It would be nice if it could be configured that a browser run by Administrator (lets say to need to Google for a solution to a problem you are working on) would drop privs (but even Linux doesn't do that).
Vista will do this. IE will run in a sandbox that limits its ability to change the system configuation and state. This is true even if the user is running as an administrator.
If you read the Microsoft recruiting rhetoric you would find that they are looking for people passionate about creating Microsoft products. My personal opinion is that you should be passionate about whatever you do but sometime passion needs to be set aside for the practicalities.
BTW, I realize that I compared Microsoft to Open Soure Development but this is not intended to be flamebait.
Alright, after reading the responses to my postings I understand the reason for the modding and hae come to agree. But I would like to make a few last points:
1) Nothing I posted in my origonal post was factually incorrect. US Marines are soldiers. I never said that photo was an action shot taken during combat, I knew then and know now that the scene was recreated.
2) I did not say that I hold the photograph itself sacred, but the sacrafice of my grandfather's generation.
3) I did not fly off the handle and I did not use the word "offended" when refering to the BSD logo. My post was not a flame. I am obviously more sensitive to issues such as theres that the general Slashdot community and I see no problem with that.
4) Most of all I am dissapointed with the flames that I received for posting my comment. I still do not understand what about my post brought on such flames.
I can say this, given the tone of the responses to my message coupled with the fact that my comment was rated "Funny" has caused me to loose a great deal of respect for the slashdot community.
To those of you out there who are tolerant of other people's positions, I apologize that you find yourself associated with a group such as this.
Some Soldier you are! If you were better educated, you would know those "World War II Soldiers" were infact U.S. Marines.
If I understand what you are saying then, according to you, a US Marine is not a soldier. I disagree with this. I know they are Marines.
your only a guardsman, sorry to hold you to higher standards
I don't know what standards you use but I am required to maintain the same level of readiness and profeciency as the active duty Air Force (but don't get to practice every day), not to mention that every day I work someone trusts me, in part, with his or her life. I believe that those are pretty high standards.
my Grandfather was *ON* that island
I hold your grandfather and all the men and women who fought in that war in the highest respect. My grandfater fought in Europe.
Anyways, the previous logo was meant to convey the fact that NetBSD has "conquered" almost all hardware; nothing more. Don't be an idiot.
This is something that I never new. So that would make me not an idiot, but ignorant. I appreciate you educating me but find your tone to be hightly disrespectful. And that is a shame.
I was going to moderate you as flambait, but I felt compelled to set you straight
I did not intend to draw flames, I just stated my opinion. I didn't realize this was such a hot topic for so many people (well, at least one person). Since I did not blatently attack anyone for no reason and with no factual backing I fail to see how my comment was flamebait. Just because you choose to respond in an inflamatory manner does not make my comment flaimbait. I just felt compelled to set you straight.
As a member of the US Air National Guard I don't like the devils raising the NetBSD flag in the likeness of World War II soldiers raising the Unites States flag over Iwo Jima. I hold the sacrifice of my grandfather's generation sacred.
'Method for licensing software to an entity, including determining a per-employee cost for the software, determining a number of employees of the entity, and determining a total licensing cost using the number of employees and the per-employee cost, wherein the total licensing cost comprises a software license for all employees of the entity and all customers of the entity.'
I find it interesting that both you and the origonal poster express a degree of disdain towards the content of this site however you both have accounts on this site.
Disclaimer: I write drivers for Windows 2000 and Windows.NET (I did not name it). The following does not apply to Windows 9x (including Me).
The long answer is that the limit is dependant on the amount of memory in your system as well as a number of other factors.
The first factor is the amount of memory. This includes RAM and the page file. The second factor is the size of the each process running on the system. If you are openning a new process for each "window" (it was not clear from the description) then the amount of memory consumed is much higher than the amount of memory consumed by each new window in the same process. The third factor, and this is the big one, is the size of the file system cache. Windows dynamically decides how much memory should be devoted to file system cache at boot time and that limits the amount of memory available for everything else in the system (including other components of the operating system). The formula that Windows used to determine the optimal size of the file system cache takes into account many factors.
When available memory begins to run low then new processes may not be able to start and new windows may not be able to be created.
(correct email: miket@NOSPAM.telocity.com w/o the NOSPAM)
They get it at the system level by using a driver. Drivers can do whatever they want on the maching. The document does nothing to take over the computer. The InTether driver sits between the application and the OS and can tehrefore act as a gatekeeper.
I have been writing Windows 2000 device drivers for the last year. I have not looked at the details of this product but do understand Windows.
The only way that a piece of software can exhibit the kind of control (in Win2k) that this claims is through a device driver. Device drivers are considered trusted parts of the operating system that have access to anything that Windows can control. Security measures can be completely bipassed when running in kernel mode.
And this leads us to how to beat it. Another device driver would be able to undo anything that this thing can do. Perhaps that means that one of the other security mechanisms would kick in and redo it. But the attack that can not be prevented is to read the unprotected data directly out of memory using other kernel mode code. Then the data can be written to disk or what ever you want to do with it. Even better, newer versions of Windows (Win98 and Win2k) allow drivers to be layered on top of one another. Perhaps there would even be a way to write a driver that would layer itself over the InTeather driver and actively copy the uncopyiable data.
Bottom line, if you are willing to dig into Windows internals this can be defeated as easily as anything else.
The idea of running multiple copies of an operating system on one box is not new and, yes, it can be very useful. I know that Unisys has been doing this for years on their A-Series machines running their MCP operating system. (MCP-anyone remember Tron?) It is an interesting concept that allows the administrator to do active load balancing by moving resources such as processors or I/O from one instance of the OS to another or even set up one instance as a backup in case of a failure. The biggest advantage is to be able to reduce the cost of operating several servers by running them all in the same box and by sharing resources. Very cool stuff.
Unysys's latest machine, the ES7000, can support up to 8 partitions (that is hopefully going to increase in the future) and currently only runs Windows. Windows does not support dynamicly moving resources between partitions at this time but that is something that is being worked on. Another project currently under way is adding support for MCP to the ES7000 and several Unix variants.
Chuang raises a possible legal issue that may be very relavant to the outcome of the Microsoft case (No, it is not over yet). Frankly, I am very dissapointed to see this comment marked as "flamebait." Just because it shines an unfavorable light upon Oracle does make it a comment that is out of line within this thread.
I am not a lawyer. I am not a Microsoft fan. But I personally would want to know if the case brought against Microsoft was done so illegaly. If industry money promoted the trial, that has a large impact on me personally. I just began work in this industry and the future of Microsoft and the industy as a whole will personally affect my life for as long as I get paid to write code.
I realize that I will probally be moderated down for this, but I like to make a personal request to whoever sensored this comment to remove himself/herself from future moderation. This is a valid comment ans should be shown the same (if not more) respect that you give the "we want to watch Billy burn and the MS campus crumble" comments do.
I believe that mandating Microsoft open up the Windows source in any way is bad for Microsoft and, more importantly, bad for the industry as a whole. Like it or not Microsoft has done a lot to bring computing to the common person and, with that, has grown the industry. Anything that would undermine Microsoft does threaten the industry as a whole.
The solution, in my opinion, is to put in place a standard for the Windows API and executable interface (similar to POSIX). The standards should be overseen by the industry. Microsoft can be a member of that organization that sets the standard. This would allow Microsoft to continue to operate with their main product line but takes away the unfair advantages that they allegedly have in their application development. More importantly, since the standards are open anybody can use them. This means that the barrier to entry into the consumer desktop market is dramaticly reduced because anybode can take advantage of the vast set of applications that already exists in the Windows world. Now competition for the desktop market can take place on a level field.
Remember, it is not the Microsoft programs that we want openned up, it is the interface. We can write our own programs--and we will be much more pleased with our own open code than any code from Microsoft.
I am frankly a little worried about what is going on here with moderator moderation all in an attempt to reduce the amount of trolls. I believe that bad posts will happen. Posts that are off-topic, posts that are without value, and even posts that are blatently wrong are all a part of a community like Slashdot. Let us not lose sight of what we want here--an oportunity to express ourselves.
I am a regular Slashdot reader and I followed the huge AC debate and, frankly, I like the results. I believe that most of you do too, judging by the results of a recent Slashdot poll. According to the poll almost three quarters believe that AC posting is, at the very least, barable. Great, we finally have the "AC Problem" under control.
But that is not enough, we need more. Now we attack the people wuo make the occasional offhand comment. (Agreed, some posters consistantly make off hand comments. I believe that they are a small minority.) What is worse is our method of attack--we are limiting (almost punnishing) the moderators! They are the Slashdot readers who are giving the most to try and make the experience of reading Slashdot more enjoyable for all of us! I find this to be a shame.
Please, leave well enough alone before the moderation system becomes so complex and offensive as to drive our best readers, those who have much to offer in their posts, away from Slashdot for good.
Finally, after reading the entire thread, I find someone who says what I was thinking. Do not apologize for your comment. You, unlike most of the previous posters, have the right idea. The idea pehind OSS is that every developer has something to offer. We should be inviting the Windows developers to join our cause.
Not one of the posters here nor any other developer has been a UNIX master from his/her first line of code. Let's give it a rest and get back to coding.
Slashdot Mirror
It would be nice if it could be configured that a browser run by Administrator (lets say to need to Google for a solution to a problem you are working on) would drop privs (but even Linux doesn't do that).
Vista will do this. IE will run in a sandbox that limits its ability to change the system configuation and state. This is true even if the user is running as an administrator.
Firefox is more widely used, IE is forced to get better.
If you read the Microsoft recruiting rhetoric you would find that they are looking for people passionate about creating Microsoft products. My personal opinion is that you should be passionate about whatever you do but sometime passion needs to be set aside for the practicalities.
BTW, I realize that I compared Microsoft to Open Soure Development but this is not intended to be flamebait.
Enjoy.
Alright, after reading the responses to my postings I understand the reason for the modding and hae come to agree. But I would like to make a few last points:
1) Nothing I posted in my origonal post was factually incorrect. US Marines are soldiers. I never said that photo was an action shot taken during combat, I knew then and know now that the scene was recreated.
2) I did not say that I hold the photograph itself sacred, but the sacrafice of my grandfather's generation.
3) I did not fly off the handle and I did not use the word "offended" when refering to the BSD logo. My post was not a flame. I am obviously more sensitive to issues such as theres that the general Slashdot community and I see no problem with that.
4) Most of all I am dissapointed with the flames that I received for posting my comment. I still do not understand what about my post brought on such flames.
Good night.
I can say this, given the tone of the responses to my message coupled with the fact that my comment was rated "Funny" has caused me to loose a great deal of respect for the slashdot community.
To those of you out there who are tolerant of other people's positions, I apologize that you find yourself associated with a group such as this.
Some Soldier you are! If you were better educated, you would know those "World War II Soldiers" were infact U.S. Marines.
If I understand what you are saying then, according to you, a US Marine is not a soldier. I disagree with this. I know they are Marines.
your only a guardsman, sorry to hold you to higher standards
I don't know what standards you use but I am required to maintain the same level of readiness and profeciency as the active duty Air Force (but don't get to practice every day), not to mention that every day I work someone trusts me, in part, with his or her life. I believe that those are pretty high standards.
my Grandfather was *ON* that island
I hold your grandfather and all the men and women who fought in that war in the highest respect. My grandfater fought in Europe.
Anyways, the previous logo was meant to convey the fact that NetBSD has "conquered" almost all hardware; nothing more. Don't be an idiot.
This is something that I never new. So that would make me not an idiot, but ignorant. I appreciate you educating me but find your tone to be hightly disrespectful. And that is a shame.
I was going to moderate you as flambait, but I felt compelled to set you straight
I did not intend to draw flames, I just stated my opinion. I didn't realize this was such a hot topic for so many people (well, at least one person). Since I did not blatently attack anyone for no reason and with no factual backing I fail to see how my comment was flamebait. Just because you choose to respond in an inflamatory manner does not make my comment flaimbait. I just felt compelled to set you straight.
As a member of the US Air National Guard I don't like the devils raising the NetBSD flag in the likeness of World War II soldiers raising the Unites States flag over Iwo Jima. I hold the sacrifice of my grandfather's generation sacred.
'Method for licensing software to an entity, including determining a per-employee cost for the software, determining a number of employees of the entity, and determining a total licensing cost using the number of employees and the per-employee cost, wherein the total licensing cost comprises a software license for all employees of the entity and all customers of the entity.'
Thank you.
(Typed from one of the crappy new Natural Keyboards that my wife wanted--she does not like it either.)
I find it interesting that both you and the origonal poster express a degree of disdain towards the content of this site however you both have accounts on this site.
If you don't like it, turn it off.
I would be interested in knowing how you used Outlook rules to filter out your spam. If you could elaborate I would be grateful.
Disclaimer: I write drivers for Windows 2000 and Windows.NET (I did not name it). The following does not apply to Windows 9x (including Me).
The long answer is that the limit is dependant on the amount of memory in your system as well as a number of other factors.
The first factor is the amount of memory. This includes RAM and the page file. The second factor is the size of the each process running on the system. If you are openning a new process for each "window" (it was not clear from the description) then the amount of memory consumed is much higher than the amount of memory consumed by each new window in the same process. The third factor, and this is the big one, is the size of the file system cache. Windows dynamically decides how much memory should be devoted to file system cache at boot time and that limits the amount of memory available for everything else in the system (including other components of the operating system). The formula that Windows used to determine the optimal size of the file system cache takes into account many factors.
When available memory begins to run low then new processes may not be able to start and new windows may not be able to be created.
(correct email: miket@NOSPAM.telocity.com w/o the NOSPAM)
They get it at the system level by using a driver. Drivers can do whatever they want on the maching. The document does nothing to take over the computer. The InTether driver sits between the application and the OS and can tehrefore act as a gatekeeper.
I have been writing Windows 2000 device drivers for the last year. I have not looked at the details of this product but do understand Windows. The only way that a piece of software can exhibit the kind of control (in Win2k) that this claims is through a device driver. Device drivers are considered trusted parts of the operating system that have access to anything that Windows can control. Security measures can be completely bipassed when running in kernel mode. And this leads us to how to beat it. Another device driver would be able to undo anything that this thing can do. Perhaps that means that one of the other security mechanisms would kick in and redo it. But the attack that can not be prevented is to read the unprotected data directly out of memory using other kernel mode code. Then the data can be written to disk or what ever you want to do with it. Even better, newer versions of Windows (Win98 and Win2k) allow drivers to be layered on top of one another. Perhaps there would even be a way to write a driver that would layer itself over the InTeather driver and actively copy the uncopyiable data. Bottom line, if you are willing to dig into Windows internals this can be defeated as easily as anything else.
Congrats!!
The idea of running multiple copies of an operating system on one box is not new and, yes, it can be very useful. I know that Unisys has been doing this for years on their A-Series machines running their MCP operating system. (MCP-anyone remember Tron?) It is an interesting concept that allows the administrator to do active load balancing by moving resources such as processors or I/O from one instance of the OS to another or even set up one instance as a backup in case of a failure. The biggest advantage is to be able to reduce the cost of operating several servers by running them all in the same box and by sharing resources. Very cool stuff.
Unysys's latest machine, the ES7000, can support up to 8 partitions (that is hopefully going to increase in the future) and currently only runs Windows. Windows does not support dynamicly moving resources between partitions at this time but that is something that is being worked on. Another project currently under way is adding support for MCP to the ES7000 and several Unix variants.
Chuang raises a possible legal issue that may be very relavant to the outcome of the Microsoft case (No, it is not over yet). Frankly, I am very dissapointed to see this comment marked as "flamebait." Just because it shines an unfavorable light upon Oracle does make it a comment that is out of line within this thread.
I am not a lawyer. I am not a Microsoft fan. But I personally would want to know if the case brought against Microsoft was done so illegaly. If industry money promoted the trial, that has a large impact on me personally. I just began work in this industry and the future of Microsoft and the industy as a whole will personally affect my life for as long as I get paid to write code.
I realize that I will probally be moderated down for this, but I like to make a personal request to whoever sensored this comment to remove himself/herself from future moderation. This is a valid comment ans should be shown the same (if not more) respect that you give the "we want to watch Billy burn and the MS campus crumble" comments do.
I believe that mandating Microsoft open up the Windows source in any way is bad for Microsoft and, more importantly, bad for the industry as a whole. Like it or not Microsoft has done a lot to bring computing to the common person and, with that, has grown the industry. Anything that would undermine Microsoft does threaten the industry as a whole.
The solution, in my opinion, is to put in place a standard for the Windows API and executable interface (similar to POSIX). The standards should be overseen by the industry. Microsoft can be a member of that organization that sets the standard. This would allow Microsoft to continue to operate with their main product line but takes away the unfair advantages that they allegedly have in their application development. More importantly, since the standards are open anybody can use them. This means that the barrier to entry into the consumer desktop market is dramaticly reduced because anybode can take advantage of the vast set of applications that already exists in the Windows world. Now competition for the desktop market can take place on a level field.
Remember, it is not the Microsoft programs that we want openned up, it is the interface. We can write our own programs--and we will be much more pleased with our own open code than any code from Microsoft.
We still have three of them here at work. I keep trying to convince my boss to give me one or two of them. He even has the origonal manuals here!!
I am frankly a little worried about what is going on here with moderator moderation all in an attempt to reduce the amount of trolls. I believe that bad posts will happen. Posts that are off-topic, posts that are without value, and even posts that are blatently wrong are all a part of a community like Slashdot. Let us not lose sight of what we want here--an oportunity to express ourselves.
I am a regular Slashdot reader and I followed the huge AC debate and, frankly, I like the results. I believe that most of you do too, judging by the results of a recent Slashdot poll. According to the poll almost three quarters believe that AC posting is, at the very least, barable. Great, we finally have the "AC Problem" under control.
But that is not enough, we need more. Now we attack the people wuo make the occasional offhand comment. (Agreed, some posters consistantly make off hand comments. I believe that they are a small minority.) What is worse is our method of attack--we are limiting (almost punnishing) the moderators! They are the Slashdot readers who are giving the most to try and make the experience of reading Slashdot more enjoyable for all of us! I find this to be a shame.
Please, leave well enough alone before the moderation system becomes so complex and offensive as to drive our best readers, those who have much to offer in their posts, away from Slashdot for good.
Michael C. Tiberio
miket@psu.edu
Finally, after reading the entire thread, I find someone who says what I was thinking. Do not apologize for your comment. You, unlike most of the previous posters, have the right idea. The idea pehind OSS is that every developer has something to offer. We should be inviting the Windows developers to join our cause.
Not one of the posters here nor any other developer has been a UNIX master from his/her first line of code. Let's give it a rest and get back to coding.