Here in the UK you rarely see bumper stickers, yet road rage is not exactly rare. So I don't really see the correlation. Having said that, whenever I see the Jesus fish on the back of a car, I do want to run it off the road on general principle. But maybe that's just me.
and the cigarette companies should "educate" smokers that they're probably going to die prematurely. Well over here in the UK, they do just that. Granted they've been forced to by government legislation, but nevertheless, you can't buy a packet of cigarettes with a message on it saying you're going to die horribly, or something similar.
Ummm, were you off-world last month when enough people had trouble with Vista SP1 MS recalled it? Stop repeating bullshit. SP1 was never released. The recall was a patch that prepared systems for SP1 via software updates. FFS, this has been repeated ad nauseum.
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. If person A needs access to some files, and person B must not have access, whatever mechanism is used must be able to differentiate between the two when those files are requested. How do we stop person B imitating person A? Maybe the examples on wikipedia are poorly written, but it still looks like it needs authentication to me.
Interesting, but I still don't see how that makes authentication unnecessary, at best it just seems another name for it. And I don't really see how it's applicable to everyday tasks such as, for example, access control on buildings or online banking.
Authentication is a broken concept. Anybody who knows anything about security knows this. Focusing on authorization, not authentication, is the only way to secure anything. How can your authorize something, unless you know who you're authorizing? The two go hand in hand, I can't see how you can have one without the other.
I could probably code that search engine extension myself - I've played a bit with creating Firefox extensions, and it's quite easy to rewrite the entire UI. What can I offer you to do that? Seriously. It's the single thing that's kept me with Mozilla all these years, but like you I have to keep switching to Firefox for things like Firebug. Why they thought it was a good idea to have yet another text entry box is beyond me. So, name your price Sir!:)
Huh? What do you need documentation for Vmware for? I've been using it for years and never used the docs. I'm talking about VMWare ESX Server. I hope to hell you're not, because if you've installed it and are running it without having read any documentation, you're in for a world of hurt one day.
It's contradictory. For example, the upgrade notes for 3.5 states that MCS isn't supported. However, other documentation in the 3.5 series are full of references to MCS and how to set it up. There is another instance where it says only Physical RDM's work with clustering, but yet another piece of documentation where it states both Physical and Virtual RDM's will work. There are numerous examples along these lines.
Some of the documentation on setting up Windows clustering is also just plain wrong. I get the impression that the documentation was written by the guys that wrote the code, but no review process was in place to check for consistency or correctness, and it was just chucked out when the software was released.
You're probably right. But that most definitely won't be the case with Microsoft's documentation. Windows is a reasonably large market for VMWare, even though they seem to be doing a pretty poor job of supporting it properly.
But currently it looks like it's the last 5% that actually depend on, and use virtualisation. The rest just want an internet browser, and something to sync their ipods to.
We're talking about servers here. Essential infrastructure for any business large or small. What the hell have ipods and browsers got to do with it?
Microsoft will do what they always do, bring out something that is good enough for 95% of people, 95% of the time. They'll leave the finer points to third parties. It'll be good enough for most places running Windows only networks.
There appear to be several virtualisation platforms appearing on the Linux side. I haven't used Xen myself, as when we were moving to virtualisation it didn't have the capabilities or support that VMWare did.
Unless VMware gets its act together it's going to lose market share pretty quickly. The documentation is awful. Just. Fucking. Awful. There's tons of it to be sure, but it's contradictory, badly written, confusing and downright wrong in places.
Ultimately I think Microsoft's hypervisor will become the default for Windows, and one of the others for Linux. VMware will become a niche product.
Microsoft would love it if the desktops and servers in any given office only ran Windows. the problem is that the same admins will be administering gear such as routers that quite decidedly don't, never will, and need SSH for proper security, etc. So, tell me, why is it's Microsoft's responsibility to supply you with tools to administer non-Microsoft systems? We're talking about an ssh client for fuck sake. It takes two minutes to track down and install one. If you're not capable of that, you certainly shouldn't be administering routers.
Sorry, I misread the original post as a complaint that Windows didn't have an ssh server, rather than a client, which didn't make much sense to me. In that case, I agree that it's an oversight, but hardly anything worth getting worked up about. It takes a couple of minutes to install something like Putty.
None of Microsoft's software requires SSH to administer, so why would they bother supplying it? Given that everyone complains bitterly about Microsoft bundling software with its OS, I find it amusing that they're now complaining it doesn't.
You are asking people to pay hundreds of dollars for your product, but out of the box it is crippled. Why is it crippled? I've never needed to ssh to a Windows server, nor has my colleague who has been administering Windows servers for 10+ years.
I just use the Remote Desktops app, which has all our servers listed. One click and a password and I have a console with a GUI, allowing me to do any administration tasks I need. Plus with the admin pack you can do a whole bunch of tasks straight from your workstation. Why would ssh make this process any easier?
Anyone who trusts Microsoft after the past two decades of dirty behavior is a fool. You could say the same thing about IBM, but that hasn't stopped a whole bunch of Linux users proclaiming them to be the best thing since sliced bread. Different strokes etc.
Absolutely. Nothing wrong with constructive criticism. I was just trying to say that anyone that mails you to tell you your code is shit without offering any helpful advice is at best a juvenile arsehole and should just be ignored.
I agree. I was somewhat worried when I put my first code out there, but once you take the plunge it's really not that bad. I remember a guy mailing me with a patch to replace a really dumb subroutine (this was a Perl script) with a one liner. He was very polite and helpful about it, considering how awful it must have looked to him. And he took the time to submit the patch, which makes all the difference.
Just do it. It's highly unlikely anyone will laugh at you. Anyone that has spent time to read through your code is unlikely to be so juvenile as to mail you just to point out how bad it is.
Of course, it may be ignored by all but a few people. Some of my stuff certainly has been. But those few people that have used it have mailed me to say how helpful it has been to them. Even if you just help one person, thats one person more than if you'd left it sitting on your hard drive. Getting that single thank you mail can really give you the warm fuzzies.
It's also interesting to see where it might end up being used. I've had people that use my stuff at NASA, the Pentagon and even Disney. Have code, will travel!:)
Other system requirements include a DVD drive, built-in FireWire, at least 512MB of RAM (additional recommended), and at least 9GB of hard disk space. Okay, I get the requirement for a DVD, a minimum amount of memory and hard disk space, but why the buggery fuck does an OS require FireWire?! Surely this is bollocks? Or is it just that any Mac that meets the other requirements will have FireWire anyway? I don't get it.
That's part of what (clearly) annoys Stallman about Torvalds. Stallman's making this huge principled stand for freedom, and all Torvalds really cares about is his kernel. I don't really think that's the case. Torvalds and Stallman obviously disagree on some things, but to say Linus doesn't care about freedom is frankly nonsense. He chose GPL2 because he wanted the kernel to be free. He's just of the opinion that GPL2 does what it needs to, and Stallman isn't. That's Linus' right, and it's certainly a stance that others share.
Besides which, what makes Stallman's direction the right one? I respect what he's done for the Open Source/Free Software community (yes, that's a big bone of contention right there), but that doesn't mean he gets to dictate the future. It's taken on a life of it's own now, and it'll go it's own way. The avalanche has started. It's too late for the pebbles to vote.
You don't have to as long as the TV is not tunable to terrestrial broadcasts. In practice, you'd probably get hounded for years, especially if you used to have a license and then stopped having one. Frankly I'd happily pay twice as much for the license as I think the BBC do a damn good job of producing quality programs (Eastenders excepted of course).
Slashdot Mirror
Here in the UK you rarely see bumper stickers, yet road rage is not exactly rare. So I don't really see the correlation. Having said that, whenever I see the Jesus fish on the back of a car, I do want to run it off the road on general principle. But maybe that's just me.
FSM = Flying Spagehetti Monster. Do a little research. It was a joke. Wow.
Meh, I'm positive that the FSM put it there, to test our faith in his noodly appendages. Life on another planet?! Preposterous!
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. If person A needs access to some files, and person B must not have access, whatever mechanism is used must be able to differentiate between the two when those files are requested. How do we stop person B imitating person A? Maybe the examples on wikipedia are poorly written, but it still looks like it needs authentication to me.
Interesting, but I still don't see how that makes authentication unnecessary, at best it just seems another name for it. And I don't really see how it's applicable to everyday tasks such as, for example, access control on buildings or online banking.
It's contradictory. For example, the upgrade notes for 3.5 states that MCS isn't supported. However, other documentation in the 3.5 series are full of references to MCS and how to set it up. There is another instance where it says only Physical RDM's work with clustering, but yet another piece of documentation where it states both Physical and Virtual RDM's will work. There are numerous examples along these lines.
Some of the documentation on setting up Windows clustering is also just plain wrong. I get the impression that the documentation was written by the guys that wrote the code, but no review process was in place to check for consistency or correctness, and it was just chucked out when the software was released.
You're probably right. But that most definitely won't be the case with Microsoft's documentation. Windows is a reasonably large market for VMWare, even though they seem to be doing a pretty poor job of supporting it properly.
But currently it looks like it's the last 5% that actually depend on, and use virtualisation. The rest just want an internet browser, and something to sync their ipods to.
We're talking about servers here. Essential infrastructure for any business large or small. What the hell have ipods and browsers got to do with it?
Microsoft will do what they always do, bring out something that is good enough for 95% of people, 95% of the time. They'll leave the finer points to third parties. It'll be good enough for most places running Windows only networks.
There appear to be several virtualisation platforms appearing on the Linux side. I haven't used Xen myself, as when we were moving to virtualisation it didn't have the capabilities or support that VMWare did.
Unless VMware gets its act together it's going to lose market share pretty quickly. The documentation is awful. Just. Fucking. Awful. There's tons of it to be sure, but it's contradictory, badly written, confusing and downright wrong in places.
Ultimately I think Microsoft's hypervisor will become the default for Windows, and one of the others for Linux. VMware will become a niche product.
Sorry, I misread the original post as a complaint that Windows didn't have an ssh server, rather than a client, which didn't make much sense to me. In that case, I agree that it's an oversight, but hardly anything worth getting worked up about. It takes a couple of minutes to install something like Putty.
None of Microsoft's software requires SSH to administer, so why would they bother supplying it? Given that everyone complains bitterly about Microsoft bundling software with its OS, I find it amusing that they're now complaining it doesn't.
I just use the Remote Desktops app, which has all our servers listed. One click and a password and I have a console with a GUI, allowing me to do any administration tasks I need. Plus with the admin pack you can do a whole bunch of tasks straight from your workstation. Why would ssh make this process any easier?
Absolutely. Nothing wrong with constructive criticism. I was just trying to say that anyone that mails you to tell you your code is shit without offering any helpful advice is at best a juvenile arsehole and should just be ignored.
I agree. I was somewhat worried when I put my first code out there, but once you take the plunge it's really not that bad. I remember a guy mailing me with a patch to replace a really dumb subroutine (this was a Perl script) with a one liner. He was very polite and helpful about it, considering how awful it must have looked to him. And he took the time to submit the patch, which makes all the difference.
:)
Just do it. It's highly unlikely anyone will laugh at you. Anyone that has spent time to read through your code is unlikely to be so juvenile as to mail you just to point out how bad it is.
Of course, it may be ignored by all but a few people. Some of my stuff certainly has been. But those few people that have used it have mailed me to say how helpful it has been to them. Even if you just help one person, thats one person more than if you'd left it sitting on your hard drive. Getting that single thank you mail can really give you the warm fuzzies.
It's also interesting to see where it might end up being used. I've had people that use my stuff at NASA, the Pentagon and even Disney. Have code, will travel!
Besides which, what makes Stallman's direction the right one? I respect what he's done for the Open Source/Free Software community (yes, that's a big bone of contention right there), but that doesn't mean he gets to dictate the future. It's taken on a life of it's own now, and it'll go it's own way. The avalanche has started. It's too late for the pebbles to vote.
How's that tinfoil hat working out for you? My god, I've seen some lame excuses to use open source in my time, but that one really takes the biscuit.
You don't have to as long as the TV is not tunable to terrestrial broadcasts. In practice, you'd probably get hounded for years, especially if you used to have a license and then stopped having one. Frankly I'd happily pay twice as much for the license as I think the BBC do a damn good job of producing quality programs (Eastenders excepted of course).
It'd get bigger! Result!