Hopefully as price drops and more people purchase the pIV chip the power of the chip will become more and more applicable. At first look the pIV may look like a bomb, a dud, a slow chip. But, the chip has great potential which is yet to be realized. As more and more applications are made available which are optimized for the pIV we'll really start to see this chip shine.
I'm sure exactly what you're asking. It looks like you're contradicting yourself. Are you asking for sources? Ports are nothing but a patchset with automated compilation procedures to grab the sources, build and install.
Are you looking for binary packages? pkg_add -r mozilla or whatever you're looking for. The majority of the packages users want are available on the ISO for install as well.
Rather than telling us about your mensa membership, why not show us through a stroke of pure brilliance.
Soon? FreeBSD is already rock solid. I've never had it fail me. I suggest you give it another chance if this is based on an opinion of past experiences. The new release engineering is incredible, its much more open that it was a few years ago and as such much more bugs gets squished during the release process.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember any Microsoft offerings requiring you to install an smtpd or httpd. Thin client? Some of our images including an entire office suite either Office 2000 or Corel Wordperfect 9, IE, Netscape, and Eudora were under 300. I wonder how small you could make a system complete with MS-DOS and Novell stacks... just as small as Linux I'd imagine.
You do _NOT_ want the entire complex running under the same channel. The proper way to set things up is to blanket the entire area, then set channels so that no two access points within range of each other will be on the same channel. This will provide for seamless movement from one zone to the other. Also if you need more bandwidth setup two access points in the same location on different channels and you instantly double the ammount of wireless bandwidth in that area. Keep in mind that payload for wireless is typically around 8Mbit/sec or so. The card will then determine which channel is least saturated and pick that.
I agree with the no security issue. You should make it clear that there is absolutely no security implied or promised. You'll shoot yourself in the foot as soon as someone's credit card number is sniffed after you told them it was all good. If you must setup security start with the assumption that every packet can and will be sniffed, with that in mind build VPN/IPSEC on top of that.
Phaw, last time I said it I was chastized and nearly murdered by the lynch mob. I'm glad you're fairing better with the "Down with MS, up with Linux, Down with MS, Up with Linux" droids.
I try to come here for news, if you'd like to express your opinion leave it for the comments. You guys are worse than FOX news.
I recently was put in charge of a wireless rollout on campus and had to support students. I became very familiar with certain rooms that were no more than 50ft from APs with no access. One building in which the entire building could easily be served by an omnidirectional in the center and be within the spec of 250FT ended up having 16 mounted throughout the building in order to keep sufficient coverage.
People need to take into consideration their structure before blindly deploying a wireless network. Our thick brick walls dropped coverage to about 1/5 what specs state.
Wireless security regardless of WEP, etc... should be based around the assumption that every packet you send into the air can and WILL be intercepted. (Also a good assumption to make with wired networks) Once you assume that this is the case, you build security in that doesn't care if packets are sniffed. You use advanced crypto available in IPSEC/VPN and other buzz words that sound cool.
They're not assuming that they know Linux, they're assuming that they know Unix; CS acredidation programs don't give a shit wether its Linux, Solaris, BSD. Most schools do this using SunOS/Solaris. All schools with accreditation from a decent authority require atleast some Unix programmming for CS degrees.
Way to go slashdot. Itd be nice if people reponsible for posting articles followed links to see what was up. The/. article links directly to a page which says that its not for public consumption. What the hell is up with that?
This site is intended for the private use of the FreeBSD committer team. As such, it was not placed on a server capable of handling the interest of the world at large.
Lame I tell you. Next thing you'll see is links to internal websites not accessable from outside corperate Intranets...
The first time I saw the Lindows site and read into it I found it humorous. The more I think about it I think this is a good step forward for the opensource community. It will bring Linux (ick!) to the desktop and still allow users to use their familiar office products that they've grown to know over the years. Hopefully this will be benefitial to the opensource community as a whole, not just Linux.
Have your finance people taken into account that the majority of the employees know Microsoft products fairly well and would have to be retrained for such a migration. The problem getting Linux or other OSS into the office isn't cost or a technical issue. Its a people issue, plain and simple people know MS Products, they've been using them for years. A move to a completely different operating system and business suit will leave the employees feeling abandoned and useless and will more than likely hurt productivity.
Something to consider. This is probably the biggest reason that OSS has had such a hard time infiltrating the office.
While I agree Apache is a wonderful product. I'm also clueful enough to realize that the offerings from Microsoft are just as great. IIS in the hands of someone with a clue is an incredible product. Problem is that IIS is handed to too many morons that mismanage and create a bad image for IIS. If Apache were as moronproof as IIS I'm sure you'd have just as many problems.
The issue here isn't installing Perl. Which I'm sure given FreeBSD's history of the ports/pkg tree will be rather painless. The issue is the thousands of perl scripts which think perl is in/usr/bin/perl. It will be located in/usr/local/bin/perl... where it should be as its soon to be a local customization.
He's right, you're wrong. He posted logged in, you posted AC... coincidence? I think not. Someone remind me again why we allow AC posts, please?
Ick! We all know that this would be determental to Linux. Productivity is something we choose to leave for Microsoft to handle. We may not actually get anything done, but damnit, I've got the source! That's what matters, right?
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Linux community when IDC confirmed that Linux market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers> Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that Linux has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Linux is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict Linux's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Linux faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Linux because Linux is dying. Things are looking very bad for Linux. As many of us are already aware, Linux continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeLinux is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenLinux leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenLinux. How many users of NetLinux are there? Let's see. The number of OpenLinux versus NetLinux posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetLinux users. Linux/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetLinux posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of Linux/OS. A recent article put FreeLinux at about 80 percent of the Linux market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeLinux users. This is consistent with the number of FreeLinux Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeLinux went out of business and was taken over by LinuxI who sell another troubled OS. Now LinuxI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house. All major surveys show that Linux has steadily declined in market share. Linux is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Linux is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. Linux continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Linux is dead.
How secure is it even if they were wired? Most large retailers connect to their credit handlers via a satelite mounted on the roof. Does anyone know how secure that is? Are they using the highly respectable DES that should be enough for everyone, least according to some.
Wireless registers have 200ft range, the satelite beams stuff into outerspace. Maybe seti@home will find our alien friends stealing credit card numbers. See, after all, that project does have a use!
FreeBSD is still lacking a native Sun JDK platform licensed from Sun. Which Java platform are you talking about? There are other VMs available btw.
Java is one of very few points where FreeBSD is lacking, if your company is based around Java then use whichever tool you find to be best, more than likely it won't be FreeBSD. For most tasks FreeBSD performs near the top of open source operating systems.
Slashdot Mirror
Hopefully as price drops and more people purchase the pIV chip the power of the chip will become more and more applicable. At first look the pIV may look like a bomb, a dud, a slow chip. But, the chip has great potential which is yet to be realized. As more and more applications are made available which are optimized for the pIV we'll really start to see this chip shine.
Why is Microsoft responsible for this? Why doesn't this fall under the Common carrier provisions? AOL wasn't held responsible for their user posts.
I'm sure exactly what you're asking. It looks like you're contradicting yourself. Are you asking for sources? Ports are nothing but a patchset with automated compilation procedures to grab the sources, build and install.
Are you looking for binary packages? pkg_add -r mozilla or whatever you're looking for. The majority of the packages users want are available on the ISO for install as well.
Rather than telling us about your mensa membership, why not show us through a stroke of pure brilliance.
Soon? FreeBSD is already rock solid. I've never had it fail me. I suggest you give it another chance if this is based on an opinion of past experiences. The new release engineering is incredible, its much more open that it was a few years ago and as such much more bugs gets squished during the release process.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember any Microsoft offerings requiring you to install an smtpd or httpd. Thin client? Some of our images including an entire office suite either Office 2000 or Corel Wordperfect 9, IE, Netscape, and Eudora were under 300. I wonder how small you could make a system complete with MS-DOS and Novell stacks... just as small as Linux I'd imagine.
You do _NOT_ want the entire complex running under the same channel. The proper way to set things up is to blanket the entire area, then set channels so that no two access points within range of each other will be on the same channel. This will provide for seamless movement from one zone to the other. Also if you need more bandwidth setup two access points in the same location on different channels and you instantly double the ammount of wireless bandwidth in that area. Keep in mind that payload for wireless is typically around 8Mbit/sec or so. The card will then determine which channel is least saturated and pick that.
I agree with the no security issue. You should make it clear that there is absolutely no security implied or promised. You'll shoot yourself in the foot as soon as someone's credit card number is sniffed after you told them it was all good. If you must setup security start with the assumption that every packet can and will be sniffed, with that in mind build VPN/IPSEC on top of that.
Phaw, last time I said it I was chastized and nearly murdered by the lynch mob. I'm glad you're fairing better with the "Down with MS, up with Linux, Down with MS, Up with Linux" droids.
I try to come here for news, if you'd like to express your opinion leave it for the comments. You guys are worse than FOX news.
Maybe its time that some hard laws are laid down concerning privacy. Everything I've seen indicates that its meerly implied rather than stated.
A courtroom is to be respected. Why have contempt of court and other things that judges can throw at people if court isn't to be taken seriously?
I recently was put in charge of a wireless rollout on campus and had to support students. I became very familiar with certain rooms that were no more than 50ft from APs with no access. One building in which the entire building could easily be served by an omnidirectional in the center and be within the spec of 250FT ended up having 16 mounted throughout the building in order to keep sufficient coverage.
People need to take into consideration their structure before blindly deploying a wireless network. Our thick brick walls dropped coverage to about 1/5 what specs state.
Wireless security regardless of WEP, etc... should be based around the assumption that every packet you send into the air can and WILL be intercepted. (Also a good assumption to make with wired networks) Once you assume that this is the case, you build security in that doesn't care if packets are sniffed. You use advanced crypto available in IPSEC/VPN and other buzz words that sound cool.
They're not assuming that they know Linux, they're assuming that they know Unix; CS acredidation programs don't give a shit wether its Linux, Solaris, BSD. Most schools do this using SunOS/Solaris. All schools with accreditation from a decent authority require atleast some Unix programmming for CS degrees.
See Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology for information on one of the most widely accepted CS accreditations.
Way to go slashdot. Itd be nice if people reponsible for posting articles followed links to see what was up. The /. article links directly to a page which says that its not for public consumption. What the hell is up with that?
This site is intended for the private use of the FreeBSD committer team. As such, it was not placed on a server capable of handling the interest of the world at large.
Lame I tell you. Next thing you'll see is links to internal websites not accessable from outside corperate Intranets...
The first time I saw the Lindows site and read into it I found it humorous. The more I think about it I think this is a good step forward for the opensource community. It will bring Linux (ick!) to the desktop and still allow users to use their familiar office products that they've grown to know over the years. Hopefully this will be benefitial to the opensource community as a whole, not just Linux.
Have your finance people taken into account that the majority of the employees know Microsoft products fairly well and would have to be retrained for such a migration. The problem getting Linux or other OSS into the office isn't cost or a technical issue. Its a people issue, plain and simple people know MS Products, they've been using them for years. A move to a completely different operating system and business suit will leave the employees feeling abandoned and useless and will more than likely hurt productivity.
Something to consider. This is probably the biggest reason that OSS has had such a hard time infiltrating the office.
While I agree Apache is a wonderful product. I'm also clueful enough to realize that the offerings from Microsoft are just as great. IIS in the hands of someone with a clue is an incredible product. Problem is that IIS is handed to too many morons that mismanage and create a bad image for IIS. If Apache were as moronproof as IIS I'm sure you'd have just as many problems.
Completely agree. College is a great time to figure out just what you REALLY want to do.
The issue here isn't installing Perl. Which I'm sure given FreeBSD's history of the ports/pkg tree will be rather painless. The issue is the thousands of perl scripts which think perl is in /usr/bin/perl. It will be located in /usr/local/bin/perl... where it should be as its soon to be a local customization.
He's right, you're wrong. He posted logged in, you posted AC... coincidence? I think not. Someone remind me again why we allow AC posts, please?
Ick! We all know that this would be determental to Linux. Productivity is something we choose to leave for Microsoft to handle. We may not actually get anything done, but damnit, I've got the source! That's what matters, right?
Yes, everyone knows that version numbers are all that matter. I'm sure if FreeBSD bumped to 11.0 you guys would swarm to it.
Oh wait, nevermind
How secure is it even if they were wired? Most large retailers connect to their credit handlers via a satelite mounted on the roof. Does anyone know how secure that is? Are they using the highly respectable DES that should be enough for everyone, least according to some.
Wireless registers have 200ft range, the satelite beams stuff into outerspace. Maybe seti@home will find our alien friends stealing credit card numbers. See, after all, that project does have a use!
Credit cards are all about being smart. If you don't spend more than you have credit cards are 100% convienience and cost you nothing in interest.
FreeBSD is still lacking a native Sun JDK platform licensed from Sun. Which Java platform are you talking about? There are other VMs available btw.
Java is one of very few points where FreeBSD is lacking, if your company is based around Java then use whichever tool you find to be best, more than likely it won't be FreeBSD. For most tasks FreeBSD performs near the top of open source operating systems.
Power to the cows!
Moo!