new to ldap huh? DNS doesnt store the actuall AD Data, those are on datafiles on the AD Servers (Ya i was shocked at that too), DNS simply holds pointers to find the services supplided and used by the directory, just like every other use of DNS.
My girlfriends brother has a small tech support business, not really a small town business, but just local stuff. He built her a machine cheap, put Win2k on it, and told her never to update her system, Norton would automatically update and would protect her just fine, Windows Update would just cause problems. I told her to update, she's not really running anything that would have much of a problem with these patches.
Anyway shes on a dial-up connection which flakes out when downloading a lot at once, so it was easier to listen to her brother and trust that norton was enough protection, after all he does this for a living, right.
That was all well and good, untill early July of course, and she picked up blaster withing the first few hours of it being let loose, had no idea what was going on, and calles me.
Funny how this would have all been prevented by running windows update from time to time, and at least she does now, automated for every Sunday.
So would you have really wanted to deal with that call, walk people through updateing to Service Pack 2 then the blaster fix, then cleaning it up? Patches are released for a reason.
Compact macs, like the Little SE here next to me, do indeed reset to 1904, and considering these are what people thought of when they thought of macs before Apples recent successes, I would have to say that the widely known macs do reset to 1904, and the other dates are for 'lesser known' Macs.
I remember that an instructor of mine once said "Mac's are great for the beginner and for the advanced user, but not in between." So, who knows, he was also thinking OS 7-8 at the time. Damn its hard to type with a band-aid on your index finger.
Actually, SunOS when it was first created was based on BSD. The SysV spec was created later, a creation process that Sun cooperated significant efforts to and retaind copyrights relating to SysV, after Sun had been distributing the BSD based SunOS and was slowly incorperated into it untill they switched to the Solaris Operating Environment moniker and the underlying kernel was closer the SysV then BSD
Having the same OS on newer and more optimal hardware (read x86) as on old overpriced one (Sparc)? Give me a break.
Seems to me you made a good strong case for haveing a single OS across the board, although you seem to think that unless that OS is linux, its not worth it. You went from "give me a break" on Solaris on all systems as a useless plus, to saying how great it is to have a single OS (linux) on all systems.
So make up your mind, is it good or useless to have a single OS on all systems? Its ok, I'll wait.
Oh come on, its funny, accept it. Everyone does this, Oracle did to show their gird computing, (well they used the matrix code stuff), its for a laugh, and you can bet money on the fact that everyone that saw it is thinking about it. Personally i would love to see it, it looks funny.
So laugh at it like your supposed to, as anyone who has a sence of humor will, and move on. Its Slashdot, we already know you hate Windows.
They do not connect the impact of what they do on the computer with the impact on another person
These newest virii, ie MSblster, are made to impact users, how could you think otherwise? oops sorry i didnt realize that it would shutdown your computer, or perhaps nimda, oh i didnt realize i was collecting your admin passwords to your NT servers, I guess I'll stop now.
The artical was really nothing special except what one person thinks of people shes met, but you cant say with a straight face that a disastorous virus such as MSBlaster, code red or nimda, wasnt written to cause the problems they did.
Because no one changes their story when an ex is trying to take their money. Interesting he only just "remembered" this considering its been at the very least 6 months since she made this claim. Oh wait a minute, you know what, I invented the Internet, how cool am I.
Here is the reason i think the matrix sucks, this is a MOVIE not a RELIGION. The Matrix was a cool movie, entertaining, there was some stuff to keep track of to keep you involved, and it finnished nicely. As soon as they created a movie, then a game, then a movie, and it was all required to have parts of the story, this idea that its a hackers religion worked to their benifit because it hid the fact THEY JUST WANTED MONEY, they were simply greedy, but no one noticed because they thought they were getting closer to god or something. I saw Laurence Fishburn (and i know that I spelt it wrong, sorry) comment that he was suprised that a movie this "smart" could be made. This is obviously simply furthering the myth that this is some how more then just a movie, except it isn't. It wasn't particulary smart, it was a little unique, but only till the 13th floor was released, which was a similar idea, but as far as smart, its not, its simply a what-if action adventure that had some computers. They're just movies people, and after the first one, not very good ones.
Well lets see, the artical said it didnt have aero so...
However the artical also said that they dont belive MS is actuall interested in bug reports from this build, but considering the change that enabling WinFS could bring around, i'd bet they are very interested in bug reports on the new features.
What was wrong with NeXT? it boils down to Unix to the masses for the most part, and it didnt fail because of anything wrong with it, it was just too early, it wasnt what people were looking for.
From everything I've seen, NeXT was quite nice, and it probably would have done quite well if it had been created about a decade later then it was, the success of OS X is a good pointer to how well NeXT could have done.
Stalman hadn't come along... no GNU and no free software ideology
RMS didn't invent the idea of Free software, he only turned it into a political thing. There was free software before RMS and there continues to be free software outsided of GNU, think BSD. It seems to me that reading the changlogs for OpenBSD 3.4 there is an effort to remove and replace the GNU software, or at least a good portion of it with BSD licenced stuff. RMS was not quite the absolute requirement as he is made out to be for Linux, it just allowed things to speed up much faster then if it hadnt been there.
Don't get me wrong, I use Linux dayly, and there for many of GNUs tools, I have nothing against them, and nothing but respect for the developers that wrote and maintain the software. I just dont like or agree with RMS's political crusade. BSD makes free software for the sake of making good software thats to be used where you need good software, it just seems like a better idea to me.
Actually this is pretty close to what I was thinking, however I leaned toward, Samba is a file and print server **only**, 2003, and all other versions of Windows server do a lot more.
I can't help but always see these comparisons as a little lopsided. Copying or moving a file aournd, or printing god knows how many print jobs, might be a good test of Sambas performance if it is either a) doing the same amount of work in the background, or b) 2003 is doing noting at all, no active directiory, no wins, no dns, nothing. Personally I haven't seen any tests that are truly set up well, I'm not saying I've seen them all, its just my observations.
I had 2003 rc1 and 2 here and I resently set up Samba 3. Samba is great, there can be no argument there and joining my AD was much easier then joining the domain with Samba 2, but 2003 was impressive compared to 2000 or NT. It was clean and more responsive on exactly the same hardware as 2000. sometimes you need to give credit where credit is due, 20003 is a good product.
This was just the first thing that popped into my mind, and slashdot is here for people to go and get things off their chest.
Slashdot Mirror
new to ldap huh? DNS doesnt store the actuall AD Data, those are on datafiles on the AD Servers (Ya i was shocked at that too), DNS simply holds pointers to find the services supplided and used by the directory, just like every other use of DNS.
My girlfriends brother has a small tech support business, not really a small town business, but just local stuff. He built her a machine cheap, put Win2k on it, and told her never to update her system, Norton would automatically update and would protect her just fine, Windows Update would just cause problems. I told her to update, she's not really running anything that would have much of a problem with these patches.
Anyway shes on a dial-up connection which flakes out when downloading a lot at once, so it was easier to listen to her brother and trust that norton was enough protection, after all he does this for a living, right.
That was all well and good, untill early July of course, and she picked up blaster withing the first few hours of it being let loose, had no idea what was going on, and calles me.
Funny how this would have all been prevented by running windows update from time to time, and at least she does now, automated for every Sunday.
So would you have really wanted to deal with that call, walk people through updateing to Service Pack 2 then the blaster fix, then cleaning it up? Patches are released for a reason.
Must have hurt to have your sence of humor removed.
Compact macs, like the Little SE here next to me, do indeed reset to 1904, and considering these are what people thought of when they thought of macs before Apples recent successes, I would have to say that the widely known macs do reset to 1904, and the other dates are for 'lesser known' Macs.
If I remember correctly, a Java applet by default can only ommunicate with the originating server.
I remember that an instructor of mine once said "Mac's are great for the beginner and for the advanced user, but not in between." So, who knows, he was also thinking OS 7-8 at the time. Damn its hard to type with a band-aid on your index finger.
Actually, SunOS when it was first created was based on BSD. The SysV spec was created later, a creation process that Sun cooperated significant efforts to and retaind copyrights relating to SysV, after Sun had been distributing the BSD based SunOS and was slowly incorperated into it untill they switched to the Solaris Operating Environment moniker and the underlying kernel was closer the SysV then BSD
So make up your mind, is it good or useless to have a single OS on all systems? Its ok, I'll wait.
Oh come on, its funny, accept it. Everyone does this, Oracle did to show their gird computing, (well they used the matrix code stuff), its for a laugh, and you can bet money on the fact that everyone that saw it is thinking about it. Personally i would love to see it, it looks funny.
So laugh at it like your supposed to, as anyone who has a sence of humor will, and move on. Its Slashdot, we already know you hate Windows.
The artical was really nothing special except what one person thinks of people shes met, but you cant say with a straight face that a disastorous virus such as MSBlaster, code red or nimda, wasnt written to cause the problems they did.
Because no one changes their story when an ex is trying to take their money. Interesting he only just "remembered" this considering its been at the very least 6 months since she made this claim. Oh wait a minute, you know what, I invented the Internet, how cool am I.
It's very Eastern
Here is the reason i think the matrix sucks, this is a MOVIE not a RELIGION. The Matrix was a cool movie, entertaining, there was some stuff to keep track of to keep you involved, and it finnished nicely.
As soon as they created a movie, then a game, then a movie, and it was all required to have parts of the story, this idea that its a hackers religion worked to their benifit because it hid the fact THEY JUST WANTED MONEY, they were simply greedy, but no one noticed because they thought they were getting closer to god or something.
I saw Laurence Fishburn (and i know that I spelt it wrong, sorry) comment that he was suprised that a movie this "smart" could be made. This is obviously simply furthering the myth that this is some how more then just a movie, except it isn't. It wasn't particulary smart, it was a little unique, but only till the 13th floor was released, which was a similar idea, but as far as smart, its not, its simply a what-if action adventure that had some computers.
They're just movies people, and after the first one, not very good ones.
Wait, wait, wait. Theres high quality stuff on cable? When did this happen?
Well lets see, the artical said it didnt have aero so...
However the artical also said that they dont belive MS is actuall interested in bug reports from this build, but considering the change that enabling WinFS could bring around, i'd bet they are very interested in bug reports on the new features.
with WinFS, this pretty much is cairo
What was wrong with NeXT? it boils down to Unix to the masses for the most part, and it didnt fail because of anything wrong with it, it was just too early, it wasnt what people were looking for.
From everything I've seen, NeXT was quite nice, and it probably would have done quite well if it had been created about a decade later then it was, the success of OS X is a good pointer to how well NeXT could have done.
So really, what was wrong with NeXT?
It seems alright to me, good place to start for hardware reviews.
What the hell were they thinking?
That was Deep Space Station K7, not k9
RMS didn't invent the idea of Free software, he only turned it into a political thing. There was free software before RMS and there continues to be free software outsided of GNU, think BSD. It seems to me that reading the changlogs for OpenBSD 3.4 there is an effort to remove and replace the GNU software, or at least a good portion of it with BSD licenced stuff. RMS was not quite the absolute requirement as he is made out to be for Linux, it just allowed things to speed up much faster then if it hadnt been there.
Don't get me wrong, I use Linux dayly, and there for many of GNUs tools, I have nothing against them, and nothing but respect for the developers that wrote and maintain the software. I just dont like or agree with RMS's political crusade. BSD makes free software for the sake of making good software thats to be used where you need good software, it just seems like a better idea to me.
Stable isnt so irrelevent when you upgrade to testing on a 486. glibc only knows of +i586 and your new kernel gets really mad when you try to boot.
I know that 486's are old, but some people still have one or two laying around, and Debian is the first distro I've seen to remove support for 486's.
Not to insult anyone, but this is true, I saw that as a flaw
Actually this is pretty close to what I was thinking, however I leaned toward, Samba is a file and print server **only**, 2003, and all other versions of Windows server do a lot more.
I can't help but always see these comparisons as a little lopsided. Copying or moving a file aournd, or printing god knows how many print jobs, might be a good test of Sambas performance if it is either a) doing the same amount of work in the background, or b) 2003 is doing noting at all, no active directiory, no wins, no dns, nothing. Personally I haven't seen any tests that are truly set up well, I'm not saying I've seen them all, its just my observations.
I had 2003 rc1 and 2 here and I resently set up Samba 3. Samba is great, there can be no argument there and joining my AD was much easier then joining the domain with Samba 2, but 2003 was impressive compared to 2000 or NT. It was clean and more responsive on exactly the same hardware as 2000. sometimes you need to give credit where credit is due, 20003 is a good product.
This was just the first thing that popped into my mind, and slashdot is here for people to go and get things off their chest.
104 days
IBM PS/2 486/33 with 32mb ram.
Had to reboot it because i forgot to build in quotas and well I need them now. Sucks too.