UIU was a pleasant suprise for us. We use it all the time and it actually works pretty well. The short version is that it rips out all your hardware information and uses sysprep and preinstalled drivers to automatically detect and install the new system's hardware on the next boot. So basically, you build one computer, run UIU, image it (with Ghost or something) and then dump it on to all the other computers, regardless of their hardware setup (well, not including SCSI or RAID). There usually isn't even any post-install configuration necessary.
We looked at Sakai briefly - we determined that it's really just not usable for a small insititution. You need to have a lot of money and resources to pour into it to get it going. One day it will be great, but it's not ready yet.
We're currently using it, and it's working great. One of it's best points is that it was designed with educational pedagogy in mind, which helps the teaching/learning process.
Actually, it might be cheaper than buying 10 computers. Depends on the actual prices.
For a regular setup, assume a 3-year upgrade cycle and a $1200 computer (not unreasonable).
As long as you can do it for under $12k, you're going to come out ahead. I don't know enough about the equipment to price it all out, but I don't think it sounds that unreasonable.
"Miss Le Guin was not involved in the development of the material or the making of the film, but we've been very, very honest to the books," explains director Rob Lieberman. "We've tried to capture all the levels of spiritualism, emotional content and metaphorical messages. Throughout the whole piece, I saw it as having a great duality of spirituality versus paganism and wizardry, male and female duality. The final moments of the film culminate in the union of all that and represent two different belief systems in this world, and that's what Ursula intended to make a statement about. The only thing that saves this Earthsea universe is the union of those two beliefs."
Sci Fi Magazine
December 2004
I've tried very hard to keep from saying anything at all about this production, being well aware that movies must differ in many ways from the books they're based on, and feeling that I really had no business talking about it, since I was not included in planning it and was given no part in discussions or decisions.
That makes it particularly galling of the director to put words in my mouth.
Mr Lieberman has every right to say what his intentions were in making the film he directed, called "Earthsea." He has no right at all to state what I intended in writing the Earthsea books.
Had "Miss Le Guin" been honestly asked to be involved in the planning of the film, she might have discussed with the film-makers what the books are about.
When I tried to suggest the unwisdom of making radical changes to characters, events, and relationships which have been familiar to hundreds of thousands of readers all over the world for over thirty years, I was sent a copy of the script and informed that production was already under way.
So, for the record: there is no statement in the books, nor did I ever intend to make a statement, about "the union of two belief systems." There's nothing at all about the "duality of spirituality and paganism," whatever that means, either.
Earlier in the article, Robert Halmi is quoted as saying that Earthsea "has people who believe and people who do not believe." I can only admire Mr Halmi's imagination, but I wish he'd left mine alone.
In the books, the wizardry of the Archipelago and the ritualism of the Kargs are opposed and united, like the yang and yin. The rejoining of the broken arm-ring is a symbol of the restoration of an unresting, active balance, offering a risky chance of peace.
This has absolutely nothing to do with "people who believe and people who do not believe." That terrible division into Believers and Unbelievers (itself a matter not of reason but of belief) is one which bedevils Christianity and Islam and drives their wars.
But the wizards of Earthsea would look on such wars as madness, and the dragons of Earthsea would laugh at them and fly away...
Toto, something tells me Earthsea isn't Iraq.
I wonder if the people who made the film of The Lord of the Rings had ended it with Frodo putting on the Ring and ruling happily ever after, and then claimed that that was what Tolkien "intended..." would people think they'd been "very, very honest to the books"?
How many people out there actually use IRC? Not many. (Compared to AIM, for instance.) How many of those people are extremely computer literate? Most of them. How many of them will be able to get around your security if they really want to? Most of them. How many of them can use a web/java based irc client without even needing to get chatzilla? All of them.
How many of them will be unable to use IRC at all when you block it from the firewall? All of them. (OK, not all. There are still ways around it.)
As someone who has had to clean viruses off infected campus computers, I say that automated updates are 100% worth it, even if they do have problems once in a while.
When Sasser ripped through, our help desk was swamped with calls from students. But not one single lab computer that had automatic updates set was affected. The benefits are obvious.
What were some of the reasons that people gave for trying/switching to linux? Was it as simple as better language support or saving money? Or were there political motives as well, such as a resistance toward Microsoft because of its nation of origin?
Not quite. I'm saying because the Thunderbird/Mozilla.org dev team considers Thunderbird to be an UNFINISHED product ("technology preview" is their phrase, not mine), you need to take that into consideration. The version number reflects the developer confidence level. The dev team does not have 100% confidence in their product because they have not gone to a 1.0 release. If they had 100% confidence (and the full feature set), they would make it a 1.0 release. Or so their numbering system leads me to believe.
From the Thunderbird website:
Mozilla Thunderbird is a Technology Preview.
This software may work well enough to be relied upon as your primary messaging client as it is based off a stable Mozilla 1.6 architecture. However, Mozilla Thunderbird is still a preview release, and therefore several features may not be complete.
But, as good as Thunderbird is at blocking spam and viruses, if it starts deleting people's email because it's not fully tested, there will be hell to pay.
Yup, still there. Actually, the bike there is a newer version. There's much less slip - in fact, it works so well you can build up some real speed.
Too bad the track is so short...
Slashdot Mirror
UIU was a pleasant suprise for us. We use it all the time and it actually works pretty well. The short version is that it rips out all your hardware information and uses sysprep and preinstalled drivers to automatically detect and install the new system's hardware on the next boot. So basically, you build one computer, run UIU, image it (with Ghost or something) and then dump it on to all the other computers, regardless of their hardware setup (well, not including SCSI or RAID). There usually isn't even any post-install configuration necessary.
It's actually "Canidon" and here's a link to the comic: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/05/21
People have been doing this for literally years. This article dates from 2002, and it was the first one I found.
Try a legal copyist.
Ooh, look! An actual review.
Sounds like you're looking for a personal wiki. WikidPad is Windows only, but I've seen others that are multi-platform.
Try Moodle instead.
We're currently using it, and it's working great. One of it's best points is that it was designed with educational pedagogy in mind, which helps the teaching/learning process.
I meant $1200 for the PCs that the server was supposed to replace.
Actually, it might be cheaper than buying 10 computers. Depends on the actual prices.
For a regular setup, assume a 3-year upgrade cycle and a $1200 computer (not unreasonable).
As long as you can do it for under $12k, you're going to come out ahead. I don't know enough about the equipment to price it all out, but I don't think it sounds that unreasonable.
Text from her website...
"Earthsea"
11/13/2004
"Miss Le Guin was not involved in the development of the material or the making of the film, but we've been very, very honest to the books," explains director Rob Lieberman. "We've tried to capture all the levels of spiritualism, emotional content and metaphorical messages. Throughout the whole piece, I saw it as having a great duality of spirituality versus paganism and wizardry, male and female duality. The final moments of the film culminate in the union of all that and represent two different belief systems in this world, and that's what Ursula intended to make a statement about. The only thing that saves this Earthsea universe is the union of those two beliefs."
Sci Fi Magazine
December 2004
I've tried very hard to keep from saying anything at all about this production, being well aware that movies must differ in many ways from the books they're based on, and feeling that I really had no business talking about it, since I was not included in planning it and was given no part in discussions or decisions.
That makes it particularly galling of the director to put words in my mouth.
Mr Lieberman has every right to say what his intentions were in making the film he directed, called "Earthsea." He has no right at all to state what I intended in writing the Earthsea books.
Had "Miss Le Guin" been honestly asked to be involved in the planning of the film, she might have discussed with the film-makers what the books are about.
When I tried to suggest the unwisdom of making radical changes to characters, events, and relationships which have been familiar to hundreds of thousands of readers all over the world for over thirty years, I was sent a copy of the script and informed that production was already under way.
So, for the record: there is no statement in the books, nor did I ever intend to make a statement, about "the union of two belief systems." There's nothing at all about the "duality of spirituality and paganism," whatever that means, either.
Earlier in the article, Robert Halmi is quoted as saying that Earthsea "has people who believe and people who do not believe." I can only admire Mr Halmi's imagination, but I wish he'd left mine alone.
In the books, the wizardry of the Archipelago and the ritualism of the Kargs are opposed and united, like the yang and yin. The rejoining of the broken arm-ring is a symbol of the restoration of an unresting, active balance, offering a risky chance of peace.
This has absolutely nothing to do with "people who believe and people who do not believe." That terrible division into Believers and Unbelievers (itself a matter not of reason but of belief) is one which bedevils Christianity and Islam and drives their wars.
But the wizards of Earthsea would look on such wars as madness, and the dragons of Earthsea would laugh at them and fly away...
Toto, something tells me Earthsea isn't Iraq.
I wonder if the people who made the film of The Lord of the Rings had ended it with Frodo putting on the Ring and ruling happily ever after, and then claimed that that was what Tolkien "intended..." would people think they'd been "very, very honest to the books"?
Ursula K. Le Guin
13 November 2004
Is anyone doing research into resisting this kind of stuff? Anti-brainwashing techniques? Peril-sensitive glasses?
...it's not worth worrying about.
How many people out there actually use IRC? Not many. (Compared to AIM, for instance.)
How many of those people are extremely computer literate? Most of them.
How many of them will be able to get around your security if they really want to? Most of them.
How many of them can use a web/java based irc client without even needing to get chatzilla? All of them.
How many of them will be unable to use IRC at all when you block it from the firewall? All of them. (OK, not all. There are still ways around it.)
Two Words:
Moon Roof
As someone who has had to clean viruses off infected campus computers, I say that automated updates are 100% worth it, even if they do have problems once in a while. When Sasser ripped through, our help desk was swamped with calls from students. But not one single lab computer that had automatic updates set was affected. The benefits are obvious.
Someone should patent the method for profiting from vague patents... then sue everyone profiting from vague patents.
What were some of the reasons that people gave for trying/switching to linux? Was it as simple as better language support or saving money? Or were there political motives as well, such as a resistance toward Microsoft because of its nation of origin?
From the Thunderbird website:
Mozilla Thunderbird is a Technology Preview.
This software may work well enough to be relied upon as your primary messaging client as it is based off a stable Mozilla 1.6 architecture. However, Mozilla Thunderbird is still a preview release, and therefore several features may not be complete.
But, as good as Thunderbird is at blocking spam and viruses, if it starts deleting people's email because it's not fully tested, there will be hell to pay.
You're deploying a "technology preview" to 1500+ users? Thunderbird is great and all (I use it), but that's ballsy.
Boundary Waters Canoe Area
Yup, still there. Actually, the bike there is a newer version. There's much less slip - in fact, it works so well you can build up some real speed. Too bad the track is so short...
"However, for some reason this is locked by Apple." How about because they didn't pay for it?
Kudos on the quick response.
The Y-windows site was Slashdotted 30 seconds after it was posted! A new record! Go Team!