Yes I covered that in another post. The regulation here is a consequence of a government dabbling in capitalism itself at the expense of the people it is supposed to represent - it's selling off a right to the highest bidders and nobody else gets it. IMHO governments are supposed to support people and the businesses they operate and not operate like a business itself since it has the overwhelming advantage of being able to allocate rights to some (such as itself) and not others.
Well that's the MS side with a bastard child of LDAP and a few issues to work out. Stuff is a bit more mature on other platforms - entire home directories on NFS, let alone profiles, were probably pretty safe in 1990.
Are you seriously trying to claim Office 2013 in Windows 8 is radically different?
Compared to XP users with Office2003 - most definitely in terms of workflow. Nearly a decade on I still get users bitching to me about the ribbon and asking me to find things in the UI for them.
IF you ignore the cost of shitty interoperability
That only matters if you are exchanging editable documents with outsiders. Personally I'm not fond of the idea of outsiders being able to change the terms of contracts or tweak the findings of technical reports to their own advantage.
That "interoperability" problem is overstated anyway. I've been in a mixed environment of *nix + MS for over a decade and the secretarial staff have had very few hassles over the years with documents in both openoffice format and MS formats - although incompatibilities between different versions of MS Word forced an upgrade on the MS side. That's with technical documents containing a lot of graphs, maps and other images. With typical office stuff I'm sure it would be even easier.
Go price a management solution for your 8,300 'free' desktops
A few sysadmins with ssh plus puppet or one of dozens of other similar system management tools. They don't even have to be paticularly experienced since this is now a very well travelled road. There's probably a few clusters that big being being managed by single sysadmins. Just because managing that many MS windows hosts with a bastard child of LDAP requires a lot of time doesn't mean it's going to take a long time with other platforms. With enough of a budget and a few recent graduates I could have rolled something like this out in 2004 let alone 2014 - as could have many others.
Typo "age old quick revenue fix" - the system of Royalty selling off the right of a person to operate a type of business and nobody else allowed to do so sucks. Variations of that suck less but the higher the barrier of entry the closer it resembles that royalist bullshit - a very frequent money raising tool of King John before Magna Carta and a bunch of well armed Barons established that he was not above the law.
I'd say it's just good old conflict of interest where the State is getting money from selling the right to operate taxis (or City in this case but the dirty work is passed up the chain via party affiliations) and people are undermining the business model of those making the money from the taxis. So what's the State to choose - the people it's supposed to represent or those giving it money? That's the conflict before it even considers whether the people undermining the business model have a case or not. Donations that directly benefit representatives of the State are also adding to the conflict of interest. Up against something like that it takes overt enough corruption to disgust a lot of people or a very compelling reason to change before anything changes the situation.
It's yet another reason why the age of quick revenue fix of selling various rights can suck when others want those rights. I wrote a long rant earlier about government sanctioned telecommunications monopolies, but deleted it off the end of this post since the message that I'm pissed off with paid for regulation is probably clear.
Capitalism at work - an example of a government that's been bought and paid for. Yet another example of why too much of a good thing sucks immensely and capitalism moderated by the public having an equal say is better than the richest person getting to set the rules for everyone else.
A potential competitor selling a scary pocket computer idea is gone, just like the linux netbook was killed by putting pressure on ASUS. I've got no idea how viable the idea of stuff like the N900 was - I've got one and still love it. Would it or it's successors have taken off? No idea, it was barely advertised and released very slowly (2 years between European and Australian releases, with the US fairly late as well) so it's almost as if Nokia was not trying to sell it.
but I'm afraid it's not even a grey cloud on the horizon as far as microsoft is concerned
Which is sadly a major problem with MS since you can use just about any word there other than linux. "Not invented here" is why we ended up with insecure piles of shit for years despite people inside MS knowing better from seeing examples elsewhere. Thus cut down CP/M with a Mac ripoff taped on top and then cut down VMS without the documentation, repeating the mistakes made elsewhere a decade or two after some of MS's own employees had seen the consequences elsewhere but couldn't get messages through the management structure.
but as long as there are 10 windows managers and 2000 distributions it'll never, ever happen.
There was one common desktop environment - called CDE of all things. Some people at Sun liked it and that's just about it. When you have a platform where nobody can force you to conform and nothing is perfect for everyone you get choice - it's a feature not a flaw. I'll remind you that not even MS has a single interface across all of their products - go to parts of "control panel" in Win8.1 if you want a reminder that it's not even consistent across a single product. I could be argued either way if it's a feature or flaw even in that case.
I don't think he tried to do that at all. His first act as President was to do a deal with terrorists, which of course he'd been setting up behind the scenes for months in a conspiracy with people inside intelligence agencies that comes pretty damn close to treason. Later he sent warships to support Iraq. He supplied weapons to Hezbolla less than a year after they blew up more than a hundred marines. He kicked the dying Russian bear to try to look tough and came very close to provoking a nuclear war. He was an actor putting on a show that was hiding that he was working against the interests of the USA.
Don't like what I've written? Try looking at it from the perspective of Hillary Clinton doing a deal with ISIS and getting intelligence agencies to stall official efforts while a Republican is in the White House and then announcing the deal some months later on election day. Do you think such a thing would be the right thing to do?
Sadly as you will see from his posting history it's a little window into living with mental illness and daily terror that his government will murder him like he thinks they murdered all those people in New York and Washington back in 2001. It's a symptom not an example of the problem.
and why don't these companies just move the servers out of USA too
I seem to recall a view being pushed hard that if an American company is involved somewhere then the servers are American even if they are in New Zealand - but it's till being tested in various courts. Such a thing tends to get very political however and the rule of law is unlikely to apply - only appeasement and deals.
So why can't other manufacturing facilities do the same?
It's generally called "co-generation", and although that applies to energy generated by a wide variety of means many are renewable. Burning methane from sewerage treatment plants to run generators is one with quite a few decades of history, another is burning plant waste such as "bagasse" from sugar cane.
There's different "support" - for instance there's some LSI controllers that FreeBSD is not happy to boot from but has no problems with anything that shows up on the adapter after boot.
Raidz of 4 drives for space or two mirrors in the pool for speed, with the SSD either as an OS drive outside the pool or caching for the pool. ZFS speed relates to the number of volumes, hence the comment above about large virtual devices (eg. a huge raidz array) versus smaller ones (several smaller raidz arrays or a bunch of mirrored pairs). For a single user the SSD probably won't make a lot of difference to the pool. Using an SSD as cache wins when there are a lot of people hitting the same files over and over and the files won't fit in main memory. In a lot of cases you are better off booting from it than putting it in the pool.
cpu and ram overhead (even by current standards, uses a tonne of resources)
It will use what it can get, but will get by with what it has. I've run it on a 32 bit "netburst" Xeon system with 4GB of ram and old IDE drives and was still pushing stuff out at 60Mb/s. Any modern machine with 8GB or more (preferably a lot more) and a few SATA disks should be able to saturate gigabit twice over.
doesn't like hardware raid
It's normally just better not to use it since your CPU/s are going to be able to do more than the little things on the RAID card plus those things don't have much memory. I've run it OK on top of RAID with cards that cannot do JBOD.
expandability sucks
Adding a new "volume" to a pool is trivial, with mirrors it's usually just another two, but with raidz2 that may be another 6 disks. I've done that a few times. The only thing that sucks is you are stuck with the existing volume configuration for the existing volumes so you can't just pop in one more disk and go from raidz1 to raidz2. With adhoc expansion you can add a two disk mirror to a pool with raidz1 since the volumes in the pool are independant, it's messy but it works as a way to add space to existing filesystems without changing anything else.
That's the killer feature especially as 10TB drives hit the market this week. A resilver puts just the used data on the drive while a rebuild fills the entire thing.
The zpool and zfs layers could be considered seperate in the same way - especially with things like zfs send to move filesystem snapshots to other pools which are usually on other machines. The filesystem does not get influenced by the nature of the pool and vice versa, so long as it's big enough to fit. Global options on pools (eg. no atime) are really just passed down to the filesystems instead of it being a zpool operation. It's really more like if LVM and ext4 were done by the same development team than a totally different and totally monolithic approach.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes I covered that in another post. The regulation here is a consequence of a government dabbling in capitalism itself at the expense of the people it is supposed to represent - it's selling off a right to the highest bidders and nobody else gets it. IMHO governments are supposed to support people and the businesses they operate and not operate like a business itself since it has the overwhelming advantage of being able to allocate rights to some (such as itself) and not others.
Yes - things such as e17 instead of the proof of concept stuff you are complaining about.
As for your screenshot - context please.
Well that's the MS side with a bastard child of LDAP and a few issues to work out. Stuff is a bit more mature on other platforms - entire home directories on NFS, let alone profiles, were probably pretty safe in 1990.
If you lost a lot of "work" with Power Point you are not using it as the simple presentation tool it is intended to be.
Early days and not built for speed - so try something like e17 instead of the newer proof of concept stuff.
That's pretty well it with stuff like puppet. Welcome to the 21st century where cluster computing methods have hit the desktop.
Compared to XP users with Office2003 - most definitely in terms of workflow. Nearly a decade on I still get users bitching to me about the ribbon and asking me to find things in the UI for them.
That only matters if you are exchanging editable documents with outsiders. Personally I'm not fond of the idea of outsiders being able to change the terms of contracts or tweak the findings of technical reports to their own advantage.
That "interoperability" problem is overstated anyway. I've been in a mixed environment of *nix + MS for over a decade and the secretarial staff have had very few hassles over the years with documents in both openoffice format and MS formats - although incompatibilities between different versions of MS Word forced an upgrade on the MS side. That's with technical documents containing a lot of graphs, maps and other images. With typical office stuff I'm sure it would be even easier.
A few sysadmins with ssh plus puppet or one of dozens of other similar system management tools. They don't even have to be paticularly experienced since this is now a very well travelled road.
There's probably a few clusters that big being being managed by single sysadmins. Just because managing that many MS windows hosts with a bastard child of LDAP requires a lot of time doesn't mean it's going to take a long time with other platforms. With enough of a budget and a few recent graduates I could have rolled something like this out in 2004 let alone 2014 - as could have many others.
Typo "age old quick revenue fix" - the system of Royalty selling off the right of a person to operate a type of business and nobody else allowed to do so sucks. Variations of that suck less but the higher the barrier of entry the closer it resembles that royalist bullshit - a very frequent money raising tool of King John before Magna Carta and a bunch of well armed Barons established that he was not above the law.
I'd say it's just good old conflict of interest where the State is getting money from selling the right to operate taxis (or City in this case but the dirty work is passed up the chain via party affiliations) and people are undermining the business model of those making the money from the taxis. So what's the State to choose - the people it's supposed to represent or those giving it money? That's the conflict before it even considers whether the people undermining the business model have a case or not. Donations that directly benefit representatives of the State are also adding to the conflict of interest.
Up against something like that it takes overt enough corruption to disgust a lot of people or a very compelling reason to change before anything changes the situation.
It's yet another reason why the age of quick revenue fix of selling various rights can suck when others want those rights. I wrote a long rant earlier about government sanctioned telecommunications monopolies, but deleted it off the end of this post since the message that I'm pissed off with paid for regulation is probably clear.
That's what she said.
Capitalism at work - an example of a government that's been bought and paid for. Yet another example of why too much of a good thing sucks immensely and capitalism moderated by the public having an equal say is better than the richest person getting to set the rules for everyone else.
Let's not, that's getting as irrelevant to comparing manufacture of welding rods to sex toys.
A potential competitor selling a scary pocket computer idea is gone, just like the linux netbook was killed by putting pressure on ASUS.
I've got no idea how viable the idea of stuff like the N900 was - I've got one and still love it. Would it or it's successors have taken off? No idea, it was barely advertised and released very slowly (2 years between European and Australian releases, with the US fairly late as well) so it's almost as if Nokia was not trying to sell it.
Which is sadly a major problem with MS since you can use just about any word there other than linux. "Not invented here" is why we ended up with insecure piles of shit for years despite people inside MS knowing better from seeing examples elsewhere. Thus cut down CP/M with a Mac ripoff taped on top and then cut down VMS without the documentation, repeating the mistakes made elsewhere a decade or two after some of MS's own employees had seen the consequences elsewhere but couldn't get messages through the management structure.
There was one common desktop environment - called CDE of all things. Some people at Sun liked it and that's just about it. When you have a platform where nobody can force you to conform and nothing is perfect for everyone you get choice - it's a feature not a flaw. I'll remind you that not even MS has a single interface across all of their products - go to parts of "control panel" in Win8.1 if you want a reminder that it's not even consistent across a single product. I could be argued either way if it's a feature or flaw even in that case.
I don't think he tried to do that at all. His first act as President was to do a deal with terrorists, which of course he'd been setting up behind the scenes for months in a conspiracy with people inside intelligence agencies that comes pretty damn close to treason. Later he sent warships to support Iraq. He supplied weapons to Hezbolla less than a year after they blew up more than a hundred marines. He kicked the dying Russian bear to try to look tough and came very close to provoking a nuclear war. He was an actor putting on a show that was hiding that he was working against the interests of the USA.
Don't like what I've written? Try looking at it from the perspective of Hillary Clinton doing a deal with ISIS and getting intelligence agencies to stall official efforts while a Republican is in the White House and then announcing the deal some months later on election day. Do you think such a thing would be the right thing to do?
Sadly as you will see from his posting history it's a little window into living with mental illness and daily terror that his government will murder him like he thinks they murdered all those people in New York and Washington back in 2001. It's a symptom not an example of the problem.
I seem to recall a view being pushed hard that if an American company is involved somewhere then the servers are American even if they are in New Zealand - but it's till being tested in various courts. Such a thing tends to get very political however and the rule of law is unlikely to apply - only appeasement and deals.
It's generally called "co-generation", and although that applies to energy generated by a wide variety of means many are renewable. Burning methane from sewerage treatment plants to run generators is one with quite a few decades of history, another is burning plant waste such as "bagasse" from sugar cane.
There's different "support" - for instance there's some LSI controllers that FreeBSD is not happy to boot from but has no problems with anything that shows up on the adapter after boot.
Raidz of 4 drives for space or two mirrors in the pool for speed, with the SSD either as an OS drive outside the pool or caching for the pool. ZFS speed relates to the number of volumes, hence the comment above about large virtual devices (eg. a huge raidz array) versus smaller ones (several smaller raidz arrays or a bunch of mirrored pairs).
For a single user the SSD probably won't make a lot of difference to the pool. Using an SSD as cache wins when there are a lot of people hitting the same files over and over and the files won't fit in main memory. In a lot of cases you are better off booting from it than putting it in the pool.
I'd say the answer is do that, but be prepared to do it again properly later :) ZFS send to something set up properly is a good cure for early fuckups.
It will use what it can get, but will get by with what it has. I've run it on a 32 bit "netburst" Xeon system with 4GB of ram and old IDE drives and was still pushing stuff out at 60Mb/s. Any modern machine with 8GB or more (preferably a lot more) and a few SATA disks should be able to saturate gigabit twice over.
It's normally just better not to use it since your CPU/s are going to be able to do more than the little things on the RAID card plus those things don't have much memory. I've run it OK on top of RAID with cards that cannot do JBOD.
Adding a new "volume" to a pool is trivial, with mirrors it's usually just another two, but with raidz2 that may be another 6 disks. I've done that a few times. The only thing that sucks is you are stuck with the existing volume configuration for the existing volumes so you can't just pop in one more disk and go from raidz1 to raidz2. With adhoc expansion you can add a two disk mirror to a pool with raidz1 since the volumes in the pool are independant, it's messy but it works as a way to add space to existing filesystems without changing anything else.
That's the killer feature especially as 10TB drives hit the market this week. A resilver puts just the used data on the drive while a rebuild fills the entire thing.
The zpool and zfs layers could be considered seperate in the same way - especially with things like zfs send to move filesystem snapshots to other pools which are usually on other machines. The filesystem does not get influenced by the nature of the pool and vice versa, so long as it's big enough to fit. Global options on pools (eg. no atime) are really just passed down to the filesystems instead of it being a zpool operation.
It's really more like if LVM and ext4 were done by the same development team than a totally different and totally monolithic approach.