I think MS would have a rougher time invading the graphics space, than would say, Google. After using Picasa, there is no doubt in my mind Google understands UI.
I wonder how Microsoft will fare competing with Adobe and if any artistic/talented types have some input on it.
It appears another potential market for MS growth (virtualization) is being headed off by the release of free tools for the user, and possible open sourcing (talking about EMC/VMware).
Could Adobe be up to the same, going OSS with file formats to prevent MS from making inroads?
UO PVP was destroyed for the most part by the advent of UO:R
You yourself alluded to the same thing in your post.
A large number of players an excellent game does not make. It merely means they are successful in their marketing, or their game is addictive enough by horse&carrot type of things which are rote in MMOs.
This is how I feel about World of Warcraft, AKA FactionQuest AKA World of PVEcraft, AKA one of the most unambitious mediocre games ever published.
In WOW, endgame content basically consists of endless faction farming, nonstop instance grinding, and totally shitty PVP based primarily on gear.
I'd give my left nut for a revamp back to the original Ultima Online (which, strangely, had far superior endgame to most of the modern MMORPGs).
Gaming companies now are just going to follow Blizzard's lead for the next 5 years churning out shit games with polished UIs and somewhat decent netcode, instead of making something novel, inspiring and nonrepetitive.
Most vendors will downrank/ignore/contest vulnerabilities. Then they will try to make comparisons between themselves and their competitors off a biased vulnerability score, impact, etc.
Software vendors should have no part in acknowledging/ranking the legitimacy of vulnerabilities, once the security community has properly identified them, and repeated results, apart from sending a Thank you note to the security gurus that found the flaws.
Really, you can tell the Pentagon is getting smarter.
While there were probably many different sea animals they could have chosen (namely mammals), they selected the most repulsive and potentially horrifying animal with which to perform their research and development. If these were cute cuddly dolphins, the US media would go apesh.t with Flipper Reruns and talk of barbarism, not to mention the eco-outcry. Instead, most of us had the ominous Jaws theme repeating in our brains as we read the article, so most people will be quite apathetic to the plight of sharks.
First of all, SANS is considered the "entry level" security group. They overhype security issues on a regular basis. They remind me of Steve Gibson of GRC, another self proclaimed "security expert". They rehash old issues all the time. My favorite quote about them is actually from Dave Aitel though.
"I think it's funny they call themselves handlers instead of "people without computer science degrees or any knowledge of computer security trying desperately to learn how to read shellcode and informing a legion of other people about vulnerabilities, worms, and exploits a. la. the blind and deaf leading the blind". Reference http://lists.virus.org/dailydave-0405/msg00075.htm l
It appears SANS is trying to throw into question the legality of port scanning. Did they get wrong too? Maybe they should make another class on this, charge $2500 for 5 days of powerpoint sessions instead of showing their ignorance.
A professor not adhering to a best practice is a minor issue, at best. However, one round of namecalling deserves another!
I expect to be modded flame/trolling for this, but it is the truth.
Big financial markets, certain medical devices (huge liability), anything nuclear and intelligence/defense.
'Most of the code audits though, are for the low hanging fruit only, since a huge codebase can take a very long time to become familiar with, and the auditors never attain the same level of understanding as the original authors' (paraphrased as told to me by a defense code auditing guru).
The right to privacy does not in any way supercede the power of the executive branch to wage war. Precedent is already set too, certain of our rights can be suspended during war.
In the civil war, WWI, and WWII, presidents authorized the interception of correspondence traveling between certain geographical areas. Nothing new, but with a left leaning press, you have to make up a scandal where none exists, so the conspiracy theorists can do their thing.
I don't care if the Fed is running a project to profile terrorists based off financial transactions, purchases, telecommunications, all that jazz. Many private industries like choicepoint already gathered information close to that previously, not to mention the phone records etc.
What is scary though, is that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger identified members of the 9-11 terrorist group prior to their attack, yet the wall of seperation between the military and law enforcement created by Jamie Gorelick was sufficient to deter that information sharing to the FBI (Able Danger was a SOCOM project).
We in the US already know we don't have half the consumer protections our european cousins have. That is why companies share our information all the time, for cash. While it isn't something I like, it isn't something I can stop either. If those companies are exploiting my personal info for cash, why can't the US govt use that same kind of info to protect us?
All the slashdot conspiracy theorists need to wake up and smell the coffee. This is not 1960. The US now has very real enemies seeking to get here and slaughter innocents. Get off your stupid America hating, "we caused this" retarded platform too.
I'm all for TIA, and I'd love to see a biometric national ID card next.
Lots of people do not have cable/satellite and prefer to watch DVDs only. Some of them for religious reasons, other economic, and others still to escape the low quality programming.
I have noticed that when I turn around Netflix DVDs the fastest, the new DVDs tend to take longer.
I'm going to look over NF's competitors now, to see if they have any deals going. F'ing NF.
I think you misread my comments to be a straight comparison of JBoss to other java application server servers, instead of JBoss as the leading OSS application server, in competition with other OSS java application servers. The point of this article is an Oracle grab at key OSS apps leading to a complete Oracle stack.
JBoss is the leading open source java app server
OSS Java app servers with low/null acquisition costs are a high growth market. All those companies going to OSS with other parts of their stack, are likewise looking at their application servers. That big list you mentioned has how many OSS competitors for JBoss in it? JBoss, like many other other OSS, only captures a very % of market share for those fat support contracts.
OSS apps with comparable feature sets tend to grow their userbases at the expense of commercial applications. It is hard to compete with free.
It seems to me the latest trend is traditional software companies buying up the smaller firms that control notable OSS solutions.
JBoss, Zend, MySQL, BerkeleyDB all fit into this category.
As pointed out by tcopeland quoting Bruce Momjian, "What they are _not_ getting involved in is software that is community controlled, like PostgreSQL or Linux, because it much harder to see how a purchase would allow tight control of the software, resulting in revenue."
OSS that fits more into the category of community controlled OSS: Apache, Postgresql, Linux
It is pretty clear, that if you are moving into OSS primarily for financial reasons, keeping your OSS project company controlled is important, to later on monetize that investment via a sellout to a less agile, well funded monolith.
When I read over dismal financial news from SGI, or another less than stellar earnings report from SUN, or even the nefarious schemes of SCO, I think about the huge missed opportunities with Linux primarily.
Many of these companies could have adopted Linux in the period ending 1998-2000 when Linux had no strong commercial supporters and quickly led the new charge.
Merely being a figurehead but supporting Linux on x86 actively, and marketing low cost, quality commodity boxes would have been enough to put these companies on a strong financial footing.
While I would prefer to be running Postgresql on Linux/UNIX, i can personally attest to the performance of Postgresql on Windows.
I started using Postgresql on Windows when the 8.0 beta releases were coming out. Wow, talk about stable and mature! What was labeled beta software, felt like a stable version instead.
Rather than going with gotchas, go with Postgresql.
I'd be curious if it was all people outsourcing their homework to party or a combination of the following:
1. Horrible public university student-teacher ratios making assistance in the learning process not only non-existent, but also frowned upon. Said student achieving the boiling point in frustration and failing to have help, seeks aid, even if paid.
2. TAs teaching all the material, oftentimes in fields they have 0 training, with another person's lesson plan/material. I have endured too many upper division security courses now, with TAs that I rated between toilet paper and turd.
3. Onerous assignments by some professor that can barely speak english and instead should be enrolled in ESL 101, where merely deciphering the assignment requires a 10 year background in cryptanalysis and NSA supercomputers. "ha, I'll just give this to some indian coder, he'll understand my professor for sure!~"
4. Rote assignments that are equally dull, unchallenging and time-consuming
5. True students seeking more elegant/better/high-graded solutions. How many times have you cobbled together something that was ugly, functional, but practically a monstrosity. Spend a few more hours on it, with 0 forward progress, or outsource the work, then analyze the solution to see a better algorithm and incorporate it? Why get a C, when you can outsource some superior work, get a better grade, and learn more in the process?
First of all, I question security professor's judgement call that the CC is worthless. The main value behind the CC is for people to build secure systems to a set, standardized lists of requirements, and reading over unbiased evaluations gauging the fufillment of those requirements.
It is only people that fail to understand the set purpose of the CC that claim it has no value.
EAL4 is just the common level to evaluate products at, because it is internationally recognized.
Slashdot Mirror
Postgresql's replication has seen much improvement recently, and shortly you might have to eat those words.
Many internet users are novices and do not understand how to utilize search engines.
The Postgresql Community is superb. I've received a huge amount of help in #postgresql on irc.freenode.net . I cannot say enough about them
EnterpriseDB (based on Postgresql) has a nice new logo too, which hints at something.....
Coincidence? I think not!
May the best RDBMS win.
Schnorrer sounds better.
I think MS would have a rougher time invading the graphics space, than would say, Google. After using Picasa, there is no doubt in my mind Google understands UI.
http://picasa.google.com/
Picasa really does make navigating large amounts of photos a breeze. Free too, which is always a plus, and the integration with gmail is growing also.
I wonder how Microsoft will fare competing with Adobe and if any artistic/talented types have some input on it.
It appears another potential market for MS growth (virtualization) is being headed off by the release of free tools for the user, and possible open sourcing (talking about EMC/VMware).
Could Adobe be up to the same, going OSS with file formats to prevent MS from making inroads?
UO PVP was destroyed for the most part by the advent of UO:R
You yourself alluded to the same thing in your post.
A large number of players an excellent game does not make. It merely means they are successful in their marketing, or their game is addictive enough by horse&carrot type of things which are rote in MMOs.
"the circle jerk is complete"
This is how I feel about World of Warcraft, AKA FactionQuest AKA World of PVEcraft, AKA one of the most unambitious mediocre games ever published.
In WOW, endgame content basically consists of endless faction farming, nonstop instance grinding, and totally shitty PVP based primarily on gear.
I'd give my left nut for a revamp back to the original Ultima Online (which, strangely, had far superior endgame to most of the modern MMORPGs).
Gaming companies now are just going to follow Blizzard's lead for the next 5 years churning out shit games with polished UIs and somewhat decent netcode, instead of making something novel, inspiring and nonrepetitive.
That article hits the money.
This makes me think of the CVSS http://www.first.org/cvss/ and how inaccurate it also is.
Most vendors will downrank/ignore/contest vulnerabilities. Then they will try to make comparisons between themselves and their competitors off a biased vulnerability score, impact, etc.
Software vendors should have no part in acknowledging/ranking the legitimacy of vulnerabilities, once the security community has properly identified them, and repeated results, apart from sending a Thank you note to the security gurus that found the flaws.
This post is inaccurate.
When I was playing Everquest frequently, the standard consumer was still using ATA100 or slower drives.
I was using Ultrawide SCSI with a very fast (for that era) 9 GB drive.
I would load at least twice as fast as most people then. During that era, load times were quite lengthy, so it made a huge difference.
Many games (esp MMORPGs) use the HD far more than people realize.
Don't believe me though.
Read what the pros say about the simplicity of finding vulnerabilities in OS X
Really, you can tell the Pentagon is getting smarter.
a rk/catch2.htm so DOD could just full up one of these remotecontrol-sharks with a full belly of fat every few years or so.
While there were probably many different sea animals they could have chosen (namely mammals), they selected the most repulsive and potentially horrifying animal with which to perform their research and development. If these were cute cuddly dolphins, the US media would go apesh.t with Flipper Reruns and talk of barbarism, not to mention the eco-outcry. Instead, most of us had the ominous Jaws theme repeating in our brains as we read the article, so most people will be quite apathetic to the plight of sharks.
On second thought though, perhaps the selection of sharks is not such a bad idea after all. Great white sharks for instance, are nearly apex predators, but not quite http://www.cnn.com/EARTH/9710/08/whale.vs.shark/ They are also very efficient http://www.elasmo-research.org/education/white_sh
Better keep these things out of Chinese waters though, would hate for one of these things to get defin'd for soup.
First of all, SANS is considered the "entry level" security group. They overhype security issues on a regular basis. They remind me of Steve Gibson of GRC, another self proclaimed "security expert". They rehash old issues all the time. My favorite quote about them is actually from Dave Aitel though.
m l
"I think it's funny they call themselves handlers instead of "people without computer science degrees or any knowledge of computer security trying desperately to learn how to read shellcode and informing a legion of other people about vulnerabilities, worms, and exploits a. la. the blind and deaf leading the blind".
Reference http://lists.virus.org/dailydave-0405/msg00075.ht
It appears SANS is trying to throw into question the legality of port scanning. Did they get wrong too? Maybe they should make another class on this, charge $2500 for 5 days of powerpoint sessions instead of showing their ignorance.
A professor not adhering to a best practice is a minor issue, at best. However, one round of namecalling deserves another!
I expect to be modded flame/trolling for this, but it is the truth.
Big financial markets, certain medical devices (huge liability), anything nuclear and intelligence/defense.
'Most of the code audits though, are for the low hanging fruit only, since a huge codebase can take a very long time to become familiar with, and the auditors never attain the same level of understanding as the original authors' (paraphrased as told to me by a defense code auditing guru).
The right to privacy does not in any way supercede the power of the executive branch to wage war. Precedent is already set too, certain of our rights can be suspended during war.
In the civil war, WWI, and WWII, presidents authorized the interception of correspondence traveling between certain geographical areas. Nothing new, but with a left leaning press, you have to make up a scandal where none exists, so the conspiracy theorists can do their thing.
I don't care if the Fed is running a project to profile terrorists based off financial transactions, purchases, telecommunications, all that jazz. Many private industries like choicepoint already gathered information close to that previously, not to mention the phone records etc.
What is scary though, is that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger identified members of the 9-11 terrorist group prior to their attack, yet the wall of seperation between the military and law enforcement created by Jamie Gorelick was sufficient to deter that information sharing to the FBI (Able Danger was a SOCOM project).
We in the US already know we don't have half the consumer protections our european cousins have. That is why companies share our information all the time, for cash. While it isn't something I like, it isn't something I can stop either. If those companies are exploiting my personal info for cash, why can't the US govt use that same kind of info to protect us?
All the slashdot conspiracy theorists need to wake up and smell the coffee. This is not 1960. The US now has very real enemies seeking to get here and slaughter innocents. Get off your stupid America hating, "we caused this" retarded platform too.
I'm all for TIA, and I'd love to see a biometric national ID card next.
This is such a crock of shit.
Lots of people do not have cable/satellite and prefer to watch DVDs only. Some of them for religious reasons, other economic, and others still to escape the low quality programming.
I have noticed that when I turn around Netflix DVDs the fastest, the new DVDs tend to take longer.
I'm going to look over NF's competitors now, to see if they have any deals going. F'ing NF.
I think you misread my comments to be a straight comparison of JBoss to other java application server servers, instead of JBoss as the leading OSS application server, in competition with other OSS java application servers. The point of this article is an Oracle grab at key OSS apps leading to a complete Oracle stack.
JBoss is the leading open source java app server
OSS Java app servers with low/null acquisition costs are a high growth market. All those companies going to OSS with other parts of their stack, are likewise looking at their application servers. That big list you mentioned has how many OSS competitors for JBoss in it? JBoss, like many other other OSS, only captures a very % of market share for those fat support contracts.
OSS apps with comparable feature sets tend to grow their userbases at the expense of commercial applications. It is hard to compete with free.
Killing off the leading product in a high growth market is bad business. It doesn't appear logical.
I think people are misunderstanding the software subscription market too, and how vastly profitable it can be.
It seems to me the latest trend is traditional software companies buying up the smaller firms that control notable OSS solutions.
JBoss, Zend, MySQL, BerkeleyDB all fit into this category.
As pointed out by tcopeland quoting Bruce Momjian, "What they are _not_ getting involved in is software that is community controlled, like PostgreSQL or Linux, because it much harder to see how a purchase would allow tight control of the software, resulting in revenue."
OSS that fits more into the category of community controlled OSS:
Apache, Postgresql, Linux
It is pretty clear, that if you are moving into OSS primarily for financial reasons, keeping your OSS project company controlled is important, to later on monetize that investment via a sellout to a less agile, well funded monolith.
When I read over dismal financial news from SGI, or another less than stellar earnings report from SUN, or even the nefarious schemes of SCO, I think about the huge missed opportunities with Linux primarily.
Many of these companies could have adopted Linux in the period ending 1998-2000 when Linux had no strong commercial supporters and quickly led the new charge.
Merely being a figurehead but supporting Linux on x86 actively, and marketing low cost, quality commodity boxes would have been enough to put these companies on a strong financial footing.
Talk about business missteps!
Mysql on Windows? .......
While I would prefer to be running Postgresql on Linux/UNIX, i can personally attest to the performance of Postgresql on Windows.
I started using Postgresql on Windows when the 8.0 beta releases were coming out. Wow, talk about stable and mature! What was labeled beta software, felt like a stable version instead.
Rather than going with gotchas, go with Postgresql.
I'd be curious if it was all people outsourcing their homework to party or a combination of the following:
1. Horrible public university student-teacher ratios making assistance in the learning process not only non-existent, but also frowned upon. Said student achieving the boiling point in frustration and failing to have help, seeks aid, even if paid.
2. TAs teaching all the material, oftentimes in fields they have 0 training, with another person's lesson plan/material. I have endured too many upper division security courses now, with TAs that I rated between toilet paper and turd.
3. Onerous assignments by some professor that can barely speak english and instead should be enrolled in ESL 101, where merely deciphering the assignment requires a 10 year background in cryptanalysis and NSA supercomputers. "ha, I'll just give this to some indian coder, he'll understand my professor for sure!~"
4. Rote assignments that are equally dull, unchallenging and time-consuming
5. True students seeking more elegant/better/high-graded solutions. How many times have you cobbled together something that was ugly, functional, but practically a monstrosity. Spend a few more hours on it, with 0 forward progress, or outsource the work, then analyze the solution to see a better algorithm and incorporate it? Why get a C, when you can outsource some superior work, get a better grade, and learn more in the process?
First of all, I question security professor's judgement call that the CC is worthless. The main value behind the CC is for people to build secure systems to a set, standardized lists of requirements, and reading over unbiased evaluations gauging the fufillment of those requirements.
It is only people that fail to understand the set purpose of the CC that claim it has no value.
EAL4 is just the common level to evaluate products at, because it is internationally recognized.
The Information Assurance Technical Framework
http://www.iatf.net/
Obligatory Wikipedia link on CC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Criteria
I read the article. Afterwards though, I am more confused.
Was it an overdone example of poor writing, or posing-at-witty critique of OSS?
In the former, it succeeded brilliantly, and the latter, failed just as dramatically.
At least it was more entertaining than another paid microsoft shill's bogus study.
3/10 because I feel generous.