True. But are they driven to this solution because of a more attractive price? Cellular prices have dramatically dropped the last 2-3 years but are they cheaper than POTS? For most folks they might run about the same. I'd love to see a QoS, Mean Time Between Failures, etc. study done comparing VoIP and cellular transmission (CDMA, GSM, TDMA, etc.).
Personally I don't relish a global shift to VoIP technology. Prices can be more attractive and all but the quality of service and reliability still pales in comparison to traditional telco.
I was in an IT position in a national wireless call center environment back in the mid-90's when VoIP was just starting to ramp up. Things have improved since then I will grant you but compared to traditional telco voice service it still is way behind.
Look at all of the things that can (and do) affect Internet data. DDOS attacks, primary global DNS server exploits, BGP/RIP route poisoning, etc. Awhile back Cisco had to distribute a patch affecting practically every IOS version due to some exploit. Plenty of network engineers were patching away at the very infrastructure of the Internet.
The POTS concept might seem old and passe but it's reliability can't be argued.
They're sure to appear on an upcoming VH-1 "Behind the Music" special and be on the verge of a reunion tour. Playing smaller venues supposedly in order to "get back to their roots" and "get closer to their fans."
Oh I see. I was looking at the Aircard that plugs directly into the laptop. That or the CF card that could insert into a handheld PDA. I guess getting rid of the handset-->computer cable ups the ante alot:-)
Where are you located in order to receive this for this low rate? When I look up a quote on the Sprint PCS website (for Columbus, Ohio) I see starting prices at $40 a month for a limited MB amount per month.
How about some sort of send/receive handshaking verification? Like...
Receiver MX server processes an incoming message.
From: field header value is stripped as well as last MX host header value.
Receiver MX server contacts sender MX server (obtained from last MX host header value) to verify authenticity of sending party (obtained as From: field header value).
If authenticity isn't verified e-mail message is automatically dropped and not delivered to intended recipient.
I'm sure that mail transmission methods likely exist that follow similar protocol, or something similar. A lot of the issues surrounding security on the Internet involve the fact that the Internet was developed without inherent security built into the model. It was intended to be a closed WAN between military sites and college campuses. Physical security was the main constraint. E-mail has been developed in an inherently insecure manner.
Since when does *ANYONE* actually believe the From: field header in an e-mail message is legitimate and not forged?? Jeeeezzzusss! The Abuse@MSN.Com folks are just igoring your ignorance in all likelihood.
the Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX banner ads that are liberally sprinkled through the/. site. The ads should have an amputee starting blankly at a Rubik's Cube.
Today for my corporate users I will be packaging a nice Mozilla installation routine. Combined with wiping MSIE from the desktop. After Secunia has announced so many MSIE vulnerabilities (with the latest one being so potentially critical) and Micro$loth blowing off issuing December patches I've had it.
Hopefully the miniserver doesn't happen to have a MySQL backend. Judging by the problems the company's website is having handling the number of MySQL client requests I think perhaps an eMachines bladeserver might be the way to go.
I concur to a point. I haven't personally seen Java tank a system, but at times it takes so goddamn long to load I would've thought the system crashed.
Java=write once, run anywhere=load of horseshit.
is the *blah blah blah* Information Society? I've never heard of this group in my life. The only Information Society I've heard of was the 80's band that I was unlucky enough to hear playing at my college's Homecoming Weekend.
Who cares what this group has to say anyway? I could say that I govern all free trade between Guatamalan midgets but what weight does that pull?
F 'em. That's what I say.
Re:Windows and Linux Video teleconferencing?
on
Get to Know GnomeMeeting
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Try googling for H.323 freeware. Should be a point in the right direction. If the software is truly standards-based in nature then it should play well...
I totally agree. My company too is a Dell Business Customer. And when I would call them to detail 100% of the issue I would still get the scripted decision tree back at Step 1. I have been an IT Field Manager of a large call center and am aware of the need to follow scripting, but jeeeezus. At least hop down a couple of steps on the tree!
Dell Support calls typically take between 30 minutes to an hour to finally get the problem acknowledged. Sometimes I would be at the point of frustration, figuring that much of my hourly rate would pay for just ordering new component rather than sit through the mindless B.S. Maybe that's Dell's intention. Most call center IVR (press this for this, press that that that) menus are intended to lose the customer. And most scripting is meant to lead them down the path of abandonment as well it seems.
Here's an example of a failed hard drive. First thing I did was replace it with another drive and the PC boots up fine. But place the old one in and it won't boot. Yep, I've FDISK'ed. It won't even FDISK. Blah, blah, blah. From there it took almost an hour to get the replacement ordered.
Ignoring the childish namecalling, I would like to see evidence that Yahoo! is still running production services on FreeBSD servers. The only references I could find were from news postings back in the late 1990's where one of the Yahoo! co-founders stated why they made the move to FreeBSD back then, after their DEC Alpha box couldn't handle the HTTP request traffic (back then it was 4 million hits a day).
Seriously, though. Wouldn't I be able to google a current reference that they are still using FreeBSD?
Although I got modded as such, I wasn't trolling. And I wasn't aware of higher profile sites like Hotmail and Yahoo! using FreeBSD servers. It was just that in my past lives (working for other larger companies in a variety of industries) I hadn't run into any notable FreeBSD implementations. A few test/development envioronments and that was about it. And in my experience (this was more than a couple of years ago) I didn't warm up to FreeBSD like I did to some other *NIX alternatives.
But everyone's free to disagree for sure. The fact that there are satisfied folks using production FreeBSD deployments says a lot and probably does discount most of the trolling resulting from the main article.
In the past several years haven't seen any high profile company announcing they are running FreeBSD servers in their production environment. Perhaps I am missing something...
Slashdot Mirror
True. But are they driven to this solution because of a more attractive price? Cellular prices have dramatically dropped the last 2-3 years but are they cheaper than POTS? For most folks they might run about the same. I'd love to see a QoS, Mean Time Between Failures, etc. study done comparing VoIP and cellular transmission (CDMA, GSM, TDMA, etc.).
I was in an IT position in a national wireless call center environment back in the mid-90's when VoIP was just starting to ramp up. Things have improved since then I will grant you but compared to traditional telco voice service it still is way behind.
Look at all of the things that can (and do) affect Internet data. DDOS attacks, primary global DNS server exploits, BGP/RIP route poisoning, etc. Awhile back Cisco had to distribute a patch affecting practically every IOS version due to some exploit. Plenty of network engineers were patching away at the very infrastructure of the Internet.
The POTS concept might seem old and passe but it's reliability can't be argued.
Or better yet "a penny." Typically techie stuff. Confuse the matter with fancy diversions.
They're sure to appear on an upcoming VH-1 "Behind the Music" special and be on the verge of a reunion tour. Playing smaller venues supposedly in order to "get back to their roots" and "get closer to their fans."
Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. It was likewise campy.
a moving elegy to his last wife that he brutually drowned. He makes Robert Blake look laid back by comparison!
Bitkeeper? I've seen a few good OSS projects use this and read some good things about it. Anyone, anyone? Bueller??
Oh I see. I was looking at the Aircard that plugs directly into the laptop. That or the CF card that could insert into a handheld PDA. I guess getting rid of the handset-->computer cable ups the ante alot :-)
Where are you located in order to receive this for this low rate? When I look up a quote on the Sprint PCS website (for Columbus, Ohio) I see starting prices at $40 a month for a limited MB amount per month.
Receiver MX server processes an incoming message.
From: field header value is stripped as well as last MX host header value.
Receiver MX server contacts sender MX server (obtained from last MX host header value) to verify authenticity of sending party (obtained as From: field header value).
If authenticity isn't verified e-mail message is automatically dropped and not delivered to intended recipient.
I'm sure that mail transmission methods likely exist that follow similar protocol, or something similar. A lot of the issues surrounding security on the Internet involve the fact that the Internet was developed without inherent security built into the model. It was intended to be a closed WAN between military sites and college campuses. Physical security was the main constraint. E-mail has been developed in an inherently insecure manner.
Since when does *ANYONE* actually believe the From: field header in an e-mail message is legitimate and not forged?? Jeeeezzzusss! The Abuse@MSN.Com folks are just igoring your ignorance in all likelihood.
Anderson in the Burger World drive thru: Did you get the order? Hello?
Butthead through the loudspeaker: We're like closed or something?
Maybe they should step back in their time machine and revitalize the market with Xenix. Bwahahahahahha!!!! What a piece of junk.
the Microsoft Windows Services for UNIX banner ads that are liberally sprinkled through the /. site. The ads should have an amputee starting blankly at a Rubik's Cube.
Hopefully the miniserver doesn't happen to have a MySQL backend. Judging by the problems the company's website is having handling the number of MySQL client requests I think perhaps an eMachines bladeserver might be the way to go.
I concur to a point. I haven't personally seen Java tank a system, but at times it takes so goddamn long to load I would've thought the system crashed. Java=write once, run anywhere=load of horseshit.
In a word...yes.
Who cares what this group has to say anyway? I could say that I govern all free trade between Guatamalan midgets but what weight does that pull?
F 'em. That's what I say.
Try googling for H.323 freeware. Should be a point in the right direction. If the software is truly standards-based in nature then it should play well...
That www.dell.com will automatically forward to www.dell.in?
Dell Support calls typically take between 30 minutes to an hour to finally get the problem acknowledged. Sometimes I would be at the point of frustration, figuring that much of my hourly rate would pay for just ordering new component rather than sit through the mindless B.S. Maybe that's Dell's intention. Most call center IVR (press this for this, press that that that) menus are intended to lose the customer. And most scripting is meant to lead them down the path of abandonment as well it seems.
Here's an example of a failed hard drive. First thing I did was replace it with another drive and the PC boots up fine. But place the old one in and it won't boot. Yep, I've FDISK'ed. It won't even FDISK. Blah, blah, blah. From there it took almost an hour to get the replacement ordered.
Seriously, though. Wouldn't I be able to google a current reference that they are still using FreeBSD?
But everyone's free to disagree for sure. The fact that there are satisfied folks using production FreeBSD deployments says a lot and probably does discount most of the trolling resulting from the main article.
In the past several years haven't seen any high profile company announcing they are running FreeBSD servers in their production environment. Perhaps I am missing something...