Ok, I see how that's a great technical feat, but how is this any different? If I suspect a machine at work I wipe it. If it's a friend asking for help, and there are tons of settings I can't easily copy, I use a LiveCD and hope for the best. The illusion of real-time scanners and programs like AdAware passed a long time ago.
Unless the virus flashes the BIOS (kudoz to the writer), the LiveCD should still be able to track it down, right? Provided the signature is known of course. I don't see how this changes anything?
This move makes perfect sense from a business perspective if you ask me.
Google is coming up with a lot of products for different mobile agents, including cellphones. These devices cannot query Wikipedia easily, and neither does Google want them to. Why go to Wikipedia.org when Google will give you that result for you anyway? Mobile users are also used to paying for stuff, internet users in general are not.
Google would benefit in several ways: 1) Reliability. They will know Wikipedia's servers will be up and running 24/7. Even when the site is mentioned on/.. Google probably has a pretty good index already, and could conceivably get a database-dump. However, if Google is going to rely on these data in the future they probably want to give the Wikipedia developers an incentive to not change tings too much. At the same time, providing MSNBot with at 9.6k connection.... 2) Better access to the data. I do not think that the people at Google are stupid enough to rip Wikipedia off and present the material as their own. However, having local access to the database would be a huge plus. 3) More users for both Wikipedia and Google. Wikipedia would receive a larger audience, Google would attract Wikipedia fans. This could be a powerful combination against MSN Search / Encarta. 4) Direct access to the database could also have other benefits. It may be possible to check the quality of 3rd party website by comparing notes, but this is just speculation on my part.
Maybe the hardcore engineer doesn't need it, but the company does!
If you have a serious network then that information is too vital (to the company) to be stored in the head of one person.
What if he/she retires? What if something bad happens? Do you get a whiteboard and start from scratch to figure out how these wires are supposed to be connected and why?
disclaimer: I work for a national distributor of these products, but probably not in your area
If you have a budget you can go for Physical Network Inventory or Logical Network Inventory by GE Network Solutions (formerly known as Smallworld), http://www.gepower.com/dhtml/network_solutions/en_ us/communication/physical_logicalnetwork.jsp/
These applications are used by some big telecom companies and model the network (physically and logically) down to single ports on switches. You can also have multiple people work on the same design, trace errors, check redundancy etc. It will probably read your autocad files too.
A good chunk of the source code is included, but I believe these applications only run on Win32 at the moment (the underlying system also runs on Linux, Solaris and HPUX).
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, I see how that's a great technical feat, but how is this any different? If I suspect a machine at work I wipe it. If it's a friend asking for help, and there are tons of settings I can't easily copy, I use a LiveCD and hope for the best. The illusion of real-time scanners and programs like AdAware passed a long time ago. Unless the virus flashes the BIOS (kudoz to the writer), the LiveCD should still be able to track it down, right? Provided the signature is known of course. I don't see how this changes anything?
This move makes perfect sense from a business perspective if you ask me.
/.. Google probably has a pretty good index already, and could conceivably get a database-dump. However, if Google is going to rely on these data in the future they probably want to give the Wikipedia developers an incentive to not change tings too much. At the same time, providing MSNBot with at 9.6k connection....
Google is coming up with a lot of products for different mobile agents, including cellphones. These devices cannot query Wikipedia easily, and neither does Google want them to. Why go to Wikipedia.org when Google will give you that result for you anyway? Mobile users are also used to paying for stuff, internet users in general are not.
Google would benefit in several ways:
1) Reliability. They will know Wikipedia's servers will be up and running 24/7. Even when the site is mentioned on
2) Better access to the data. I do not think that the people at Google are stupid enough to rip Wikipedia off and present the material as their own. However, having local access to the database would be a huge plus.
3) More users for both Wikipedia and Google. Wikipedia would receive a larger audience, Google would attract Wikipedia fans. This could be a powerful combination against MSN Search / Encarta.
4) Direct access to the database could also have other benefits. It may be possible to check the quality of 3rd party website by comparing notes, but this is just speculation on my part.
Maybe the hardcore engineer doesn't need it, but the company does!
If you have a serious network then that information is too vital (to the company) to be stored in the head of one person.
What if he/she retires? What if something bad happens? Do you get a whiteboard and start from scratch to figure out how these wires are supposed to be connected and why?
eh.. accidently hit the return key while writing the heading ; )
disclaimer: I work for a national distributor of these products, but probably not in your area If you have a budget you can go for Physical Network Inventory or Logical Network Inventory by GE Network Solutions (formerly known as Smallworld), http://www.gepower.com/dhtml/network_solutions/en_ us/communication/physical_logicalnetwork.jsp/
These applications are used by some big telecom companies and model the network (physically and logically) down to single ports on switches. You can also have multiple people work on the same design, trace errors, check redundancy etc. It will probably read your autocad files too.
A good chunk of the source code is included, but I believe these applications only run on Win32 at the moment (the underlying system also runs on Linux, Solaris and HPUX).