Well that depends on your window manager. Windowmaker has an option to make child windows open in the same workspace as their parent and it works nicely.
The european approach is better... Mobiles cost more for you to call, but incoming calls to your mobile are free. At least one operator in the UK actually gives you a cut of the call costs when someone calls you. So marketting companies have to pay to talk to you, they have to pay if they get your voicemail and if your lucky you might actually get some of that money. I would have no issues receiving marketting calls on a premium rate number.
You can use CentOS, which is fully compatible with RHEL.. Or Solaris, i believe Solaris is well supported by Oracle.
As for running Oracle on windows, it's far more secure to run it on Unix...
Oracle on windows runs as SYSTEM, whereas on unix it runs under it's own "oracle" account. Any vulnerability found in Oracle becomes far more serious on windows than on unix.
Because it's dangerous to use microsoft. The more of their products you start becoming dependant on, the greater the risk of being screwed over.
It is always dangerous to become dependant on a single source for anything. No other vendor produces a windows-compatible OS or other drop in replacements for their products, your always faced with a costly migration. Unlike with x86 hardware (dell, hp, ibm, acer whatever, you can easily drop in replacements) and linux (debian, redhat, suse, easy enough to change) where you always have an easy exit-strategy incase something bad happens. Isn't it better to migrate now rather than waiting until it will be even more expensive and risky?
Aside from that, with microsoft you are reliant on a single source for patches and support etc.
Unfortunately samba doesn't gracefully handle disconnects. and doesn't work well with the unix approach of having filesystems explicitely mounted and unmounted.
Aside from that, the user= option isn't terribly secure if the user has local root on the system.
And how many places tell you to use IE.. That's far more retarded. And boils down to laziness on the part of the developers.
I don't believe in forcing people to use particular apps either, however there's nothing wrong with demanding people use apps which comply to a certain set of standards.
This happens with cars too, if you go into a garage with a particularly old car in a really poor state of disrepair, it's highly likely they will recommend you replace it, cars can often get to such a state that repairing them is not financially viable and it's much cheaper and easier to buy a new car. This is the same with IE, it's horrendously outdated compared to other browsers and unlike a car, you can't get someone to fix it for you.
Apps should be written to published standards, and require any browser which complies with those standards, so long as the app complies with the standards then any browser that fails to render it is at fault. After all, there are many things which simply can't be done in outdated browsers like IE, and many other things that require lots of nasty kludges for IE but can be done easily and cleanly in modern browsers.
Multiple workspaces are the best solution sofar... So long as you know which programs you put in each workspace, or even if you don't so long as you have a pager like the old enlightenment one, you can go straight to what you need without having to keep tapping alt-tab repeatedly.
But they don't seem to work very well... When you switch desktops, you see all the windows minimising and all the ones for the next desktop un-minimising, it's quite an ugly effect and a far cry from X11 window managers, which have virtually all had multiple desktops by default for YEARS.
And to add my $0.02, scrolling one by one through a list of your apps is horrendous when you have tons of things open... Personally i use WindowMaker and i run a large number of apps including a lot of X11 apps exported from other systems. I press alt+numbers to switch between workspaces, i have a browser on workspace 1, email on workspace 2, several instant messaging programs on workspace 10 (alt-0) and miscellaneous other stuff spread around the others. I don't need to scroll through a list of apps to get the one i want, (but i can if i really feel the need) i can simply go direct to the appropriate workspace.
Whenever i'm forced to use windows, i find the whole system so unwieldy, especially when "taskbar grouping" is turned on, the interface is completely unsuitable for someone who has a large number of apps running.
Wasn't there another domain parking service a few years ago, which went over to windows because microsoft paid them a lot of money, and then promptly went back to solaris when the 2 year deal expired?
When the antitrust complaints were first made, IE was not integrated into the OS and apps did not depend on it. That came later, and the level of integration was significantly increased during the trial.
Well if exchange is the only server to support MAPI, then perhaps they cant use it because they dont run exchange.
As for outlook being specifically an exchange client, the specific exchange client was the original "inbox" app that shipped with exchange, outlook was intended as a general purpose mail program with exchange support and came along much later.
And as for ISP's not supporting IMAP, this is due to the way IMAP is intended to store the mail on server rather than downloading it, this isn't in the interest of most large isp's since having thousands of megabytes of customer's mail on their server will increase costs dramatically.
Outlook is missing one big important feature: Threading... It doesn't set in-reply-to headers, nor does it display threads, which make it completely useless for keeping track of complex email conversations and especially mailing lists... Imagine browsing slashdot in a non threaded way!
It also top-posts by default, and i could never work out how to make it default to bottom posting...
Another issue it has, is when used with exchange, it can't keep track of timezones correctly if you get an appointment from one timezone, while your sitting in another, or your home exchange server is set to another, it can't deal with it properly and mis-schedules the time.
Maybe he doesn't want to use a proprietary protocol to collect his mail, as that would force everyone in his organisation to use outlook and nothing else.
No doubt outlook includes poor support for standard protocols to try and pressure people into using exchange, it wouldn't be the first time.
Neither IE nor firefox pass, he was saying that if IE passed he would consider using it as a browser, until then firefox's effort is still a lot better even if it doesn't pass everything in ACID2.
No... He implied that IE's rendering is inferior to firefox, and that if it supported ACID2 it would be superior to firefox and he might consider looking at it.
Well, people are lazy or uneducated to have used activex in the first place... There are alternatives, such as flash and java, which are cross platform and far more secure.
Well, those laws are wrong then... Corporations should be just as accountable for illegal behaviour as individuals, and the individuals running the company should be held accountable.
The firefox search bar may default to google, but it has several other search engines added to it by default as well. There has to be *Some* default, although it could ask you during installation i guess.
This is in contrast to microsoft's approach, which is to have msn as both the default and the only option that's available without actively seeking out and installing alternatives.
Well going for proprietary products that are only supported by a single vendor is also a huge risk. If businesses looked at the risks properly, none of them would buy microsoft at all anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Well that depends on your window manager. Windowmaker has an option to make child windows open in the same workspace as their parent and it works nicely.
Then why do corporations not worry about the huge risks associated with using a proprietary system that can only be supported by a single vendor?
The european approach is better...
Mobiles cost more for you to call, but incoming calls to your mobile are free. At least one operator in the UK actually gives you a cut of the call costs when someone calls you.
So marketting companies have to pay to talk to you, they have to pay if they get your voicemail and if your lucky you might actually get some of that money.
I would have no issues receiving marketting calls on a premium rate number.
I used the default "monkeys" sample that came with asterisk, playing on a loop... One telemarketter listened to it for over 30 seconds.
The internet has existed for a lot more than 15 years, it's just become more popular in that time.
The fact that Oracle on windows runs as SYSTEM, whereas on unix it runs under it's own account is a perfectly valid security reason to run it on unix.
Another reason would be cost, oracle is expensive enough already without having to pay for windows as well.
You can use CentOS, which is fully compatible with RHEL.. Or Solaris, i believe Solaris is well supported by Oracle.
As for running Oracle on windows, it's far more secure to run it on Unix...
Oracle on windows runs as SYSTEM, whereas on unix it runs under it's own "oracle" account. Any vulnerability found in Oracle becomes far more serious on windows than on unix.
Because it's dangerous to use microsoft. The more of their products you start becoming dependant on, the greater the risk of being screwed over.
It is always dangerous to become dependant on a single source for anything. No other vendor produces a windows-compatible OS or other drop in replacements for their products, your always faced with a costly migration. Unlike with x86 hardware (dell, hp, ibm, acer whatever, you can easily drop in replacements) and linux (debian, redhat, suse, easy enough to change) where you always have an easy exit-strategy incase something bad happens. Isn't it better to migrate now rather than waiting until it will be even more expensive and risky?
Aside from that, with microsoft you are reliant on a single source for patches and support etc.
Unfortunately samba doesn't gracefully handle disconnects. and doesn't work well with the unix approach of having filesystems explicitely mounted and unmounted.
Aside from that, the user= option isn't terribly secure if the user has local root on the system.
NFS with kerberos is a much better idea.
And how many places tell you to use IE.. That's far more retarded. And boils down to laziness on the part of the developers.
I don't believe in forcing people to use particular apps either, however there's nothing wrong with demanding people use apps which comply to a certain set of standards.
This happens with cars too, if you go into a garage with a particularly old car in a really poor state of disrepair, it's highly likely they will recommend you replace it, cars can often get to such a state that repairing them is not financially viable and it's much cheaper and easier to buy a new car. This is the same with IE, it's horrendously outdated compared to other browsers and unlike a car, you can't get someone to fix it for you.
Apps should be written to published standards, and require any browser which complies with those standards, so long as the app complies with the standards then any browser that fails to render it is at fault. After all, there are many things which simply can't be done in outdated browsers like IE, and many other things that require lots of nasty kludges for IE but can be done easily and cleanly in modern browsers.
Multiple workspaces are the best solution sofar...
So long as you know which programs you put in each workspace, or even if you don't so long as you have a pager like the old enlightenment one, you can go straight to what you need without having to keep tapping alt-tab repeatedly.
But they don't seem to work very well... When you switch desktops, you see all the windows minimising and all the ones for the next desktop un-minimising, it's quite an ugly effect and a far cry from X11 window managers, which have virtually all had multiple desktops by default for YEARS.
And to add my $0.02, scrolling one by one through a list of your apps is horrendous when you have tons of things open... Personally i use WindowMaker and i run a large number of apps including a lot of X11 apps exported from other systems. I press alt+numbers to switch between workspaces, i have a browser on workspace 1, email on workspace 2, several instant messaging programs on workspace 10 (alt-0) and miscellaneous other stuff spread around the others. I don't need to scroll through a list of apps to get the one i want, (but i can if i really feel the need) i can simply go direct to the appropriate workspace.
Whenever i'm forced to use windows, i find the whole system so unwieldy, especially when "taskbar grouping" is turned on, the interface is completely unsuitable for someone who has a large number of apps running.
Wasn't there another domain parking service a few years ago, which went over to windows because microsoft paid them a lot of money, and then promptly went back to solaris when the 2 year deal expired?
When the antitrust complaints were first made, IE was not integrated into the OS and apps did not depend on it. That came later, and the level of integration was significantly increased during the trial.
They should make the API details public, so that you can replace the mshtml code with an html rendering engine of your choice, such as gecko or khtml
Well if exchange is the only server to support MAPI, then perhaps they cant use it because they dont run exchange.
As for outlook being specifically an exchange client, the specific exchange client was the original "inbox" app that shipped with exchange, outlook was intended as a general purpose mail program with exchange support and came along much later.
And as for ISP's not supporting IMAP, this is due to the way IMAP is intended to store the mail on server rather than downloading it, this isn't in the interest of most large isp's since having thousands of megabytes of customer's mail on their server will increase costs dramatically.
Outlook is missing one big important feature:
Threading...
It doesn't set in-reply-to headers, nor does it display threads, which make it completely useless for keeping track of complex email conversations and especially mailing lists... Imagine browsing slashdot in a non threaded way!
It also top-posts by default, and i could never work out how to make it default to bottom posting...
Another issue it has, is when used with exchange, it can't keep track of timezones correctly if you get an appointment from one timezone, while your sitting in another, or your home exchange server is set to another, it can't deal with it properly and mis-schedules the time.
Maybe he doesn't want to use a proprietary protocol to collect his mail, as that would force everyone in his organisation to use outlook and nothing else.
No doubt outlook includes poor support for standard protocols to try and pressure people into using exchange, it wouldn't be the first time.
Neither IE nor firefox pass, he was saying that if IE passed he would consider using it as a browser, until then firefox's effort is still a lot better even if it doesn't pass everything in ACID2.
No...
He implied that IE's rendering is inferior to firefox, and that if it supported ACID2 it would be superior to firefox and he might consider looking at it.
Well, people are lazy or uneducated to have used activex in the first place... There are alternatives, such as flash and java, which are cross platform and far more secure.
SGI or CRAY will sell you a much larger system if you have the money... 4-figure processor numbers are not uncommon.
Well, those laws are wrong then...
Corporations should be just as accountable for illegal behaviour as individuals, and the individuals running the company should be held accountable.
The firefox search bar may default to google, but it has several other search engines added to it by default as well.
There has to be *Some* default, although it could ask you during installation i guess.
This is in contrast to microsoft's approach, which is to have msn as both the default and the only option that's available without actively seeking out and installing alternatives.
Well going for proprietary products that are only supported by a single vendor is also a huge risk. If businesses looked at the risks properly, none of them would buy microsoft at all anyway.