>Plus, after years of hotair, RedHat just became credible Windows alternative for internal applications.
Why would a directory service product make a Linux distribution company credible Windows alternative for internal apps? And when exactly did that happen? Right after the announcement, perhaps?
>Crashing once a week is acceptable for a premium smartphone?
Of course it is. I am not running 911 service here.
I deliberately wrote about the crashes to give you guys something to be happy about. Honestly, I don't see what's the big deal - after all, it's a Windows OS - very convenient, but it has its quirks. I reboot it and it's back.
Okay, let me give you an idea why Windows - I had big problems synching my calendar - one application in the office, another at home and yet another on the phone. The same with address and phone book. I value fixing these inconveniences at about $15/week. In a year, that's more than I paid for the phone. That's about the ROI.
I looked at Treo - fewer features, too big for my liking. I looked at some other phones/PDAs - there was always something that I didn't like. The phone I bought had all the features I liked and has very few annoyances (as I said, it crashes once a week and another one is that Windows is sometimes slow to respond, that's about it). It excells in everything else.
"but a number of people disagree, including a key Novell Asia-Pac exec, Paul Kangro."
OMFG, what a surprise! Why you didn't add another informative follow up comment like "but a number of people disagree with Kangro, including a key Microsoft exec, Steve Ballmer". Of course they'll disagree because it's their job.
Give us some real news.
BTW, Windows may require reboots, but it doesn't say anything about the difficulty level - it's easy to patch but it sometimes requires downtime.
Linux - well, tell me how to update Red Hat Enterprise Linux v3.0 to v4.0.
>Lying to your stockholders by promising things you can't deliver is bad business.
Oh so you KNOW they can't deliver?
I recently bought a $500 Windows smart phone (includes a camera and a music player which plays MP3s) and I'm extremely happy with it (yes, it does crash once a week, but it's a small tradeoff for all the good features).
Years ago Microsoft has given the Chinese government access to the complete source code of Windows operating systems. And the Chinese are not the only government who has access to the Windows source code.
I've ran a Zope site (Zope which I haven't had to update for the past two years; it did have 2-3 security bugs during that time but none of them affected me). It never crashed (moderate loading, static, but over 200MB of content) and it gave me several years of piece of mind. Compare that with some PHP-what-have-ya and their constant security disasters (not to mention quarterly Apache security updates).
From the URL: ------------ Where: From local network
The vulnerability is caused due to a boundary error, which can be triggered via Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer when connecting to a file server. This can be exploited to cause a buffer overflow by setting up a malicious share with an overly long name (about 300 bytes) containing no lower case characters. ------------
a) I control the local network at work and home and for that to happen someone would have to break thru my Linux firewall or gain admin access to a Samba/CIFS machine from within the local network b) I would be highly suspicious of opening a file with a name longer than 30 characters. And I'd reprimand any employee for unnecessary creating a filename of over 50 characters.
> They're trying to associate google.com.net with them in an effort to confuse customers.
Hah! I dare Google to sue them and I wish they win.
Then Google will get their ass sued to death by misc. companies whose trademarks Google associates with competitors' ads at a rate of 1000's impressions per minute (if not more).
I don't agree? The real test would be number of vulns multiplied by seriousness.
>Then compare that time to M$' response time.
Whatever. In the meantime, I'll switch to MS IE as it has no known serious vulns and later go back to the newest Firefox.
I think it's clear by now that both these browsers aren't particularly secure so there's no real reason to favor one instead of the other when it comes to security. Firefox has spent its credit when it comes to security.
>I just wish, just ONCE that somebody would do a fair evaluation, without an agenda to forward.
I don't think it'd really matter as usefullness of such tests is quite limited. How many people make OS decision based on result of one benchmark?
Even those deciding on OS for single-purpose service (like file serving) should first and foremost look at performance under their own workload, then consider non-performance factors (manageability, skills, etc.) and finally look at tests like these.
> Microsoft wastes about 1 billion $ in "windows research". Linux is quite romatic compared with that, even if all the main kernel hackers are employed
Why? Because it OSS copies CSS interfaces and features built with that research money?
They had been a bit slow because they willingly did other things (Itanium 2, etc.) but they should be able to squeeze AMD back to its proper size in x86-64 space.
I'm not surprised at all - being IBMers, Global Services charge for their services far more than other regular and "small-time" vendors.
Now, big enterprises may have bought some services out of fear when they initially introduced Linux, but it's definitively impossible to continue paying Global Services for work that isn't even neccessary on the Windows platform and/or that can be done equally well by anyone with Linux skills.
>Branches in the UK still actively demand Microsoft Windows,
'the fuck you care? If that's what they need to do their work, so be it! In country where I live, I'd hate to see them learning GNOME or messing around with OpenOffice import/export filters instead of doing their fucking jobs 'cause when I'm paying someone's salary I wanna see them work. Productively.
>governments seem to have difficulty making the reality in low-level department branches match up with their official national policies
That's normal. In case you haven't noticed, governments don't actually attract the best and brightest (excluding national labs and/or research institutes which are a tiny percentage of all government workforce), so don't expect too much.
Are you fucking kidding me? Insightful my ass. And what happened according to non-US sources?
RTFA. These Italian guys were obviously inexperienced for that kind of undertaking (ignorant of "rules of the game"). You don't zoom thru an armed checkpoint in Iraq.
Slashdot Mirror
>I'd like to approach them with all of the relevant information in a presentable format.
Don't you have anything better to do?
I am aways weary of people like you.
If you're so upbeat about doing something useful for free, go help the poor.
> That would be great, except that in non-socialist countries there's no good way to retire without being a shareholder at some point or another.
The same thing happens in socialist countries where everything belong to "the people".
> Interestingly, a brit pop star recently said that the real evil is 'shareholders'.
Which is why socialist societies are evil by definition
>Plus, after years of hotair, RedHat just became credible Windows alternative for internal applications.
Why would a directory service product make a Linux distribution company credible Windows alternative for internal apps?
And when exactly did that happen? Right after the announcement, perhaps?
>cheep.
Chimp?
No, they have a de-facto search engine monopoly.
> Congratulations! You get the honor the first post AND mod points for insightful, and you didn't have any useful information.
Congratulations!
You get the honor the second post AND mod points for insightful, and you didn't have any useful information.
The grandparent was correct (and insightful, for the smart reader).
There's no correct answer to a generic question like that.
It's its, you illiterate fuckos (the submitter and the editor(s)).
>Crashing once a week is acceptable for a premium smartphone?
Of course it is.
I am not running 911 service here.
I deliberately wrote about the crashes to give you guys something to be happy about.
Honestly, I don't see what's the big deal - after all, it's a Windows OS - very convenient, but it has its quirks.
I reboot it and it's back.
Okay, let me give you an idea why Windows - I had big problems synching my calendar - one application in the office, another at home and yet another on the phone. The same with address and phone book.
I value fixing these inconveniences at about $15/week. In a year, that's more than I paid for the phone. That's about the ROI.
I looked at Treo - fewer features, too big for my liking. I looked at some other phones/PDAs - there was always something that I didn't like. The phone I bought had all the features I liked and has very few annoyances (as I said, it crashes once a week and another one is that Windows is sometimes slow to respond, that's about it).
It excells in everything else.
"but a number of people disagree, including a key Novell Asia-Pac exec, Paul Kangro."
OMFG, what a surprise!
Why you didn't add another informative follow up comment like "but a number of people disagree with Kangro, including a key Microsoft exec, Steve Ballmer".
Of course they'll disagree because it's their job.
Give us some real news.
BTW, Windows may require reboots, but it doesn't say anything about the difficulty level - it's easy to patch but it sometimes requires downtime.
Linux - well, tell me how to update Red Hat Enterprise Linux v3.0 to v4.0.
>Lying to your stockholders by promising things you can't deliver is bad business.
Oh so you KNOW they can't deliver?
I recently bought a $500 Windows smart phone (includes a camera and a music player which plays MP3s) and I'm extremely happy with it (yes, it does crash once a week, but it's a small tradeoff for all the good features).
AFAIK they've already delivered on their promise.
And you're clueless.
Years ago Microsoft has given the Chinese government access to the complete source code of Windows operating systems.
And the Chinese are not the only government who has access to the Windows source code.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-990526.html
>perl or python or something.
zope.org
> PHP is a bit fluffy
zope.org
I've ran a Zope site (Zope which I haven't had to update for the past two years; it did have 2-3 security bugs during that time but none of them affected me). It never crashed (moderate loading, static, but over 200MB of content) and it gave me several years of piece of mind.
Compare that with some PHP-what-have-ya and their constant security disasters (not to mention quarterly Apache security updates).
> This is not embarassing. It's news that is good enough to repeat.
Hah!
It is irresponsible, iritiating, disgraceful and stupid, that's what it is.
>I can't wait for Java to be fully open source so I can gut it and re-release it how I would like to see it written.
Yeah, I'm sure you're skillful enough to issue a spelling-fixing patch.
>If I owned a publishing house I would hire them immediately.
Probably that's why you don't own a publishing house.
From the URL:
------------
Where: From local network
The vulnerability is caused due to a boundary error, which can be triggered via Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer when connecting to a file server. This can be exploited to cause a buffer overflow by setting up a malicious share with an overly long name (about 300 bytes) containing no lower case characters.
------------
a) I control the local network at work and home and for that to happen someone would have to break thru my Linux firewall or gain admin access to a Samba/CIFS machine from within the local network
b) I would be highly suspicious of opening a file with a name longer than 30 characters. And I'd reprimand any employee for unnecessary creating a filename of over 50 characters.
> They're trying to associate google.com.net with them in an effort to confuse customers.
Hah! I dare Google to sue them and I wish they win.
Then Google will get their ass sued to death by misc. companies whose trademarks Google associates with competitors' ads at a rate of 1000's impressions per minute (if not more).
> It's a free service, they don't owe you anything.
No it's not a free service.
I pay those bozos to show my ads and by not being online they're fucking me up.
> If anything you should realise from the downtime how much you rely on Google, and you should appreciate it more.
Yeah, and perhaps in light of the excessive reliance I should diversify my advertising providers.
>To my mind that is the real test
I don't agree?
The real test would be number of vulns multiplied by seriousness.
>Then compare that time to M$' response time.
Whatever. In the meantime, I'll switch to MS IE as it has no known serious vulns and later go back to the newest Firefox.
I think it's clear by now that both these browsers aren't particularly secure so there's no real reason to favor one instead of the other when it comes to security. Firefox has spent its credit when it comes to security.
>I just wish, just ONCE that somebody would do a fair evaluation, without an agenda to forward.
I don't think it'd really matter as usefullness of such tests is quite limited. How many people make OS decision based on result of one benchmark?
Even those deciding on OS for single-purpose service (like file serving) should first and foremost look at performance under their own workload, then consider non-performance factors (manageability, skills, etc.) and finally look at tests like these.
> Microsoft wastes about 1 billion $ in "windows research". Linux is quite romatic compared with that, even if all the main kernel hackers are employed
Why? Because it OSS copies CSS interfaces and features built with that research money?
They have.+ dual-core+chips/2100-1006_3-5697088.html?tag=nefd. top
"For example, even though Intel introduced 64-bit x86 chips midway through 2005--more than a year after AMD--it outpaced AMD in server shipments in 2004."
http://news.com.com/Intel+highlights+its+next-gen
They had been a bit slow because they willingly did other things (Itanium 2, etc.) but they should be able to squeeze AMD back to its proper size in x86-64 space.
I'm not surprised at all - being IBMers, Global Services charge for their services far more than other regular and "small-time" vendors.
Now, big enterprises may have bought some services out of fear when they initially introduced Linux, but it's definitively impossible to continue paying Global Services for work that isn't even neccessary on the Windows platform and/or that can be done equally well by anyone with Linux skills.
>When building cluster of stock PCs it should not be more then $500/PC.
What are you talking about?
The now (in)famous Apple cluster cost them about 5 million for 1,100 nodes or $5K/node.
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112083/G5cluster.html
And that was supposed to be a good deal.
>>"These systems are just like physical assets," .... They become brittle with age,
>That's also assuming you can source replacement kit for hardware failures.
And how the hell is that different from what he said?
(Systems = hardware + software)
>Branches in the UK still actively demand Microsoft Windows,
'the fuck you care?
If that's what they need to do their work, so be it!
In country where I live, I'd hate to see them learning GNOME or messing around with OpenOffice import/export filters instead of doing their fucking jobs 'cause when I'm paying someone's salary I wanna see them work. Productively.
>governments seem to have difficulty making the reality in low-level department branches match up with their official national policies
That's normal. In case you haven't noticed, governments don't actually attract the best and brightest (excluding national labs and/or research institutes which are a tiny percentage of all government workforce), so don't expect too much.
Are you fucking kidding me? Insightful my ass.
And what happened according to non-US sources?
RTFA. These Italian guys were obviously inexperienced for that kind of undertaking (ignorant of "rules of the game").
You don't zoom thru an armed checkpoint in Iraq.