DLPAR is way cool.................. DLPAR is generations ahead of any VM technology on the market. The big difference is that DLPAR utilizes a hardware based hypervisor that manages the different partitions. DLPAR has the ability to provision or de-provision new lpars on the fly based upon a servers load.
LPAR's go way back with IBM's Z-Series........
Avoid AD. AD uses it's own non-standard object id's so that Microsoft can lock you into a AD/IIS environment. MIcrosoft's solution for interoperability is to sell you their MMS Microsoft metadirectory services product.
If you don't have a exceptionally large directory Novell's E-directory makes a lot of sense. It's mature and is very extensible.
IBM's directory service is free and is DB based. For large directories this good since it speeds up replication and lookups. No you don't need a DB admin for IBM"s directory service.
Sun's has a very strong LDAP product
Openldap: It's promising but still evolving, not ready for large enterprises yet. The other problem is that it requires some programming and lot of technical knowledge to implement.
This is a really blatantly biased study. I wonder where his grant money is coming from.......???
There is some major flaws with his theory....... He is focusing on.NET framework vulnerabilities. Microsoft tries to act as though the languages and.net api's have had no vulnerabilities. Here is just a few ASP.NET vulnerabilites:
" Microsoft ASP.NET URI Canonicalization Unauthorized Web Access Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 1000
Last modified on: 2004-10-05 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11342
2 Microsoft Ships Nimda To Korea in.NET (News) Rank: 952
Last modified on: 2002-06-13 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/news/480
3 Microsoft ASP.NET StateServer Cookie Handling Buffer Overflow Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 944
Last modified on: 2002-06-05 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/4958
4 Microsoft Visual Studio.NET Debugger Privilege Enforcement Weakness (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 932
Last modified on: 2004-04-15 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/10161
5 Microsoft Visual Studio.NET Korean Version Nimda Infected File Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 907
Last modified on: 2002-06-12 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/5012
6 Microsoft Visual Studio.NET msdds.dll Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 885
Last modified on: 2005-08-17 00:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/14594
7 Microsoft Visual C++ 7/Visual C++.Net Buffer Overflow Protection Weakness (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 882
Last modified on: 2002-02-13 17:00:00 MST
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/4108
8 Microsoft ASP.NET Unicode Character Conversion Multiple Cross-Site Scripting Vulnerabilities (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 879
Last modified on: 2005-02-15 17:00:00 MST
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/12574
9 Microsoft ASP.NET RPC/Encoded Remote Denial Of Service Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 871
Last modified on: 2005-07-11 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/14217
10 Microsoft ASP.NET Request Validation Null Byte Filter Bypass Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 871
Last modified on: 2003-09-07 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/8562
11 Multiple Vulnerabilities found in Microsoft.Net Passport Services Rank: 871
Last modified on: 2003-05-07 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/82/320989
12 Multiple Vulnerabilities found in Microsoft.Net Passport Services Rank: 871
Last modified on: 2003-05-07 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/320808"
So the idea that there is no vulnerabilites in.net is bunk at best.....
Another problem is that because of the MSDN EULA there has not been any hack challenges or external without Microsoft's permission. A few months ago Windows NT Pro magazine hosted a IIS6 hack challenge and it was mysteriously pulled fromt their site. I tried contacting them, but they never responded to my questions about the hack challenges.
The big issue however is that there is architectual flaws in the Windows architecture Microsoft's Blind Spot (http://news.com.com/2010-1071-831385.html
The real question for Cisco is what business value and innovation can they bring to Nokia......??
This will prove to be especially difficult due to the large market share they already have. Motorola has a new CEO and is becoming much more innovative and compeitive. So therefore Nokia will have make a quantum leap in innovation in order for Cisco to deliver sufficient shareholder return.
One possiblity could be realtime videophone conferencing. Currently they are essentially seperate technologies.
In the end I think takover of Nokia by Cisco is unlikely.
My biggest complaint is that the FCC should have required the telco's and cable companies to give more time for a transition period. A 1 year transition period is too brief given how dominant their monopoly is.
Hopefully this will spur the deployment of POE (Power over ethernet) and fixed point wimax.
Linux is very close to becoming mainstream desktop OS. Linux is still lacking a bit in the help, install and education areas.....
Linux still needs a better help system. No users consumer user wants to click on a menu item and end up at a command prompt with the man pages for help.
Linux also needs a easier install. It would be most helpful if there was knoppix type of boot for the other distros.
Linux also needs a better books that are more suited for learning and classroom curriculm. The Oreilly books are helpful, but they are more suited to people that already know Linux.
I was a bit suprised to hear that IPTV was intended for PC viewing...... So this seems like a way for Microsoft to gain a foothold in the home enterainment market with it''s Windows Media player PC devices. Till now Microsoft has a direct inroad into home enertainment. Now IPTV becomes the default choice for those who choose to use it. Microsoft has talked about X-box becoming the home entertainment device. With their DRM technology this gives MS the ability to control and charge for what content is delivered. I believe Microsoft will use it's money to seed the market.
On the otherhand IPTV creates more competition for Cable and Satellite.....
This raises some interesting questions:
1. Will IPTV be able to be viewed in other formats such as HDTV.
2.Will there be a device to convert IPTV signals to other formats.
3.Can IPTV be be viewed with Realplayer.....??
Sun really just re-allocating it's resources. After all the the components of JDS are OSS to begin with. Looking Glass and Star Office are both OSS to one degree or another.
The real question is Sun's mindshare gaining traction...?? The big problem is that Sun has always had problems making it's software into a business revenue generator.
If they want to succeed they need to sell the operating system seperately from the hardware. Secondly the OS needs be available on multiple distro's.
The other thing they could do is adopt a more advanced processor like IBM's 405LP (low power). There is still a big power consumption problem and this processor would help to solve this.........
From a marketing perspective they need to concentrate on solidifying it's existing market share. There is still a lot of opportunity, I have seen a lot of people purchasing the Treo's. A lot people have been purchasing the Tungsten line as well.
Microsoft is incorporating speech recognition into their PocketPC phones. Once embedded speech processors are integrated then speech will really take off. You can imagine how what the productivity gains will be once people are able to process email while driving.
I agree with all the reasons peope list for choosing OSS and Firefox. On the otherhand I don't believe in using OSS simply because it's OSS. OSS should be viewed as any other technology. That is it is OSS is solution to solve a problem. People anr organizations will choose OSS when they feel it is mature enough to solve their solution.
There is a lot of busineses in the mid-market that are all window shops. But I find it hard to believe that they are not considering Linux. What I think will happen is that Linux will be adopted a departmental basis in the mid-market.
Part of the problem is that many of the IT workers are used to a structured learning programs like the Microsoft MCSE tracks. In the Linux world there is still a lack of courseware and classes available. You have some basic Linux classes available, but there is no real comprehensive courses.
One of the really fascinating features of this server is that uses IBM DLAR (Dynamic logical partitioning). This means that new
instances of any of the supported OS's can be instantiated or removed as needed.
A google browser makes more sense than ever for them. Longhorn's desktop search poses a direct threat to google. So go and hire the leader in browser technology and build your own iteration. Go out and capitalize on Firefox which is alread eating away at IE. Now market the hell out of Gbrowser and premept Longhorn.
It's probably highly unlikely that Google would enter the OS market.
If they were to do so my guess is that Google would come out with it's own Linux Distro. Google intent would be to check Longhorn and give it the mindshare to sell into more enterprises.
It's rather ironic since Activex was based on OLE. OLE was invented orginally by IBM. ActiveX shoud have been abandoned years ago it's a protocol that's long outlived original purpose and usefulness. Let's remember that OLE was originally envisioned as application connectivity technology.
The big problem was that for many years IBM let the Lotus division be too independent. Until IBM re-integrated Lotus they would do their own thing and ignore corporate initiatives. For some time Lotus supported the IE browser only. This is rather ironic since the internal document "IBM Network Computing Software Division Strategy" http://www.scripting.com/misc/ibmStrategy.html" stated that maintaining Netscapes market share was critical to IBM. Let's also remeber that Lotus still sells market suite and is Windows only (Lotus Smartsuite code is frozen).Personally Id don't understand why IBM has not ported it to Linux and has not open sourced the product. Another factor was that PC division was so Windows oriented for so many years. This another good reason to see the PC division leave. So it will take IBM some time to migrate it's desktops to Linux.
So as a result Lotus developed a lot of IE ActiveX windows only apps like Sametime and Quickplace. On the otherhand Lotus and IBM have been shedding the last vestiges of Windows IE dependencies.
But I supposed IBM could use Mono.net to help overcome some of ActiveX dependencices. I am not certain if Mono.net has implemented a full policy based.net security framework as of yet.
"To invent something totally new and different just because you want to do something new and different is in my opinion, the height of stupidity and hubris."
If this is not a example of arrogance than I don't know what it is. It allmost sounds like a Bill Gates statement.
Ok so there is upsides and downsides of Microsoft's IPTV
The downside is that Microsoft will extend it's monopoly.
The upside is that IPTV will serve as a catalyst for service providers to speed up their networks (ie fiber to the home). The plus is that IPTV will provide more competition and lower prices.
But the other downside is that there is currently no viable OSS or commercial IPTV in the US today. This said there is nothing technically to preclude the service prodvider from offering a alternative. Let's remember however that the FCC ruled that carriers do not have to allow competitors on their networks.
In the end however I think this will probalbly prove good for consumers.
Ok the downside is that Microsoft extends it's monopoly.
The upside is that it serves as a catalyst for the phone company to speed up it network (ie fiber to the home). The other plus is that it creates more competition in the cable TV/satellite market.
Now the other downside is that there is currently no viable open source or business alternativeson the market today. But since the service providers are upgrading there networks there is nothing to technically preclude them from offering or allowing alternative service. In any case things will get very interesting.
Personally I don't see why more independent programmers collaborate more on programming projects. It occurs a lot in Open Source projects, but commercial projects tend to rely on independent programmers. Part of the problem is that more programmers need to embrace a combination of real-time collaborationa and extreme programming.
Perhaps one should use a vented case like a old box fan to disguise the radiator. In any case most men don't rule the household and or the wife/girlfriend threatens to leave... But I suppose it depends upon you priorities
Slashdot Mirror
DLPAR is way cool.................. DLPAR is generations ahead of any VM technology on the market. The big difference is that DLPAR utilizes a hardware based hypervisor that manages the different partitions. DLPAR has the ability to provision or de-provision new lpars on the fly based upon a servers load. LPAR's go way back with IBM's Z-Series........
Avoid AD. AD uses it's own non-standard object id's so that Microsoft can lock you into a AD/IIS environment. MIcrosoft's solution for interoperability is to sell you their MMS Microsoft metadirectory services product. If you don't have a exceptionally large directory Novell's E-directory makes a lot of sense. It's mature and is very extensible. IBM's directory service is free and is DB based. For large directories this good since it speeds up replication and lookups. No you don't need a DB admin for IBM"s directory service. Sun's has a very strong LDAP product Openldap: It's promising but still evolving, not ready for large enterprises yet. The other problem is that it requires some programming and lot of technical knowledge to implement.
This is a really blatantly biased study. I wonder where his grant money is coming from.......??? There is some major flaws with his theory....... He is focusing on .NET framework vulnerabilities. Microsoft tries to act as though the languages and .net api's have had no vulnerabilities. Here is just a few ASP.NET vulnerabilites:
" Microsoft ASP.NET URI Canonicalization Unauthorized Web Access Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 1000
Last modified on: 2004-10-05 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11342
2 Microsoft Ships Nimda To Korea in .NET (News) Rank: 952
Last modified on: 2002-06-13 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/news/480
3 Microsoft ASP.NET StateServer Cookie Handling Buffer Overflow Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 944
Last modified on: 2002-06-05 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/4958
4 Microsoft Visual Studio .NET Debugger Privilege Enforcement Weakness (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 932
Last modified on: 2004-04-15 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/10161
5 Microsoft Visual Studio .NET Korean Version Nimda Infected File Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 907
Last modified on: 2002-06-12 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/5012
6 Microsoft Visual Studio .NET msdds.dll Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 885
Last modified on: 2005-08-17 00:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/14594
7 Microsoft Visual C++ 7/Visual C++.Net Buffer Overflow Protection Weakness (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 882
Last modified on: 2002-02-13 17:00:00 MST
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/4108
8 Microsoft ASP.NET Unicode Character Conversion Multiple Cross-Site Scripting Vulnerabilities (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 879
Last modified on: 2005-02-15 17:00:00 MST
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/12574
9 Microsoft ASP.NET RPC/Encoded Remote Denial Of Service Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 871
Last modified on: 2005-07-11 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/14217
10 Microsoft ASP.NET Request Validation Null Byte Filter Bypass Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities) Rank: 871
Last modified on: 2003-09-07 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/8562
11 Multiple Vulnerabilities found in Microsoft .Net Passport Services Rank: 871
Last modified on: 2003-05-07 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/82/320989
12 Multiple Vulnerabilities found in Microsoft .Net Passport Services Rank: 871
Last modified on: 2003-05-07 18:00:00 MDT
URL: http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/320808"
So the idea that there is no vulnerabilites in .net is bunk at best.....
Another problem is that because of the MSDN EULA there has not been any hack challenges or external without Microsoft's permission. A few months ago Windows NT Pro magazine hosted a IIS6 hack challenge and it was mysteriously pulled fromt their site. I tried contacting them, but they never responded to my questions about the hack challenges.
The big issue however is that there is architectual flaws in the Windows architecture Microsoft's Blind Spot (http://news.com.com/2010-1071-831385.html
The real question for Cisco is what business value and innovation can they bring to Nokia......?? This will prove to be especially difficult due to the large market share they already have. Motorola has a new CEO and is becoming much more innovative and compeitive. So therefore Nokia will have make a quantum leap in innovation in order for Cisco to deliver sufficient shareholder return. One possiblity could be realtime videophone conferencing. Currently they are essentially seperate technologies. In the end I think takover of Nokia by Cisco is unlikely.
My biggest complaint is that the FCC should have required the telco's and cable companies to give more time for a transition period. A 1 year transition period is too brief given how dominant their monopoly is. Hopefully this will spur the deployment of POE (Power over ethernet) and fixed point wimax.
Linux is very close to becoming mainstream desktop OS. Linux is still lacking a bit in the help, install and education areas..... Linux still needs a better help system. No users consumer user wants to click on a menu item and end up at a command prompt with the man pages for help. Linux also needs a easier install. It would be most helpful if there was knoppix type of boot for the other distros. Linux also needs a better books that are more suited for learning and classroom curriculm. The Oreilly books are helpful, but they are more suited to people that already know Linux.
I was a bit suprised to hear that IPTV was intended for PC viewing...... So this seems like a way for Microsoft to gain a foothold in the home enterainment market with it''s Windows Media player PC devices. Till now Microsoft has a direct inroad into home enertainment. Now IPTV becomes the default choice for those who choose to use it. Microsoft has talked about X-box becoming the home entertainment device. With their DRM technology this gives MS the ability to control and charge for what content is delivered. I believe Microsoft will use it's money to seed the market. On the otherhand IPTV creates more competition for Cable and Satellite..... This raises some interesting questions: 1. Will IPTV be able to be viewed in other formats such as HDTV. 2.Will there be a device to convert IPTV signals to other formats. 3.Can IPTV be be viewed with Realplayer.....??
I wonder if Bill Gates is afraid of a implant crash....??
Sun really just re-allocating it's resources. After all the the components of JDS are OSS to begin with. Looking Glass and Star Office are both OSS to one degree or another. The real question is Sun's mindshare gaining traction...?? The big problem is that Sun has always had problems making it's software into a business revenue generator.
It's too bad that the PDA's use internal batteries. It's the ultimate upgrade for computer industry. Garunteed obsolesence.
If they want to succeed they need to sell the operating system seperately from the hardware. Secondly the OS needs be available on multiple distro's. The other thing they could do is adopt a more advanced processor like IBM's 405LP (low power). There is still a big power consumption problem and this processor would help to solve this......... From a marketing perspective they need to concentrate on solidifying it's existing market share. There is still a lot of opportunity, I have seen a lot of people purchasing the Treo's. A lot people have been purchasing the Tungsten line as well. Microsoft is incorporating speech recognition into their PocketPC phones. Once embedded speech processors are integrated then speech will really take off. You can imagine how what the productivity gains will be once people are able to process email while driving.
I wonder what the estimated installs of IE is per second.....???
I agree with all the reasons peope list for choosing OSS and Firefox. On the otherhand I don't believe in using OSS simply because it's OSS. OSS should be viewed as any other technology. That is it is OSS is solution to solve a problem. People anr organizations will choose OSS when they feel it is mature enough to solve their solution.
There is a lot of busineses in the mid-market that are all window shops. But I find it hard to believe that they are not considering Linux. What I think will happen is that Linux will be adopted a departmental basis in the mid-market. Part of the problem is that many of the IT workers are used to a structured learning programs like the Microsoft MCSE tracks. In the Linux world there is still a lack of courseware and classes available. You have some basic Linux classes available, but there is no real comprehensive courses.
One of the really fascinating features of this server is that uses IBM DLAR (Dynamic logical partitioning). This means that new instances of any of the supported OS's can be instantiated or removed as needed.
A google browser makes more sense than ever for them. Longhorn's desktop search poses a direct threat to google. So go and hire the leader in browser technology and build your own iteration. Go out and capitalize on Firefox which is alread eating away at IE. Now market the hell out of Gbrowser and premept Longhorn.
It's probably highly unlikely that Google would enter the OS market. If they were to do so my guess is that Google would come out with it's own Linux Distro. Google intent would be to check Longhorn and give it the mindshare to sell into more enterprises.
Not certain, but I do know that IBM is concentrating most of it's efforts on Lotus Workplace messaging.
It's rather ironic since Activex was based on OLE. OLE was invented orginally by IBM. ActiveX shoud have been abandoned years ago it's a protocol that's long outlived original purpose and usefulness. Let's remember that OLE was originally envisioned as application connectivity technology. The big problem was that for many years IBM let the Lotus division be too independent. Until IBM re-integrated Lotus they would do their own thing and ignore corporate initiatives. For some time Lotus supported the IE browser only. This is rather ironic since the internal document "IBM Network Computing Software Division Strategy" http://www.scripting.com/misc/ibmStrategy.html" stated that maintaining Netscapes market share was critical to IBM. Let's also remeber that Lotus still sells market suite and is Windows only (Lotus Smartsuite code is frozen).Personally Id don't understand why IBM has not ported it to Linux and has not open sourced the product. Another factor was that PC division was so Windows oriented for so many years. This another good reason to see the PC division leave. So it will take IBM some time to migrate it's desktops to Linux. So as a result Lotus developed a lot of IE ActiveX windows only apps like Sametime and Quickplace. On the otherhand Lotus and IBM have been shedding the last vestiges of Windows IE dependencies. But I supposed IBM could use Mono.net to help overcome some of ActiveX dependencices. I am not certain if Mono.net has implemented a full policy based .net security framework as of yet.
I think finding new and better ways of doing things is always good.
"To invent something totally new and different just because you want to do something new and different is in my opinion, the height of stupidity and hubris." If this is not a example of arrogance than I don't know what it is. It allmost sounds like a Bill Gates statement.
Ok so there is upsides and downsides of Microsoft's IPTV The downside is that Microsoft will extend it's monopoly. The upside is that IPTV will serve as a catalyst for service providers to speed up their networks (ie fiber to the home). The plus is that IPTV will provide more competition and lower prices. But the other downside is that there is currently no viable OSS or commercial IPTV in the US today. This said there is nothing technically to preclude the service prodvider from offering a alternative. Let's remember however that the FCC ruled that carriers do not have to allow competitors on their networks. In the end however I think this will probalbly prove good for consumers.
Ok the downside is that Microsoft extends it's monopoly. The upside is that it serves as a catalyst for the phone company to speed up it network (ie fiber to the home). The other plus is that it creates more competition in the cable TV/satellite market. Now the other downside is that there is currently no viable open source or business alternativeson the market today. But since the service providers are upgrading there networks there is nothing to technically preclude them from offering or allowing alternative service. In any case things will get very interesting.
Personally I don't see why more independent programmers collaborate more on programming projects. It occurs a lot in Open Source projects, but commercial projects tend to rely on independent programmers. Part of the problem is that more programmers need to embrace a combination of real-time collaborationa and extreme programming.
Perhaps one should use a vented case like a old box fan to disguise the radiator. In any case most men don't rule the household and or the wife/girlfriend threatens to leave... But I suppose it depends upon you priorities