Maximum quoted disk is just the amount they will supply it preconfigured with, if the disks are standard scsi theres nothing to stop you filling up all available slots with the largest capacity drives you can find.
Well, knoppix doesn't play well with propriatory filesystems like NTFS.. i actually followed the guide on the qemu site, and hit reset when it borked.. then it resumed the install and worked, and once it had booted up for the first time i deleted all the files.
I had a Cyrix MII chip that overheated to the point that it turned the fan (cheap plastic fan with cheap plastic prongs holding it to the heatsink) to a pool of molten plastic at the bottom of the case.
Any card needs drivers, wether those are drivers for your OS or drivers for your firmware... X86 BIOS will try to initialize a secondary BIOS on an expansion card, and the Mac's OpenFirmware will try to do something similar but obviously not compatible due to differences in both the hardware (x86 code wont run on a ppc cpu) and the software in use. This is required for any device that will be used before the OS is loaded, such as display, storage (only for the bootdrive tho), and IO devices (usb, keyboard, mouse ports etc) For this same reason, the MacOSX drivers for a particular piece of hardware won't work on a windows machine with the same hardware. I believe the Alpha machines partially got around this problem by having a bios emulator built in to the firmware.
But the software companies didn't try to make demands and changes to the way music is played in order to prevent software copying.. What gives music the companies the right to come trying to demand that computers be changed to accomodate them?
Do apps written in this way work correctly with other browsers? A web application should be written to follow standards, and thus display correctly in any standards compliant browser. Tho here i'm not sure if microsoft's changes make their browser more or less standards compliant, the point remains that one behavior is broken, and not truly a webapp if it doesn't follow published standards.
So, either MS have broken their browser by introducing this new behavior, and therefore you should file a bug report, and they *should* fix it.. or the webapp itself was already broken, in which case MS can`t be blamed.
FX!32 would emulate roughly a p3 running at the same clockrate as the alpha on which it's running, so the alpha still had the advantage until x86 started overtaking it for clockrate, which must have been 1999 or 2000 afaik.. Alpha was the first chip to reach 1ghz, but pretty much stopped there..
I installed win2k and encountered the disk full during install problem, it seems to create thousands of logfiles.. if you delete them, it will continue just fine.. I never found it all that slow tho, without the accelerator.. I will try it with the accelerator when i get to work tomorrow.
VNC is horrendously slow, i dont know why anyone would want to use it.. windows supports rdesktop, which is MUCH faster and X11 supports remote displays natively
Well, it works as a kernel module on current 2.4.x and 2.6.x linux kernels, and thats it.. If there are many changes to 2.7.x etc, it will stop working, similarly it won't work on freebsd or netbsd, or whatever other os people may want to run it on..
Alpha would be very hard to emulate, atleast to get it right.. I imagine the PALCode emulation would be difficult and slow... but using an alpha to emulate other procs is quite easy since the cpu was actually designed to do that..
I'm not surprised the UK came out top, we get most shows 6 months behind other countries if we even get them atall, sometimes it's possible to get them quicker with satelite or cable, but these cost a lot of money (and we brits already pay a tv license.. many people are quite insulted to be asked to pay even more, especially when most of the paid for channels also include commercials which we dont get on the BBC channels) and some landlords don't allow the installation of satelite or cable in their buildings..
Only because MSIE doesn't even support this feature atall. It will be interesting to see if IE7 supports this feature... If you really want to go back to an antiquated browser which doesn't support any of the newer features in which vulnerabilities have been found, may i suggest Mosaic?
Well, how much does it cost to employ a contract programmer for a few days? Even if you don't have coders on staff, you can easily get some contractors.. Perhaps this would be a good business to get into, offering custom code services for OSS projects to those companies too small to employ internal coders.. Want an extra feature in mozilla? Need a new driver for the linux kernel? You could employ someone specifically to do it exactly to your requirements. Commercial vendors will always implement things in the most generic way to try and appeal to the widest audience of potential customers.
Didn't choose, they were forced into it by their OS/2's division's poor marketting... IBM would always have preferred to sell you OS/2, and until recently all their x86 hardware was available with OS/2 preinstalled. I got my thinkpad with OS/2, i couldn't get it without an os atall, so i figured i'd rather pay for OS/2 than windows.
No, Apple had the GUI first... Amiga came along a couple of years later with a much better one which offered (as you describe) true multitasking, hardware accelerated video and sound (and dma for floppy access etc) AmigaOS was always technically superior to MacOS, and had a much larger market share... The problem was, commodore marketted them towards gamers and didn't keep the lead they had.
And how about a server which serves other purposes than being a webserver? As for testing that the http server was responding, i would never do that from the box itself, since that wouldn't be a true test, testing from another machine is a far more realistic test and will fail if theres network issues for instance. Aside from that, no webserver i have ever configured has had a browser installed on it. I have often telnetted to the web port and issued a manual get request to check the server is responding, you get far more control over the request than a browser will give you anyway.
It's just generally good security to remove anything that's not being used. If someone does compromise the server, a browser will make it easier for them to download and install additional apps. Also if there is a browser present, then admins will often be lazy and use the browser that's already there to google for help if they're having problems during administration, which increases the chance they will stumble across a hostile website which exploits a hole in their browser.
Plus, if a browser is installed then it's one more app that you need to keep patched up to date, the less software you have installed the less time you have to spend applying patches.
There are many more reasons why you should remove as many apps as possible from a server..
You gave one reason why a webserver might have a web browser installed, but can you tell me why a mailserver would need a browser? or why a webserver would require an email account or media player?
VNC? Eugh! Don't use vnc, use ssh and X11, both of which are supported by default by OSX and will integrate much better with the local os. An ssh session to a remote unix box will behave just like a local session with the OSX console app, and X11 apps will get managed by the OSX window manager, but diehard mac users may find it strange that the menu is at the top of the window.. Other than that, it works well. VNC on the other hand will give you one large monolithic window containing a whole window manager and emulated screen, and the apps within it wont interact well with your local apps.. Also, VNC is incredibly slow, even over a lan. As for filesharing, NFS or SMB will work, NFS should work better actually..
But assuming you fitted them yourself, where would you get tires for free? It's not a fair comparison since you have to pay for tires, but you don't need to pay for an os.
Having IE (and outlook express) by default and non removeable is an issue from a security audit perspective too, if we find a linux machine that's supposed to be a server but it has kde, konqueror, mozilla etc installed, that's a security issue, no server should have a web browser installed on it... On a windows machine, those apps are always there and can't be removed, that's a security issue too, and probably a much bigger one given ie's track record, but there's no solution to it.
Even if you remove iexplore.exe, you can still access IE by just typing a url into the address bar of an explorer.exe process, iexplore.exe basically just calls explorer in browser mode. I would very much like to see IE removed, even assuming they fix all the known security holes and no new ones are found, it's still a horrendously inferior and outdated browser compared to the modern alternatives and i would very much like to remove it completely just so i dont need to bother patching it incase some poorly written app decides to invoke it against my wishes. This is the same reason i make sure not to install netscape 4.x when i setup a solaris machine. FWIW, solaris makes no effort to stop me totally removing netscape, on my mac i can trivially remove the 2 browsers which are installed by default (ie5 and safari)
It does contain a handfull of programs, and they do bundle too many programs. The difference here is the reason WHY.. MS bundle their own programs because that way an inferior ms app can compete more effectively with superior alternatives, since most users won't spend the time looking for a program if they already have one which is adequate. Thus MS apps need not be superior to the competition, they only need to be adequate/mediocre. Linux distributions on the other hand, have nothing to gain from bundling particular apps, neither do the authors of those apps have anything to gain from their apps being bundled. And finally a given linux distribution will usually bundle multiple apps which perform the same function, instead of just the single app theyre trying to push. For instance, most distributions come with konqueror, mozilla, lynx and possibly even more browsers.
Either way, there are thousands of websites out there with sql injection attacks where you can execute shell commands on the database server. Were this any other type of database then these users would be slightly protected from their poor coding since the attackers could only corrupt the database and not infiltrate the system hosting it.
Development cost is usually a one-off, bandwidth may be cheap but it soon adds up, as does memory and disk space, therefore the more heavily you plan to use the system the more you benefit from not using xml.. Also, in many places of the world bandwidth, diskspace and cputime are not cheap or readily available while developers are cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
Maximum quoted disk is just the amount they will supply it preconfigured with, if the disks are standard scsi theres nothing to stop you filling up all available slots with the largest capacity drives you can find.
Well, knoppix doesn't play well with propriatory filesystems like NTFS.. i actually followed the guide on the qemu site, and hit reset when it borked.. then it resumed the install and worked, and once it had booted up for the first time i deleted all the files.
I had a Cyrix MII chip that overheated to the point that it turned the fan (cheap plastic fan with cheap plastic prongs holding it to the heatsink) to a pool of molten plastic at the bottom of the case.
Any card needs drivers, wether those are drivers for your OS or drivers for your firmware...
X86 BIOS will try to initialize a secondary BIOS on an expansion card, and the Mac's OpenFirmware will try to do something similar but obviously not compatible due to differences in both the hardware (x86 code wont run on a ppc cpu) and the software in use. This is required for any device that will be used before the OS is loaded, such as display, storage (only for the bootdrive tho), and IO devices (usb, keyboard, mouse ports etc)
For this same reason, the MacOSX drivers for a particular piece of hardware won't work on a windows machine with the same hardware.
I believe the Alpha machines partially got around this problem by having a bios emulator built in to the firmware.
But the software companies didn't try to make demands and changes to the way music is played in order to prevent software copying.. What gives music the companies the right to come trying to demand that computers be changed to accomodate them?
Do apps written in this way work correctly with other browsers?
A web application should be written to follow standards, and thus display correctly in any standards compliant browser. Tho here i'm not sure if microsoft's changes make their browser more or less standards compliant, the point remains that one behavior is broken, and not truly a webapp if it doesn't follow published standards.
So, either MS have broken their browser by introducing this new behavior, and therefore you should file a bug report, and they *should* fix it.. or the webapp itself was already broken, in which case MS can`t be blamed.
adblock supports blocking of iframes, and normal frames.. I have quite a lot blocked
FX!32 would emulate roughly a p3 running at the same clockrate as the alpha on which it's running, so the alpha still had the advantage until x86 started overtaking it for clockrate, which must have been 1999 or 2000 afaik.. Alpha was the first chip to reach 1ghz, but pretty much stopped there..
I installed win2k and encountered the disk full during install problem, it seems to create thousands of logfiles.. if you delete them, it will continue just fine.. I never found it all that slow tho, without the accelerator.. I will try it with the accelerator when i get to work tomorrow.
VNC is horrendously slow, i dont know why anyone would want to use it.. windows supports rdesktop, which is MUCH faster and X11 supports remote displays natively
Well, it works as a kernel module on current 2.4.x and 2.6.x linux kernels, and thats it..
If there are many changes to 2.7.x etc, it will stop working, similarly it won't work on freebsd or netbsd, or whatever other os people may want to run it on..
Alpha would be very hard to emulate, atleast to get it right.. I imagine the PALCode emulation would be difficult and slow... but using an alpha to emulate other procs is quite easy since the cpu was actually designed to do that..
I'm not surprised the UK came out top, we get most shows 6 months behind other countries if we even get them atall, sometimes it's possible to get them quicker with satelite or cable, but these cost a lot of money (and we brits already pay a tv license.. many people are quite insulted to be asked to pay even more, especially when most of the paid for channels also include commercials which we dont get on the BBC channels) and some landlords don't allow the installation of satelite or cable in their buildings..
Only because MSIE doesn't even support this feature atall. It will be interesting to see if IE7 supports this feature...
If you really want to go back to an antiquated browser which doesn't support any of the newer features in which vulnerabilities have been found, may i suggest Mosaic?
Well, how much does it cost to employ a contract programmer for a few days? Even if you don't have coders on staff, you can easily get some contractors..
Perhaps this would be a good business to get into, offering custom code services for OSS projects to those companies too small to employ internal coders.. Want an extra feature in mozilla? Need a new driver for the linux kernel? You could employ someone specifically to do it exactly to your requirements. Commercial vendors will always implement things in the most generic way to try and appeal to the widest audience of potential customers.
Didn't choose, they were forced into it by their OS/2's division's poor marketting... IBM would always have preferred to sell you OS/2, and until recently all their x86 hardware was available with OS/2 preinstalled. I got my thinkpad with OS/2, i couldn't get it without an os atall, so i figured i'd rather pay for OS/2 than windows.
No, Apple had the GUI first... Amiga came along a couple of years later with a much better one which offered (as you describe) true multitasking, hardware accelerated video and sound (and dma for floppy access etc)
AmigaOS was always technically superior to MacOS, and had a much larger market share... The problem was, commodore marketted them towards gamers and didn't keep the lead they had.
And how about a server which serves other purposes than being a webserver?
As for testing that the http server was responding, i would never do that from the box itself, since that wouldn't be a true test, testing from another machine is a far more realistic test and will fail if theres network issues for instance.
Aside from that, no webserver i have ever configured has had a browser installed on it. I have often telnetted to the web port and issued a manual get request to check the server is responding, you get far more control over the request than a browser will give you anyway.
It's just generally good security to remove anything that's not being used. If someone does compromise the server, a browser will make it easier for them to download and install additional apps.
Also if there is a browser present, then admins will often be lazy and use the browser that's already there to google for help if they're having problems during administration, which increases the chance they will stumble across a hostile website which exploits a hole in their browser.
Plus, if a browser is installed then it's one more app that you need to keep patched up to date, the less software you have installed the less time you have to spend applying patches.
There are many more reasons why you should remove as many apps as possible from a server..
You gave one reason why a webserver might have a web browser installed, but can you tell me why a mailserver would need a browser? or why a webserver would require an email account or media player?
VNC? Eugh!
Don't use vnc, use ssh and X11, both of which are supported by default by OSX and will integrate much better with the local os. An ssh session to a remote unix box will behave just like a local session with the OSX console app, and X11 apps will get managed by the OSX window manager, but diehard mac users may find it strange that the menu is at the top of the window.. Other than that, it works well. VNC on the other hand will give you one large monolithic window containing a whole window manager and emulated screen, and the apps within it wont interact well with your local apps.. Also, VNC is incredibly slow, even over a lan.
As for filesharing, NFS or SMB will work, NFS should work better actually..
But assuming you fitted them yourself, where would you get tires for free? It's not a fair comparison since you have to pay for tires, but you don't need to pay for an os.
Having IE (and outlook express) by default and non removeable is an issue from a security audit perspective too, if we find a linux machine that's supposed to be a server but it has kde, konqueror, mozilla etc installed, that's a security issue, no server should have a web browser installed on it... On a windows machine, those apps are always there and can't be removed, that's a security issue too, and probably a much bigger one given ie's track record, but there's no solution to it.
Even if you remove iexplore.exe, you can still access IE by just typing a url into the address bar of an explorer.exe process, iexplore.exe basically just calls explorer in browser mode. I would very much like to see IE removed, even assuming they fix all the known security holes and no new ones are found, it's still a horrendously inferior and outdated browser compared to the modern alternatives and i would very much like to remove it completely just so i dont need to bother patching it incase some poorly written app decides to invoke it against my wishes. This is the same reason i make sure not to install netscape 4.x when i setup a solaris machine.
FWIW, solaris makes no effort to stop me totally removing netscape, on my mac i can trivially remove the 2 browsers which are installed by default (ie5 and safari)
It does contain a handfull of programs, and they do bundle too many programs. The difference here is the reason WHY..
MS bundle their own programs because that way an inferior ms app can compete more effectively with superior alternatives, since most users won't spend the time looking for a program if they already have one which is adequate. Thus MS apps need not be superior to the competition, they only need to be adequate/mediocre.
Linux distributions on the other hand, have nothing to gain from bundling particular apps, neither do the authors of those apps have anything to gain from their apps being bundled. And finally a given linux distribution will usually bundle multiple apps which perform the same function, instead of just the single app theyre trying to push. For instance, most distributions come with konqueror, mozilla, lynx and possibly even more browsers.
Either way, there are thousands of websites out there with sql injection attacks where you can execute shell commands on the database server. Were this any other type of database then these users would be slightly protected from their poor coding since the attackers could only corrupt the database and not infiltrate the system hosting it.
Development cost is usually a one-off, bandwidth may be cheap but it soon adds up, as does memory and disk space, therefore the more heavily you plan to use the system the more you benefit from not using xml.. Also, in many places of the world bandwidth, diskspace and cputime are not cheap or readily available while developers are cheap.