If you weren't so fucking illiterate, you'd see he did manage to get it set up. Why don't you go learn to read?
Wow. That's a strange twist. No, Mr. Pot, I am not black.
He created a cockamamie setup involving external daemons and strange rulesets and workarounds. This is the amateurish stuff that household cowboys (most of whom post to Slasdhdot, it seems) hack up and call "done".
My NAT'ed FTP servers have one or two firewall rules and a proper configuration and they work. Give me a 500MHz machine and I'll set up an FTP server (compiled from source) behind NAT inside of an hour. Properly.
Why don't you tell us how to set it up then, fscktard.
Why would I tell you how to do it, when I could charge you $60/hour to do it for you? I've already read the manuals, I already know what I'm doing.
n.b. I charge a fee for computer instruction, too, but it's less than my service fee.
If this doesn't interest you, try reading the documentation for your FTP server and firewall of choice. Get back to me when you've figured it out. You know who I am.
Assuming the user is going to download all 3 ISO images one way or another, what's the issue if he grabs them using 6 streams in 1/6th (roughly) of the time, or in one stream for the full stretch?
I have a 1.5MBit ADSL line at home. I can download at approximately 192KBytes/sec at wire speed, or a more realistic 180KBytes/sec. Regardless of whether I run one wget or ten, I will still download at 180KBytes/sec, therefore taking the same amount of time.
However, now I'm maintaining more connections, using more CPU power, and taking up more spaces on the server that could otherwise be used for othuer users to download the same file.
That's a stupid idea, and it seems to result in little more than excessively flawed download results, like the people who tell me they've transferred 100KBytes/sec across a 28.8k modem, or who've tweaked their cable modems to give them T3 speeds at home, or...
But hey, since atleast 9/10 of the postings in this thread have been complete digressions from any semblence of the question asked (which, in and of itself, was a pretty silly question), I suppose mis-information is acceptable. What more should I expect from "Ask Stupid Questions Of Slashdot" anymore?
I set this all up for someone recently, and it DOES finally work, with tunneled passive ftp connections to a proftpd server behind a nat gateway, but it was a big pain. Due to the way proftpd works (not sure about other daemons...) the passive connections are directed to the interface the client is connected to. So, with an ssh tunneled connection, proftpd sees the client connection TO 127.0.0.1 (because thats where sshd is). So it tells the client, connect back to me for the data connection, my IP is 127.0.0.1. And the client tries to connect to itself, and fails saying "can't open data connection". The solution was to point the tunnel not to 127.0.0.1, but to the external IP, and have the nat gateway forward internal traffic back to itself. So traffic comes in over ssh, over to the firewallwall (where the nat rewriting happens), and then back to the same machine for ftp.
So let me get this straight; you're using NAT, but are too incompetent to properly configure it for your NAT'ed servers, and this is a fault of the protocol?
[X] Post Anonymously
Atleast you had the foresight to cover for your embarassment. It's ok, not everyone is cut out for systems administration. It's never too late to take a shop class.
1.) "The Product may not be used by more than two (2) processors at any one time on any single Workstation Computer."
Microsoft's NT-based products have always (to my reccolection) been licensed on a per-processor basis. That's part of the reason to justify Server -> Advanced Server -> Datacenter. They're referring to the system processor, otherwise known as a central processing unit, or CPU. The nonsense about graphics cards, GPUs, pixel shaders, etc. is bunk. As has already been pointed out, they are not running Windows, Windows is running them.
2.) "You may permit a maximum of ten (10) computers or other electronic devices (each a "Device") to connect to the Workstation Computer to utilize the services of the Product solely for File and Print services, Internet Information Services, and remote access (including connection sharing and telephony services). The ten connection maximum includes any indirect connections made through "multiplexing" or other software or hardware which pools or aggregates connections."
Not a discrepancy, per se, but a limitation imposed so that you may be forced to upgrade the license to a server-class if you're serving a large quantity of clients. The wording is relatively specific, actually, considering it's a Microsoft EULA. I can clearly understand that they are referring to a local network server situation.
3.) "Except as otherwise permitted by the NetMeeting, Remote Assistance, and Remote Desktop features described below, you may not use the Product to permit any Device to use, access, display or run other executable software residing on the Workstation Computer, nor may you permit any Device to use, access, display, or run the Product or Product's user interface, unless the Device has a separate license for the Product."
"This is not a mainframe. Use your own computer." They don't want you to set up a dozen dumb terminals and use them to run a Windows XP desktop. In the cases of WinVNC / VNC Server, it generally takes over the active desktop, rather than replicating the desktop out for a separate session. In a nutshell, if you're at a keyboard and staring at a monitor and there's a Microsoft Windows XP interface displayed on same monitor, and you are the only one using this interface, you should pay for a license for Windows XP.
4.) "Microsoft reserves the right to discontinue any Internet-based services provided to you or made available to you through the use of the Product."
This one's almost too insulting to respond to. "Microsoft reserves the right to discontinue... " - discontinue, people. Read. Learn. They are not preventing you from viewing aol.com, they are acknowledging that at some point, Windows Update might not exist any more. Example; Windows 95, and soon-to-be Windows 98. I bet if you looked, you'd find similar clauses in their EULAs. It's known as "CYA" - Cover Your Ass. They don't want to be tied to a web service for the next four decades because somebody read and agreed to an antique EULA.
This is not news. This is FUD, and not even intelligent FUD, at that. Please, Slashdot, don't fan the flames unless warranted.
Would it kill them just to ditch the 14-page EULA and admit that I should be able to enjoy the same rights I have when I buy a book?
While I agree that EULAs are becomming entirely too complicated and restrictive; software is not analagous to a book.
Large scale software requires several developers, somehow funded, to be created. It requires extensive alpha and beta testing, code and security audits, more testing, documentation, a feedback and support system, and then the costs of advertising, marketing, shipping, etc. Software also has the inherent requirement to evolve and grow, as well as support any defects that may have shipped. Books are edited for style and content and shipped. Rarely are authors required to publish updates to their works.
Books can be read and re-read, but one copy can only be reasonably read once at a time. Software, on the other hand, has the ability to be used dozens or even thousands of times simultaneously. This is what software authors are seeking remuneration for.
Any place where you use one low-end server, you usually use multiple low-end servers, for redundancy. A shitload of x86 systems is cheaper than a shitload of sun systems.
Therein lies the difference. Whereas a company would have to deploy "a shitload" of x86 servers, they would only require a small handful of Sun servers. This also reduces strain on the power feed, backup power systems, etc. and can significantly reduce the TCO. Initial purchase price isn't everything.
Sun equipment is also generally more powerful and scalable than its Intel bretheren, and I for one hope cheap, commodity hardware never replaces proven server-grade hardware. That's a world I'd hate to administer.
I used to run into these people all the time when I worked selling computer games. We would only take back defectives (which we would verify) if the box was opened.
Even that's a little difficult to verify, if your clientell is clever (which pirates tend to be).
Buy game, copy, microwave for 3 seconds, return "defective" CD, buy different game, repeat.
This situation, though, is certainly a sticky widget. How is a company expected to post a 14 page EULA on the outside of a box and still have room for the product name and logo, but then again, how am I to know what the EULA says if I pay for it, THEN discover that it allows the vendor to make surprise visits to my hard drive every week to ensure that I'm playing nicey-nice?
Maybe software vendors should provide copies of the EULA on paper to the stores and indicate, on the packaging, that the purchaser has the right to request a copy for their review. Simply putting the EULA on the vendor's website isn't acceptable. If I'm purchasing Windows for the first time because I don't yet own a coputer, I can't be reasonably expected to visit their webpage.
I've lived in three Canadian cities so far, and I find that busses are usually very good at being almost exactly on schedule at the route's "timed" points.
LOL.. I've observed bus driver behaviour from both behind their seat and in a car, and I know why they're on time. First and foremost, they're big and they know it. That helps them cut in and out of traffic. Secondly, heavy feet are common, and almost a requirement for Ontario bus drivers, it seems. Third, they work together. Ever had to make a hard left turn into a heavy stream of traffic? Imagine having something the size of a house blocking traffic flow for you. Now just ease around that corner like the road's empty.
Long and short of it, these guys drive full-sized busses like Paul Tracy drives an Indycar. I just can't imagine moving somewhere and having to deal with a bus service that, like, didn't run on time. If ever the bus was late, there was a real good reason (and no, a mere 12-18 inches of snow is seldom a good enough reason!)
I've never seen a bus leave a timed stop early, and the sure fire way to get a late bus to come is to light up a cigarette.
The fewer cigarettes remaining in the pack, the sooner the bus arrives.:)
Er... you don't have to do walk through inspections and surveys of all the computer labs to use Ghost.
You simply reghost the machines via the network each night/week.
You also have to find out which machines are defective during their daily/weekly usage, isolate their identity, then connect to your server and initiate the process. Otherwise, you could have upwards of hundreds of people having to share a machine or do without. (And believe you me, there are students out there vindictive enough to disable workstations the day after their weekly imaging to ensure maximal downtime). The failure rate for imaging such large quantities of machines is entirely too high to be done on a regular basis. It would still require a small team of admins to walk the network and ensure that all labs are functional (ie; waiting at a login prompt, and able to be logged in, not conflicting with another machine (network ID has to be unique; the post-image process has to be undertaken sucessfully)).
I just love how so many armchair sysadmins on Slashdot have the perfect network strategy figured out.
What you're not considering, of course, is the traffic generated during the time this individual has has ${SOFTWARE} installed on the workstation, what traffic and/or data have been transmitted to countless sites on the Internet, and what potential nasties have been brought into the "trusted" network that is now sharing data pathways with all the students' reports, term papers, assignments, financial data, and personal information.
Ghost is a great product. For what it does, it's absolutely fantastic. I would highly reccomend it for any mass network software deployment. I can't sing its praises highly enough - honestly. However, Ghost is NOT designed to protect the network against users tampering with workstation configurations. In the network security / data integrity chart, Ghost is but one of many tools (including group and user policies, physical security, firewalls, IDS, etc.
Only when all other tools and automated protection systems have failed does Ghost come into play.
Imaging labs, or even small groups of workstations is entirely too taxing a process to be undertaken on a highly regular basis.
That's what programs like Ghost are for... if a user installs something that breaks other programs, just ghost a fresh copy of a known good configuration back over the hard drive. All trojans, viruses and broken programs are gone.
That idea works well in theory, until you start to imagine a network of 500 computers with 2000 users. Administrators are over-worked as it is, without having to do walk-through inspections and surveys of all computer labs all day long to find out of some of the machines need re-imaging.
Ghost is a great solution for mass-distribution of an OS/software config, but it's not a solution to users tampering with local systems. Not by far.
You can get hardware keyboard loggers. They go between the keyboard and the case. They're fairly cheap, and availiable to consumers.
Pardon my ignorance, having never laid eyes on the public systems referenced at either University, but how open, exactly, are they?
A few things come immediately to mind; why not encase the whole system, including keyboard connectors et al, in an external case? (Not a PC case, but an enveloping case that might even include the monitor) Also, why even have a floppy or CDROM drive attached? Makes securing the BIOS password a lot more pointless if you now have to cart around a set of lock-pick tools, a spare floppy drive and ribbon, and be able to perform surgery on the box while nobody's looking.
If these truly are desktop machines, open and exposed to the world in all their glory, it seems to me as if they'd be the last machines I'd trust with my PIN, credit card, bank card, or any other personal details. Casual web surfing only, thankyouverymuch.
Even better, say that when you've discovered someone had applied for a half-dozen lines of credit in your name, ran them up a few thousand dollars, and left you with the bill.
Hear, hear!
Credit reports can be very deceiving. Take a person who's had several student loans to get themselves through post-secondary education, been forced to drop out of school and find any work they can muster in order to not only pay off thousands of dollars worth of debts, but also try to save money to become eligible to (hopefully) return, and whose co-signer has screwed them directly or indirectly out of money and credit.
That person's credit report will read like a bad novel, but does that make them at all ineligible to work? Uncapable of handling finances? Just because a person is forced to live off of Kraft Dinner for weeks at a time doesn't make them irresponsible, it might just mean they weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth, didn't qualify for obtusely regulated government student loans (too much money available) or private institution student loans (not enough money available) and has received a bad break.
Credit checks like that could quote conceivably ruin a person's chances of getting out of debt, I'd say.
Your post was most certainly not a troll, and has been unfairly moderated. Some people have either bad luck, or are genuine victims of crimes against them that affect their credit reports, and as such they are most certainly not accurate, nor should they be used against a potential employee.
Ignorance==disagreeing with your point of view, perhaps?
LOL! I find it so terribly amusing when people bring that up; comes up almost as often as these arguments by analogy that Slashdot is so famous for. Fantastic, thanks for the chuckle!
Seriously, it's ignorance of the industry's history and future trends. If you don't know where we've been or where we're going, you've likely got no place in the industry. I certainly wouldn't want to hire a past-dweller, and I don't know many employers in a struggling economy who would, either.
But you cling to the notion that I'm so egotistical that I'm trying to merely berate you with my opinion. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
{laugh} What a world, what a world... Here I was under the impression that BBS users were stuck in the past and the savvy Internet users were future oriented. Oh, my sides!
I've checked for them in just about every local store, including Best Buy, CompUSA, Circuit City, Staples, OfficeMax and more. If I can't buy them then they don't exist.
Perhaps you should complain to the management of these establishment. The local computer shop I work for just got another case of SKC 900MB CD-R discs this past week; it's half sold out already.
50 CD spindles of these units will be in any time now.
Unfortunate that you're missing out, but they do very much exist, and are in very widespread use already. One customer alone has burned well over 100 of them in the past couple months. {shrug} To each his own, I suppose.
We don't need figures. I've used USB, and I've had bad results. I could care less if every other person I talk to is happy with USB. It's been nothing by trouble for me. Not only do I not trust it, but I simply won't use anything that connects via USB anymore.
That's probably the most short-sighted and ignorant comment I've read on Slashdot in several weeks.
Thats funny when i do the same I just need my 750 zip drive and the disk that i carry in it.
So I carry one disc, which I put in my pocket, and you have to carry an entire piece of hardware. I know that I can put this disc into almost every PC purchased in the last decade, you have to physically plug your device in, providing the computer has enough free ports.
I can pick up 800MB CD-RW discs for $3, or even cheaper if I buy them in quantity. How much does your media cost? Can you carry 24 ZIP disks in a 5" square, 1.5" thick wallet?
If your ZIP drive fails, you have to go find another computer with a ZIP drive in it to restore your data (provided it hasn't become corrupted when the drive failed). I can count no less than ten CD-ROM drives in my home alone.
Your situation (everyone in your school having a ZIP drive) is the exception, not the rule. I can guarantee you that for everyone who owns a ZIP drive greater than 250MB (they're too small to be considered), I can point you to ten thousand people who own a CD-ROM, where likely a thousand or more are burners.
Sorry, but you're not going to win me over with the ZIP disk argument. I've got one. I used to use it until I replaced it with a burner. They're just not as useful. Not nearly.
Let us broaden our horizon! How about smart UPSes, I believe most of them connect to a serial port
Many UPSs are being converted to USB connectors already. It won't be long (if it hasn't happened already) that the major power conversion companies scrap legacy serial links altogether.
Or how about various kinds of industrial devices that can be hooked up to a computer?
Most of these devices can function perfectly well connected to a 486, from the devices I've seen anyways. There's no need for them to upgrade their lathe controllers to a P5 5.0GHz machine with all the bells and whistles if what they've got works. If they are forced into a computer upgrade and can't possibly obtain a legacy PC, I'm sure a $20 port converter won't kill them, considering many of these devices price at upwards of $10k.
But back on topic for a bit; I suggest a more capable REPLACEMENT for floppy drives instead of simply discarding them.
(etc.. regarding drivers)
There are more capable devices - they're known as CD-RW drives. They're generic, inexpensive, widely supported, and easier to use every day. They're faster, more robust, hold more data, and the media has a longer life expectancy. Most new hardware I deal with comes with drivers on CDs, save for mice (but who needs a driver for a mouse nowadays?)
CDs require some BIOS magic to become bootable I believe.
The 'magic' has been contained and is under control.;) Many popular CD writing apps have a checkbox and/or option that says "Make a bootable CD" which then follows with step-by-step instructions on how to go about making the transition. Usually something along the lines of "Insert a bootable disk" or "point me towards a bootable disk image file" or "use the same boot disk image I used last time". So easy, a child of five could do it!
Now someone fetch me a child of five!
USB ports are (usually) on the back of the PC and I dont recall ever hearing anything about USB drives being bootable.
Negatory, my friend!;)
USB ports are now on the front of most standard PC cases, many keyboards have USB ports, as do many monitors. USB hubs come in a million shapes and sizes, and range in price from around $20 through to several hundred dollars. Some powered, some not. With the USB 2.0 cable standard, the hubs can be even farther from the PC than before; tens of feet, so you can safely connect a USB hub across the room (or in another room!) from your PC, and to it, connect all of your peripherals. Many new motherboards' boot options include "USB HDD" and "USB CDROM", among other new-fangled boot option choices. These aren't even the latest in whiz-bang technology, either. The ECS K7S5A can boot from USB, for example.
Let's not forget that we still have bootable CDs. All is not lost!
Try getting a Linksys USB Network Adapter to work under linux, or one of the many 4 port serial USB adapters to work for more than 10 minutes.
There are about a million or so cable and/or DSL customers in Canada who are presently using USB NICs without problems. Just because SOME OSS drivers aren't up to snuff at this present time doesn't mean there's a problem with the hardware.
BTW - I myself use a 10/100 USB NIC (LinkSys - the driver under Linux is called "Pegasus") when dealing with machines that either don't have a NIC but do have USB (for whatever reason, I keep encountering these) or for machines that need a quick second ethernet interface, and I've got zero complaints. Sure, it's limited to 12MB/Sec, but it's better than playing the sneakerner disk-swap game for large files.
Got a cable/ADSL modem at home? Notice that thing on the back... seems to be a serial port plug. A lot of routers/etc use a web-based or telnet interface now too, but there's added security in having it as an onboard port
Actually, I've got both at home, and none of them have any form of serial connectivity. I've personally used three brands each of cable and DSL modems. I install cable and DSL for residential and business users professionally, and deal with probably upwards of a dozen varieties of cable/DSL modem products, and not a single one of them have serial ports on the back.
Cable modems have 75OHm cable connector, DC power connector, and a 10BaseT RJ-45 connector.
DSL modems have an RJ-11 telephone cable connector, DC power connector, and a 10BaseT RJ-45 connector.
In fact, new(er) DSL modems being shipped to customers are USB.
Which brand(s) of modems are you referring to, and where are they being deployed?
To take a chance on new tech means risking a nights worth of transactions and for what? What is the gain for the change? Just because it's newer does not make it better.
By the same token, we should still be using mainframes and dumb terminals.
Newer technology is faster, more upwards-capable (scalable), and far easier to support. I don't want to go back to refridgerator-sized disk drives; do you?
As far as the customer is concerned, chances are they don't know a lick of difference between a serial modem and an alternative product, such as a USB modem. It's up to the vendor to supply these outfits with technology they've tested, and by the time serial ports are impossible to find on new hardware (and serial port cards are similarly scarce), they'll have had several years with which to work with equipment manufacturers to get network access devices that work. More to the point, it's entirely feasable that by that point these "$50k or more on credit cards each day" locations will have dedicated data pipes over which these transactions can be piggy-backed, thus reducing their need for three or four additional POTS lines running to the location.
It'll also reduce the overhead, hassle, and risk involved with having three or four additional DC 'bricks' connected to the wall / UPS.
A lot of old computer technology has existed for decades, was rock-solid, reliable, and tested for years upon years, but it's gone the way of the dodo, much like ISA, serial, paralell, PS/2, and floppy drives will.
Very soon, the power, storage, and speed of your home PC (including its visual displays) will be available in a unit that can clip on to your belt. You'll be able to [wired|wirelessly] share data with passers-by in seconds, and keep track of your e-mail and workload whereever you are. We can't make advances like that if we're going to insist on clinging to the past like a favourite pet. The past is always ending, the future ever arriving. Let's not spoil it with sentiment or ignorance.
I do, but it's older than most (Palm III) and I'm seriously considering upgrading it. And when I do, it'll be USB, partly since it's much faster, and mostly because nobody makes serial PDAs anymore.
A colleague of mine recently upgraded from a IIIc to a Tungsten, and gave me a quick demonstration. He connected the two devices to two computers (of equal calibre), both running Win'98 with the Palm Desktop software installed. Sync'ing the same set of data (address book, schedule, eBooks, some pictures, etc.) along with some fonts and a couple of applications to each device was night and day. There were about ~20 object groups (I'm not 100% familiar with the workings of the software, never having owned a PDA of my own), and the Tungsten was finished before the IIIc had sync'd the second group. It was awe-inspiring, and it's only USB 1!
With PDAs obtaining more and more storage capacity (256MB memory cards, for example) there's no way I'd want to sit through a 115.2k sync. Not on your life.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow. That's a strange twist. No, Mr. Pot, I am not black.
He created a cockamamie setup involving external daemons and strange rulesets and workarounds. This is the amateurish stuff that household cowboys (most of whom post to Slasdhdot, it seems) hack up and call "done".
My NAT'ed FTP servers have one or two firewall rules and a proper configuration and they work. Give me a 500MHz machine and I'll set up an FTP server (compiled from source) behind NAT inside of an hour. Properly.
Why would I tell you how to do it, when I could charge you $60/hour to do it for you? I've already read the manuals, I already know what I'm doing.
n.b. I charge a fee for computer instruction, too, but it's less than my service fee.
If this doesn't interest you, try reading the documentation for your FTP server and firewall of choice. Get back to me when you've figured it out. You know who I am.
I have a 1.5MBit ADSL line at home. I can download at approximately 192KBytes/sec at wire speed, or a more realistic 180KBytes/sec. Regardless of whether I run one wget or ten, I will still download at 180KBytes/sec, therefore taking the same amount of time.
However, now I'm maintaining more connections, using more CPU power, and taking up more spaces on the server that could otherwise be used for othuer users to download the same file.
That's a stupid idea, and it seems to result in little more than excessively flawed download results, like the people who tell me they've transferred 100KBytes/sec across a 28.8k modem, or who've tweaked their cable modems to give them T3 speeds at home, or ...
But hey, since atleast 9/10 of the postings in this thread have been complete digressions from any semblence of the question asked (which, in and of itself, was a pretty silly question), I suppose mis-information is acceptable. What more should I expect from "Ask Stupid Questions Of Slashdot" anymore?
So let me get this straight; you're using NAT, but are too incompetent to properly configure it for your NAT'ed servers, and this is a fault of the protocol?
Atleast you had the foresight to cover for your embarassment. It's ok, not everyone is cut out for systems administration. It's never too late to take a shop class.
I'm glad someone said that; I HATE that phrase! "Let's touch base ..." "I'm glad you called to touch base ... "
Throw in the occasional "copacetic" (who SAYS that?) and you've gotcherself one Stewart-Grade Nerve Grinder.
Microsoft's NT-based products have always (to my reccolection) been licensed on a per-processor basis. That's part of the reason to justify Server -> Advanced Server -> Datacenter. They're referring to the system processor, otherwise known as a central processing unit, or CPU. The nonsense about graphics cards, GPUs, pixel shaders, etc. is bunk. As has already been pointed out, they are not running Windows, Windows is running them.
Not a discrepancy, per se, but a limitation imposed so that you may be forced to upgrade the license to a server-class if you're serving a large quantity of clients. The wording is relatively specific, actually, considering it's a Microsoft EULA. I can clearly understand that they are referring to a local network server situation.
"This is not a mainframe. Use your own computer." They don't want you to set up a dozen dumb terminals and use them to run a Windows XP desktop. In the cases of WinVNC / VNC Server, it generally takes over the active desktop, rather than replicating the desktop out for a separate session. In a nutshell, if you're at a keyboard and staring at a monitor and there's a Microsoft Windows XP interface displayed on same monitor, and you are the only one using this interface, you should pay for a license for Windows XP.
This one's almost too insulting to respond to. "Microsoft reserves the right to discontinue ... " - discontinue, people. Read. Learn. They are not preventing you from viewing aol.com, they are acknowledging that at some point, Windows Update might not exist any more. Example; Windows 95, and soon-to-be Windows 98. I bet if you looked, you'd find similar clauses in their EULAs. It's known as "CYA" - Cover Your Ass. They don't want to be tied to a web service for the next four decades because somebody read and agreed to an antique EULA.
This is not news. This is FUD, and not even intelligent FUD, at that. Please, Slashdot, don't fan the flames unless warranted.
While I agree that EULAs are becomming entirely too complicated and restrictive; software is not analagous to a book.
Large scale software requires several developers, somehow funded, to be created. It requires extensive alpha and beta testing, code and security audits, more testing, documentation, a feedback and support system, and then the costs of advertising, marketing, shipping, etc. Software also has the inherent requirement to evolve and grow, as well as support any defects that may have shipped. Books are edited for style and content and shipped. Rarely are authors required to publish updates to their works.
Books can be read and re-read, but one copy can only be reasonably read once at a time. Software, on the other hand, has the ability to be used dozens or even thousands of times simultaneously. This is what software authors are seeking remuneration for.
Therein lies the difference. Whereas a company would have to deploy "a shitload" of x86 servers, they would only require a small handful of Sun servers. This also reduces strain on the power feed, backup power systems, etc. and can significantly reduce the TCO. Initial purchase price isn't everything.
Sun equipment is also generally more powerful and scalable than its Intel bretheren, and I for one hope cheap, commodity hardware never replaces proven server-grade hardware. That's a world I'd hate to administer.
Even that's a little difficult to verify, if your clientell is clever (which pirates tend to be).
Buy game, copy, microwave for 3 seconds, return "defective" CD, buy different game, repeat.
This situation, though, is certainly a sticky widget. How is a company expected to post a 14 page EULA on the outside of a box and still have room for the product name and logo, but then again, how am I to know what the EULA says if I pay for it, THEN discover that it allows the vendor to make surprise visits to my hard drive every week to ensure that I'm playing nicey-nice?
Maybe software vendors should provide copies of the EULA on paper to the stores and indicate, on the packaging, that the purchaser has the right to request a copy for their review. Simply putting the EULA on the vendor's website isn't acceptable. If I'm purchasing Windows for the first time because I don't yet own a coputer, I can't be reasonably expected to visit their webpage.
LOL.. I've observed bus driver behaviour from both behind their seat and in a car, and I know why they're on time. First and foremost, they're big and they know it. That helps them cut in and out of traffic. Secondly, heavy feet are common, and almost a requirement for Ontario bus drivers, it seems. Third, they work together. Ever had to make a hard left turn into a heavy stream of traffic? Imagine having something the size of a house blocking traffic flow for you. Now just ease around that corner like the road's empty.
Long and short of it, these guys drive full-sized busses like Paul Tracy drives an Indycar. I just can't imagine moving somewhere and having to deal with a bus service that, like, didn't run on time. If ever the bus was late, there was a real good reason (and no, a mere 12-18 inches of snow is seldom a good enough reason!)
The fewer cigarettes remaining in the pack, the sooner the bus arrives. :)
You also have to find out which machines are defective during their daily/weekly usage, isolate their identity, then connect to your server and initiate the process. Otherwise, you could have upwards of hundreds of people having to share a machine or do without. (And believe you me, there are students out there vindictive enough to disable workstations the day after their weekly imaging to ensure maximal downtime). The failure rate for imaging such large quantities of machines is entirely too high to be done on a regular basis. It would still require a small team of admins to walk the network and ensure that all labs are functional (ie; waiting at a login prompt, and able to be logged in, not conflicting with another machine (network ID has to be unique; the post-image process has to be undertaken sucessfully)).
I just love how so many armchair sysadmins on Slashdot have the perfect network strategy figured out.
What you're not considering, of course, is the traffic generated during the time this individual has has ${SOFTWARE} installed on the workstation, what traffic and/or data have been transmitted to countless sites on the Internet, and what potential nasties have been brought into the "trusted" network that is now sharing data pathways with all the students' reports, term papers, assignments, financial data, and personal information.
Ghost is a great product. For what it does, it's absolutely fantastic. I would highly reccomend it for any mass network software deployment. I can't sing its praises highly enough - honestly. However, Ghost is NOT designed to protect the network against users tampering with workstation configurations. In the network security / data integrity chart, Ghost is but one of many tools (including group and user policies, physical security, firewalls, IDS, etc.
Only when all other tools and automated protection systems have failed does Ghost come into play.
Imaging labs, or even small groups of workstations is entirely too taxing a process to be undertaken on a highly regular basis.
That idea works well in theory, until you start to imagine a network of 500 computers with 2000 users. Administrators are over-worked as it is, without having to do walk-through inspections and surveys of all computer labs all day long to find out of some of the machines need re-imaging.
Ghost is a great solution for mass-distribution of an OS/software config, but it's not a solution to users tampering with local systems. Not by far.
Most of them.
Nevertheless, s/floppy/cdrom/
Pardon my ignorance, having never laid eyes on the public systems referenced at either University, but how open, exactly, are they?
A few things come immediately to mind; why not encase the whole system, including keyboard connectors et al, in an external case? (Not a PC case, but an enveloping case that might even include the monitor) Also, why even have a floppy or CDROM drive attached? Makes securing the BIOS password a lot more pointless if you now have to cart around a set of lock-pick tools, a spare floppy drive and ribbon, and be able to perform surgery on the box while nobody's looking.
If these truly are desktop machines, open and exposed to the world in all their glory, it seems to me as if they'd be the last machines I'd trust with my PIN, credit card, bank card, or any other personal details. Casual web surfing only, thankyouverymuch.
Hear, hear!
Credit reports can be very deceiving. Take a person who's had several student loans to get themselves through post-secondary education, been forced to drop out of school and find any work they can muster in order to not only pay off thousands of dollars worth of debts, but also try to save money to become eligible to (hopefully) return, and whose co-signer has screwed them directly or indirectly out of money and credit.
That person's credit report will read like a bad novel, but does that make them at all ineligible to work? Uncapable of handling finances? Just because a person is forced to live off of Kraft Dinner for weeks at a time doesn't make them irresponsible, it might just mean they weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth, didn't qualify for obtusely regulated government student loans (too much money available) or private institution student loans (not enough money available) and has received a bad break.
Credit checks like that could quote conceivably ruin a person's chances of getting out of debt, I'd say.
Your post was most certainly not a troll, and has been unfairly moderated. Some people have either bad luck, or are genuine victims of crimes against them that affect their credit reports, and as such they are most certainly not accurate, nor should they be used against a potential employee.
LOL! I find it so terribly amusing when people bring that up; comes up almost as often as these arguments by analogy that Slashdot is so famous for. Fantastic, thanks for the chuckle!
Seriously, it's ignorance of the industry's history and future trends. If you don't know where we've been or where we're going, you've likely got no place in the industry. I certainly wouldn't want to hire a past-dweller, and I don't know many employers in a struggling economy who would, either.
But you cling to the notion that I'm so egotistical that I'm trying to merely berate you with my opinion. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
{laugh} What a world, what a world ... Here I was under the impression that BBS users were stuck in the past and the savvy Internet users were future oriented. Oh, my sides!
Perhaps you should complain to the management of these establishment. The local computer shop I work for just got another case of SKC 900MB CD-R discs this past week; it's half sold out already.
50 CD spindles of these units will be in any time now.
Unfortunate that you're missing out, but they do very much exist, and are in very widespread use already. One customer alone has burned well over 100 of them in the past couple months. {shrug} To each his own, I suppose.
Phonetically, it's pronounced "See Dee Are Double You"
That's probably the most short-sighted and ignorant comment I've read on Slashdot in several weeks.
Enjoy your obsolescence.
So I carry one disc, which I put in my pocket, and you have to carry an entire piece of hardware. I know that I can put this disc into almost every PC purchased in the last decade, you have to physically plug your device in, providing the computer has enough free ports.
I can pick up 800MB CD-RW discs for $3, or even cheaper if I buy them in quantity. How much does your media cost? Can you carry 24 ZIP disks in a 5" square, 1.5" thick wallet?
If your ZIP drive fails, you have to go find another computer with a ZIP drive in it to restore your data (provided it hasn't become corrupted when the drive failed). I can count no less than ten CD-ROM drives in my home alone.
Your situation (everyone in your school having a ZIP drive) is the exception, not the rule. I can guarantee you that for everyone who owns a ZIP drive greater than 250MB (they're too small to be considered), I can point you to ten thousand people who own a CD-ROM, where likely a thousand or more are burners.
Sorry, but you're not going to win me over with the ZIP disk argument. I've got one. I used to use it until I replaced it with a burner. They're just not as useful. Not nearly.
Many UPSs are being converted to USB connectors already. It won't be long (if it hasn't happened already) that the major power conversion companies scrap legacy serial links altogether.
Most of these devices can function perfectly well connected to a 486, from the devices I've seen anyways. There's no need for them to upgrade their lathe controllers to a P5 5.0GHz machine with all the bells and whistles if what they've got works. If they are forced into a computer upgrade and can't possibly obtain a legacy PC, I'm sure a $20 port converter won't kill them, considering many of these devices price at upwards of $10k.
(etc.. regarding drivers)
There are more capable devices - they're known as CD-RW drives. They're generic, inexpensive, widely supported, and easier to use every day. They're faster, more robust, hold more data, and the media has a longer life expectancy. Most new hardware I deal with comes with drivers on CDs, save for mice (but who needs a driver for a mouse nowadays?)
The 'magic' has been contained and is under control. ;) Many popular CD writing apps have a checkbox and/or option that says "Make a bootable CD" which then follows with step-by-step instructions on how to go about making the transition. Usually something along the lines of "Insert a bootable disk" or "point me towards a bootable disk image file" or "use the same boot disk image I used last time". So easy, a child of five could do it!
Now someone fetch me a child of five!
Negatory, my friend! ;)
USB ports are now on the front of most standard PC cases, many keyboards have USB ports, as do many monitors. USB hubs come in a million shapes and sizes, and range in price from around $20 through to several hundred dollars. Some powered, some not. With the USB 2.0 cable standard, the hubs can be even farther from the PC than before; tens of feet, so you can safely connect a USB hub across the room (or in another room!) from your PC, and to it, connect all of your peripherals. Many new motherboards' boot options include "USB HDD" and "USB CDROM", among other new-fangled boot option choices. These aren't even the latest in whiz-bang technology, either. The ECS K7S5A can boot from USB, for example.
Let's not forget that we still have bootable CDs. All is not lost!
There are about a million or so cable and/or DSL customers in Canada who are presently using USB NICs without problems. Just because SOME OSS drivers aren't up to snuff at this present time doesn't mean there's a problem with the hardware.
BTW - I myself use a 10/100 USB NIC (LinkSys - the driver under Linux is called "Pegasus") when dealing with machines that either don't have a NIC but do have USB (for whatever reason, I keep encountering these) or for machines that need a quick second ethernet interface, and I've got zero complaints. Sure, it's limited to 12MB/Sec, but it's better than playing the sneakerner disk-swap game for large files.
Actually, I've got both at home, and none of them have any form of serial connectivity. I've personally used three brands each of cable and DSL modems. I install cable and DSL for residential and business users professionally, and deal with probably upwards of a dozen varieties of cable/DSL modem products, and not a single one of them have serial ports on the back.
Cable modems have 75OHm cable connector, DC power connector, and a 10BaseT RJ-45 connector.
DSL modems have an RJ-11 telephone cable connector, DC power connector, and a 10BaseT RJ-45 connector.
In fact, new(er) DSL modems being shipped to customers are USB.
Which brand(s) of modems are you referring to, and where are they being deployed?
By the same token, we should still be using mainframes and dumb terminals.
Newer technology is faster, more upwards-capable (scalable), and far easier to support. I don't want to go back to refridgerator-sized disk drives; do you?
As far as the customer is concerned, chances are they don't know a lick of difference between a serial modem and an alternative product, such as a USB modem. It's up to the vendor to supply these outfits with technology they've tested, and by the time serial ports are impossible to find on new hardware (and serial port cards are similarly scarce), they'll have had several years with which to work with equipment manufacturers to get network access devices that work. More to the point, it's entirely feasable that by that point these "$50k or more on credit cards each day" locations will have dedicated data pipes over which these transactions can be piggy-backed, thus reducing their need for three or four additional POTS lines running to the location.
It'll also reduce the overhead, hassle, and risk involved with having three or four additional DC 'bricks' connected to the wall / UPS.
A lot of old computer technology has existed for decades, was rock-solid, reliable, and tested for years upon years, but it's gone the way of the dodo, much like ISA, serial, paralell, PS/2, and floppy drives will.
Very soon, the power, storage, and speed of your home PC (including its visual displays) will be available in a unit that can clip on to your belt. You'll be able to [wired|wirelessly] share data with passers-by in seconds, and keep track of your e-mail and workload whereever you are. We can't make advances like that if we're going to insist on clinging to the past like a favourite pet. The past is always ending, the future ever arriving. Let's not spoil it with sentiment or ignorance.
A colleague of mine recently upgraded from a IIIc to a Tungsten, and gave me a quick demonstration. He connected the two devices to two computers (of equal calibre), both running Win'98 with the Palm Desktop software installed. Sync'ing the same set of data (address book, schedule, eBooks, some pictures, etc.) along with some fonts and a couple of applications to each device was night and day. There were about ~20 object groups (I'm not 100% familiar with the workings of the software, never having owned a PDA of my own), and the Tungsten was finished before the IIIc had sync'd the second group. It was awe-inspiring, and it's only USB 1!
With PDAs obtaining more and more storage capacity (256MB memory cards, for example) there's no way I'd want to sit through a 115.2k sync. Not on your life.