1. Google is a service company, their products(Keyhole, Search Appliance, etc) are extensions of their services really.. They provide a service that leverages other things.
Mining the information of 8 billion pages is not a product, it is a service. One that is hugely useful.
2. You are not, in any way, forced to use Google's services/products. Thus, they are not a the end all of the world, you can simply choose to not work with them. Really, it is easy.
Apple, with 10.4 Tiger, made a technology called Launchd that was intended to replace a couple technologies(like init) and handle the automatic service startup and whatnot functions.. They way it was designed and and implemented has led to noticable, sometimes dramatic speed improvements in boot time. Plus, it consolidates redundant features into a single, clean, application.
Re:ICMP flaw #1 on Linux: it's in the kernel
on
Examining ICMP Flaws
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Probably just a typo, but I wanted to clarify a mistype in your post.
ICMP IS a subset of the Internet Protocol(IP). IP, part of TCP/IP, has an error reporting mechanism for when things get screwed up, it is called ICMP. It doesn't sit on top nor beside IP, it sits inside of it, logically speaking.
Both ICMP, which is consider its own entity at times, but is a subset of IP as a whole, and IP are at layer 3. The Networking layer.
TCP and UDP are layer 4.
microkernels(as mentioned in another post) do exactly this: move as much OUT of the kernel as possible, including the networking (TCP/IP) stack. This isn't a bad idea, necesarily, it gives some advantages that microkernels are all about. If your networking stack gets completely destroyed, it doesn't take down your kernel, etc, etc.
monolithic kernels, like Linux(and most OSes, since they are 'easier' and more commonly accepted design) put more things inside the kernel like the networking stack. Not everything, but more things than a microkernel.
All that being said, even in linux, you could still write an userspace TCP/IP stack and use it, AFAIK. Though things like performance would be an issue.
"Stealing the Network: How To Own The Box" is a good book about general hacking/cracking/forensics/geekery. 10 chapters, 10 different stories talking about how a person (playing on offense or defense) goes about a computer or network hack. One of the stories in the middle is a good one on a former employee that does some real-life social engineering and whatnot to get to his end goal.
Just finished the book, well worth the fairly short read. All non-true stories but are based in a realistic setting. Gets mildly to fairly technical on the how and what the plot character is doing not just a "Yes, I'm in!" but the actual command output or thought process on what they are trying to accomplish.
6MB down and 1MB up (or whatever your actual stats are) is WAY more than enough to handle the home user though.
Even for high end, amazing quality, uber-good sound, you are only using a couple hundred KB tops both ways. At the most. I mean, really good looking video can be done in well under 1MB per second, and voice is a fraction of that.
The problem is latency and then the NAT/Firewall/broken end-to-end communication junk home users have.
In a business where many users on a LAN are using it, then your 100MB up/down is more useful for the many multiple phone 'lines' being run. For a home user, you can easily have 1, of not a couple phone calls (party lines) going without issue. If you aren't playing halo online or something like that.
And IMHO, even 100MB is ridiculously large for any office user. I mean really, even working their pants off I can't see a situation where the average, or even power, user would be able to tap out a 100MB line. Something else(the server, client, switcher/router) would get maxed out first, 100MB is quite a lot when you start plugging in numbers for bandwidth usage.
Well you can think that, but you would be wrong. The school district can dictate the rules a student must abide by when using district equipment. Why wouldn't they?
Microsoft can "violate your right to free speech" when they go after people who are posting their serials or product keys, libraries can block adult sites from children(actually, atleast at the school district I work at, we are forced by law to have filtering methods in place to block adult content).
It is 1) not the kid's computer, but rather school property on loan to the child and 2) a public school that has legal restrictions and requirements in the technology they make available...
besides... why not just have LDAP (OpenDirectory, from Apple, or any other) with Administrator's accounts as admins and student accounts as restricted users? Don't hardcode a password that will be easily hacked, make it authenticate to a server. (No, an admin couldn't log in if a kid was at home, but a school tech doesn't support computers from on-site, they repair them at a school, where the LDAP server would be available).
Adapt or die, not that big of a deal. You use Microsoft because it is common, relatively easy, and accepted. If Linux became that (or rather, Redhat) or FreeBSD or Mac OS X, would your shop just give up? No, you would migrate, most likely, to the new system teach yourself a couple new tricks and live happily ever after.
The world doesn't end just because a product people depend on goes away or because less ambiguous. Businesses have needs that they will fill with whatever works for them, be it Windows or *nix or whatever.
"They now have Win2K, WinXP Home Edition, WinXP Pro, Win2003 server, WinCE and now another version for the XBox."
Tablet Edition, Media Center, Advanced Server, Enterprise Server, Small Business, Windows Mobile, Windows 64-bit, etc, etc.
Yea, Microsoft is all over the place, they really should cut back. For example, 1 server version that can do everything the current server versions do. From multi-processor(4,8, etc) boxes to uh... well what else do they strip out to make it a different version?
It wouldn't be unreasonable to see Apple migrate to intel for their centrino/wireless setup. Airport Extremes are nice(I am using it right now) but the power to manipulate the card (promisc. mode, MAC spoofing... for legit use, of course) isn't supported and that is a big lacking feature for *nix users.
But freenet isn't reliable enough to retrieve user's freesites(web pages on freenet) even if a user went to the trouble of making them. It takes minutes, MINUTES, to retrieve any given page and the liklihood of you getting that page is unacceptably low.
I can take a slow speed, though Freenet is too slow to be considered production by a long shot, but reliability isn't their either.
Freenet should be able to handle people quickly joining and leaving, even when the existing user's caches are getting hit a lot, Freenet's ability to discover, add, remove and recognize nodes on the network should be able to work better.
Furthermore, if Freenet's design(I assume the fancy routing scheme they use) was more refined(read:less fancy, a simple design that is more optimized) it would be able to more quickly service larger volumes of request... and low and behold, Freenet should then be able to make due with that new user's cache and pull from it as needed, even if only for minutes or hours.
Freenet just doesn't scale or handle changes well. For that matter, it doesn't handle insertion, retrieval or nodes well. This has nothing to do with evil/. posting point-release of Freenet and everything to do with a broken project that needs fixing.
I believe in truly Free Speech, but I think people just lose faith in Freenet because it is so fickle, not necessarily because of its moral obligations.
Freenet seems to get a decent idea, partially work it out, have it fail, and then migrate to a radically different design to fix the problems the first decent idea had.
Freenet shouldn't be www speed, but the abysmal reliability and speed of the version I have tried(various times over the last 3 years) make it a joke of a project when it could be a pinnacle of open source development. What is so hard with choosing a simple, straightforward design(none of this 'nodes specialize in certain types of content' crap). Let a node cache whatever it passes through with sane metrics for replacement and bug fix and optimize THAT code.
So frustrating, because i want to be shouting to people how amazing a concept it is, but I can't do that because you can't consider the Freenet reliable or usable, even when loosely defined.
They have done great, exception for the multiple times they break their own HID/HIG. iTunes, for example, and the whole brushed metal is basicly an excuse for making cool-looking apps. I like brushed metal, but apple has changed the HIG to morph around what they think looks best. There really should only be 1 window gui, aqua.
Mail, in OS X, is even a third window gui(?), it isn't quite Aqua, and has noticable differences unlike any other application on OS X. Why? Who knows.
Apple has done great, but they have clearly ignored their own UI rules for the sake of eye candy at times.
But that implies that the currect game will stay stagnant until it can be directly compared in 2008. This is not so.
Game A, available now, will likely be game A 2.0 by 2008, while game B will be 1.0 (but under development longer than Game A's 1.0 product.
Once we start hearing what OS X 10.5's feature set will be with regards to Spotlight(it may not see a 2.0, quite honestly) then we will be able to get closer to comparing things evenly.
Two years is roughly what should be expected for 10.5/11... Apple has said they are going to slow down development(they can't hold this break neck speed indefinitely) so 12-16 has been the standard 10.x development time frame, another 6-12 months would be roughly correct.
"Can one undo a commandline "rm" in OSX?
One would not do such a thing in Mac OS X."
Granted, I use finder to delete files 95% of the time, but on occasion I use the rm command to delete.. Not only can I not undo this, rm does not act the same way finder's delte does.. rm does not put files into the trash.
This seems like a design flaw. The Mac is a great platform(my Tiger dvd is in the mail, I am hooked) and the Tiger features that make mv and cp more mac-native are great. Having said that, the GUI operations that have a CLI counterpart (delete in finder vs. the rm command) should operate the the same way and be interchangeable wherever possible.
Webkit is part of the OS, Safari is just an application that uses Webkit's rendering libraries. The only thing I know of as being a problem is that Apple made the moronic decision to place the 'default web browser' setting in Safari's preferences and not in System Preferences... so deleting Safari would get you into trouble there, theoretically.
Quicktime I can't speak to, but yes, it could get hairy if you just went and deleted it.
iLife '05 ships with all macs, IIRC. So yes, it is a separate entity from the Tiger 10.4 disc if you purchase as an upgrade, but does come with new macs.
Slashdot Mirror
Two things to feed the troll..
1. Google is a service company, their products(Keyhole, Search Appliance, etc) are extensions of their services really.. They provide a service that leverages other things.
Mining the information of 8 billion pages is not a product, it is a service. One that is hugely useful.
2. You are not, in any way, forced to use Google's services/products. Thus, they are not a the end all of the world, you can simply choose to not work with them. Really, it is easy.
Apple, with 10.4 Tiger, made a technology called Launchd that was intended to replace a couple technologies(like init) and handle the automatic service startup and whatnot functions.. They way it was designed and and implemented has led to noticable, sometimes dramatic speed improvements in boot time. Plus, it consolidates redundant features into a single, clean, application.
7 1558293
A good review can be found here: http://www.afp548.com/article.php?story=200506200
Probably just a typo, but I wanted to clarify a mistype in your post.
ICMP IS a subset of the Internet Protocol(IP). IP, part of TCP/IP, has an error reporting mechanism for when things get screwed up, it is called ICMP. It doesn't sit on top nor beside IP, it sits inside of it, logically speaking.
Both ICMP, which is consider its own entity at times, but is a subset of IP as a whole, and IP are at layer 3. The Networking layer.
TCP and UDP are layer 4.
microkernels(as mentioned in another post) do exactly this: move as much OUT of the kernel as possible, including the networking (TCP/IP) stack. This isn't a bad idea, necesarily, it gives some advantages that microkernels are all about. If your networking stack gets completely destroyed, it doesn't take down your kernel, etc, etc.
monolithic kernels, like Linux(and most OSes, since they are 'easier' and more commonly accepted design) put more things inside the kernel like the networking stack. Not everything, but more things than a microkernel.
All that being said, even in linux, you could still write an userspace TCP/IP stack and use it, AFAIK. Though things like performance would be an issue.
"Stealing the Network: How To Own The Box" is a good book about general hacking/cracking/forensics/geekery. 10 chapters, 10 different stories talking about how a person (playing on offense or defense) goes about a computer or network hack. One of the stories in the middle is a good one on a former employee that does some real-life social engineering and whatnot to get to his end goal.
Just finished the book, well worth the fairly short read. All non-true stories but are based in a realistic setting. Gets mildly to fairly technical on the how and what the plot character is doing not just a "Yes, I'm in!" but the actual command output or thought process on what they are trying to accomplish.
6MB down and 1MB up (or whatever your actual stats are) is WAY more than enough to handle the home user though.
Even for high end, amazing quality, uber-good sound, you are only using a couple hundred KB tops both ways. At the most. I mean, really good looking video can be done in well under 1MB per second, and voice is a fraction of that.
The problem is latency and then the NAT/Firewall/broken end-to-end communication junk home users have.
In a business where many users on a LAN are using it, then your 100MB up/down is more useful for the many multiple phone 'lines' being run. For a home user, you can easily have 1, of not a couple phone calls (party lines) going without issue. If you aren't playing halo online or something like that.
And IMHO, even 100MB is ridiculously large for any office user. I mean really, even working their pants off I can't see a situation where the average, or even power, user would be able to tap out a 100MB line. Something else(the server, client, switcher/router) would get maxed out first, 100MB is quite a lot when you start plugging in numbers for bandwidth usage.
Well you can think that, but you would be wrong. The school district can dictate the rules a student must abide by when using district equipment. Why wouldn't they?
Microsoft can "violate your right to free speech" when they go after people who are posting their serials or product keys, libraries can block adult sites from children(actually, atleast at the school district I work at, we are forced by law to have filtering methods in place to block adult content).
It is 1) not the kid's computer, but rather school property on loan to the child and 2) a public school that has legal restrictions and requirements in the technology they make available...
besides... why not just have LDAP (OpenDirectory, from Apple, or any other) with Administrator's accounts as admins and student accounts as restricted users? Don't hardcode a password that will be easily hacked, make it authenticate to a server. (No, an admin couldn't log in if a kid was at home, but a school tech doesn't support computers from on-site, they repair them at a school, where the LDAP server would be available).
Adapt or die, not that big of a deal. You use Microsoft because it is common, relatively easy, and accepted. If Linux became that (or rather, Redhat) or FreeBSD or Mac OS X, would your shop just give up? No, you would migrate, most likely, to the new system teach yourself a couple new tricks and live happily ever after.
The world doesn't end just because a product people depend on goes away or because less ambiguous. Businesses have needs that they will fill with whatever works for them, be it Windows or *nix or whatever.
It is not anything new, I don't think.
"They now have Win2K, WinXP Home Edition, WinXP Pro, Win2003 server, WinCE and now another version for the XBox."
Tablet Edition, Media Center, Advanced Server, Enterprise Server, Small Business, Windows Mobile, Windows 64-bit, etc, etc.
Yea, Microsoft is all over the place, they really should cut back. For example, 1 server version that can do everything the current server versions do. From multi-processor(4,8, etc) boxes to uh... well what else do they strip out to make it a different version?
But wikipedia is a joke of a reference. Anyone can edit the article prior to linking to it and change the intent or wording to fit their argument.
It wouldn't be unreasonable to see Apple migrate to intel for their centrino/wireless setup. Airport Extremes are nice(I am using it right now) but the power to manipulate the card (promisc. mode, MAC spoofing... for legit use, of course) isn't supported and that is a big lacking feature for *nix users.
But freenet isn't reliable enough to retrieve user's freesites(web pages on freenet) even if a user went to the trouble of making them. It takes minutes, MINUTES, to retrieve any given page and the liklihood of you getting that page is unacceptably low.
I can take a slow speed, though Freenet is too slow to be considered production by a long shot, but reliability isn't their either.
That is called scalability. It is a good thing.
/. posting point-release of Freenet and everything to do with a broken project that needs fixing.
Freenet should be able to handle people quickly joining and leaving, even when the existing user's caches are getting hit a lot, Freenet's ability to discover, add, remove and recognize nodes on the network should be able to work better.
Furthermore, if Freenet's design(I assume the fancy routing scheme they use) was more refined(read:less fancy, a simple design that is more optimized) it would be able to more quickly service larger volumes of request... and low and behold, Freenet should then be able to make due with that new user's cache and pull from it as needed, even if only for minutes or hours.
Freenet just doesn't scale or handle changes well. For that matter, it doesn't handle insertion, retrieval or nodes well. This has nothing to do with evil
I believe in truly Free Speech, but I think people just lose faith in Freenet because it is so fickle, not necessarily because of its moral obligations.
Freenet seems to get a decent idea, partially work it out, have it fail, and then migrate to a radically different design to fix the problems the first decent idea had.
Freenet shouldn't be www speed, but the abysmal reliability and speed of the version I have tried(various times over the last 3 years) make it a joke of a project when it could be a pinnacle of open source development. What is so hard with choosing a simple, straightforward design(none of this 'nodes specialize in certain types of content' crap). Let a node cache whatever it passes through with sane metrics for replacement and bug fix and optimize THAT code.
So frustrating, because i want to be shouting to people how amazing a concept it is, but I can't do that because you can't consider the Freenet reliable or usable, even when loosely defined.
It worked with my v551 (and my friends too, actually) without a hitch. Over bluetooth too. iSync didn't support this model in Panther.
Apple is using it in their Tiger (OS X 10.4) release come the 29th of this month. So there is a few millions new GCC 4.0 users right there.
They have done great, exception for the multiple times they break their own HID/HIG. iTunes, for example, and the whole brushed metal is basicly an excuse for making cool-looking apps. I like brushed metal, but apple has changed the HIG to morph around what they think looks best. There really should only be 1 window gui, aqua.
Mail, in OS X, is even a third window gui(?), it isn't quite Aqua, and has noticable differences unlike any other application on OS X. Why? Who knows.
Apple has done great, but they have clearly ignored their own UI rules for the sake of eye candy at times.
Such as Steve Jobs, multiple times.
But that implies that the currect game will stay stagnant until it can be directly compared in 2008. This is not so.
Game A, available now, will likely be game A 2.0 by 2008, while game B will be 1.0 (but under development longer than Game A's 1.0 product.
Once we start hearing what OS X 10.5's feature set will be with regards to Spotlight(it may not see a 2.0, quite honestly) then we will be able to get closer to comparing things evenly.
Two years is roughly what should be expected for 10.5/11... Apple has said they are going to slow down development(they can't hold this break neck speed indefinitely) so 12-16 has been the standard 10.x development time frame, another 6-12 months would be roughly correct.
Fucking learn the difference of two completely different words and be done with it then.
One would not do such a thing in Mac OS X."
Granted, I use finder to delete files 95% of the time, but on occasion I use the rm command to delete.. Not only can I not undo this, rm does not act the same way finder's delte does.. rm does not put files into the trash.
This seems like a design flaw. The Mac is a great platform(my Tiger dvd is in the mail, I am hooked) and the Tiger features that make mv and cp more mac-native are great. Having said that, the GUI operations that have a CLI counterpart (delete in finder vs. the rm command) should operate the the same way and be interchangeable wherever possible.
With built-in fail-over redundancy!
Webkit is part of the OS, Safari is just an application that uses Webkit's rendering libraries. The only thing I know of as being a problem is that Apple made the moronic decision to place the 'default web browser' setting in Safari's preferences and not in System Preferences... so deleting Safari would get you into trouble there, theoretically.
Quicktime I can't speak to, but yes, it could get hairy if you just went and deleted it.
iLife '05 ships with all macs, IIRC. So yes, it is a separate entity from the Tiger 10.4 disc if you purchase as an upgrade, but does come with new macs.