The ZDNet article is simply talking about Netscape 7 being included with Lindows. The MSNBC article goes into far greater detail about Lindows and is talking about the AOL client rather than just Netscape.
The fact the uPnP is being thrust upon the world by Microsoft guarantees that it will be a winning "standard" (gag). Already it is widely deployed on Win2k and XP and as these system's market penetration continues, after a while everyone will have it.
You, however, asked if there are alternatives. Of course there are. None will likely have the market penetration that uPnP will have but a possibly strong contender will be Apple's Rendevzous, recently announced here on Slashdot. It uses Apple's "Open Source" license.
I'd really like for him to explain "crippleware". How are they crippling it? While he has seen it and I have to wait for another week, so far everything points to Red Hat simply changing the default themes and icons. I connot see how this is crippling KDE.
Furthermore, it is my understanding that the default KDE themes are in there and simply need to be selected from the configurator. How is this crippling it.
To go one step further, I see a fair bit of ranting, especially on Slashdot(go figure), about how bad this new Red Hat theme is. The thing is, if you don't like it change it. How many people actually continue to use KDEs default themes? Few if any, I'll bet. Pretty much everybody changes the desktop to their own preferrences. So, what's the big deal about selecting your own preferrences over the Red Hat theme versus selecting your own preferrences over the KDE themes?
The thing is that SPAM works! If it wasn't profitable no one would bother with it but, it is profitable. Highly profitable! So long as people keep buying from spammers spam will continue to infest the internet.
Just like the Nigerian money scam, so long as people continue to fall for it, it will continue to circulate. Blacklists and other technology solutions will never be able to keep out all the spam. Legislation will never be effective against it. The only way to make it die is for people to stop buying from it and so far, it seems that there are far too many people who are insecure about their penis size for the spam to stop.
True, most of these things do already exist. The thing is that they are all INTEGRATED in Exchange 2000. I hate to say it but, "seamlessly integrated" not slapped together in a hodge podge of different applications.
Also, regarding your advice about pointing to directories... Exchange stores all of its information in a high performance database. This technique makes it much faster than a directory and file based system. Much faster! This is especially important when you are looking at information stores that support thousands of concurrent users, tied to dozens of other information stores. If this weren't true, there would be no need for Kolab. We could simply throw Postfix and Cyrus together with iCalendar and we'd be done, somewhat like Caldera/SCO does with the Volution Messaging package..
But, Kolab IS needed because, so far, nothing else compares with Exchange except Notes and GroupWise and none of them is open source.
I have the highest hopes for Kolab, the HIGHEST hopes.
If only you could get CEO or CIO magazine to link to that article.
Unfortunately, few if any CEOs or CIOs will ever read the article. Having this article on Linux Planet and Slashdot is simply preaching to the chior. Again!
Re:as long as I have the option of not installing
on
More on KDE Groupware
·
· Score: 2
Of course they would, since it would still be included in the proce of the computer. If Linux==Windows there really is no reason to switch for the vast numbers of people that think Windows comes free because they don't get an itemised bill.
Wrong again. The user may not see the cost on their itemized bill but, Dell and HP and Gateway definitely do. If the could provide the same thing on their PCs without it costing them they could increase their profit. Or they could reduce the cost of their PC to the consumer and increase their sales.
Furthermore, what about upgrades. Case in point, my father-in-law. The other day he says, "I went into your favorite retail store the other day to see about getting a new copy of Windows. I fugured that the price must have gone down in the last cuple of years but, I was amazed to see that it costs US$199 now! Needless to say, I didn't get it."
Basically what you are saying boils down to "we fear and hate change". Well, that's your problem and I don't care if you think I'm being "egotistical", "elitest" or even "1337" because I don't want you to hold me back.
You may well be right. Perhaps 90% of the computer users out there DO fear change. After all it's human nature. But, no one is holding you back.
That's the beauty of KDE and GNome. They are totally configuarble. You can do whatever you want with them and they won't hold you back. But, by having the default install look like Windows, that 90% of the computer using population don't immediately slam their minds shut when they first see it. It is a win-win situation for everyone. Unless you're Microsoft, that is....
Once you have used Exchange, you'll understand.
on
More on KDE Groupware
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Exchange goes far beyond what you describe. First by centralizing these functions it makes it easier to manage the single application, rather than several different ones. Backups are a breeze.
The calendaring goes beyond what you describe. Not only can you receive a meeting invitation, you can also share calendars or entire mail boxes. This is a common practice, where managers will share their calendar or mailbox with a secretary so that the secretary can perform various functions, like setting appointments, for the manager while they are out of the office. If you call and would like an appointment with the manager, you will more likely get his secretary who, if they are using Exchange, can look at his calendar and tell you when he would be available for such an appointment. Then the secretary can register the appointment in the manager's Outlook calendar. Beyond that still, even if you do not care to share a calendar with anyone, people who wish to schedule meetings with you can immediately see if any and all of the meeting participants are available at that particular time. They cannot see what is on the calendar but, they can see that you have something scheduled and are unavailable at the time they are trying to schedule the meeting for. This makes meeting scheduling much faster than the older method of offering several different times to various participants and hoping that they will respond and that their responses do not conflict with other meeting participants.
Then there is the additional feature of Exchange called public folders. Here you can store publicly available discussion forums, rather like USENET. Also, you can store forms, bulletin boards and any other public information that you like. You can also restrict access to these "public" areas to certain people.
Exchange 2000 also has a NNTP server built in so you can host USENET news or your own NNTP news groups.
Then there is the BIG difference. Exchange is extensible meaning that other applications can be layered on top of or integrated into Exchange. These third party applications include things like document management, voice mail, Faxing and much much more.
Don't forget, Outlook is not the same as Outlook Express and that Outlook is simply a client application. It is the Exchange server at the back end that really provides the great services that people want. Many of these service are mission critical to a LOT of businesses. Also, don't forget that although you claim not to like Outlook, the VAST majority of users like it very much. They like having everything right there in a single convenient location and for them, it just works!
Re:as long as I have the option of not installing
on
More on KDE Groupware
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
or other imporant Linux functions started relying on Gnome or KDE, it would be the beginning of the end for Linux--because it would then really start being just like Windows.
And why would this be the end of Linux? It might be the end of egotistical elitest Linux hippie types, as any and everyone would be able to use it rather than just the 1337 few but, it wouldn't be the end of Linux. In fact, if Linux were exactly like Windows, do you think that anyone would ever again PAY for Windows? This is exactly what Microsoft fears the most from Linux. If it does get to be the same as Windows, no one will shell out US$300 for a copy of Windows XP whatever when they can down load the "same thing"(Linux) for free.
Indeed, if Linux were to become the same as Windows, it would be a crushing blow to Microsoft, not Linux. BillG can't sell his product against the same thing for free. If Linux were being made by a company and sold for even only US$5 a pop, Microsoft wouldn't be worried. In that case they could afford to give Windows away, just long enought to put that company out of business and then Microsoft could return to charging thier usual prices. But, Linux is totally free. Forever! Microsoft can't compete against that and BillG knows it. So, he must instead make Windows better and point out the shortcomings of Linux to make people want to spend big bucks on his overpriced OS.
The fact is however, that Linux is not becoming the same as Windows. Linux is very different from Windows and that is part of the reason that so many people presently fear using it. But, the KDE and Gnome interfaces to Linux are becoming more Windows like everyday. This is a good thing as it will hide the differences and complexities of Linux from people who do not know, care or want to think about what's underneath. Instead, it will present them with an interface that 99% of the computer using population is already familiar and comfortable with. They will be far less fearful and far more likely to give Linux a try. Then they will think, "I can spend US$300 for MS Windows or I can have the "same thing" for free?!?!?!?!? Hmmmm....."
Btrieve is the biggest, worst, most awful, satanic, abhorent piece of shit there ever was. And, Pervasive SQL 2000 or whatever it is called this week is still the same old worthless Btrieve piece of shit.
In fact, because they are tied to btrieve applications like Arcserve and Peachtree Accounting and a dozen other specialty apps also SUCK!!!!
Later, when I calm down, I tell you how I really feel.
You've got an array with multiple users so, I assume that this is a server and not a workstation. Or possibly it is a SAN with multiple servers(users)? What I don't understand is how the users are responsible for the missing backups.
In the case of a server, it is obvious that a server level backup should be backing up the data of all users. If you are running a SAN and you are referring to certain servers not backing up their particular partitions, it is still inexplicable because you should be doing SAN level backups in this case.
So, while it is easy and common to blame the users for not doing backups, this case sounds more like a management problem on the network side. If it's in the datacenter it should be backed up. Period! If it's not in the datacenter, well, we all take our chances don't we. If you run without backups it is completely unreasonable to expect any form of safety from total data loss.
Agreed, I see this fairly often. However, I see genuine dual drive failures too.
No, the drives don't both fail at the same time. More typically the array is attached to a "custom" built system that does not have adequate alarming. In this case one drive fails and no one realizes it has failed. The system continues to operate for an extended period of time, possibly many months, and then a second drive fails. At that point it's all over.
Now this is rare with mainstream systems like Compaq/HP and Dell. With these systems a drive fails and the server emits an ear piercing alarm that cannot be stoppped without rebooting the system or replacing and rebuilding the drive. It's absolutely maddening especially if you have to wait for several hours with this alarm screaming away. But, it makes genuine dual drive failures on these systems unheard of.
I'm at a customer site. I get a call that I am needed, immediately, at another site in the next city. I jump into the trusty Batmobile and type in the address on the touch sensitive, in dash screen. As I back out of the parking space, a progress bar is displayed for about fifteen seconds, "Calculating route".
As I start out of the parking lot, a map of the best route to this new location is displayed on the screen and the route is drawn on the map. In a side bar, information such as trip time and distance is clearly displayed as well as an indicator of the distance to the next turn, its street name and which direction I need to turn.
Just then the stereo system's volume drops to a whisper and a soothing lady's voice announces, "Proceed straight for two miles. Then turn left on Oak Street.". And the music volume is returned to normal.
Two minutes later, the stereo volume drops again. There is a gentle "bong" and the now familiar voice says, "Left turn ahead, half mile."
This is repeated continuously throughout the trip. The whole time the map is being updated, showing my present position in the middle of the screen. The map rotates as I change directions and I can, at the touch of a single button zoom the map in or out to get my preferred view.
Finally, the lady's voice comes on again, "Destination just ahead on left.". I swing left into the parking lot and go to work.
After completing my work, it's time for lunch. I'm not familiar with this particular city and I have no idea where the restaurants are. I slide into the Batmobile again and start navigating the menu on the touch sensitive screen. I select Destination -> Places -> Restaurants and I am given a menu listing 10 or more types of restaurants. I select Chinese -> Sort by Distance and I am presented with a list of Chinese restaurants and their distance from my position. I don't like the sound of the first two in the list and I press the third selection for the Golden Dragon @ 1.2 miles. The lady's voice returns and guides me directly to to Golden Dragon.
After lunch, I want to get my oil changed. A friend told me to try a new repair shop not far from my home. I don't have an address, just the phone number that my friend gave me. Once again, the Batmobile is there. I select from my destination menu, "By Phone Number" and punch in the phone number. The screen changes and lists, "Speedy's Honest Lube Parlor 1653 Blue St". I hit enter and I'm again presented with a guide map to the destination. As I start to drive the familiar voice returns, "Left turn one mile ahead on 22nd Ave".
Right now, the best solution available is from Alpine. By combining these products you can have everything that you want with the exception of the web cam. But, you can hack that yourself.
No, none of these are free. In fact, they are really quite expensive but, it sounds like you want the best so, here it is.
The other alternative is to get another vehicle that already has this equipment installed and beautifully integrated into the vehicle. You will think that you have died and gone to heaven if you trade your Grand Cherokee for an Acura MDX. The vehicle is one of the finest SUVs available and the gadgets are sweet! The navigation system does all that you want, has voice prompts integrated into the mind blowing Bose audio system and your rear passengers will truely appreciate the DVD changer.
Ok, the price is pretty cheap. No argument from me there. But, I still can't see the "technical greatness" of this device. Symbol, Cisco and probably Lucent have always had bridges capable of both bridging and AP mode at the same time.
Also, they can all be configured to talk with each other so, I don't understand the proprietary reference. Sure, Symbol et al don't speak Cisco's enhanced WEP but, the Cisco can be configured to use standard WEP so it will speak with the others.
So, besides cost, whats so special about this device? Something else that I am missing is the power output of the Linksys bridge. What is it? Historically, the cheaper Linksys Wi-Fi products have had a lower power output that the others. Is this also true here or does this latest Linksys bridge put out the full 100 milliwatts, as the others do?
Sure, it's great to be able to download a movie anytime you want but, I frear that the net can't handle it.
Lets fast-forward a few years. Everyone has xDSL or cable and everyone downloads or streams their movies. At 700+ MB per movie and possibly per person what is the internet going to be like? I know that there is presently excess bandwidth available and that there is supposed to be a fair bit of dark fibre but, is there really enough. How much bandwidth will be left for email and surfing, not to mention IP phones, when everybody is downloading their movies?
Today, it is possible for several people in a household to be watching several different movies at the same time but, on different channels. What will it be like when those same people are all downloading a 700+ MB film? Remember that their neighbors will be doing the same thing with possibly different films at slightly different times. What will it be like when, rather than broadcasting 100 streams to millions of viewers, there are millions of streams. Many of these streams will be the same, as is the case with broadcast, but they will be separate because they will be out of phase time wise.
It all seems grossly inefficient to me and I don't believe that the internet or even Internet2 can handle the kind of traffic that this will produce and still remain usable.
Netware 6 ships with Apache 1.3.22 and Tomcat 3.3. It is NOT vulnerable to this particular exploit. Note that some Netware 6 services also uses the Netware-Enterprise-Web-Server 5.1 from defunct Novonyx, a joint effort of Novell and Netscape.
Now, Apache does offer a 2.x version that does also run on Netware. So, it is possible for someone to upgrade their Netware server from 1.3.22 to 2.x but, this is not how Novell ships it. Additionally, most Netware shops will take their updates only from Novell therefore, I would be surprised if there were many Apache 2.x servers running on Netware.
Custom kernels are necessary because Linux is a monolithic kernel. That means that in order to use certain hardware or other features, the drivers have to reside in the kernel itself.
Now, lets suppose that you just got the latest gee wiz device and you want to use it on your Linux box. You hook your "flux capacitor" up to the firewire port and nothing happens. Why, because either a firewire or a flux capacitor driver (or both) is required and the kernel doesn't have it installed. This means that you must rebuild the kernel with the appropriate driver in order for your new flux capacitor to work.
Now, some may argue that the kernels should be pre-built with all the drivers and everything. Indeed, many distros do something like this for their stock kernels. But that still doesn't account for hardware that is yet to be invented. It also causes the kernel to grow into a giant that gives the term monolithic a whole new meaning. This large size means slow boot times and slower overall performance, in some cases. Surely, you don't want that?
Indeed, many people want to trim the size of their kernel to an absolute minimum to improve the performance of their system, not to mention the security enhancement of removing unneccessary services. Do you really need HAM radio support? Most people don't, so why would most people want the HAM drivers loaded in their kernel? Do you need NTFS file system support, as I do? Probably not, especially with write access, so why include it? But at the same time, why prevent me from using it, as I need to?
Even without the above reasons requiring the custom kernel, there is one more reason in favor of it. Part of the whole idea behind Linux is the ability to modify and customize it to your heart's content. That means if you want to modify your kernel you can. And this project will make such modifications easier than in the past. If you don't want to bother with customizing your kernel, then use the latest stock kernel from a major distribution, which will have mostly everything included. But, if it is slow or your flux capacitor isn't supported, you'll just have to wait and hope that the distro includes the support in its next release.
After finally being able to get the page, I think that it is a great start and a tremendous improvement over Xconfig.
That said, I think he still needs to go further. Most users don't have a clue what all the options are or mean. Even with the descriptions and recommendations they will quickly become overwelmed.
I feel that users should be presented with a very basic and lean initial configuration screen. One that lists generic features for them to enable and disable. For example a single check box for IDE and SCSI HD support or a single checkbox to enable HAM radio support with generic or "standard" options preselected for those devices. Then there should be an advanced button that brings them to the complete configuration options, such as Roman's example.
This, combined with some form of modprobe hardware detection, would make kernel configuration a breeze, even for MCSEs. Also, the fact that this configurator reads the existing config, rather than starting with a blank slate everytime, is great!!
Not a particularly strong endorsement of open souce now, is it? I'm sure we'll see this used in MS literature describing the stability of MS products. Something like:
NT/2000/XP - So reliable, that the JPL uses it to control their satellites.
Slashdot Mirror
That's really funny. I like it.
Just to be devil's advocate here, Root by default is simply a page from Microsoft's very successful history.
The ZDNet article is simply talking about Netscape 7 being included with Lindows. The MSNBC article goes into far greater detail about Lindows and is talking about the AOL client rather than just Netscape.
The fact the uPnP is being thrust upon the world by Microsoft guarantees that it will be a winning "standard" (gag). Already it is widely deployed on Win2k and XP and as these system's market penetration continues, after a while everyone will have it.
You, however, asked if there are alternatives. Of course there are. None will likely have the market penetration that uPnP will have but a possibly strong contender will be Apple's Rendevzous, recently announced here on Slashdot. It uses Apple's "Open Source" license.
This is the BBC
Love it or hate it, the BBC is the best source of news in the world.
I'd really like for him to explain "crippleware". How are they crippling it? While he has seen it and I have to wait for another week, so far everything points to Red Hat simply changing the default themes and icons. I connot see how this is crippling KDE.
Furthermore, it is my understanding that the default KDE themes are in there and simply need to be selected from the configurator. How is this crippling it.
To go one step further, I see a fair bit of ranting, especially on Slashdot(go figure), about how bad this new Red Hat theme is. The thing is, if you don't like it change it. How many people actually continue to use KDEs default themes? Few if any, I'll bet. Pretty much everybody changes the desktop to their own preferrences. So, what's the big deal about selecting your own preferrences over the Red Hat theme versus selecting your own preferrences over the KDE themes?
Much ado about nothing....
The thing is that SPAM works! If it wasn't profitable no one would bother with it but, it is profitable. Highly profitable! So long as people keep buying from spammers spam will continue to infest the internet.
Just like the Nigerian money scam, so long as people continue to fall for it, it will continue to circulate. Blacklists and other technology solutions will never be able to keep out all the spam. Legislation will never be effective against it. The only way to make it die is for people to stop buying from it and so far, it seems that there are far too many people who are insecure about their penis size for the spam to stop.
True, most of these things do already exist. The thing is that they are all INTEGRATED in Exchange 2000. I hate to say it but, "seamlessly integrated" not slapped together in a hodge podge of different applications.
Also, regarding your advice about pointing to directories... Exchange stores all of its information in a high performance database. This technique makes it much faster than a directory and file based system. Much faster! This is especially important when you are looking at information stores that support thousands of concurrent users, tied to dozens of other information stores. If this weren't true, there would be no need for Kolab. We could simply throw Postfix and Cyrus together with iCalendar and we'd be done, somewhat like Caldera/SCO does with the Volution Messaging package..
But, Kolab IS needed because, so far, nothing else compares with Exchange except Notes and GroupWise and none of them is open source.
I have the highest hopes for Kolab, the HIGHEST hopes.
If only you could get CEO or CIO magazine to link to that article.
Unfortunately, few if any CEOs or CIOs will ever read the article. Having this article on Linux Planet and Slashdot is simply preaching to the chior. Again!
Rave reviews, none the less.
If you make posts like this.
Grow a litlle. Expand your horizons. You will be a better person and the world might be a better place.
Redneck Reference: Jeff Foxworthy, comedian. Redneck Jokes
Of course they would, since it would still be included in the proce of the computer. If Linux==Windows there really is no reason to switch for the vast numbers of people that think Windows comes free because they don't get an itemised bill.
Wrong again. The user may not see the cost on their itemized bill but, Dell and HP and Gateway definitely do. If the could provide the same thing on their PCs without it costing them they could increase their profit. Or they could reduce the cost of their PC to the consumer and increase their sales.
Furthermore, what about upgrades. Case in point, my father-in-law. The other day he says, "I went into your favorite retail store the other day to see about getting a new copy of Windows. I fugured that the price must have gone down in the last cuple of years but, I was amazed to see that it costs US$199 now! Needless to say, I didn't get it."
Basically what you are saying boils down to "we fear and hate change". Well, that's your problem and I don't care if you think I'm being "egotistical", "elitest" or even "1337" because I don't want you to hold me back.
You may well be right. Perhaps 90% of the computer users out there DO fear change. After all it's human nature. But, no one is holding you back.
That's the beauty of KDE and GNome. They are totally configuarble. You can do whatever you want with them and they won't hold you back. But, by having the default install look like Windows, that 90% of the computer using population don't immediately slam their minds shut when they first see it. It is a win-win situation for everyone. Unless you're Microsoft, that is....
Exchange goes far beyond what you describe. First by centralizing these functions it makes it easier to manage the single application, rather than several different ones. Backups are a breeze.
The calendaring goes beyond what you describe. Not only can you receive a meeting invitation, you can also share calendars or entire mail boxes. This is a common practice, where managers will share their calendar or mailbox with a secretary so that the secretary can perform various functions, like setting appointments, for the manager while they are out of the office. If you call and would like an appointment with the manager, you will more likely get his secretary who, if they are using Exchange, can look at his calendar and tell you when he would be available for such an appointment. Then the secretary can register the appointment in the manager's Outlook calendar. Beyond that still, even if you do not care to share a calendar with anyone, people who wish to schedule meetings with you can immediately see if any and all of the meeting participants are available at that particular time. They cannot see what is on the calendar but, they can see that you have something scheduled and are unavailable at the time they are trying to schedule the meeting for. This makes meeting scheduling much faster than the older method of offering several different times to various participants and hoping that they will respond and that their responses do not conflict with other meeting participants.
Then there is the additional feature of Exchange called public folders. Here you can store publicly available discussion forums, rather like USENET. Also, you can store forms, bulletin boards and any other public information that you like. You can also restrict access to these "public" areas to certain people.
Exchange 2000 also has a NNTP server built in so you can host USENET news or your own NNTP news groups.
Then there is the BIG difference. Exchange is extensible meaning that other applications can be layered on top of or integrated into Exchange. These third party applications include things like document management, voice mail, Faxing and much much more.
Don't forget, Outlook is not the same as Outlook Express and that Outlook is simply a client application. It is the Exchange server at the back end that really provides the great services that people want. Many of these service are mission critical to a LOT of businesses. Also, don't forget that although you claim not to like Outlook, the VAST majority of users like it very much. They like having everything right there in a single convenient location and for them, it just works!
or other imporant Linux functions started relying on Gnome or KDE, it would be the beginning of the end for Linux--because it would then really start being just like Windows.
And why would this be the end of Linux? It might be the end of egotistical elitest Linux hippie types, as any and everyone would be able to use it rather than just the 1337 few but, it wouldn't be the end of Linux. In fact, if Linux were exactly like Windows, do you think that anyone would ever again PAY for Windows? This is exactly what Microsoft fears the most from Linux. If it does get to be the same as Windows, no one will shell out US$300 for a copy of Windows XP whatever when they can down load the "same thing"(Linux) for free.
Indeed, if Linux were to become the same as Windows, it would be a crushing blow to Microsoft, not Linux. BillG can't sell his product against the same thing for free. If Linux were being made by a company and sold for even only US$5 a pop, Microsoft wouldn't be worried. In that case they could afford to give Windows away, just long enought to put that company out of business and then Microsoft could return to charging thier usual prices. But, Linux is totally free. Forever! Microsoft can't compete against that and BillG knows it. So, he must instead make Windows better and point out the shortcomings of Linux to make people want to spend big bucks on his overpriced OS.
The fact is however, that Linux is not becoming the same as Windows. Linux is very different from Windows and that is part of the reason that so many people presently fear using it. But, the KDE and Gnome interfaces to Linux are becoming more Windows like everyday. This is a good thing as it will hide the differences and complexities of Linux from people who do not know, care or want to think about what's underneath. Instead, it will present them with an interface that 99% of the computer using population is already familiar and comfortable with. They will be far less fearful and far more likely to give Linux a try. Then they will think, "I can spend US$300 for MS Windows or I can have the "same thing" for free?!?!?!?!? Hmmmm....."
Btrieve is the biggest, worst, most awful, satanic, abhorent piece of shit there ever was. And, Pervasive SQL 2000 or whatever it is called this week is still the same old worthless Btrieve piece of shit.
In fact, because they are tied to btrieve applications like Arcserve and Peachtree Accounting and a dozen other specialty apps also SUCK!!!!
Later, when I calm down, I tell you how I really feel.
You've got an array with multiple users so, I assume that this is a server and not a workstation. Or possibly it is a SAN with multiple servers(users)? What I don't understand is how the users are responsible for the missing backups.
In the case of a server, it is obvious that a server level backup should be backing up the data of all users. If you are running a SAN and you are referring to certain servers not backing up their particular partitions, it is still inexplicable because you should be doing SAN level backups in this case.
So, while it is easy and common to blame the users for not doing backups, this case sounds more like a management problem on the network side. If it's in the datacenter it should be backed up. Period! If it's not in the datacenter, well, we all take our chances don't we. If you run without backups it is completely unreasonable to expect any form of safety from total data loss.
Agreed, I see this fairly often. However, I see genuine dual drive failures too.
No, the drives don't both fail at the same time. More typically the array is attached to a "custom" built system that does not have adequate alarming. In this case one drive fails and no one realizes it has failed. The system continues to operate for an extended period of time, possibly many months, and then a second drive fails. At that point it's all over.
Now this is rare with mainstream systems like Compaq/HP and Dell. With these systems a drive fails and the server emits an ear piercing alarm that cannot be stoppped without rebooting the system or replacing and rebuilding the drive. It's absolutely maddening especially if you have to wait for several hours with this alarm screaming away. But, it makes genuine dual drive failures on these systems unheard of.
This sounds all wrong but, read this and think about it.
Please, don't use encryption!!!
Sure!
I'm at a customer site. I get a call that I am needed, immediately, at another site in the next city. I jump into the trusty Batmobile and type in the address on the touch sensitive, in dash screen. As I back out of the parking space, a progress bar is displayed for about fifteen seconds, "Calculating route".
As I start out of the parking lot, a map of the best route to this new location is displayed on the screen and the route is drawn on the map. In a side bar, information such as trip time and distance is clearly displayed as well as an indicator of the distance to the next turn, its street name and which direction I need to turn.
Just then the stereo system's volume drops to a whisper and a soothing lady's voice announces, "Proceed straight for two miles. Then turn left on Oak Street.". And the music volume is returned to normal.
Two minutes later, the stereo volume drops again. There is a gentle "bong" and the now familiar voice says, "Left turn ahead, half mile."
This is repeated continuously throughout the trip. The whole time the map is being updated, showing my present position in the middle of the screen. The map rotates as I change directions and I can, at the touch of a single button zoom the map in or out to get my preferred view.
Finally, the lady's voice comes on again, "Destination just ahead on left.". I swing left into the parking lot and go to work.
After completing my work, it's time for lunch. I'm not familiar with this particular city and I have no idea where the restaurants are. I slide into the Batmobile again and start navigating the menu on the touch sensitive screen. I select Destination -> Places -> Restaurants and I am given a menu listing 10 or more types of restaurants. I select Chinese -> Sort by Distance and I am presented with a list of Chinese restaurants and their distance from my position. I don't like the sound of the first two in the list and I press the third selection for the Golden Dragon @ 1.2 miles. The lady's voice returns and guides me directly to to Golden Dragon.
After lunch, I want to get my oil changed. A friend told me to try a new repair shop not far from my home. I don't have an address, just the phone number that my friend gave me. Once again, the Batmobile is there. I select from my destination menu, "By Phone Number" and punch in the phone number. The screen changes and lists, "Speedy's Honest Lube Parlor 1653 Blue St". I hit enter and I'm again presented with a guide map to the destination. As I start to drive the familiar voice returns, "Left turn one mile ahead on 22nd Ave".
Sweet!!!!
There isn't one. Sorry, but them's the facts.
Right now, the best solution available is from Alpine. By combining these products you can have everything that you want with the exception of the web cam. But, you can hack that yourself.
No, none of these are free. In fact, they are really quite expensive but, it sounds like you want the best so, here it is.
The other alternative is to get another vehicle that already has this equipment installed and beautifully integrated into the vehicle. You will think that you have died and gone to heaven if you trade your Grand Cherokee for an Acura MDX. The vehicle is one of the finest SUVs available and the gadgets are sweet! The navigation system does all that you want, has voice prompts integrated into the mind blowing Bose audio system and your rear passengers will truely appreciate the DVD changer.
But, damn!
Ok, the price is pretty cheap. No argument from me there. But, I still can't see the "technical greatness" of this device. Symbol, Cisco and probably Lucent have always had bridges capable of both bridging and AP mode at the same time.
Also, they can all be configured to talk with each other so, I don't understand the proprietary reference. Sure, Symbol et al don't speak Cisco's enhanced WEP but, the Cisco can be configured to use standard WEP so it will speak with the others.
So, besides cost, whats so special about this device? Something else that I am missing is the power output of the Linksys bridge. What is it? Historically, the cheaper Linksys Wi-Fi products have had a lower power output that the others. Is this also true here or does this latest Linksys bridge put out the full 100 milliwatts, as the others do?
Sure, it's great to be able to download a movie anytime you want but, I frear that the net can't handle it.
Lets fast-forward a few years. Everyone has xDSL or cable and everyone downloads or streams their movies. At 700+ MB per movie and possibly per person what is the internet going to be like? I know that there is presently excess bandwidth available and that there is supposed to be a fair bit of dark fibre but, is there really enough. How much bandwidth will be left for email and surfing, not to mention IP phones, when everybody is downloading their movies?
Today, it is possible for several people in a household to be watching several different movies at the same time but, on different channels. What will it be like when those same people are all downloading a 700+ MB film? Remember that their neighbors will be doing the same thing with possibly different films at slightly different times. What will it be like when, rather than broadcasting 100 streams to millions of viewers, there are millions of streams. Many of these streams will be the same, as is the case with broadcast, but they will be separate because they will be out of phase time wise.
It all seems grossly inefficient to me and I don't believe that the internet or even Internet2 can handle the kind of traffic that this will produce and still remain usable.
Netware 6 ships with Apache 1.3.22 and Tomcat 3.3. It is NOT vulnerable to this particular exploit. Note that some Netware 6 services also uses the Netware-Enterprise-Web-Server 5.1 from defunct Novonyx, a joint effort of Novell and Netscape.
Now, Apache does offer a 2.x version that does also run on Netware. So, it is possible for someone to upgrade their Netware server from 1.3.22 to 2.x but, this is not how Novell ships it. Additionally, most Netware shops will take their updates only from Novell therefore, I would be surprised if there were many Apache 2.x servers running on Netware.
Custom kernels are necessary because Linux is a monolithic kernel. That means that in order to use certain hardware or other features, the drivers have to reside in the kernel itself.
Now, lets suppose that you just got the latest gee wiz device and you want to use it on your Linux box. You hook your "flux capacitor" up to the firewire port and nothing happens. Why, because either a firewire or a flux capacitor driver (or both) is required and the kernel doesn't have it installed. This means that you must rebuild the kernel with the appropriate driver in order for your new flux capacitor to work.
Now, some may argue that the kernels should be pre-built with all the drivers and everything. Indeed, many distros do something like this for their stock kernels. But that still doesn't account for hardware that is yet to be invented. It also causes the kernel to grow into a giant that gives the term monolithic a whole new meaning. This large size means slow boot times and slower overall performance, in some cases. Surely, you don't want that?
Indeed, many people want to trim the size of their kernel to an absolute minimum to improve the performance of their system, not to mention the security enhancement of removing unneccessary services. Do you really need HAM radio support? Most people don't, so why would most people want the HAM drivers loaded in their kernel? Do you need NTFS file system support, as I do? Probably not, especially with write access, so why include it? But at the same time, why prevent me from using it, as I need to?
Even without the above reasons requiring the custom kernel, there is one more reason in favor of it. Part of the whole idea behind Linux is the ability to modify and customize it to your heart's content. That means if you want to modify your kernel you can. And this project will make such modifications easier than in the past. If you don't want to bother with customizing your kernel, then use the latest stock kernel from a major distribution, which will have mostly everything included. But, if it is slow or your flux capacitor isn't supported, you'll just have to wait and hope that the distro includes the support in its next release.
After finally being able to get the page, I think that it is a great start and a tremendous improvement over Xconfig.
That said, I think he still needs to go further. Most users don't have a clue what all the options are or mean. Even with the descriptions and recommendations they will quickly become overwelmed.
I feel that users should be presented with a very basic and lean initial configuration screen. One that lists generic features for them to enable and disable. For example a single check box for IDE and SCSI HD support or a single checkbox to enable HAM radio support with generic or "standard" options preselected for those devices. Then there should be an advanced button that brings them to the complete configuration options, such as Roman's example.
This, combined with some form of modprobe hardware detection, would make kernel configuration a breeze, even for MCSEs. Also, the fact that this configurator reads the existing config, rather than starting with a blank slate everytime, is great!!
Inadequate JVMs forced migration to Windows NT,
Not a particularly strong endorsement of open souce now, is it? I'm sure we'll see this used in MS literature describing the stability of MS products. Something like:
NT/2000/XP - So reliable, that the JPL uses it to control their satellites.