Over the years I've slapped together a good number of computers from semi-obsolete parts businesses get rid of (think Pentium IIs, Celeron 533mhz's, etc).
To which I'll add a $20 Geforce MX, slap on a pirated version of XP, install a few games like the Sims, Fifa Soccer, Putt-Putt.. and lots and lots of educational software.
I used to also load MS Office but I've been finding that OOo is good enough that I may just go with that in the future.
I'll harden the system as much as possible.. install all the latest patches, configure automatic updating, remove all traces of Outlook, etc. I used to load a cracked version of Eudora pro but Thunderbird is good enough that I will typically put that on now.
I freely give these systems out to underprivelaged families living in and around local slum. Not sure whether you would call this "giving back," but it helps keep kids out of trouble and gives them something productive to do.
Windows XP has a built in cd-buring system that is fairly easy to use.
Nero is a 3rd party solution that has more features and some wizards to help the user along, but its implementation requires you to create a "project" which is a bit of overkill for run-of-the-mill copying of a few files to a CD.
A security patch should not break code. Were I "the boss of that guy," I would consider Microsoft to be at fault.
Sounds like a time for damage control and updating that app or library (even if it means using a disassembler).
As for deploying at a large enterprise, it would be wise to test mission critical apps before doing so. But such testing should be routine and be completed ASAP.
Three weeks isn't that long for a patch to be out. Many organizations actually test patches out on non-production machines before randomly installing software that Microsoft says is ok.
But if you are going to trust a closed source operating system, you may as well trust all updates from the owners of the code. I mean, who else is qualified to release patches...?
As they say: In for a penny, in for a pound.
I run Windows update on all my employer's servers and workstations within 48 hours of a security patch being released. I figure that is enough for a billion dollar company to retract a patch that has gone bad.
Slashdot Mirror
> plus they were willing to pony up a million $$$
Thankyou, Captain Obvious.
> BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.... I think the idiots of the world have united on the message board today.
Welcome to Slashdot!
Are you enjoying your second day here?
The slashdot database is pretty huge.. I wonder if the servers could handle this kind of indexing?
And you can still find it with this search
Zero comments and it's already slashdotted!
This means everyone went to read the article before posting. (Gasp!)
They probably just wanted to figure out what the hell cellphane is...
Linus may be able to insist they include a notice such as "Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds," but I doubt he cares.
I think it was an honest question, and your post was helpful.
thats hilarious man
No, this is science.
GNU/SOS does have a certain ring to it..
They already discontinued distributing Linux, I doubt they are interested in starting up again.
Why is this necessary when we have the EFF?
The EFF is much more broad.
RedHat is only concerned with Linux and the GPL, plus they want the publicity.
Over the years I've slapped together a good number of computers from semi-obsolete parts businesses get rid of (think Pentium IIs, Celeron 533mhz's, etc).
To which I'll add a $20 Geforce MX, slap on a pirated version of XP, install a few games like the Sims, Fifa Soccer, Putt-Putt.. and lots and lots of educational software.
I used to also load MS Office but I've been finding that OOo is good enough that I may just go with that in the future.
I'll harden the system as much as possible.. install all the latest patches, configure automatic updating, remove all traces of Outlook, etc. I used to load a cracked version of Eudora pro but Thunderbird is good enough that I will typically put that on now.
I freely give these systems out to underprivelaged families living in and around local slum. Not sure whether you would call this "giving back," but it helps keep kids out of trouble and gives them something productive to do.
> Don't you mean the GNU Emacs editor?
No he means the GNU/Emacs OS.
Because 2.3 was the development series for 2.4 , 2.3 probably has a good chunk of the code that was allegedly incorporated into 2.4
it's absolutely terrible to see what IBM did to the Sequent culture
Buy them suits?
I know it is a coincidence, I just find it humerous.
Having never used KDE, I can't comment on how it is easier to burn CDs with "Linux" than XP.
But I do think XP's implementation is quite easy.
Windows XP has a built in cd-buring system that is fairly easy to use.
Nero is a 3rd party solution that has more features and some wizards to help the user along, but its implementation requires you to create a "project" which is a bit of overkill for run-of-the-mill copying of a few files to a CD.
That wasn't my point, I understand they can't be held liable under the law.
As for the company firing their employees, I'd rather work a job I am overqualified for than work for such a company.
If the DMV computers crashed and all services came screeching to a halt, would the people waiting in line even notice?
;)
You bet they would notice. Asuming PC boot times were decent, being limited to 60 seconds a person would speed things up greatly
Wouldn't they have to use Windows in order to test their virus as they develop it?
;)
Nah, the WINE project is becomming such an accurate implementation that you can actually develop viruses under it
A security patch should not break code. Were I "the boss of that guy," I would consider Microsoft to be at fault.
Sounds like a time for damage control and updating that app or library (even if it means using a disassembler).
As for deploying at a large enterprise, it would be wise to test mission critical apps before doing so. But such testing should be routine and be completed ASAP.
Three weeks isn't that long for a patch to be out. Many organizations actually test patches out on non-production machines before randomly installing software that Microsoft says is ok.
But if you are going to trust a closed source operating system, you may as well trust all updates from the owners of the code. I mean, who else is qualified to release patches...?
As they say: In for a penny, in for a pound.
I run Windows update on all my employer's servers and workstations within 48 hours of a security patch being released. I figure that is enough for a billion dollar company to retract a patch that has gone bad.
No, the plural is grammatically correct because he is allowing for the future possibility of other cities following suit...