Well, like you mentioned, Mozilla has more the "all-in-one" package you're looking for.
In my organization, we finally are migrating from IE to Firefox. We've run into some Javascript compatibility problems with our on-line CRM Netsuite, but I've been able to work around them.
We could get off of the Microsoft Outlook bus if Thunderbird (or other package) had a Microsoft Exchange protocol (and, for now, we're stuck on Windows because of some apps we need to run to stay in business)
A good number, perhaps a majority, of users who use IE are completely unaware they are using it. They'll say "I'm getting onto the Internet" or "I just run Yahoo" -- stuff like that, kind of sad, really. They don't know Internet Explorer is the problem, let alone that they're using it.
Although people are aware there are security problems due to news reports in the mass media, they are rarely attributed to Internet Explorer vulnerabilities. Usually the culprit is a "dangerous worm" or it sometimes gets as specific as "Windows".
The ad isn't going to change any minds unless it plainly spells out in plain language the dangers inherent in Internet Explorer. It might be helpful to provide a URL to a site which exploits some of these vulnerabilities, as well as provide a download link for Firefox.
Unfortunately, without the capacity for centralized management, corporate IT will stick to IE, and that's a least as big of a problem to get Firefox implemented as lack of brand recognition.
I wonder if the inclusion of a driver's photograph on a license generated this much "panic". Was the very idea of putting a person's picture, address and data of birth on the same state-issue card interpreted as a trampling of civil liberties?
Using a smart card as a driver's license and including things like driving, citizenship or criminal record on the card would make sense for law enforcement, provided some effort was made to hinder access. Getting this information for anybody is a trivial matter in the US.
If every attempt to ensure some level of security is met with gnashing of teeth by the ACLU/EFF/et al these organizations are going to be completely ignored by policy makers (more than they already are)
Through the 80's the US was assured that the losses in domestic industrial jobs (ex. the automotive sector) would be more than made up for by new technology jobs.
Here we are, twenty years later, and the growth of such jobs is mostly in "low-wage" countries. This makes complete sense for the employers involved, it's their duty to shareholders to get labor at the cheapest cost.
Libertarian and free-market economic philosophy looks at this as a generally good thing, goods/services get produced at the lowest cost. The numbers are not dire (with regards to "job loss"), but the trends are disturbing for those of us who are getting a bit long-in-the-tooth to change careers.
To get to the point:
- Countries such as India and China have socialized health care, which eliminates the burden that corporations have with US employers, how would you address this discrepancy?
- Is there any room in the Libertarian philosophy to maintain some level of economic inefficiency (i.e. subsidization) to maintain the capacity to domestically produce certain goods and services that have strategic importance to our nations needs (i.e. do we offsource nuclear warhead construction because Iran will build them cheaper than us? do we let Boeing fold because Airbus, subsidized by the EU, can provide jets more cost-effectively?)
- The governments of some countries are aggressively pursuing relationships with corporations by providing them land and other resources to set up shop? How can the US, which has relatively strict restrictions for such public/private relationships (with the exception of Texas-based energy companies), compete with governments willing to "bribe" corporations to locate and employ there?
Would the jobs Gates refers to be all of those programming jobs that were supposed to save the post-industrial worker and instead are going to South Asia? Or is he refering to the increased phone-support helpdesk jobs to deal with the crap software spewed from software sweatshops, oh, whose jobs are getting outsourced as well.
Besides, whatever supposed jobs we're loosing to open source can be more than made up for by getting paid to implement open source programs(anybody tried to implement Compiere CRM, not a trivial task).
Since open source programs can be customized to each customer's needs, more opportunities can be created for people skilled in programming and with an understanding of business processes.
Open source may kill jobs, but it's not the jobs most of us in Europe or the States are getting anyway.
This USB Drive was in your Daddy's pocket when he was shot down outside the office. He was captured and put in a Boeing prison camp. Now he knew if the suits ever saw the drive it'd be confiscated. The way your Daddy looked at it, that drive was your birthright. And he'd be damned if and dopeheads were gonna put their greasy corporate hands on his boy's birthright. So he hid it in the one place he knew he could hide somethin'. His ass. Five long years, he wore this drive up his ass. Then when he died of disentary, he gave me the drive. I hid with uncomfortable hunk of plastic up my ass for two years. Then, after seven years, I was sent home to my family. And now, little man, I give the drive to you.
I have poked around on Firefox's FAQ's and haven't been able to find out how to accomplish this. If I could get Gecko to render HTML in Outlook, we could shitcan IE. Could you give me any idea of where I could go to find out how to do this?
(We need Outlook due to some third-party apps that operate as Outlook plug-ins)
What would be really great is if the Firefox team could build ActiveX wrappers mapping the integration of IE into third-party apps (like QuickBooks and FranklinCovey). This would allow companies to obliterate IE from their organizations.
I read the article and I'm not sure they found the vulnerability by "dumb luck" or if they were able to analyze the open-source firmware posted on Linksys' site.
Given Cisco's resources, and recent theft of some of their router code, it kind of makes you wonder how something like this could have gone under the radar.
Then again, maybe they're too busy writing Linux drivers for their wireless cards!
I had computers in my kids rooms with much the same rules you had. I'd like to think of my 12 year old boy and girl as mature and well adjusted.
My wife had been nagging at me about monitoring what they were doing. I had a router set up that monitored their web activity, nothing too awful.
And then there was Instant Messaging.
After a bit of a change in behavior, which I had chalked up to normal adolescence, I finally broke down and installed snopping software on their computers. I loaded it on when I got home and we were going to sit them down at dinner the next day and tell them we were monitoring their Internet usage. What I saw on the Instant Messaging chats was so far over the top I pulled the computers out of their rooms.
Doing it all over again, I would put computers in their rooms and tell them right off the bat they are going to have all of their usage monitored (do not settle for web proxying or router logs - capture their IM, chat room and message board posts). Keep your kids on a leash of reasonable length and they'll stay out of trouble. The bummer is, your kids don't have to "do anything" to get involved in an entirely inapropriate chat session with some fucked-up pervert.
What I learned from this? Kids are our responsibility. We have a moral obligation to protect them and get them to adulthood in one piece; they have no constitutional right to do what they want.
Google newsgroup search is also behaving strangely
on
What's Wacky with Google?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've been getting an issue for weeks now where I'll do a newsgroup search, click on a match's "Show Thread" link and get an error that the thread isn't available.
If you go back and try again, it works.
Annoying, but not life threatening, at any rate...
The primary difference between your example and Microsoft's is that a Microsoft system would shut down when reporting the error -- your example refers to a redundant, fault-tolerant system which, of course, Microsoft would have nothing to do with.
Prior art indeed! Hmphf!
It may indeed be easier cheaper to develop apps under Windows when the shop is all Windows; but is it cheaper to build cross-platform, interoperable applications that can communicate and run across the multiple platforms that may be encountered within (and outside) an enterprise?
I would argue that J2EE development platform is a far more cost-effective, scalable and portable approach than.NET/COM +/DCOM/etc. Microsoft can put on all of the XML window-dressing it wants, it doesn't change the Windows-centric underpinnings.
Scenario 3: Sony releases set-top device based on Linux for video recording AND console games (Tivo on steroids?) - gives enough value add to the hardware so that they can make a couple of bucks selling the devices but retains Linux compatibility. They still get to license the Playstation moniker for money.
Simultaneously, Sony releases VAIO PC's with Linux that duplicates enough of the set-top functionality so that you don't have to choose between desktop and set-top box. Best of all for Sony, no M$ royalties.
Hmmm, let's see... Structuring the pricing of a product to promote your own operating system.
Somebody explain to me how this kind of linking of products is any better than Microsoft giving away Internet Exploder to promote Windows.
StarOffice has just be relagated to another bloated piece of crap office "productivity" package to avoid.
The entertainment industry want their shareholders to be fooled into thinking that the industry can implement this technology (which doesn't work) and continue milking the public (and their artists) in much the same way as they have been for the past few decades. They, and their whores in the federal government, have a vested interest in keeping Joe Public uninformed about the charade that their so-called copyright protection gives.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, like you mentioned, Mozilla has more the "all-in-one" package you're looking for.
In my organization, we finally are migrating from IE to Firefox. We've run into some Javascript compatibility problems with our on-line CRM Netsuite, but I've been able to work around them.
We could get off of the Microsoft Outlook bus if Thunderbird (or other package) had a Microsoft Exchange protocol (and, for now, we're stuck on Windows because of some apps we need to run to stay in business)
A good number, perhaps a majority, of users who use IE are completely unaware they are using it. They'll say "I'm getting onto the Internet" or "I just run Yahoo" -- stuff like that, kind of sad, really. They don't know Internet Explorer is the problem, let alone that they're using it.
Although people are aware there are security problems due to news reports in the mass media, they are rarely attributed to Internet Explorer vulnerabilities. Usually the culprit is a "dangerous worm" or it sometimes gets as specific as "Windows".
The ad isn't going to change any minds unless it plainly spells out in plain language the dangers inherent in Internet Explorer. It might be helpful to provide a URL to a site which exploits some of these vulnerabilities, as well as provide a download link for Firefox.
Unfortunately, without the capacity for centralized management, corporate IT will stick to IE, and that's a least as big of a problem to get Firefox implemented as lack of brand recognition.
I wonder if the inclusion of a driver's photograph on a license generated this much "panic". Was the very idea of putting a person's picture, address and data of birth on the same state-issue card interpreted as a trampling of civil liberties? Using a smart card as a driver's license and including things like driving, citizenship or criminal record on the card would make sense for law enforcement, provided some effort was made to hinder access. Getting this information for anybody is a trivial matter in the US. If every attempt to ensure some level of security is met with gnashing of teeth by the ACLU/EFF/et al these organizations are going to be completely ignored by policy makers (more than they already are)
Through the 80's the US was assured that the losses in domestic industrial jobs (ex. the automotive sector) would be more than made up for by new technology jobs. Here we are, twenty years later, and the growth of such jobs is mostly in "low-wage" countries. This makes complete sense for the employers involved, it's their duty to shareholders to get labor at the cheapest cost. Libertarian and free-market economic philosophy looks at this as a generally good thing, goods/services get produced at the lowest cost. The numbers are not dire (with regards to "job loss"), but the trends are disturbing for those of us who are getting a bit long-in-the-tooth to change careers. To get to the point: - Countries such as India and China have socialized health care, which eliminates the burden that corporations have with US employers, how would you address this discrepancy? - Is there any room in the Libertarian philosophy to maintain some level of economic inefficiency (i.e. subsidization) to maintain the capacity to domestically produce certain goods and services that have strategic importance to our nations needs (i.e. do we offsource nuclear warhead construction because Iran will build them cheaper than us? do we let Boeing fold because Airbus, subsidized by the EU, can provide jets more cost-effectively?) - The governments of some countries are aggressively pursuing relationships with corporations by providing them land and other resources to set up shop? How can the US, which has relatively strict restrictions for such public/private relationships (with the exception of Texas-based energy companies), compete with governments willing to "bribe" corporations to locate and employ there?
Knowing Lucas, he's probably getting ready to cast Ben Affleck or Leonardo Di'Caprio as Thrawn.
Would the jobs Gates refers to be all of those programming jobs that were supposed to save the post-industrial worker and instead are going to South Asia? Or is he refering to the increased phone-support helpdesk jobs to deal with the crap software spewed from software sweatshops, oh, whose jobs are getting outsourced as well. Besides, whatever supposed jobs we're loosing to open source can be more than made up for by getting paid to implement open source programs(anybody tried to implement Compiere CRM, not a trivial task). Since open source programs can be customized to each customer's needs, more opportunities can be created for people skilled in programming and with an understanding of business processes. Open source may kill jobs, but it's not the jobs most of us in Europe or the States are getting anyway.
This USB Drive was in your Daddy's pocket when he was shot down outside the office. He was captured and put in a Boeing prison camp. Now he knew if the suits ever saw the drive it'd be confiscated. The way your Daddy looked at it, that drive was your birthright. And he'd be damned if and dopeheads were gonna put their greasy corporate hands on his boy's birthright. So he hid it in the one place he knew he could hide somethin'. His ass. Five long years, he wore this drive up his ass. Then when he died of disentary, he gave me the drive. I hid with uncomfortable hunk of plastic up my ass for two years. Then, after seven years, I was sent home to my family. And now, little man, I give the drive to you.
I have poked around on Firefox's FAQ's and haven't been able to find out how to accomplish this. If I could get Gecko to render HTML in Outlook, we could shitcan IE. Could you give me any idea of where I could go to find out how to do this? (We need Outlook due to some third-party apps that operate as Outlook plug-ins)
What would be really great is if the Firefox team could build ActiveX wrappers mapping the integration of IE into third-party apps (like QuickBooks and FranklinCovey). This would allow companies to obliterate IE from their organizations.
I read the article and I'm not sure they found the vulnerability by "dumb luck" or if they were able to analyze the open-source firmware posted on Linksys' site. Given Cisco's resources, and recent theft of some of their router code, it kind of makes you wonder how something like this could have gone under the radar. Then again, maybe they're too busy writing Linux drivers for their wireless cards!
Computers will have done for education what television did for parenting.
Did you try re-running their configuration program? Anything interesting in your XFree log?
I had computers in my kids rooms with much the same rules you had. I'd like to think of my 12 year old boy and girl as mature and well adjusted. My wife had been nagging at me about monitoring what they were doing. I had a router set up that monitored their web activity, nothing too awful. And then there was Instant Messaging. After a bit of a change in behavior, which I had chalked up to normal adolescence, I finally broke down and installed snopping software on their computers. I loaded it on when I got home and we were going to sit them down at dinner the next day and tell them we were monitoring their Internet usage. What I saw on the Instant Messaging chats was so far over the top I pulled the computers out of their rooms. Doing it all over again, I would put computers in their rooms and tell them right off the bat they are going to have all of their usage monitored (do not settle for web proxying or router logs - capture their IM, chat room and message board posts). Keep your kids on a leash of reasonable length and they'll stay out of trouble. The bummer is, your kids don't have to "do anything" to get involved in an entirely inapropriate chat session with some fucked-up pervert. What I learned from this? Kids are our responsibility. We have a moral obligation to protect them and get them to adulthood in one piece; they have no constitutional right to do what they want.
I've been getting an issue for weeks now where I'll do a newsgroup search, click on a match's "Show Thread" link and get an error that the thread isn't available. If you go back and try again, it works. Annoying, but not life threatening, at any rate...
The primary difference between your example and Microsoft's is that a Microsoft system would shut down when reporting the error -- your example refers to a redundant, fault-tolerant system which, of course, Microsoft would have nothing to do with. Prior art indeed! Hmphf!
It may indeed be easier cheaper to develop apps under Windows when the shop is all Windows; but is it cheaper to build cross-platform, interoperable applications that can communicate and run across the multiple platforms that may be encountered within (and outside) an enterprise? I would argue that J2EE development platform is a far more cost-effective, scalable and portable approach than .NET/COM +/DCOM/etc. Microsoft can put on all of the XML window-dressing it wants, it doesn't change the Windows-centric underpinnings.
Scenario 3: Sony releases set-top device based on Linux for video recording AND console games (Tivo on steroids?) - gives enough value add to the hardware so that they can make a couple of bucks selling the devices but retains Linux compatibility. They still get to license the Playstation moniker for money.
Simultaneously, Sony releases VAIO PC's with Linux that duplicates enough of the set-top functionality so that you don't have to choose between desktop and set-top box. Best of all for Sony, no M$ royalties.
Hmmm, let's see... Structuring the pricing of a product to promote your own operating system. Somebody explain to me how this kind of linking of products is any better than Microsoft giving away Internet Exploder to promote Windows. StarOffice has just be relagated to another bloated piece of crap office "productivity" package to avoid.
http://www.desaware.com/SpyWorksL2.htm
The entertainment industry want their shareholders to be fooled into thinking that the industry can implement this technology (which doesn't work) and continue milking the public (and their artists) in much the same way as they have been for the past few decades. They, and their whores in the federal government, have a vested interest in keeping Joe Public uninformed about the charade that their so-called copyright protection gives.