon a guy in #linux who claims to run a software shop in Norway where you applied for a job and he flatly rejected you. Basically, he said that anyone who was dumb enough to risk a lifetime blacklist was too dumb to work for him. I have no idea about the verity of this story, but the rationale behind what he said makes sense - people who display a callous disregard for "the rules" don't often fit into the corporate culture. My questions are whether or not you have felt any of the backlash like that described above, and also if you now regret undertaking this project. Sure, you will live in infamy as the guy who cracked CSS, but at the same time you may have jeopardized your employment possiblities in your home country - and you're only 16.
This is stupid. I can't stand Mitnick or what he did, and personally the only reason I'm happy he is released is because I won't have to wade through any more of that "Free Kevin" crap anymore. And I can't believe so many people went for the 5th amendment argument hook, line, and sinker. A criminal does not get the spoils of his crime back after jail. I have never, not once, heard of a guy doing 15 for grand theft auto and then getting the stolen car back when he is released. The one person I have actually met who once robbed a bank is dirt poor. He hasn't exactly been able to recoup his plunder, and Uncle Sam certainly didn't hand it to him with a bow on top when he got out.
Mitnick robbed companies, guys. He isn't entitled to the data. Legally, he's not even entitled to a computer. His parole would be revoked seven ways to Sunday if he were to actually use whatever encrypted things he had, and I don't see any reason for giving it back.
Oh come off it already. Karma is not the dick measuring contest you think it is, despite your best efforts. I'm not sure if you know this, but other users can't even see your karma. The only people that "fish" for karma are the morons that troll around pointing it out, as well. So either post things of substance or don't post at all.
You're in a bit of a quandary. First, the 370 pin PPGA socket for Celeron processors is not compatible with the FC-PGA Pentium III coppermines. Abit is releasing a SlotKet III which supposedly will fit both PPGA Celerons and Coppermines in a Slot1 motherboard, but regressing to Slot1 seems a bit pointless ATM considering where everything is headed. I would tell you to wait a few months for FC-PGA Celerons to be released and buy a compatible motherboard, but unfortunately Intel is disabling SMP on the new edition Celerons. If you really have your heart set on upgrading, I suppose you could get a good Slot1 SMP motherboard and slocket Celeron 370PPGAs for now and see what happens with the FC-PGA->Slot1 converters. Otherwise, hey, motherboards are cheap, and for the price of 2 P3-1Ghz chips you could probably score a couple of P3-950s and a shiny new mobo with all the bells and whistles. In other words, I wouldn't get my heart set on upgrading, which is increasingly looking to be an antiquated concept.
It'll probably be more unstable, but cubane will give a bigger boom. There are just more C-H bonds in cubane, which means more energy is released per molecule when they combust. Cyclopropane, and to a greater extent it's evil sister cyclopropene are less stable so they'd take less energy to blow up but the explosion wouldn't be as big as cubane. I'd take cubane for my bombmaking needs any day.
You won't notice a difference between SSH and Telnet for text login, even over a modem. This means of course you should go with SSH. It's a lot more featureful than telnet, and has been around so much longer than all the other altnernatives you mentioned that it's bound to be more secure. Also, the distinction between SSH and TelnetSSL must be made - tunneling telnet through SSL encrypts your communications, so your session won't get sniffed, but anyone who has your public key can still access the box just like regular telnet (assuming you're not using a firewall). Obviously, this isn't that much of a leap over plain old telnet - they still get a login: prompt at will, which with enough motivation will can be cracked. OTOH SSH can disable password based logins altogether and use RSA for authentication, where you create a private/public keyblock that you must supply a decryption key to login with. The only way someone will be able to login to your box period is if they get ahold of and crack your private key, which at 1024 bits would take several billion years IIRC, or if they install their own public key on the server, which makes this whole discussion a moot point. So I would use SSH.
No, it's not a free-market economy. The record industry is an example of laissez-faire capitalism at its worst. 5 huge companies control what's played on the radio, what CDs you find at the store, etc. And it's not just a question of risk. Artists recoup about 5% of their gross CD sales money. Do you really mean to tell me that the other 95% is so called "flop insurance" in case the CD sucks? Get real - even when CDs flop the record companies still turn a profit. That's the way it is my friend, and if you are still buying CDs then you, not me, are supporting the old school regime which robs the musician of the money and motivation to produce more material. If every musician distributed through MP3, I guarantee you you would see more people producing more work of more quality.
I have no legal basis for this, but it seems like this sort of hits right in the gray area of US copyright law - it's illegal for people to download music they don't own. It's illegal for people to upload music they own for people who don't own it to download. But is it illegal for people who own music to post it so other people who own it can download it again? If so, how far does that right extend. If I own the LP version of a track, can I download the live version? I haven't ever heard any discussion of a case like this before; even RIAAs own propaganda doesn't mention it. Any legal scholars want to take a whack at it?
You're wrong in thinking that musicians are getting screwed. They're not. Musicians make almost no money from selling CDs anyways; they tend to get contractually raped by the same recording industry fatcats who are bitching about audio CD piracy (conincidence?). Have you heard any artists publicly complain in genuine about MP3 proliferation? I haven't. I have seen some posters where RIAA payed artists money to sign their name on an anti-piracy statement. But by and large, most artists couldn't care less.
It's a well known and time-honored fact that music artists make far more from concerts than CD sales - anecdotally, look at who the rich rock stars are: guys who are really good live (David Bowie, the Stones, Aerosmith, arguable Ricky Martin, Madonna, etc.) A lot of well known artists seem to prefer MP3 to convential distribution, simply because they're tired of being whored by the recording industry. It's cheaper and more effective to have your singles put out electronically, especially when that means more fans paying $60 for a concert ticket that the record company doesn't get a single cent of. It seems like every day some label forces another of their artists to take down MP3s off their site (see Tom Petty, Pete Townshend, many others) in spite of that artist's protests to the contrary. What does this tell you?
NEC SuperScript 870 is great - pretty output, fast as hell, and 10/100bT ready. IIRC it's Linux compatible, but I'm not sure. Definitely check that out before you buy it. I use it on our home LAN of 7 Windows PCs and it hasn't failed me yet - nothing like printing seven simultaneous jobs and having everything work like clockwork.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Through nmap and telnet, I can see that that algore2000.com uses Linux and Apache. Al Gore has been known to assimilate buzzwords and jargon in a big way (MIT seems to have had his number during commencement on this one). For example, several months ago I recieved a mail from the site claiming it was now "Open Source" when in reality it was nothing of the such and the term wasn't even remotely applicable to anything on the site. How much of your decision to go with Linux/Apache came out of practicality, and how much of it came because they are the trendy things to be running?
--
Look, you have to change your frame of reference. I see everyone doing cost/benefit analyses, uptime/reboot ratios, etc. for NT4. Why? Windows 2000 is very loosely based on the NT4 codebase. I mean, hell, they actually introduced another 65,000 bugs, so you know that there's a lot of new stuff in there. To be honest, I've found it quite stable, and I'm using Build 2072, which is 100+ builds from the last release candidate. There's probably 130,000 bugs in that version, yet it hasn't crashed for me once. Neither has Linux. In other words, I've found them to be equally stable. Windows and Linux. How's that for strange?
I'm not saying that Win2K is as stable as Sun, and probably not even as stable as Linux in general, but you shouldn't write it off so quickly. I mean that in two ways: first, if you're looking for a good, easy to use server, give 2000 a try, and also, for the rest of us, we need to beware of the threat that Windows 2000 poses. A lot of the shortcomings which inveterate Linux advocates use as cannon fodder aren't there anymore. I've always used Linux because I believe in open standards and Open Source, and it would be a shame to see Windows 2000 gain ground, what with Microsoft's usage of exactly the opposite.
--
Mm interesting.. how would you code that anyways?
--
Hah.. I called him Wilson. Even I'm not so sci-fi illiterate as to forget it's WINSTON, and I'd prefer Conrad to Crichton any day of the week :)
--
Sorry to disappoint you all, conspiracy theorists, but this binary is kosher, despite what you may wish to the contrary. How about next time, instead of just slathering on the FUD to each post, try doing a little investigation, and you might just keep from sounding like another crazed anti-government wacko. That's what I did, and lo and behold, it doesn't phone home, beam the contents of your hard drive to a secret bunker on the moon, or anything else. Of course, I could just be a minion of the Ministry of Truth myself... in fact, I am! And we're after you, Wilson! But don't take my word for it - trace out the system calls and you'll see that you have nothing to worry about. Try it:
./find_ddos -p -y
strace -e trace=network
No system calls for networking are made. I bypassed the full hard drive scan for the sake of time, but I've done that too and you have nothing to fear. So either use the tool or don't - really, I don't care - but please refrain from polluting the message boards up with more anti-government FUD. As if there wasn't enough already.
--
There's no need; I just 'strace'd the entire thing and it's kosher. It does scan every file on your hard drive, which is kind of annoying, but fair enough they tell you that's what it does in the docs. Of course, I've only used the Linux version, so YMMV on BSD and Solaris, and if you're a real conspiracy theorist then you've got to assume that I downloaded a tainted version as I have not MD5'd it :)
--
First, I think this is a pretty lame question - I could see it in "Dead Abby" before I could in "Ask Slashdot". The entire point of having morals is to retain your constituition in the face of opposition - not to have Slashdot form them for you. If you have to ask what's right or wrong, then maybe it's not that big of an issue, eh?
Anyways, it really doesn't sound like you have much of a choice. If the domain name could go for millions, what business owner in their right mind is going to turn down the prospect of selling it? You may lose sleep over the underlying philosophical rubbish, but I think you should realize the futility of your position: if everying is as you make it to be, it will be sold. If the owners care about money enough to reorganize the company, then they'll certainly care enough to net a quick couple million at the expense of filing 10 minutes worth of paper work. I guess I fall into the camp of "change what you can, and accept what you can't," so I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
--
Yes exactly ... I can just see it now: "NO MOVING PARTS" emblazoned in big, yellow lettering on the package. And that's a warning, not a feature ;)
--
AOLserver has really nice TCL support. Some people would prefer scripting in TCL to php4. Just thought it should be mentioned.
--
Well this might be painfully apparent, but you'd be amazed how many times I've seen people do stupid things like turn their front page into an .asp script merely to have today's date on it (cron! I tell them). Anyways, make everything static, as much as possible. Stat out what pages are receiving the most hits and endeavor to make them as static as possible. This is what most big sites do - Yahoo recieves well over 100 million hits daily and they sure as hell aren't dynamically creating anything besides search results. Any page that is not immediately created or modifyed based on a user request can be made static when used in combination with scripting.
:) Lots of ways to skin the cat here.
This being said, don't enslave yourself to Apache. There are lots faster ways to shooting static text over a socket, namely Zeus and khttpd, the kernel http server. It (khttpd) only serves static pages, but by placing it out of user space you get to bypass all the kernel gunk that accompanies a user-level proces. Needless to say, it's really, really fast (especially compared to Apache) and I have no doubt that even on a modest Pentium 1 you could crank out hundreds of thousands of pages a day using static HTML and the khttpd. Also, it can be used in combination with another webserver, so you don't have to sacrifice any dynamic fuctionality. Check Zeus if you need more features. Either way, they're faster than Apache. Other than that, all the obvious apply - put the SQL server on a separate box and make SQL queries as sparingly as possible. If your site is image-laden, consider putting those on a separate box. Or clone your boxes and employ load-balancing. Or just pray for Apache 2 to be released
--
The real killerapp for wireless tech will be a bridge, of all things - just a plain old transciever that plugs into any hub, switch, whatever. To date I have found only one such device from Proxim, and it costs over a thousand dollars. Think about it - no interplatform compatiblity issues, true interoperation with existing infrastructure, and no taking up slots in your server for radio equipment that could and should reside outside of it. I can't believe Diamond et al. didn't think of this when they made their home networking push. Carrying a signal over the phone lines is great and really, really convenient - but I am not going to downgrade from 10mbps Ethernet on 6 of my computers to 1.2mbps phone lines on 7 when I add another PC. If I could buy a HomeFree kit and a bridge from phone line -> ethernet into my existing hub, I'd have bought 10 of them months ago. Instead, I'm forced to sacrifice weekends stringing cable to whatever room gets the next PC (7 and counting ;). The same goes for any of the electric line packages, etc. Give us the bridges!
--
You live in Norway, where lifetime blacklisting is both a legal and acceptable business practice. Certainly you had to know that there would be repercussions from releasing DeCSS, yet you did it anyways. There is a very real possiblity that you might find yourself on such a list - despite my and other's opinions to the contrary, quite a few pointy-haired bosses out there think of you as a punk hacker kid who will cost a lot of "honest" businessmen a lot of money.
I chanced upon a guy in #linux who claims to run a software shop in Norway where you applied for a job and he flatly rejected you. Basically, he said that anyone who was dumb enough to risk a lifetime blacklist was too dumb to work for him. I have no idea about the verity of this story, but the rationale behind what he said makes sense - people who display a callous disregard for "the rules" don't often fit into the corporate culture. My questions are whether or not you have felt any of the backlash like that described above, and also if you now regret undertaking this project. Sure, you will live in infamy as the guy who cracked CSS, but at the same time you may have jeopardized your employment possiblities in your home country - and you're only 16.
--
Bravo. /me wishes he had modpoints.
--
Because if it wasn't incriminating then his lawyer wouldn't be pleading the fifth. Read the article, you jackass.
--
This is stupid. I can't stand Mitnick or what he did, and personally the only reason I'm happy he is released is because I won't have to wade through any more of that "Free Kevin" crap anymore. And I can't believe so many people went for the 5th amendment argument hook, line, and sinker. A criminal does not get the spoils of his crime back after jail. I have never, not once, heard of a guy doing 15 for grand theft auto and then getting the stolen car back when he is released. The one person I have actually met who once robbed a bank is dirt poor. He hasn't exactly been able to recoup his plunder, and Uncle Sam certainly didn't hand it to him with a bow on top when he got out.
Mitnick robbed companies, guys. He isn't entitled to the data. Legally, he's not even entitled to a computer. His parole would be revoked seven ways to Sunday if he were to actually use whatever encrypted things he had, and I don't see any reason for giving it back.
--
Idiot.
--
Oh come off it already. Karma is not the dick measuring contest you think it is, despite your best efforts. I'm not sure if you know this, but other users can't even see your karma. The only people that "fish" for karma are the morons that troll around pointing it out, as well. So either post things of substance or don't post at all.
--
You're in a bit of a quandary. First, the 370 pin PPGA socket for Celeron processors is not compatible with the FC-PGA Pentium III coppermines. Abit is releasing a SlotKet III which supposedly will fit both PPGA Celerons and Coppermines in a Slot1 motherboard, but regressing to Slot1 seems a bit pointless ATM considering where everything is headed. I would tell you to wait a few months for FC-PGA Celerons to be released and buy a compatible motherboard, but unfortunately Intel is disabling SMP on the new edition Celerons. If you really have your heart set on upgrading, I suppose you could get a good Slot1 SMP motherboard and slocket Celeron 370PPGAs for now and see what happens with the FC-PGA->Slot1 converters. Otherwise, hey, motherboards are cheap, and for the price of 2 P3-1Ghz chips you could probably score a couple of P3-950s and a shiny new mobo with all the bells and whistles. In other words, I wouldn't get my heart set on upgrading, which is increasingly looking to be an antiquated concept.
--
It'll probably be more unstable, but cubane will give a bigger boom. There are just more C-H bonds in cubane, which means more energy is released per molecule when they combust. Cyclopropane, and to a greater extent it's evil sister cyclopropene are less stable so they'd take less energy to blow up but the explosion wouldn't be as big as cubane. I'd take cubane for my bombmaking needs any day.
--
You won't notice a difference between SSH and Telnet for text login, even over a modem. This means of course you should go with SSH. It's a lot more featureful than telnet, and has been around so much longer than all the other altnernatives you mentioned that it's bound to be more secure. Also, the distinction between SSH and TelnetSSL must be made - tunneling telnet through SSL encrypts your communications, so your session won't get sniffed, but anyone who has your public key can still access the box just like regular telnet (assuming you're not using a firewall). Obviously, this isn't that much of a leap over plain old telnet - they still get a login: prompt at will, which with enough motivation will can be cracked. OTOH SSH can disable password based logins altogether and use RSA for authentication, where you create a private/public keyblock that you must supply a decryption key to login with. The only way someone will be able to login to your box period is if they get ahold of and crack your private key, which at 1024 bits would take several billion years IIRC, or if they install their own public key on the server, which makes this whole discussion a moot point. So I would use SSH.
--
No, it's not a free-market economy. The record industry is an example of laissez-faire capitalism at its worst. 5 huge companies control what's played on the radio, what CDs you find at the store, etc. And it's not just a question of risk. Artists recoup about 5% of their gross CD sales money. Do you really mean to tell me that the other 95% is so called "flop insurance" in case the CD sucks? Get real - even when CDs flop the record companies still turn a profit. That's the way it is my friend, and if you are still buying CDs then you, not me, are supporting the old school regime which robs the musician of the money and motivation to produce more material. If every musician distributed through MP3, I guarantee you you would see more people producing more work of more quality.
--
I have no legal basis for this, but it seems like this sort of hits right in the gray area of US copyright law - it's illegal for people to download music they don't own. It's illegal for people to upload music they own for people who don't own it to download. But is it illegal for people who own music to post it so other people who own it can download it again? If so, how far does that right extend. If I own the LP version of a track, can I download the live version? I haven't ever heard any discussion of a case like this before; even RIAAs own propaganda doesn't mention it. Any legal scholars want to take a whack at it?
--
You actually BOUGHT fscking STOCK in LinuxOne? What a complete jacka... erm, wait, that's LINX. I stand corrected ;)
--
And you are sitting ... here?
You're wrong in thinking that musicians are getting screwed. They're not. Musicians make almost no money from selling CDs anyways; they tend to get contractually raped by the same recording industry fatcats who are bitching about audio CD piracy (conincidence?). Have you heard any artists publicly complain in genuine about MP3 proliferation? I haven't. I have seen some posters where RIAA payed artists money to sign their name on an anti-piracy statement. But by and large, most artists couldn't care less.
It's a well known and time-honored fact that music artists make far more from concerts than CD sales - anecdotally, look at who the rich rock stars are: guys who are really good live (David Bowie, the Stones, Aerosmith, arguable Ricky Martin, Madonna, etc.) A lot of well known artists seem to prefer MP3 to convential distribution, simply because they're tired of being whored by the recording industry. It's cheaper and more effective to have your singles put out electronically, especially when that means more fans paying $60 for a concert ticket that the record company doesn't get a single cent of. It seems like every day some label forces another of their artists to take down MP3s off their site (see Tom Petty, Pete Townshend, many others) in spite of that artist's protests to the contrary. What does this tell you?
--
NEC SuperScript 870 is great - pretty output, fast as hell, and 10/100bT ready. IIRC it's Linux compatible, but I'm not sure. Definitely check that out before you buy it. I use it on our home LAN of 7 Windows PCs and it hasn't failed me yet - nothing like printing seven simultaneous jobs and having everything work like clockwork. :)
--