You better check again. There is a wonderful world of switches out there now. Every kind of switch from layer 2 through layer 7. There are many other manufacturers offering similar products too.
The difference between these "switches" and the layer 3 routers that you are use to is the hardware architecture. While older routers consisted of routing code on a CPU passing packets through the CPU and out the appropriate interface, these layer 3-7 switches use ASICs(Application Specific Integrated Circuits) to process the packets rather than the CPU. This translates into a MUCH higher throughput than the CPU based router could ever handle.
If you get in medium to large networks you will see these switches everywhere. Switches with 128 or more gigabit ethernet ports all switching at line speed. Your Alcatel DSL router or Cisco 2600 doesn't even know what line speed is.
Indeed, there are layer 7 switches. Some of the Nortel/Alteon switches can even switch based on URLs. Makes for a much faster hosting site.
Have you been under a rock or something. The people in that region are very technically adept. Why, just the other day I was reading on Slashdot about Afghan kids downloading steaming movies on their Commodore 64. If the kids can do that, just imaging what Al Quaeda could do. Remember, they are very well financed and I'm sure they have invested heavily in research and development of just such an attack.
Be afraid! Very afraid... Hoover damn could explode at any moment.
"But the scientists have still to try to recreate that process."
Why? Is there some need for antiquated photo processing? While the photograph is of significant historical value, I can see no value in re-creating the process. We have no shortage of poor quality photographs today. Even todays poorest quality is FAR superior to this. Why would anyone waste research dollars trying to reproduce the process.
You mention that you offer training classes. For the sake of this discussion I will assume that your classes are of high quality and technical depth and not simply, a weeks worth of marketing speak.
If this is the case, then there isn't much more that the admins need, except perhaps a half dozen free tech support calls to people who actually know about the product. But that's the rub, isn't it? Most of your sales don't include training classes.
This is a very common, if not universal problem. Training is always the first thing to get cut from the budget. This is usually followed but the cutting of netwaork management equipment/software. Simply put, your training classes need to be sold of given to EVERY customer that buys from you. Furthermore, if there are 10 admins that will be managing this new equipment, you need to send all 10 to the classes. The old story of, we'll send Bob and then he can train the rest of you when he gets back just doesn't work. It never has.
The ideal scenario goes like this:
1. Vendor engineers spend a month on site learning the clients network.
2. Clients admins go to training while the vendor's engineers support the client's network and start building out the new gear.
3. Client's admins return from training and assist in the cut over to the new equipment.
4. Vendor leaves a small engineering force behind to solve technical issues that the client's admins are not yet ready to handle.
The two most important ingredients here are client training and vendor engineers that actually know WTF they are doing!
While I will not argue, for a second, that it use to be far cheaper to build your own PC, I must question whether this is still true.
In the past years I have built numerous systems for myself and friends, at considerable savings. But, more recently, the price of a pre-built PCs has plummeted. Prices have dropped to such a low level that I really wonder if you can still beat the price when building from parts.
Now, I mean the same parts, no substitutes. You can't compare the savings you got building your system from AMD processors WingDing Memory and NoName drives to a Compaq using an Intel with Samsung Memory and WesternDigital drives. Even if you can match or beat the price, is it enough to justify the trouble.
There are also other considerations. Warranty is one of them. But there are also support issues. I know that we "geeks never need help fixing our problems" but, there are sometimes issues with firmware or software conflicts that a large vendors help may prove to be invaluable. I guarantee that the component vendors will produce updated firmware and drivers for the Compaqs and Dells before they look to the white box users.
After all these years, the sub $1000 PC makes the point moot for me. For under $1000 it just isn't worth my effort to acquire and build from parts. It's much easier to just unbox and power on.
Nortel's CallPilot, their latest voicemail solution, offers this form of access as one of its many Unified Messaging modules. It works with most mail clients and can even be used via a browser. Voicemails appear as email messages in your inbox and when you open the message it plays the voicemail for you. I've even heard of text-to-speech transcribers, though I've yet to use such a service.
But, you stated that you don't want to spend the money for your own system and instead use the phone company's offering. This makes it all depend on your phone company. Many phone companies use Nortel's products and some actually offer this service. Sprint is the first to come to mind. Sprint uses Nortel for their switches and voice applications and does offer CallPilot Unified Messaging in many areas.
I'm quite sure that there are many other phone companies that offer similar services.
The key words to remember are; "management wants all the bells and whistles offered by Exchange".
This limits your choices considerably. The choices are Exchange, Lotus Notes and more recently, Oracle. The latter two will require far more work in the form of setup, configuration and custom programming. Exchange is going to be the easiest, does-it-all out of the box solution. The truth hurts, but there it is.
For those that question the capabilities of Exchange and what it has over SendMail, here are just a few. Email with extensive routing, filtering, tracking and control. Single message store. Calendaring, calendar sharing and free/busy search capabilities. Public folders and or NNTP. Extensibility allowing any application to be integrated such as voice mail. Virus Scanning and filtering support (Very Important). Automation (both server and client side). Web access client interface. Instant messaging. Active directory integration (allows management of a single directory). And, lest we forget the most important part, total and complete support of Microsoft Outlook clients (Love it or hate it, that's what the users want).
There are many more features and functions as well.
Similar stuff has already been deployed and is in use today. Here are two examples. The first is a MCI Worldcom deployment from 2001. Your voice calls and data are already flowing around the world on these pipes. The second is, perhaps surprisingly, a Chinese deployment. I'm sure that there are others too but, frankly I can't be bothered to look them up. I know, from personal involvement that there are several other high-speed installations around but, these do not span such great distances. Rather the are 30 and 70 mile rings around metropolitan areas but, they are just as fast and in one case even faster.
Citrix Nfuse Citrix Metaframe Microsoft Windows 2000 Server & Terminal services.
It's a high upfront cost but, it *is* the *best* solution. Citrix Nfuse is an add-on that allows you to access your applications over the internet, through a web browser. Citrix Metframe allows you to serve a desktop or individual applications over a wide range of protocols and topologies. Windows 2000 Server Terminal Services offers the core multi-user environment that all this works on. With this combination you can have access to any and all of your individual applications or the entire desktop, from *any* client. Citrix has clients for DOS, Win32, Mac, Unix, Java, and even a web browser.
Using this configuration, you can have performance VERY near to the performance and responsiveness of actually being at the console of a workstation. It will, on average, only require 20Kbps of bandwidth so, you can even use it transparently over dial-up. If you need *nix access, you simply need to use an Xclient, such as Hummingbird's Xceed on the Metaframe server. This gives you terminal access as well as the ability to run X-Windows applications.
Many people here are recommending VNC (a good product) or Windows XP. VNC is not the answer to your question because VNC is simply remotely controlling a workstation if used on a Windows box. It is multi-user on Unix but it requires more bandwidth and is not nearly as stable and reliable as the Metframe solution. Furthermore, using VNC on a Unix box eliminates the use of Windows applications, unless you can get them running under Wine. Windows XP is probably the worst solution because, although it does have Terminal Services built in, this service is limited to one or two users, as it is only intended for remote diagnostics and repair. It is not intended to be for multi-user use and it cannot be licensed for multi-user use. The "yet to be released".NET server will have true multi-user capability and licensing as Windows 2000 Server does now. Even so, Microsoft Terminal Service solutions, require a great deal more bandwidth than the Citrix ones do and there are clients for Win32 ONLY!
Tarantella has also benn mentioned as a solution. This is *not* a bad choice. However, Tarantella is not as mature or robust as Metaframe is. This means that there are likely to be problems using Tarantella that have already been solved by Citrix. Client options, is the first that comes to mind.
So, in the end the Citrix Metaframe solution is the best of all worlds. Like I said, it isn't cheap but, damn, it's the best thing since sliced bread!
The system of capitalism is founded on the concept of trade of anything that is deemed of value. Regarless of whether or not it is a tangible item. How tangible are stocks or better yet, futures? How tangible is insurance? How tangible is interest?
We as a society place value on all sorts of items both tangible and intangible. Hell, we pay for "peace of mind", how intangible is that? So long as it is of value to someone then they will pay a price for it. Capitalism lives on!!!!!!!!
It's called a copyright. It's been around for years and is used in most of the worlds free or at least capitalistic societies.
But, so many here are thoroughly disgusted with the term of the restriction because they cannot have it for themselves, right now. They're not interested in their kids having it for free, they want it for free, now!
It never ceases to amaze me how little things change from generation to generation. The "kids" or those "without" always demand, gimme gimme gimee and postulate their communal ideas. Yet, inevitably, they grow older and begin developing their own means. Suddenly the communal mentality swings to: It's mine and I'm not giving it away.
Most don't realize this change happening. They don't hear it in their own words, as in the above posts. They say no, my children shouldn't be provided for. The kids should work for themselves and not be lazy. Yet these very same posters themselves cry, "gimme gimme gimme". Why don't they work for themselves? Why don't they stop being lazy? Why don't they make their own great work? Why should they have mine????
No sir, I like the present system. I can make my work freely available or I can control its use as I see fit. The Supreme court will review this case. The Supreme court will find in favor of copyright protection and this will continue to be a Great Nation.
I definitely suffer the "free is for me" mentality, but.......
First off, copyrights and other restrictions are a cornerstone of capitalism. The make it free to everyone approach is the foundation of communism, not capitalism.
The second thought, is that if I devote my life to a project and produce a great work, shouldn't I be able to enjoy the spoils and decide the future of that great work? Shouldn't I be able to go to my grave, comforted by the fact that my magnum opus will provide for my children's future?
Let's face a little fact that we keep forgetting. Rarely, if ever, is a great work supressed or lost. Most often the works *ARE* available to any and everyone. But, you *do* have to pay for it. If it's not worth it to you, then perhaps it is not such a great work. Even the touted "research" that gets bandied about so often *is* available. But, alas you do have to pay Bayer or Pfizer millions to license it.
This is capitalism at its finest. Accept no substitute as you may be the one that is disappointed.
This is one of the several reasons why software RAID, especially under NT is a bad idea. While there may be an obscure utility out there, chances are slim. Your likely only hope is going to be a disk editor.
With RAID 0, software or hardware, your best solution is going to be tape. But, it sounds like you don't have that option. Treat the incident as a learning experience and move on.
The comforting howl and warmth of the System/36. The soothing glow of the green screen with the login prompt permanently burned into the screen. The reassuring, desk rattling thud of the keyboard solenoid. The green bar spewing as the 3000 line report prints one line per page. The massive template worksheets and counting tiny squares for hours on end. Those were the days......
A detailed technical explanation of.NET, for those that were interested but were still to lazy to look at MSDN for themselves.
That said, the hype of.NET is increasing and it will no doubt become the "standard" for Windows development. But, regardless of the promises and conceptual or theoretical "superiority" of.NET, I can't help but think that this is yet another layer of complication. Yet another standard is broken by Microsoft (C++ class inheritance for one). I predict that.NET will be the ire of developers of the future. It will make us long for the "simpler/better" days of MFC and COM.
I think that I'll take a step back. From now on, all my development work will be done in QBASIC.;)
I'm not certain what exactly they planned to do with the information that they were collecting but, you appear to be concerned that they were planning to block or restrict your access to porn.
But, take heart because here is a very interesting bit of trivia. AT&T Broadband, the new operators/owners of Comcast, is the single largest distributor of porn. Here's a Fronline episode on PBS that recently discussed this. They (AT&T) do not advertise this fact in any way but, distributing porn generates millions and possibly billions for AT&T Broadband. For this reason, AT&T Broadband is actually very cozy with the porn industry and is not eager to damage that relationship.
In short, regardless of Comcast's actions, your porn would have been safe.
The thing that I find rather interesting is that, although the list includes almost every vendor known to man, there is at least one vendor that is noticably missing. Perhaps I missed it but, I was unable to find Nortel Networks a.k.a. Bay Networks a.k.a. WellFleet on the list. Now, synoptics was on the list and it was the merger of Synoptics and WellFleet that created Bay networks but, I don't see the more recent names anywhere. Saves me a lot of patching.
Those are better than the coverage maps that the cell phone providers offer. Their, almost certainly, far more accurate too.
Now, if we can just get them to do the project at a national level and post a searchable map, like Mapquest, on the web it would be awesome. Going on the road? Just grab a map before you go and stay connected the whole time, probably free of charge too! Since, so many of the WLANs aren't secured.
First, if everyone in the world is going to be using my system for their own use (personal, business, hacking, cracking, benevolent, nefarious) then, I want compensation for what they use. Say, a quarter of a penny per clock cycle. Ithink that's fair.
Second, on a humerous note, if some luser opens an Outlook virus attachment, does everyone then get it even if they don't open it? Does the global OS become infected?
While some of what you say or suggest is true, the fact is that *everyone* here feels that they are more qualified to make the decisions than their PHB. But, when we look at the many posts to follow this one, we realize that regarless of what they think, many of these people aren't qualified to make any form of decision at all.
I partially agree, certainly Ben Franklin would need to RTFM. But did you read it to learn how to operate the car or to learn the "rules of the road" in order to pass the test. My 5 year old knows how to enter, start and drive almost any car, even though he has never done it, read the manual or understod the rules of the road.
Did you need to RTFM in order to get out of a car, ever? The fact is that they are intuitively designed in that, with all the various makes and models, driving or getting in and out are pretty much the same. However, in mainstream software the method used to get out is both counter intuitive and varied.
Windows -- Click Start(Start????) -> Shutdown -> Ok
Linux -- Shutdown -h now
Slashdot Mirror
You better check again. There is a wonderful world of switches out there now. Every kind of switch from layer 2 through layer 7. There are many other manufacturers offering similar products too.
The difference between these "switches" and the layer 3 routers that you are use to is the hardware architecture. While older routers consisted of routing code on a CPU passing packets through the CPU and out the appropriate interface, these layer 3-7 switches use ASICs(Application Specific Integrated Circuits) to process the packets rather than the CPU. This translates into a MUCH higher throughput than the CPU based router could ever handle.
If you get in medium to large networks you will see these switches everywhere. Switches with 128 or more gigabit ethernet ports all switching at line speed. Your Alcatel DSL router or Cisco 2600 doesn't even know what line speed is.
Indeed, there are layer 7 switches. Some of the Nortel/Alteon switches can even switch based on URLs. Makes for a much faster hosting site.
Have you been under a rock or something. The people in that region are very technically adept. Why, just the other day I was reading on Slashdot about Afghan kids downloading steaming movies on their Commodore 64. If the kids can do that, just imaging what Al Quaeda could do. Remember, they are very well financed and I'm sure they have invested heavily in research and development of just such an attack.
Be afraid! Very afraid... Hoover damn could explode at any moment.
It's not Google, it's the gif. I don't know what's in it but, not only is it slow to load it also runs up the CPU utilization. Big time!
Not only is it huge. Not only is it /.ed. But, it also made X11 run my CPU utilization up to a steady 97%.
"But the scientists have still to try to recreate that process."
Why? Is there some need for antiquated photo processing? While the photograph is of significant historical value, I can see no value in re-creating the process. We have no shortage of poor quality photographs today. Even todays poorest quality is FAR superior to this. Why would anyone waste research dollars trying to reproduce the process.
You mention that you offer training classes. For the sake of this discussion I will assume that your classes are of high quality and technical depth and not simply, a weeks worth of marketing speak.
If this is the case, then there isn't much more that the admins need, except perhaps a half dozen free tech support calls to people who actually know about the product. But that's the rub, isn't it? Most of your sales don't include training classes.
This is a very common, if not universal problem. Training is always the first thing to get cut from the budget. This is usually followed but the cutting of netwaork management equipment/software. Simply put, your training classes need to be sold of given to EVERY customer that buys from you. Furthermore, if there are 10 admins that will be managing this new equipment, you need to send all 10 to the classes. The old story of, we'll send Bob and then he can train the rest of you when he gets back just doesn't work. It never has.
The ideal scenario goes like this:
1. Vendor engineers spend a month on site learning the clients network.
2. Clients admins go to training while the vendor's engineers support the client's network and start building out the new gear.
3. Client's admins return from training and assist in the cut over to the new equipment.
4. Vendor leaves a small engineering force behind to solve technical issues that the client's admins are not yet ready to handle.
The two most important ingredients here are client training and vendor engineers that actually know WTF they are doing!
While I will not argue, for a second, that it use to be far cheaper to build your own PC, I must question whether this is still true.
In the past years I have built numerous systems for myself and friends, at considerable savings. But, more recently, the price of a pre-built PCs has plummeted. Prices have dropped to such a low level that I really wonder if you can still beat the price when building from parts.
Now, I mean the same parts, no substitutes. You can't compare the savings you got building your system from AMD processors WingDing Memory and NoName drives to a Compaq using an Intel with Samsung Memory and WesternDigital drives. Even if you can match or beat the price, is it enough to justify the trouble.
There are also other considerations. Warranty is one of them. But there are also support issues. I know that we "geeks never need help fixing our problems" but, there are sometimes issues with firmware or software conflicts that a large vendors help may prove to be invaluable. I guarantee that the component vendors will produce updated firmware and drivers for the Compaqs and Dells before they look to the white box users.
After all these years, the sub $1000 PC makes the point moot for me. For under $1000 it just isn't worth my effort to acquire and build from parts. It's much easier to just unbox and power on.
Was it Logan's run or was it Mars?
Nortel's CallPilot, their latest voicemail solution, offers this form of access as one of its many Unified Messaging modules. It works with most mail clients and can even be used via a browser. Voicemails appear as email messages in your inbox and when you open the message it plays the voicemail for you. I've even heard of text-to-speech transcribers, though I've yet to use such a service.
But, you stated that you don't want to spend the money for your own system and instead use the phone company's offering. This makes it all depend on your phone company. Many phone companies use Nortel's products and some actually offer this service. Sprint is the first to come to mind. Sprint uses Nortel for their switches and voice applications and does offer CallPilot Unified Messaging in many areas.
I'm quite sure that there are many other phone companies that offer similar services.
The key words to remember are; "management wants all the bells and whistles offered by Exchange".
This limits your choices considerably. The choices are Exchange, Lotus Notes and more recently, Oracle. The latter two will require far more work in the form of setup, configuration and custom programming. Exchange is going to be the easiest, does-it-all out of the box solution. The truth hurts, but there it is.
For those that question the capabilities of Exchange and what it has over SendMail, here are just a few. Email with extensive routing, filtering, tracking and control. Single message store. Calendaring, calendar sharing and free/busy search capabilities. Public folders and or NNTP. Extensibility allowing any application to be integrated such as voice mail. Virus Scanning and filtering support (Very Important). Automation (both server and client side). Web access client interface. Instant messaging. Active directory integration (allows management of a single directory). And, lest we forget the most important part, total and complete support of Microsoft Outlook clients (Love it or hate it, that's what the users want).
There are many more features and functions as well.
Similar stuff has already been deployed and is in use today. Here are two examples. The first is a MCI Worldcom deployment from 2001. Your voice calls and data are already flowing around the world on these pipes. The second is, perhaps surprisingly, a Chinese deployment. I'm sure that there are others too but, frankly I can't be bothered to look them up. I know, from personal involvement that there are several other high-speed installations around but, these do not span such great distances. Rather the are 30 and 70 mile rings around metropolitan areas but, they are just as fast and in one case even faster.
Ingredients:
.NET server will have true multi-user capability and licensing as Windows 2000 Server does now. Even so, Microsoft Terminal Service solutions, require a great deal more bandwidth than the Citrix ones do and there are clients for Win32 ONLY!
Citrix Nfuse
Citrix Metaframe
Microsoft Windows 2000 Server & Terminal services.
It's a high upfront cost but, it *is* the *best* solution. Citrix Nfuse is an add-on that allows you to access your applications over the internet, through a web browser. Citrix Metframe allows you to serve a desktop or individual applications over a wide range of protocols and topologies. Windows 2000 Server Terminal Services offers the core multi-user environment that all this works on. With this combination you can have access to any and all of your individual applications or the entire desktop, from *any* client. Citrix has clients for DOS, Win32, Mac, Unix, Java, and even a web browser.
Using this configuration, you can have performance VERY near to the performance and responsiveness of actually being at the console of a workstation. It will, on average, only require 20Kbps of bandwidth so, you can even use it transparently over dial-up. If you need *nix access, you simply need to use an Xclient, such as Hummingbird's Xceed on the Metaframe server. This gives you terminal access as well as the ability to run X-Windows applications.
Many people here are recommending VNC (a good product) or Windows XP. VNC is not the answer to your question because VNC is simply remotely controlling a workstation if used on a Windows box. It is multi-user on Unix but it requires more bandwidth and is not nearly as stable and reliable as the Metframe solution. Furthermore, using VNC on a Unix box eliminates the use of Windows applications, unless you can get them running under Wine. Windows XP is probably the worst solution because, although it does have Terminal Services built in, this service is limited to one or two users, as it is only intended for remote diagnostics and repair. It is not intended to be for multi-user use and it cannot be licensed for multi-user use. The "yet to be released"
Tarantella has also benn mentioned as a solution. This is *not* a bad choice. However, Tarantella is not as mature or robust as Metaframe is. This means that there are likely to be problems using Tarantella that have already been solved by Citrix. Client options, is the first that comes to mind.
So, in the end the Citrix Metaframe solution is the best of all worlds. Like I said, it isn't cheap but, damn, it's the best thing since sliced bread!
A reasonable argument that I can stomach. You're such a realist.
;)
What are you doing here??
The system of capitalism is founded on the concept of trade of anything that is deemed of value. Regarless of whether or not it is a tangible item. How tangible are stocks or better yet, futures? How tangible is insurance? How tangible is interest?
We as a society place value on all sorts of items both tangible and intangible. Hell, we pay for "peace of mind", how intangible is that? So long as it is of value to someone then they will pay a price for it. Capitalism lives on!!!!!!!!
It's called a copyright. It's been around for years and is used in most of the worlds free or at least capitalistic societies.
But, so many here are thoroughly disgusted with the term of the restriction because they cannot have it for themselves, right now. They're not interested in their kids having it for free, they want it for free, now!
It never ceases to amaze me how little things change from generation to generation. The "kids" or those "without" always demand, gimme gimme gimee and postulate their communal ideas. Yet, inevitably, they grow older and begin developing their own means. Suddenly the communal mentality swings to: It's mine and I'm not giving it away.
Most don't realize this change happening. They don't hear it in their own words, as in the above posts. They say no, my children shouldn't be provided for. The kids should work for themselves and not be lazy. Yet these very same posters themselves cry, "gimme gimme gimme". Why don't they work for themselves? Why don't they stop being lazy? Why don't they make their own great work? Why should they have mine????
No sir, I like the present system. I can make my work freely available or I can control its use as I see fit. The Supreme court will review this case. The Supreme court will find in favor of copyright protection and this will continue to be a Great Nation.
I definitely suffer the "free is for me" mentality, but.......
First off, copyrights and other restrictions are a cornerstone of capitalism. The make it free to everyone approach is the foundation of communism, not capitalism.
The second thought, is that if I devote my life to a project and produce a great work, shouldn't I be able to enjoy the spoils and decide the future of that great work? Shouldn't I be able to go to my grave, comforted by the fact that my magnum opus will provide for my children's future?
Let's face a little fact that we keep forgetting. Rarely, if ever, is a great work supressed or lost. Most often the works *ARE* available to any and everyone. But, you *do* have to pay for it. If it's not worth it to you, then perhaps it is not such a great work. Even the touted "research" that gets bandied about so often *is* available. But, alas you do have to pay Bayer or Pfizer millions to license it.
This is capitalism at its finest. Accept no substitute as you may be the one that is disappointed.
This is one of the several reasons why software RAID, especially under NT is a bad idea. While there may be an obscure utility out there, chances are slim. Your likely only hope is going to be a disk editor.
With RAID 0, software or hardware, your best solution is going to be tape. But, it sounds like you don't have that option. Treat the incident as a learning experience and move on.
The comforting howl and warmth of the System/36.
The soothing glow of the green screen with the login prompt permanently burned into the screen.
The reassuring, desk rattling thud of the keyboard solenoid.
The green bar spewing as the 3000 line report prints one line per page.
The massive template worksheets and counting tiny squares for hours on end.
Those were the days......
Whoa!
Whoa!
Whoa!
Bad trip! Did someone slip a lid into my coffee??
A detailed technical explanation of .NET, for those that were interested but were still to lazy to look at MSDN for themselves.
.NET is increasing and it will no doubt become the "standard" for Windows development. But, regardless of the promises and conceptual or theoretical "superiority" of .NET, I can't help but think that this is yet another layer of complication. Yet another standard is broken by Microsoft (C++ class inheritance for one). I predict that .NET will be the ire of developers of the future. It will make us long for the "simpler/better" days of MFC and COM.
;)
That said, the hype of
I think that I'll take a step back. From now on, all my development work will be done in QBASIC.
I'm not certain what exactly they planned to do with the information that they were collecting but, you appear to be concerned that they were planning to block or restrict your access to porn.
But, take heart because here is a very interesting bit of trivia. AT&T Broadband, the new operators/owners of Comcast, is the single largest distributor of porn. Here's a Fronline episode on PBS that recently discussed this. They (AT&T) do not advertise this fact in any way but, distributing porn generates millions and possibly billions for AT&T Broadband. For this reason, AT&T Broadband is actually very cozy with the porn industry and is not eager to damage that relationship.
In short, regardless of Comcast's actions, your porn would have been safe.
The thing that I find rather interesting is that, although the list includes almost every vendor known to man, there is at least one vendor that is noticably missing. Perhaps I missed it but, I was unable to find Nortel Networks a.k.a. Bay Networks a.k.a. WellFleet on the list. Now, synoptics was on the list and it was the merger of Synoptics and WellFleet that created Bay networks but, I don't see the more recent names anywhere. Saves me a lot of patching.
Those are better than the coverage maps that the cell phone providers offer. Their, almost certainly, far more accurate too.
Now, if we can just get them to do the project at a national level and post a searchable map, like Mapquest, on the web it would be awesome. Going on the road? Just grab a map before you go and stay connected the whole time, probably free of charge too! Since, so many of the WLANs aren't secured.
First, if everyone in the world is going to be using my system for their own use (personal, business, hacking, cracking, benevolent, nefarious) then, I want compensation for what they use. Say, a quarter of a penny per clock cycle. Ithink that's fair.
Second, on a humerous note, if some luser opens an Outlook virus attachment, does everyone then get it even if they don't open it? Does the global OS become infected?
While some of what you say or suggest is true, the fact is that *everyone* here feels that they are more qualified to make the decisions than their PHB. But, when we look at the many posts to follow this one, we realize that regarless of what they think, many of these people aren't qualified to make any form of decision at all.
So, are you sure that you know it all?
I partially agree, certainly Ben Franklin would need to RTFM. But did you read it to learn how to operate the car or to learn the "rules of the road" in order to pass the test. My 5 year old knows how to enter, start and drive almost any car, even though he has never done it, read the manual or understod the rules of the road.
Did you need to RTFM in order to get out of a car, ever? The fact is that they are intuitively designed in that, with all the various makes and models, driving or getting in and out are pretty much the same. However, in mainstream software the method used to get out is both counter intuitive and varied.
Windows -- Click Start(Start????) -> Shutdown -> Ok
Linux -- Shutdown -h now