I had a similiar experience with a Dell tape autoloader, but since it mostly involved new parts, I can vouch for it being manufacturing problems. I should also mention that, in my experience, an autoloader is going to be sent back at least once, no matter who makes it!
Anyway, we purchased the autoloader, and it worked fine for about a month, at which point the tape drive stopped being recognized as a valid device. So, after troubleshooting and contacting Dell, they sent out another one. The one they shipped had the wrong drive =( so they sent another one. This one was DOA. They sent ANOTHER one, and sent a tech with it. Now, the nice thing is that this whole episode only took three days, since they sent each of them next day.
Anyway, the tech (which I really didnt need) didnt make it (they use Unisys in this area, but I dont like them; their service is either really good or really bad, depending on who you get), and generally wasted more of my limited time, so they sent someone else the next day, who put it all together and in the rack for me, whoopie do. I still had to do the server work. Anyway, it worked for three more months, and the second tape bay kept reporting it was occupied (a big problem when it tried to replace that tape after recording to it). So, replaced again. I dont work there anymore, but I heard two months ago it had the exact same issue. Oh well. I did document how to work around it for them, so at least it didnt mess up the backup schedule after the problem was identified.
So the moral of my story is that all hardware (especially specialty hardware like autoloaders) are prone to manufacturing defects; especially with computers, you have to make allowances when you realize hundreds of thousands of these parts are made; if you take the stance of never putting any trust in your equipment, you get the best frame of mind for effective disaster recovery methods and engineering in redundancies. Its more expensive, but IT is all about protecting the information; hardware can be replaced easier and at lest cost than that information.
There are many people who will not use Windows for idealogical and/or security reasons but still need to interoperate with Windows machines
As anybody who actually has an informed opinion knows, there are essentially no more/less security issues with Windows than with any other OS; the fact that you (and many other people) make that claim is just indicitive of how 'informed' your opinion is.
As for ideological issues, that is really their own problem. Look at the subject line to see what Im talking about... But my point is that a technological issue should be solved by choosing what is best for the task, not some foolish, ill-concieved 'holy war' ideology.
There are standards in technology for a reason
Thats right, there are. And MS has consistant standards between all their products. If you had an informed opinion, you would know the issue isnt no standards, but that those standards werent reached with outside concensus. MS creates their own standards, and uses them in their products, but is not beholden to an outside group telling them what they can and cant do. This is actually a benefit for them, because it allows them to set their own pace (popular concensus takes a long time, look at DVD, DDR RAM, etc. for examples of problems with this). Also, these standards bodies tend to be highly contrarian to MS, so why be part of something which is just going to be used for politics rather than getting problems solved?
MS is just going the capitalistic route, and letting the market decide the technology. Since the market is choosing MS products, it seems they are making correct decisions somewhere...
Since MS won't open up, then Linux has to do whatever it takes to open them up.
It is not Linux's place (or even their goal, since this is just you ranting) to change how MS does things. MS has interoperability with other NOS's without having to resort to theft; it would be nice to see Linux follow in their footsteps. However, since Open Source is based upon flagrant usage of unoriginal materials (which sometimes includes outright theft), its just a different mentality.
THIS IS A GOOD THING. It is keeping the competition even
First off, Linux isnt 'in competition' with MS. Even Torvalds has said this; the fact that people are making this a holy war is just their own stupidity hijacking his operating system. Second, I dont see how outright theft of MS's driver is a good thing. As I keep repeating like a mantra, if they need Linux to work with NTFS, they need to write their own driver rather than stealing MS's.
What don't you get about that?
I guess your ethics regarding theft are more flexible than mine. I generally try and live my life according to principles.
Who knows, maybe that is the point? I cant see that licensing out FAT would generate significant amounts of money, but since that is an unresearched statement, it could very well be wrong.
Its the main reason I tell people to either have it built from good (not cheaply made third party) parts, or to get it from Dell (if they need a brand on it, which some do).
You can go to Dell's site, type in an ID number on the PC (or just reference the model number), and it will give you a list of all the hardware they put in that line (or, with the ID, it will tell you what is most likely in there; sometimes there are a few for the same thing, like a NIC or modem).
Compaq USED TO have the best support site, but HP screwed them up like I figured they would. Now they are ~okay~, I guess, but not as good as it used to be. Everyone else, yech.
The problem, in a nutshell, is that computers in the stores (CompUSA, Best Buy, etc) are consumer-level. They have better, business-level, computers they sell to different outlets. But the consumer-level computers use junky parts, buggy drivers, bad memory, etc. They are just made to milk a thin profit margin, not to be reliable.
Since Dell doesnt have to deal with the expenses of a supply chain to brick-and-mortar stores (and that supply chain is VERY expensive: warehousing, shipping, salesforce, contracts, lawyers, coordination, advertising, shelf space, etc), they can use quality parts and still make a profit.
Dell also uses standard motherboards, cases, etc. You are likely getting a Western Digital or Seagate HD, a good CD-Rom, etc.
But at least Im not asking Dell to do my troubleshooting. Thats the issue- people thing the phone jockey is going to cast a magic spell and know what is going wrong.
You sound more like you are being a raving asshole to your friends. I would rather be one to some idiot on a message board than to people I know personally.
I enjoy working with computers. If you dont, maybe you are in the wrong line of work. At the best, you could at least give them good advice, like paying extra to have Dell send an on-site person.
Thats the issue- its hard to troubleshoot over the phone. Too often, as you found, doing computing 'on the cheap' doesnt work out well. Spend the extra money if you arent a guru- if you need it, it will be worth it just to not have the headaches.
Also, as somebody who used to fix hardware, Ive had many times where it works on the test bench then stops working later. Also, sometimes you cant reproduce the problem. Also, sometimes parts break in transit (despite the 'fragile' tag...)
1. I have often dealt with Dell Tech Support, and its so much easier when you realize the person on the other end of the phone is most likely not a computer expert (otherwise why would they be doing phone support?). I generally troubleshoot myself, and call them when I need assistance with a resolution.
For example, I had a good laptop, but there was some strangeness with the hard drive which caused it to sometimes lock up during boot-up. So, I looked into all the things that could be causing it, and when I figured out it was the HD, I called Dell, they sent me a new one, I used Ghost to xfer the data, and sent the bad one back. Very easy.
I also had a problem with the CD-Rom, and exchanged that as well. But the problem is that people with no diagnostic skills call up Tech Support and expect someone else to magically divine what is wrong. Have you ever done phone support? I occasionally have to when people are out in the field; it gets escalated to me because either an onsite tech is stumped, or a VIP has an issue. And, even talking to somebody who is technically competent, its pretty hard.
2. tell people to buy their printers from somebody besides Dell. Maybe you should look at the quality of the machine? No, that would be too difficult.
Let see i recall the time that i had a dead *clicking* harddrive and the tech wanted me to boot to a dos floppy to attempt to access the NTFS formatted hard drive. All of these things i made him aware of. i left the receiver on the clicking drive for 5 minutes while i wasted time making up the dos floppy he requested. this is but one of a number of unpleasant and unproductive support calls to dell.
So tell them you tried other methods already, or just lie. BTW, you should have just booted to an NT cd. If the partition utility (or even FDISK, actually) can see the partition, it could be something else. Heck, go to GRC.com and get "SpinRight"; it will will warn you *before* your hard drive goes bad.
Anyway, I could care less what you do, I dont own Dell stock. But unless somebody rolls their own, I tell them to use Dell; they are the best of the brand name machines, IMO, and I see a lot of different machines.
This is probably the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Linux uses WINE because Windows programs are the most prevalent and some people won't switch without them.
Its not dumb, its just not what you want to hear. As my title says, its using a screwdriver as a hammer. If you want to run something under Windows, run it in Windows instead of clunking it into an OS which it wasnt made for. Its amazing how several people I know run Linux, but all their software is running with WINE (and pretty poorly at that).
SAMBA is needed for similar reasons. People need to share with Windows.
As I said, SAMBA is needed because Linux isnt very good as a NOS. Netware doesnt need SAMBA, because it is a good NOS.
Same deal with NTFS. This is not about taking anything from Windows.
Really? It seems like it is at least taking the ntfs.sys- as I said, they cant get their second-tier operating system to work with Windows, so they have to keep borrowing parts of it for their own OS.
MS doesn't seem to believe in open standards so this process is necessary.
And why should MS use open standards ON THEIR OWN OPERATING SYSTEM? MS isnt telling the Linux community what they can and cant do on their OS, so why does the Linux community feel they should be able to tell MS's engineers what they should and shouldnt do? The big problem with free speach is that people tend to keep very deep seated, stupid opinions. Even the truth cannot convince them.
One person screams that Linux will never win out because there is not 100% interoperation between Windows and Linux. Then when interoperation is attempted someone screams about ripping Windows off.
Um, maybe thats because they ARE ripping Windows off? If they are such scarry good programmers, why do they need to use MS's ntfs.sys? Let them make their own driver! Basically, they are just admitting they cant do it, so they need to 'borrow' somebody else's work to get their task accomplished.
Thats kind of the problem with Open Source programmers- if they cant borrow somebody else's work, they are lost. Put them in a room with a computer and a programming reference book, and they cant do shit. Im by no means the world's best programmer, but put me in the same situation and I can put together something decent. Its just a different mentality- one needs to use the work of others, and the other is able to make their own solutions.
,i> Get over it and make up your mind already.
Given a similiar situation, I will say the same thing every time. If interop with Windows is so important, maybe they are using the wrong OS. I dont see Windows people crying that they cant run Mac or Linux software.
I cant understand why Linux people are so desperate to always take Windows stuff. They have to use WINE (should be whine) because they dont have any good games, they need to make SAMBA because they dont have a real NOS, and now they need to 'borrow' NTFS because they cant make a NTFS driver of their own.
And 'of course' they are going to use an ntfs.sys which is on their licensed copy of Windows... Im sure they wouldnt dare get it off a warez site...
When program are free, good programmers are worthless. If I had a software company, I would hire the cheapest guys I could find, as long as they do passable work. THEN, just make the applications Open Source! You can have programmers who are probably smarter, and definitely better, doing the work FOR FREE!!!
Hmm, I actually think I will do that. It seems like stealing, but its really not!
Unless they find a way to encrypt that Post-It note under the user's keyboard, I would just recommend allowing simple passwords, with a 90 expiration as the shortest.
Also, be nice. Dont set that password filter too agressive. I usually dont allow the user's first name or last name as a pwd, nor their department or the name of the company. It also checks for a few other common stupid passwords (1234, password, etc.), but otherwise its fair game.
I would rather have them using their cat's name than have that damn post-it!
I stay that with the American legal system, SCO still has pretty good odds. I mean hell, they just let a psychotic crossdressing murderer go free, who may have killed two OTHER people as well. AND they let OJ go free, we also had the Supreme Court elect the president with a court ruling which shouldnt have been made at all, was totally incomptehensible even to lawyers, and was explicitly stated as being a situational, non-president setting ruling (the last of which they have no grounds to say, since the judicial system is all about president; that is an issue for future cases to decide).
I realise some of those examples are criminal cases, but it doesnt matter: its symptomatic of the whole system. Im sure there are tons of other examples of cases with no merit at all still winning or having to be settled. Unfortunately, the facts have very little to do with our American "Justice" system.
I did recommend Dell, and I still do. I would rather have them buy a quality computer than some junk from Toshiba, HP, IBM, etc or thru Best Buy or CompUSA.
Dell is doing this for legal reasons: especially when anti-spyware companies are getting sued for calling a spyware company "Spyware".
Besides, if somebody I know gets a computer, what they hell are they calling Dell's phone support for? I dont know about you, but the people I know recognize me as an expert on computers. Perhaps if the people you know dont, its because you arent.
Um, are you fucking stupid? Did you even read the article? Debian's security breach ring any bells? Is having their servers hacked "in the wild" enough for you?
What a moron! No wonder you were too much of a pussy to post with your account!
The official release from MS (not the specials for corporate customers or MSDN subscribers) is bare.
And I care about the home user why?
Note that the Spb release I saw was from the local pirates. I know this because who else would bundle Office-XP on the same disk?
Um, ya, its really hard to copy the OEM cd and put the office install directory in there. Also, just as an example of what of a know-nothing you are, I found this for you. So you can quit spreading your whiny stuipd "M$ doesnt bundle the SP, the hackers do" FUD.
Its called Windows Update. You can also schedule it; but you already knew that, seeing how you are such an expert on what MS products can and cant do.
Can I download and compile XP in a secure environment?
I dont know; I guess it depends on how secure your environment is... MS isnt responsible for that. you seem to THINK your environment is pretty secure, but I cant say I have EVER heard of an exploit in the NT kernel which allowed somebody to compromise the system. So apparently you are less secure than you are trying to claim.
Was it ever compiled in a secure environment? Probably not because MS actively discourages quality and security because it compromises their bottom line
and you know this because you worked there, right? Otherwise you are just blathering stupid, ignorant nonsense.
which is why I can't extract the worlds most buggy browser from the operating system without a major headache
Oh, you mean Mozilla?. Or perhaps you were refering to Nutscrape... um, I mean Netscape? Or were you, by chance, refering to Opera? You need to be a little less vague. Actually, I have never used any of those, so I cant account for how shitty their uninstall programs are (aside from seeing how shitty their application security is).
True I believe Moz gives you an Email client as well but Moz's Email client is flawed by outlook standard - no arbitrary execution of code.
Oh really? Seems the open source community is trying to keep pace... BTW, I routinely remove Outlook Express from every server I set up, and its well documented, and pretty easy to find if you actually get off your lazy ass and look for it... but its so much easier to just complain!
Give me their raw kernel, and I mnight be able to make a secure system, but not with the crap they ship with it.
Somehow, I find it hard to believe that you alone are way better than all the programmers they have working on this stuff at MS. What OS kernels have YOU developed, again? BTW, I did a little looking, and the only kernel exploits were corrected on Feb. 9 and Apr. 4-5 of 2002. Otherwise, no kernel exploits. So much for the claim that open source produces better quality. If you are so bloody good, why didnt you find this, any of these... or maybe some of this or that, or the other thing???
As fordue dilligence, you are probably aware of it as a clapped out VC buzzword.
Unlike yourself, who apparently brags that he can deploy servers right after loading the os (which updates to current with the patches, whoopy do! It saves you a tiny amount of time!). Maybe Im too conservative; I like to test my hardware and applications prior to deployment. But then again, Im not fixing the linux kernel and all those buggy web browsers in my spare time, either, so maybe I just have more free time than yourself....oh wait, you arent fixing them either...
You start with a policy defining data and service avail
Ah, I see. Apparently you suffer from the delusion that Gentoo is some security promised land. Psst.. your buffer overflows and arbitrary code executions are showing...
Also, I dont consider an 'installation' complete until I have installed, configured, and tested the server anyway. I dont see that any other OS is going to save me significant time on that, since testing really has little to do with the OS: the exact mechanism is just a detail. Its called "due dilligence"- you should try it some time!
It appears like all Microsofties you are deeply confused as to what constitutes an operating system.
Well, moron, we were talking Microsoft, which is a company (not an operating system). Also mentioned were IE, Outlook, IIS, etc. Last time I checked, THOSE werent operating systems either. It appears that like all true idiots, you are deeply confused as to what constitutes reading comprehension.
LOL, where do you think they got those pirated copies? You HONESTLY believe the pirates were the ones who put in the patches?
I dont know specifically about the XP situation, since I mainly work on servers (and thus Win2k), but every time I get a new server, we get a disc with the latest SP inside for Win2k server. So I would imagine the OEM versions are always at the latest and greatest. Its just so much easier to do things like that when you dont have to put out a boxed product- send the new disc and thats it!
As far as liability, the only people taking stupidity like that are lawyers, who need to stir up bullshit to make more money. Even the class action suits only made money for the lawyers, so dont act like these guys are so altruistic.
Doh!! Ya, I guess that could be a wrinkle in his plan. Oh well, nothing ever changes around here. When people have nothing intelligent to say, they like to say it on Slashdot.
As a matter of fact I AM an MCSE. Your assumptions are certainly not sound. You assume my dislike of windows and belief in it's instability are based on ignorance. You are wrong, they are based on experience and extensive knowledge.
Then I have to assume you just arent very good. Because, as I keep saying, there are lots of people building stable Windows servers and networks. Ive done it many times, so I know it can be done, and its not just a fluke.
A crimper on the other hand is used by REAL network technicians to secure literally hundreds of connections every day. Even 1 weak crimp could destroy your 99.999% uptime in an office. I'd argue it's one of the single most likely points of failure in the network.
If the most they know is that you can fill in a blank with an ip for domain x, www.domain, ftp.domain, and there is a spot for making sure mail.domain works then they DO NOT know DNS, they merely understand the CONCEPT of dns. Like a gun, understanding the concept is NOT knowing enough to be trusted to use it.
So in other workds, if you cant debug source code, you shouldnt be allowed to do data entry on a word processor. Nice analogy. How about people who admin things can do admin, and people who engineer things can fix problems when they arise? Nice division of labor, isnt it? I dont think people getting paid over $70k/year should be stuck doing hours of data entry work, but thats just my opinion. Oh ya, and also the opinion of MS, apparently. Try coming up with a valid point next time, thanks for playing.
You ASSUME I'm basing my judgements on office personel, implying secretaries, etc
You were the one who lumped them in with phone support people. I just said that I automatically disqualify somebody's opinion (yourself, in this case) who bases a company's tech knowledge on phone support people; you were just looking for a way to say that MS is stupid, and said something stupid. Just admit it and move on, because you arent fooling me, and most likely nobody else is reading this tripe.
Yup they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. The only way out of that of course is to bundle a WORKING driver. A linux system is ALOT closer to plug and play, you plug hardware in, you boot, it detects it.
I would reply to that, but Im laughing so hard I can barely type. I hope you dont honestly believe that crap you are trying to claim as true.
Denial is nice isn't it? It was actually XP he was refering to. You don't count downtime for patches as outages? I do. I consider a reboot to reset the clock. Patches don't generally take a unix system down.
No, I consider an outage to be when the system crashes, stops responing, etc. Since the majority of places arent 24/7, staying late one or two nights a month after hours isnt a big deal. BTW, MS is making no reboot patches, but since you claim to be an MCSE I guess you already knew that... didnt you? BTW, how were you talking about XP? They dont have XP servers...
You don't exactly have much flexibility in terms of controlling what users do in 2k/XP.
Speak for yourself. I can control anything I want to on *my* networks.
You avoid those problems in the OS by working around them and choosing applications which don't make the system calls that go haywire. That's cheating. It's on the desktop that you find out what is broken in an OS. There are users misconfiguring, that's one thing, and then there is the OS breaking in response to a user action (shouldn't happen).
Nice bullshit. If anyone were reading it here, Im sure you would get modded up. However, just spewing metaphysical bullshit is too light on details. I dont see anything about using the OS and having it spontaneously combust like you are talking of. Just because I wo
Slashdot Mirror
Anyway, we purchased the autoloader, and it worked fine for about a month, at which point the tape drive stopped being recognized as a valid device. So, after troubleshooting and contacting Dell, they sent out another one. The one they shipped had the wrong drive =( so they sent another one. This one was DOA. They sent ANOTHER one, and sent a tech with it. Now, the nice thing is that this whole episode only took three days, since they sent each of them next day.
Anyway, the tech (which I really didnt need) didnt make it (they use Unisys in this area, but I dont like them; their service is either really good or really bad, depending on who you get), and generally wasted more of my limited time, so they sent someone else the next day, who put it all together and in the rack for me, whoopie do. I still had to do the server work. Anyway, it worked for three more months, and the second tape bay kept reporting it was occupied (a big problem when it tried to replace that tape after recording to it). So, replaced again. I dont work there anymore, but I heard two months ago it had the exact same issue. Oh well. I did document how to work around it for them, so at least it didnt mess up the backup schedule after the problem was identified.
So the moral of my story is that all hardware (especially specialty hardware like autoloaders) are prone to manufacturing defects; especially with computers, you have to make allowances when you realize hundreds of thousands of these parts are made; if you take the stance of never putting any trust in your equipment, you get the best frame of mind for effective disaster recovery methods and engineering in redundancies. Its more expensive, but IT is all about protecting the information; hardware can be replaced easier and at lest cost than that information.
As anybody who actually has an informed opinion knows, there are essentially no more/less security issues with Windows than with any other OS; the fact that you (and many other people) make that claim is just indicitive of how 'informed' your opinion is.
As for ideological issues, that is really their own problem. Look at the subject line to see what Im talking about... But my point is that a technological issue should be solved by choosing what is best for the task, not some foolish, ill-concieved 'holy war' ideology.
There are standards in technology for a reason
Thats right, there are. And MS has consistant standards between all their products. If you had an informed opinion, you would know the issue isnt no standards, but that those standards werent reached with outside concensus. MS creates their own standards, and uses them in their products, but is not beholden to an outside group telling them what they can and cant do. This is actually a benefit for them, because it allows them to set their own pace (popular concensus takes a long time, look at DVD, DDR RAM, etc. for examples of problems with this). Also, these standards bodies tend to be highly contrarian to MS, so why be part of something which is just going to be used for politics rather than getting problems solved?
MS is just going the capitalistic route, and letting the market decide the technology. Since the market is choosing MS products, it seems they are making correct decisions somewhere...
Since MS won't open up, then Linux has to do whatever it takes to open them up.
It is not Linux's place (or even their goal, since this is just you ranting) to change how MS does things. MS has interoperability with other NOS's without having to resort to theft; it would be nice to see Linux follow in their footsteps. However, since Open Source is based upon flagrant usage of unoriginal materials (which sometimes includes outright theft), its just a different mentality.
THIS IS A GOOD THING. It is keeping the competition even
First off, Linux isnt 'in competition' with MS. Even Torvalds has said this; the fact that people are making this a holy war is just their own stupidity hijacking his operating system. Second, I dont see how outright theft of MS's driver is a good thing. As I keep repeating like a mantra, if they need Linux to work with NTFS, they need to write their own driver rather than stealing MS's.
What don't you get about that?
I guess your ethics regarding theft are more flexible than mine. I generally try and live my life according to principles.
Who knows, maybe that is the point? I cant see that licensing out FAT would generate significant amounts of money, but since that is an unresearched statement, it could very well be wrong.
You can go to Dell's site, type in an ID number on the PC (or just reference the model number), and it will give you a list of all the hardware they put in that line (or, with the ID, it will tell you what is most likely in there; sometimes there are a few for the same thing, like a NIC or modem).
Compaq USED TO have the best support site, but HP screwed them up like I figured they would. Now they are ~okay~, I guess, but not as good as it used to be. Everyone else, yech.
The problem, in a nutshell, is that computers in the stores (CompUSA, Best Buy, etc) are consumer-level. They have better, business-level, computers they sell to different outlets. But the consumer-level computers use junky parts, buggy drivers, bad memory, etc. They are just made to milk a thin profit margin, not to be reliable.
Since Dell doesnt have to deal with the expenses of a supply chain to brick-and-mortar stores (and that supply chain is VERY expensive: warehousing, shipping, salesforce, contracts, lawyers, coordination, advertising, shelf space, etc), they can use quality parts and still make a profit.
Dell also uses standard motherboards, cases, etc. You are likely getting a Western Digital or Seagate HD, a good CD-Rom, etc.
Troubleshoot, then call tech support.
I enjoy working with computers. If you dont, maybe you are in the wrong line of work. At the best, you could at least give them good advice, like paying extra to have Dell send an on-site person.
Also, as somebody who used to fix hardware, Ive had many times where it works on the test bench then stops working later. Also, sometimes you cant reproduce the problem. Also, sometimes parts break in transit (despite the 'fragile' tag...)
For example, I had a good laptop, but there was some strangeness with the hard drive which caused it to sometimes lock up during boot-up. So, I looked into all the things that could be causing it, and when I figured out it was the HD, I called Dell, they sent me a new one, I used Ghost to xfer the data, and sent the bad one back. Very easy.
I also had a problem with the CD-Rom, and exchanged that as well. But the problem is that people with no diagnostic skills call up Tech Support and expect someone else to magically divine what is wrong. Have you ever done phone support? I occasionally have to when people are out in the field; it gets escalated to me because either an onsite tech is stumped, or a VIP has an issue. And, even talking to somebody who is technically competent, its pretty hard.
2. tell people to buy their printers from somebody besides Dell. Maybe you should look at the quality of the machine? No, that would be too difficult.
Let see i recall the time that i had a dead *clicking* harddrive and the tech wanted me to boot to a dos floppy to attempt to access the NTFS formatted hard drive. All of these things i made him aware of. i left the receiver on the clicking drive for 5 minutes while i wasted time making up the dos floppy he requested. this is but one of a number of unpleasant and unproductive support calls to dell.
So tell them you tried other methods already, or just lie. BTW, you should have just booted to an NT cd. If the partition utility (or even FDISK, actually) can see the partition, it could be something else. Heck, go to GRC.com and get "SpinRight"; it will will warn you *before* your hard drive goes bad.
Anyway, I could care less what you do, I dont own Dell stock. But unless somebody rolls their own, I tell them to use Dell; they are the best of the brand name machines, IMO, and I see a lot of different machines.
Anyway, its a shame that people need to focus so much on a spelling error than the point.
Its not dumb, its just not what you want to hear. As my title says, its using a screwdriver as a hammer. If you want to run something under Windows, run it in Windows instead of clunking it into an OS which it wasnt made for. Its amazing how several people I know run Linux, but all their software is running with WINE (and pretty poorly at that).
SAMBA is needed for similar reasons. People need to share with Windows.
As I said, SAMBA is needed because Linux isnt very good as a NOS. Netware doesnt need SAMBA, because it is a good NOS.
Same deal with NTFS. This is not about taking anything from Windows.
Really? It seems like it is at least taking the ntfs.sys- as I said, they cant get their second-tier operating system to work with Windows, so they have to keep borrowing parts of it for their own OS.
MS doesn't seem to believe in open standards so this process is necessary.
And why should MS use open standards ON THEIR OWN OPERATING SYSTEM? MS isnt telling the Linux community what they can and cant do on their OS, so why does the Linux community feel they should be able to tell MS's engineers what they should and shouldnt do? The big problem with free speach is that people tend to keep very deep seated, stupid opinions. Even the truth cannot convince them.
One person screams that Linux will never win out because there is not 100% interoperation between Windows and Linux. Then when interoperation is attempted someone screams about ripping Windows off.
Um, maybe thats because they ARE ripping Windows off? If they are such scarry good programmers, why do they need to use MS's ntfs.sys? Let them make their own driver! Basically, they are just admitting they cant do it, so they need to 'borrow' somebody else's work to get their task accomplished.
Thats kind of the problem with Open Source programmers- if they cant borrow somebody else's work, they are lost. Put them in a room with a computer and a programming reference book, and they cant do shit. Im by no means the world's best programmer, but put me in the same situation and I can put together something decent. Its just a different mentality- one needs to use the work of others, and the other is able to make their own solutions.
,i> Get over it and make up your mind already.
Given a similiar situation, I will say the same thing every time. If interop with Windows is so important, maybe they are using the wrong OS. I dont see Windows people crying that they cant run Mac or Linux software.
And 'of course' they are going to use an ntfs.sys which is on their licensed copy of Windows... Im sure they wouldnt dare get it off a warez site...
Hmm, I actually think I will do that. It seems like stealing, but its really not!
Opps, I meant to say judicial "precident", not president. Damn you, Freud!
Also, be nice. Dont set that password filter too agressive. I usually dont allow the user's first name or last name as a pwd, nor their department or the name of the company. It also checks for a few other common stupid passwords (1234, password, etc.), but otherwise its fair game.
I would rather have them using their cat's name than have that damn post-it!
I realise some of those examples are criminal cases, but it doesnt matter: its symptomatic of the whole system. Im sure there are tons of other examples of cases with no merit at all still winning or having to be settled. Unfortunately, the facts have very little to do with our American "Justice" system.
Dell is doing this for legal reasons: especially when anti-spyware companies are getting sued for calling a spyware company "Spyware".
Besides, if somebody I know gets a computer, what they hell are they calling Dell's phone support for? I dont know about you, but the people I know recognize me as an expert on computers. Perhaps if the people you know dont, its because you arent.
What a moron! No wonder you were too much of a pussy to post with your account!
And I care about the home user why?
Note that the Spb release I saw was from the local pirates. I know this because who else would bundle Office-XP on the same disk?
Um, ya, its really hard to copy the OEM cd and put the office install directory in there. Also, just as an example of what of a know-nothing you are, I found this for you. So you can quit spreading your whiny stuipd "M$ doesnt bundle the SP, the hackers do" FUD.
Its called Windows Update. You can also schedule it; but you already knew that, seeing how you are such an expert on what MS products can and cant do.
Can I download and compile XP in a secure environment?
I dont know; I guess it depends on how secure your environment is... MS isnt responsible for that. you seem to THINK your environment is pretty secure, but I cant say I have EVER heard of an exploit in the NT kernel which allowed somebody to compromise the system. So apparently you are less secure than you are trying to claim.
Was it ever compiled in a secure environment? Probably not because MS actively discourages quality and security because it compromises their bottom line
and you know this because you worked there, right? Otherwise you are just blathering stupid, ignorant nonsense.
which is why I can't extract the worlds most buggy browser from the operating system without a major headache
Oh, you mean Mozilla?. Or perhaps you were refering to Nutscrape... um, I mean Netscape? Or were you, by chance, refering to Opera? You need to be a little less vague. Actually, I have never used any of those, so I cant account for how shitty their uninstall programs are (aside from seeing how shitty their application security is).
True I believe Moz gives you an Email client as well but Moz's Email client is flawed by outlook standard - no arbitrary execution of code.
Oh really? Seems the open source community is trying to keep pace... BTW, I routinely remove Outlook Express from every server I set up, and its well documented, and pretty easy to find if you actually get off your lazy ass and look for it... but its so much easier to just complain!
Give me their raw kernel, and I mnight be able to make a secure system, but not with the crap they ship with it.
Somehow, I find it hard to believe that you alone are way better than all the programmers they have working on this stuff at MS. What OS kernels have YOU developed, again? BTW, I did a little looking, and the only kernel exploits were corrected on Feb. 9 and Apr. 4-5 of 2002. Otherwise, no kernel exploits. So much for the claim that open source produces better quality. If you are so bloody good, why didnt you find this, any of these... or maybe some of this or that, or the other thing???
As fordue dilligence, you are probably aware of it as a clapped out VC buzzword.
Unlike yourself, who apparently brags that he can deploy servers right after loading the os (which updates to current with the patches, whoopy do! It saves you a tiny amount of time!). Maybe Im too conservative; I like to test my hardware and applications prior to deployment. But then again, Im not fixing the linux kernel and all those buggy web browsers in my spare time, either, so maybe I just have more free time than yourself. ...oh wait, you arent fixing them either...
You start with a policy defining data and service avail
Ah, another linux kernel exploit. I sure am glad Im running Windows!
Also, I dont consider an 'installation' complete until I have installed, configured, and tested the server anyway. I dont see that any other OS is going to save me significant time on that, since testing really has little to do with the OS: the exact mechanism is just a detail. Its called "due dilligence"- you should try it some time!
It appears like all Microsofties you are deeply confused as to what constitutes an operating system.
Well, moron, we were talking Microsoft, which is a company (not an operating system). Also mentioned were IE, Outlook, IIS, etc. Last time I checked, THOSE werent operating systems either. It appears that like all true idiots, you are deeply confused as to what constitutes reading comprehension.
I dont know specifically about the XP situation, since I mainly work on servers (and thus Win2k), but every time I get a new server, we get a disc with the latest SP inside for Win2k server. So I would imagine the OEM versions are always at the latest and greatest. Its just so much easier to do things like that when you dont have to put out a boxed product- send the new disc and thats it!
As far as liability, the only people taking stupidity like that are lawyers, who need to stir up bullshit to make more money. Even the class action suits only made money for the lawyers, so dont act like these guys are so altruistic.
Likewise with OSX, Unix, Opera, Sendmail [oh lord, Sendmail... possibly the most deeply flawed piece of software ever...], Mozilla, etc.
Then I have to assume you just arent very good. Because, as I keep saying, there are lots of people building stable Windows servers and networks. Ive done it many times, so I know it can be done, and its not just a fluke.
A crimper on the other hand is used by REAL network technicians to secure literally hundreds of connections every day. Even 1 weak crimp could destroy your 99.999% uptime in an office. I'd argue it's one of the single most likely points of failure in the network.
Cat-5 Cable, $.50/foot. Crimp connectors, $.10 each. Crimp tool, $7.50. Checking your work, priceless.
If the most they know is that you can fill in a blank with an ip for domain x, www.domain, ftp.domain, and there is a spot for making sure mail.domain works then they DO NOT know DNS, they merely understand the CONCEPT of dns. Like a gun, understanding the concept is NOT knowing enough to be trusted to use it.
So in other workds, if you cant debug source code, you shouldnt be allowed to do data entry on a word processor. Nice analogy. How about people who admin things can do admin, and people who engineer things can fix problems when they arise? Nice division of labor, isnt it? I dont think people getting paid over $70k/year should be stuck doing hours of data entry work, but thats just my opinion. Oh ya, and also the opinion of MS, apparently. Try coming up with a valid point next time, thanks for playing.
You ASSUME I'm basing my judgements on office personel, implying secretaries, etc
You were the one who lumped them in with phone support people. I just said that I automatically disqualify somebody's opinion (yourself, in this case) who bases a company's tech knowledge on phone support people; you were just looking for a way to say that MS is stupid, and said something stupid. Just admit it and move on, because you arent fooling me, and most likely nobody else is reading this tripe.
Yup they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. The only way out of that of course is to bundle a WORKING driver. A linux system is ALOT closer to plug and play, you plug hardware in, you boot, it detects it.
I would reply to that, but Im laughing so hard I can barely type. I hope you dont honestly believe that crap you are trying to claim as true.
Denial is nice isn't it? It was actually XP he was refering to. You don't count downtime for patches as outages? I do. I consider a reboot to reset the clock. Patches don't generally take a unix system down.
No, I consider an outage to be when the system crashes, stops responing, etc. Since the majority of places arent 24/7, staying late one or two nights a month after hours isnt a big deal. BTW, MS is making no reboot patches, but since you claim to be an MCSE I guess you already knew that... didnt you? BTW, how were you talking about XP? They dont have XP servers...
You don't exactly have much flexibility in terms of controlling what users do in 2k/XP.
Speak for yourself. I can control anything I want to on *my* networks.
You avoid those problems in the OS by working around them and choosing applications which don't make the system calls that go haywire. That's cheating. It's on the desktop that you find out what is broken in an OS. There are users misconfiguring, that's one thing, and then there is the OS breaking in response to a user action (shouldn't happen).
Nice bullshit. If anyone were reading it here, Im sure you would get modded up. However, just spewing metaphysical bullshit is too light on details. I dont see anything about using the OS and having it spontaneously combust like you are talking of. Just because I wo