Enterprise Architect is very nice, since you can do forward and reverse software engineering with it.
However, if you do not have the budget allocated for it, a good compromise is StarUML, which became very nice and usable lately and has the same "feeling" and menu-driven approach like the old Rational Rose and Enterprise Architect:
As for Rational Rose, the first original version was very good with some known quirks until it became IBM Rational Rose and was converted into a "super Eclipse" plug-in.
So, if you enjoyed drawing UML diagrams in the old Rational Rose, then Enterprise Architect and StarUML are the tools that you are looking for.
As for the actual writing part, your company should already have a good set of Word Templates, to document the actual Sofware Requirement and Specification (SRS), Sofware Design Document (SDD), Change Request Document (CRD).
Once, you got those set up, then we mostly use MantisBT or BaseCamp to share, comment and track them.
As for producing code documentation, the choice are: Doxygen, JavaDoc, NDoc, JsDoc:
Wow, it took all those people to "reinvent" a Zero-Point Module (ZPM) device:
"A ZPM is capable of generating immense amounts of energy by utilizing zero point energy which derives from a phenomenon known as the quantum foam (subatomic wormholes opening and closing constantly in and out of subspace). A ZPM contains an artificially created region of subspace from which this power is drawn. Since this process is thermodynamically irreversible, every ZPM (if used) will eventually reach maximum entropy, at which point it is depleted and can no longer provide power."
2) Add 2 weeks to that amount for a complete code review.
3) Any changes by the customer means "adding 2 weeks to the schedule", even if it's one line of code... why? because, it must pass documentation, Q.A., validation and be reviewed by the entire department, without accounting for "double bug", bug induced by another bug and stuff like that or bugs that are in the core library and means retesting "everything", "every module", etc.
4) Any changes must be approved, reviewed and means adding delay (normally a big NO-NO) and therefore, 99% of the case thoses changes are left for future phases or abandonned by the client when they realise the implication. If not, it's your objective to discourage them or force them to reconsider by any means. =P
5) Don't give any feedback to the customer unless you must! If you do, downgrade any progress to minimum to reduce expectation and refrain the customer from adding new stuff to the TODO list.
6) Which means, each phase must be clear, consise, humble, realistic, feasible, with lots of buffer time for fixes, reviews and testing. Exagerating how complicated it is to a customer is always a good idea, because in the end, everything that seems easy is actually very difficult.
7) Do minimum documentation, UML to get started... They'll get rewritten at least 30 times, before everyone in the group agrees after what 40 meetings?
8) Once the phase somehow works and the thing is somehow settle, start documenting it, so you don't forget. It's actually a very good way to detect logical mistakes, misbehaviors, bad coupling, bad cohesion, missing corner cases, bad design choices, usability problems, etc.
9) Best teamwork is small team of 3-5 senior people working toghether hand-in-hand, sometime helped by 1-2 junior, which can do much better than 120 junior who are completely clueless and never deliver on time...
10) For big projects split things up in component and/or phases that a small team of 3-5 people can do, keeping in mind of the big picture so its scales up, but ignoring any meaningless future details that don't matter "right now".
11) Rush the people to do it in "the simple 1/2 time delay", keeping in pocket the "double time" remaining for any arising issue and reworking the core libraries, overhaulin the code, reviews, fixing bugs, etc. This means that if you are really late, you are actually late on your "buffer time". If things goes well, then the project will be done before it's expected, which will impress any client.
12) Finally, but not the least, there's no such thing as a bug, it's just a "small improvement", a "new feature", "code overhaulin", "mispelled requirement" or a "security enhancement". It keeps customer smiling, it's less depressing for everyone and overall keeps the mood up on everyone face with a laugh or two!;-) Furthermore, no ones want to hear that the code is "full of bug", but saying that a group of people are always "enhancing, overhauling and improving the code base" also means bigger bonus! =)
Hope it saves you from any future project delay or cost overrun!
No wonder why the webpage says: "Click on image thumbnails to see a larger images. Video clips will be online next week"...
Why next week? Can't we just take down the entire MIT web server! =P
So, those poor students in mid-session won't be able to access to their course material and similar! =)
That's nice a new excuse just came out! "Sir, I couldn't do my assignment, because the MIT web server was slashdotted, so I couldn't access the course material, can I get an extension.... PLEASE!!!!"
So, next time, you guys have a hard deadline assignment, please just post an article on slashdot and there you go.
MythBuster said it was impossible!
So, it's Myth Busted.
Who are these guys, to even think that this is actually possible back then?!
Oh, and BTW, first post! =)
Well, maybe, but IBM Rational Rose XP is worst usability wise then the old Rational Rose.
Also, if Rational Rose XP is a plug-in for Eclipse, but Rose is 30x the size of eclipse... which one is really the plug-in?
And why do you need Eclipse?! I think it was just a fast way for them to bloat up Eclipse, and reuse existing Eclipse parts to recrate Rational Rose XP.
It crash less often than the old, but it eats way more memory.
For instance, you cannot create some non-implementation abstract specification scenario diagrams with ease, it force you to create "implementation classes", especially when you have to dupe the classes to remove some "not meaningful" associations, instead of having a "hide association" boolean config.
It also add some freaking slash:/action/(/a/,/b/) instead of just action(a,b) for scenarios.
Some configuration settings are no more available. Changing colors/font of some items is no more possible in some cases.
Coordinates on infinite planes are just weird...
If you prefered to have text below the use case that's no more possible, which sometimes makes use cases diagrams looks odds with some having large and other small ovals or having to put a large ovals on everything just to make it similar, reducing the amount of stuff you can fit on a page.
It force you to include association to be displayed, even though it is "not meaningful" in the current displayed context. Especially, if you try to create a higher abstraction view.
The cool class diagrams private/protected/public icons are no more replaced with boring text symbols.
It force you to use some "templates" and completely ignores "what you actually want to do". Also, it display all unmeaningful icons on the left using a non intuitive hide/show menu and then prohibits you to use them, instead of having a simple toolbar like in the old to draw your diagram and remove non-usable one.
Basically, give me back a bug-fixed Rational Rose (non-XP) app.
Your post is the most miserable format, I have read compare to all the other posts,
especially when the way that most of us do most of our reading is on a computer.
Seriously, use some return please, next time.
Thank you!
Does Google need an OS? No!That's the real beauty and the real threat of Google. Microsoft still assumes that everything needs an OS. Google is proving time and again that the OS is nothing in the long run. Google is acting on something Microsoft considered a threat 10+ years ago--that the Internet may become an OS unto itself (not in the true sense of OS, but in the sense that its platform negates the need to run a proprietary OS like Windows).
Well, yes, they need an OS and that OS is based on the GNU/Linux kernel. However, it's mostly a custom strip down RedHat 6.2 or 7.2 distro and using a python/perl/mysql backend.
Does a "Google OS" exist? not really. [It's a bit of a stretch]
Does a "Google Linux Distribution" exist? Absolutely.
Maybe in the future, a real "Google Desktop Distro" would be sold with computers, which would be a basic strip down desktop with every desktop applications being on the web, on Google Application Servers.
Don't worry, if there is some "acetylene terrorist" in there, Bush will seek and "smoke them out" !
Everyone know, they have some "chemical warfare", look look this powerpoint slide, they have "CHEMICAL BOMBS" !!! they have some sneaky plans, look at this slide!!! they gonna attack us with chemical bombs! we must destroy them! I mean... bring democracy in there!
Then we try to bring "democracy" over our new "acetylene bacteria" chemical storm warlord, then we just send another Unocal V.P. dress up as an "acetylene bacteria" warlord and nobody on CNN will ever see the difference.
Worst case, hey just nuke them all. As simple as that. Don't forget, "their terrorist, they eat acetylene" ! Don't forget, "we finish the job", "we finish" as Bush said!
"God bless us. God bless US. God bless America".
After all we "borrow" all the methane in there and burn it up here. No chance those "terrorists" get a hand on that "precious gas". Oooops sorry is that microphone still on?!
Most cracks are extremely simple, crackers are simply looking for a conditional and unconditional jump instruction, that's it! Then it's all about stepping into the code step by step and having break points.
So, one easy way is as simple as by passing the checks by renaming JZ into JNZ, JE into JNE, JO into JNO, or similar when the serial number is checked.
This way any invalid serial is now actually valid... You might have to add a NOP to make the instruction the same length.
Other serials are simply generated by having the serial key code compare being blindly copied into another program to create a keygen.
if ( input_key != calculated_key ) { error(); }
Another way is to run it in debug mode and then see the content of the register having calculated_key.
The only product scheme which are more difficult to crack is those which they *seems* to be cracked, but fail unexpectively after a period of time which is very far apart the actual "test". Days or weeks is a good delay.
And for products which prevent "debug mode" utilities, well, there exist other products to go around this issue by simply masquerading the WinIce/SoftIce application, so it doesn't get detected and prevented from running in "debug mode".
That's all I can tell.
Some of course are encrypted, but even then the code must be "decrypted" before being run so... it's still possible to analyze it, just a bit harder.
In the end, the best way for a product is to be good, useful, have nice manuals and have a proper support at the right price, then the majority of people will buy it, especially if it's bundled with good hardware, since it wouldn't make sense otherwise.
The problem with any programming language and it's once legacy source code writing style kicks in, this is true for any language, include C, C++ or Perl.
The older the language is, the more chance that you find some unmaintainable legacy source code.
The thing with newer language with Python, Ruby, PHP, Java and some C++ is that these are "recent" language, therefore, the odds of finding a very old legacy system is smaller.
In 10-15 years from now, you will say that Python, Ruby, PHP or Java is so "unreadable", because they are no more the "flavor du jour" and new constructs exists instead. Like most people says about cobol, pascal, scheme, lisp source code.
There is a difference between "unreadable" and "encrypted". The former was not "expecting" to be unreadable, it is just badly written by mistake or use older construct that nowadays are no more used. The later was made on purpose, which is the difference.
If you want "unreadable" C source code, take a look at Graphviz Dot, no it's not part of IOCCC and was not make to be part of it, but if you ever try to understand this legacy code, good luck!!!
Disclaimer, Graphviz dot is a nice piece of software, but it cries out loud to be heavily refactored.
In fact, the first two layers were refactored, but the core engine is dated back to the 80's with K&R style and variable/function/struct name being less than 5 characters!
If you want "unreadable" Perl source code, take a look at any source code, which have:
no "use strict;" no "use vars qw{};" use heavily "local" use heavily "map" no "return" statement --> $r; == return $r; use heavily complex non-trivial regexp without documenting them. no documentation or POD. use some old perl construct.
Take a look at this one,
clc (gzip'ed tarfile) Counts total lines, noncomment lines, and statements in C/C++ source. Written by Brad Appleton in 1995. Implemented in perl.
For instance, the following queries were supposed to give 5+ results on Google and no results on Yahoo, so let see if that actually works...
Sometimes you get no results on Google "on the first tries" go figure... "that server is down/busy?!"
If you get any results they are the same repeating over and over ispell dictionary word list!
I don't know about you but that's pretty useless...
Also, the fact that both search engines limits to the first 1000 results, that's pretty useless,
how can we know for sure there is 100000+ results for apple if after page XYZ, results are truncated?
Affected Products: Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 up to and including SP6a Microsoft Windows 2000 up to and including SP4 Microsoft Windows XP up to and including SP2 Microsoft Windows Server 2003 up to and including SP1
It's nice to be a Microsoft "reject"... at least when worms come out I don't give a damn.
Just don't use Internet Explorer and have a good Firewall...
The only problem with Windows 98 SE, is that most newer machine cannot install it properly, since drivers do not exists!!! arggggg.
Which means.... hmmm maybe I should update my Dell Laptop. =(
Anyone knows where to find Windows 98 drivers for Dell laptops ?! [Hint: Dell Tech Support are clueless]
Also, it's funny that all those fine.NET companies, which insist on using ASP.NET, C#, ISS crapt will get infected again, again and again... why nobody learn... just use LAPP!!! (Linux, Apache, PostgreSQL, Perl/PHP)
You never use MS Office CSS extension and InternetExplorer HTML did you? =^D
Page-break, you print 1 page per HTML file.
*safer approach*
If your report is a template, and you know that your invoice can print as many as 50 lines per HTML page,
at line 51 you continue on to the "next page HTML template".
Margins and borders can be fixed with the help of MS Office HTML extension that works just fine in InternetExplorer and Mozilla.
The only tricky thing is printing landscape on a network printer, since you don't have the orientation priviledge using software,
but that can be "fixed" easily by pre-setting or prompting page setup via DCOM or toggling using:
OK, I've been giving some thought, and I think I've got a handle on The Root Causes of Wintel Terrorism. Just why do people turn to Monopoly terrorism to achieve their goals?
1) It's simple. It has an ease and ready accessibility to essentially any group of company, of any size, where they can pull off a "terrorist" marketting attack with very limited resources to brainwash any PHB out there.
2) It's flashy.Wintel Terrorism is "the new coolness." It gets a lot of attention, very quickly. You see, it's much more cool to use Wintel then lets say Linux at work.
3) It's empowering. The one element that all Wintel terrorist groups have, at the start, is far more passion than power, which is true for Microsoft Windows and Intel back in the 80's. They care a great deal about their cause, but they simply can't get anything done through more legitimate means. Absolutely. So they start getting violent, to increase their profile and extend their power by crushing all their competitors, by hiring false journalist, by destroying the credibility of any one beating them.
4)It's deniable. If a government wants something done, but doesn't want to risk the backlash of doing it openly themselves, they can try to get some Wintel "terrorists" to do it for them. This way, they can stand back and say "tsk, tsk" when something bad happens that benefits them, such as huge payback contributions to their politic party campaign..
5) It's cheap. Modern marketting PHB unbrainwashing weapons and training cost far, far more than an average individual or group can afford. But MSCE/.NET/Free MSDN Universal license circular dependancy bomb belts probably cost less than a couple of dollars to make the DVDs and advertising, compared to the huge billion dollars revenues lock-in and platform establishing that it creates. Bill Gates put together their first Microsoft product in their mom's basement.
6) It's tough to fight. A long time ago, a bunch of countries laid out a set of rules for using Unix software. These rules were designed to, among other things, minimize the number of computers infected during a war. In exchange for some serious restrictions on what users could do, large groups of people, institutions, and companies were declared "off limits." The cyber-terrorists systematically look at those new homogeneous security flaws and use them as guidelines for how to best attack our computers and servers.
Many people look at the cyber-terrorist attacks [in the civilized world] and wonder why it's happening. I look at the above and wonder why there haven't been more.
Linux/AMD zealot speak brother!
P.S.: Is it me or other people read the headline as:
British Intel(TM) Shuts Down al-Qaeda Sites
Slashdot Mirror
Enterprise Architect is very nice, since you can do forward and reverse software engineering with it.
However, if you do not have the budget allocated for it, a good compromise is StarUML,
which became very nice and usable lately and has the same "feeling" and menu-driven approach
like the old Rational Rose and Enterprise Architect:
http://staruml.sourceforge.net/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/staruml/files/staruml/5.0/staruml-5.0-with-cm.exe/download
As for Rational Rose, the first original version was very good with some known quirks until it
became IBM Rational Rose and was converted into a "super Eclipse" plug-in.
So, if you enjoyed drawing UML diagrams in the old Rational Rose,
then Enterprise Architect and StarUML are the tools that you are looking for.
And if you do not like to draw with a mouse then Graphviz Dot and a good text editor is for you:
http://www.graphviz.org/Download.php
For tracking issues / documents and schedule,
I can recommend either BugZilla, Mantis or BaseCamp:
http://www.bugzilla.org/download/
http://www.mantisbt.org/
http://basecamphq.com/
As for the actual writing part, your company should already have a good set of Word Templates,
to document the actual Sofware Requirement and Specification (SRS), Sofware Design Document (SDD),
Change Request Document (CRD).
Once, you got those set up, then we mostly use MantisBT or BaseCamp to share, comment and track them.
As for producing code documentation, the choice are: Doxygen, JavaDoc, NDoc, JsDoc:
http://www.doxygen.org/
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/documentation/index-jsp-135444.html
http://ndoc.sourceforge.net/
HP and IBM's Take on Web 2.0 http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/servers-hp-ibm,1937.html
http://video.google.ca/videosearch?q=PEPCK-C
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfXUVReySs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6oxXwBsD1U
Well, at least one person found it funny! X-D Did you post it as anonymous to not get -1 Flamebait too?
Quote: "We're making good progress, doing all the things we need to get done."
It's NOT called progress, it's called "Postgres".
Anyway that sentence doesn't make sense and should be read as:
"We're making goods with Postgres, doing all the things we need to get done."
I don't know about you but... Zune It Zucks!
Wow, it took all those people to "reinvent" a Zero-Point Module (ZPM) device:
;)
"A ZPM is capable of generating immense amounts of energy by utilizing zero point energy which derives from a phenomenon known as the quantum foam (subatomic wormholes opening and closing constantly in and out of subspace). A ZPM contains an artificially created region of subspace from which this power is drawn. Since this process is thermodynamically irreversible, every ZPM (if used) will eventually reach maximum entropy, at which point it is depleted and can no longer provide power."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Point_Module
We knew all along that Dr. Samantha Carter is the brightest of all to figure this one out,
while it took all those people to figure that out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samantha_Carter
http://www.scifi.com/atlantis/tech/
P.S. I know, I know, it's just a sci-fi show... still! =)
Seriously, doubling the time is NOT enough.
;-)
Top 12 - Rule of thumb says:
1) Triple the estimated time + 10%.
2) Add 2 weeks to that amount for a complete code review.
3) Any changes by the customer means "adding 2 weeks to the schedule", even if it's one line of code... why? because, it must pass documentation, Q.A., validation and be reviewed by the entire department, without accounting for "double bug", bug induced by another bug and stuff like that or bugs that are in the core library and means retesting "everything", "every module", etc.
4) Any changes must be approved, reviewed and means adding delay (normally a big NO-NO) and therefore, 99% of the case thoses changes are left for future phases or abandonned by the client when they realise the implication. If not, it's your objective to discourage them or force them to reconsider by any means. =P
5) Don't give any feedback to the customer unless you must! If you do, downgrade any progress to minimum to reduce expectation and refrain the customer from adding new stuff to the TODO list.
6) Which means, each phase must be clear, consise, humble, realistic, feasible, with lots of buffer time for fixes, reviews and testing. Exagerating how complicated it is to a customer is always a good idea, because in the end, everything that seems easy is actually very difficult.
7) Do minimum documentation, UML to get started... They'll get rewritten at least 30 times, before everyone in the group agrees after what 40 meetings?
8) Once the phase somehow works and the thing is somehow settle, start documenting it, so you don't forget. It's actually a very good way to detect logical mistakes, misbehaviors, bad coupling, bad cohesion, missing corner cases, bad design choices, usability problems, etc.
9) Best teamwork is small team of 3-5 senior people working toghether hand-in-hand, sometime helped by 1-2 junior, which can do much better than 120 junior who are completely clueless and never deliver on time...
10) For big projects split things up in component and/or phases that a small team of 3-5 people can do, keeping in mind of the big picture so its scales up, but ignoring any meaningless future details that don't matter "right now".
11) Rush the people to do it in "the simple 1/2 time delay", keeping in pocket the "double time" remaining for any arising issue and reworking the core libraries, overhaulin the code, reviews, fixing bugs, etc. This means that if you are really late, you are actually late on your "buffer time". If things goes well, then the project will be done before it's expected, which will impress any client.
12) Finally, but not the least, there's no such thing as a bug, it's just a "small improvement", a "new feature", "code overhaulin", "mispelled requirement" or a "security enhancement". It keeps customer smiling, it's less depressing for everyone and overall keeps the mood up on everyone face with a laugh or two!
Furthermore, no ones want to hear that the code is "full of bug", but saying that a group of people are always "enhancing, overhauling and improving the code base" also means bigger bonus! =)
Hope it saves you from any future project delay or cost overrun!
Hell, set up some kind of a honeynet with several types of servers (Windows, Mac, *nix) in various states of security.
Nah! Too difficult to do.
You don't have to setup an honeypot or honeynet or whatever,
or do anything special, just scan any unpatched windows machine and that should be easy!
Finding Spyware, Malware, Backdoors, Trojans and dialers are bonus point.
BTW, you may not use Windows and Security,
in the same sentence, since that's a contradiction.
In fact, CLI++ sounds better and would be a better compromise. Between C++, C++/CLI, CLI/C++, CLI and C++ =P You don't have to search forever...
No wonder why the webpage says:
8 15d479865f65c52/index.html
"Click on image thumbnails to see a larger images. Video clips will be online next week"...
Why next week?
Can't we just take down the entire MIT web server! =P
So, those poor students in mid-session won't be able
to access to their course material and similar! =)
That's nice a new excuse just came out!
"Sir, I couldn't do my assignment, because the MIT web server was slashdotted,
so I couldn't access the course material, can I get an extension.... PLEASE!!!!"
So, next time, you guys have a hard deadline assignment,
please just post an article on slashdot and there you go.
For everyone else, please use the Mirror...
http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/90e7777b89ad9e53
MythBuster said it was impossible! So, it's Myth Busted. Who are these guys, to even think that this is actually possible back then?! Oh, and BTW, first post! =)
Well, maybe, but IBM Rational Rose XP is worst usability wise
/action/(/a/,/b/)
then the old Rational Rose.
Also, if Rational Rose XP is a plug-in for Eclipse, but Rose is 30x the size of eclipse...
which one is really the plug-in?
And why do you need Eclipse?!
I think it was just a fast way for them to bloat up Eclipse,
and reuse existing Eclipse parts to recrate Rational Rose XP.
It crash less often than the old, but it eats way more memory.
For instance, you cannot create some non-implementation abstract specification scenario diagrams with ease, it force you to create "implementation classes", especially when you have to dupe the classes to remove some "not meaningful" associations, instead of having a "hide association" boolean config.
It also add some freaking slash:
instead of just action(a,b) for scenarios.
Some configuration settings are no more available.
Changing colors/font of some items is no more possible in some cases.
Coordinates on infinite planes are just weird...
If you prefered to have text below the use case that's no more possible,
which sometimes makes use cases diagrams looks odds
with some having large and other small ovals or having
to put a large ovals on everything just to make it similar,
reducing the amount of stuff you can fit on a page.
It force you to include association to be displayed,
even though it is "not meaningful" in the current displayed context.
Especially, if you try to create a higher abstraction view.
The cool class diagrams private/protected/public icons
are no more replaced with boring text symbols.
It force you to use some "templates" and completely ignores
"what you actually want to do". Also, it display all
unmeaningful icons on the left using a non intuitive
hide/show menu and then prohibits you to use them,
instead of having a simple toolbar like in the old
to draw your diagram and remove non-usable one.
Basically, give me back a bug-fixed Rational Rose (non-XP) app.
Your post is the most miserable format,
I have read compare to all the other posts, especially when
the way that most of us do most of our reading is on a computer.
Seriously, use some return please, next time.
Thank you!
Does Google need an OS? No!That's the real beauty and the real threat of Google. Microsoft still assumes that everything needs an OS. Google is proving time and again that the OS is nothing in the long run. Google is acting on something Microsoft considered a threat 10+ years ago--that the Internet may become an OS unto itself (not in the true sense of OS, but in the sense that its platform negates the need to run a proprietary OS like Windows).
Well, yes, they need an OS and that OS is based on the GNU/Linux kernel.
However, it's mostly a custom strip down RedHat 6.2 or 7.2 distro
and using a python/perl/mysql backend.
Does a "Google OS" exist? not really. [It's a bit of a stretch]
Does a "Google Linux Distribution" exist? Absolutely.
http://code.google.com/mirror/gsa.html
Maybe in the future, a real "Google Desktop Distro"
would be sold with computers, which would be a basic strip down desktop
with every desktop applications being on the web, on Google Application Servers.
Please mod parent up!
Don't worry, if there is some "acetylene terrorist" in there,
Bush will seek and "smoke them out" !
Everyone know, they have some "chemical warfare",
look look this powerpoint slide, they have "CHEMICAL BOMBS" !!!
they have some sneaky plans, look at this slide!!!
they gonna attack us with chemical bombs!
we must destroy them! I mean... bring democracy in there!
Then we try to bring "democracy"
over our new "acetylene bacteria" chemical storm warlord,
then we just send another Unocal V.P. dress up
as an "acetylene bacteria" warlord
and nobody on CNN will ever see the difference.
Worst case, hey just nuke them all. As simple as that.
Don't forget, "their terrorist, they eat acetylene" !
Don't forget, "we finish the job", "we finish" as Bush said!
"God bless us. God bless US. God bless America".
After all we "borrow" all the methane in there and burn it up here.
No chance those "terrorists" get a hand on that "precious gas".
Oooops sorry is that microphone still on?!
http://www.jengajam.com/r/End-Of-The-World
Most cracks are extremely simple, crackers are simply looking for a conditional and unconditional jump instruction, that's it! Then it's all about stepping into the code step by step and having break points.
if ( !condition ) { error_message(); }
http://www.unixwiz.net/techtips/x86-jumps.html
So, one easy way is as simple as by passing the checks by renaming JZ into JNZ, JE into JNE, JO into JNO, or similar when the serial number is checked.
This way any invalid serial is now actually valid...
You might have to add a NOP to make the instruction the same length.
Other serials are simply generated by having the serial key code compare being blindly copied into another program to create a keygen.
if ( input_key != calculated_key ) { error(); }
Another way is to run it in debug mode and then see the content of the register having calculated_key.
The only product scheme which are more difficult to crack is those which they *seems* to be cracked, but fail unexpectively after a period of time which is very far apart the actual "test".
Days or weeks is a good delay.
And for products which prevent "debug mode" utilities, well, there exist other products to go around this issue by simply masquerading the WinIce/SoftIce application, so it doesn't get detected and prevented from running in "debug mode".
That's all I can tell.
Some of course are encrypted, but even then the code must be "decrypted" before being run so...
it's still possible to analyze it, just a bit harder.
In the end, the best way for a product is to be good, useful, have nice manuals and have a proper support at the right price, then the majority of people will buy it, especially if it's bundled with good hardware, since it wouldn't make sense otherwise.
Maybe they should create one version called Windows anti-geek version.
If you try to uninstall Windows or to install any other operating system, it would do everything it can using DRM and similar to prohibit.
It would also prohibit you from repairing or tweaking your computer or removing spyware/virus.
Oh wait! that's already in all 7 vista versions!
Sorry!
The problem with any programming language and it's once legacy source code writing style kicks in, this is true for any language, include C, C++ or Perl.
h viz-2.4.tar.gz
t ar.gz
The older the language is, the more chance that you find some unmaintainable legacy source code.
The thing with newer language with Python, Ruby,
PHP, Java and some C++ is that these are "recent" language, therefore, the odds of finding a very old legacy system is smaller.
In 10-15 years from now, you will say that Python, Ruby, PHP or Java is so "unreadable",
because they are no more the "flavor du jour"
and new constructs exists instead. Like most people says about cobol, pascal, scheme, lisp source code.
There is a difference between "unreadable" and "encrypted".
The former was not "expecting" to be unreadable, it is just badly written by mistake or use older construct that nowadays are no more used.
The later was made on purpose, which is the difference.
If you want "unreadable" C source code, take a look at Graphviz Dot, no it's not part of IOCCC and was not make to be part of it, but if you ever try to understand this legacy code, good luck!!!
Disclaimer, Graphviz dot is a nice piece of software, but it cries out loud to be heavily refactored.
In fact, the first two layers were refactored, but the core engine is dated back to the 80's with K&R style and variable/function/struct name being less than 5 characters!
http://www.graphviz.org/pub/graphviz/ARCHIVE/grap
If you want "unreadable" Perl source code,
take a look at any source code, which have:
no "use strict;"
no "use vars qw{};"
use heavily "local"
use heavily "map"
no "return" statement --> $r; == return $r;
use heavily complex non-trivial regexp without documenting them.
no documentation or POD.
use some old perl construct.
Take a look at this one,
clc (gzip'ed tarfile)
Counts total lines, noncomment lines, and statements in C/C++ source.
Written by Brad Appleton in 1995. Implemented in perl.
http://www.chris-lott.org/resources/cmetrics/clc.
While the Perl script is both nice and readable: http://vburton.ncsa.uiuc.edu/compare.txt
n +clambers + displosion 7 s+heterolecithal + Oistrak e s+multiplications g radated p h+overheard i tudinize o educationalizes
The log results are shown here: http://vburton.ncsa.uiuc.edu/searchresultlog.txt
For instance, the following queries were supposed to give 5+ results on Google and no results on Yahoo, so let see if that actually works...
Sometimes you get no results on Google "on the first tries" go figure... "that server is down/busy?!"
If you get any results they are the same repeating over and over ispell dictionary word list!
I don't know about you but that's pretty useless...
Also, the fact that both search engines limits to the first 1000 results, that's pretty useless, how can we know for sure there is 100000+ results for apple if after page XYZ, results are truncated?
Here's some queries:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=carbolizatio
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=anecdote%27s
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=centerable%2
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=unobservable
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=misanthropiz
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=buttonmould+
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=myocardiogra
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pinions+plat
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=sloppiness+c
Affected Products:
.NET companies,
Microsoft Windows NT 4.0 up to and including SP6a
Microsoft Windows 2000 up to and including SP4
Microsoft Windows XP up to and including SP2
Microsoft Windows Server 2003 up to and including SP1
It's nice to be a Microsoft "reject"...
at least when worms come out I don't give a damn.
Just don't use Internet Explorer and have a good Firewall...
The only problem with Windows 98 SE, is that most newer machine cannot install it properly, since drivers do not exists!!! arggggg.
Which means.... hmmm
maybe I should update my Dell Laptop. =(
Anyone knows where to find Windows 98 drivers for Dell laptops ?! [Hint: Dell Tech Support are clueless]
Also, it's funny that all those fine
which insist on using ASP.NET, C#, ISS crapt will get infected again, again and again...
why nobody learn... just use LAPP!!!
(Linux, Apache, PostgreSQL, Perl/PHP)
Seriously, poor osdir.com servers!
e lease=403&slide=17
e lease=403&slide=18
On the other side, the KDE background is simply gorgeous:
http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?r
http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?r
Enjoy!
Page-break, you print 1 page per HTML file. *safer approach*
If your report is a template, and you know that your invoice can print as many as 50 lines per HTML page,
at line 51 you continue on to the "next page HTML template".
Margins and borders can be fixed with the help of MS Office HTML extension that works just fine in InternetExplorer and Mozilla.
As for paper margins, these can be fixed via PageSetup in the Windows registry quite easily.
The only tricky thing is printing landscape on a network printer, since you don't have the orientation priviledge using software, but that can be "fixed" easily by pre-setting or prompting page setup via DCOM or toggling using:and now your 8x11 page is "landscape" by being rotated sideways. Don't forget to rotate any gif/jpeg/png, since that only rotate text.
Have a nice day!
Dude, I totally agree with you.
OK, I've been giving some thought, and I think I've got a handle on The Root Causes of Wintel Terrorism. Just why do people turn to Monopoly terrorism to achieve their goals?
1) It's simple. It has an ease and ready accessibility to essentially any group of company, of any size, where they can pull off a "terrorist" marketting attack with very limited resources to brainwash any PHB out there.
2) It's flashy. Wintel Terrorism is "the new coolness." It gets a lot of attention, very quickly. You see, it's much more cool to use Wintel then lets say Linux at work.
3) It's empowering. The one element that all Wintel terrorist groups have, at the start, is far more passion than power, which is true for Microsoft Windows and Intel back in the 80's. They care a great deal about their cause, but they simply can't get anything done through more legitimate means. Absolutely. So they start getting violent, to increase their profile and extend their power by crushing all their competitors, by hiring false journalist, by destroying the credibility of any one beating them.
4)It's deniable. If a government wants something done, but doesn't want to risk the backlash of doing it openly themselves, they can try to get some Wintel "terrorists" to do it for them. This way, they can stand back and say "tsk, tsk" when something bad happens that benefits them, such as huge payback contributions to their politic party campaign..
5) It's cheap. Modern marketting PHB unbrainwashing weapons and training cost far, far more than an average individual or group can afford. But MSCE/.NET/Free MSDN Universal license circular dependancy bomb belts probably cost less than a couple of dollars to make the DVDs and advertising, compared to the huge billion dollars revenues lock-in and platform establishing that it creates. Bill Gates put together their first Microsoft product in their mom's basement.
6) It's tough to fight. A long time ago, a bunch of countries laid out a set of rules for using Unix software. These rules were designed to, among other things, minimize the number of computers infected during a war. In exchange for some serious restrictions on what users could do, large groups of people, institutions, and companies were declared "off limits." The cyber-terrorists systematically look at those new homogeneous security flaws and use them as guidelines for how to best attack our computers and servers.
Many people look at the cyber-terrorist attacks [in the civilized world] and wonder why it's happening. I look at the above and wonder why there haven't been more.
Linux/AMD zealot speak brother!
P.S.: Is it me or other people read the headline as: British Intel(TM) Shuts Down al-Qaeda Sites