Another one that misses the point. I was responding to the fact that the OP says the survey is invalid because it didn't include HIS public web servers (and if it did, he thinks that would somehow change the #s).
I'm trying to say that the survey is totally pointless, because it doesn't give you a real idea of how many servers are deployed (because it can't).
I'd think an intranet site used to store R&D notes on drug research is more important than a public website which is parked, but if you think overwise that is certainly your choice.
We didn't do private intranet sites exclusively; there's a large soup company whose public sites I had a hand in mantaining and adding new functionality. There are others I can't mention because of NDA, but I can promise you know who they are. And we were an exclusively MS shop.
And you're missing the point; is a intranet web server which is critical for a company to do business less important than a public web site serving static content?
Not everyone has a couple grand they are able to flop down at the drop of a hat in order to get the latest and greatest, some people have very tight budgets.
No one said 'latest and greatest', but it IS possible to buy a new computer capable of running WindowsXP for $300. I don't think its THAT hard to scrap up $300.
If the white trash on welfare can afford a brand new truck and low profile tires and all that other shit, I'm sure they can use some of our money to buy a computer.
Nothing you said contradicts the statement (or the FCC rule) that the mircowave shouldn't be giving off harmful interference in the first place. What exactly is your point?
No one is saying throw it away. But to expect an application to support your legacy junk is unreasonable. You can still use Firefox, you just won't be able to upgrade after a certain point.
If you want to keep running your old hardware on your almost 10 year old OS, go ahead, but don't keep everyone else back that wants to move forward by demanding FF to support you.
Part of the argument for dropping Win9x support is that it doesn't run on Linux from 1995-1998 either.
I think its smart to drop support for Win9x; its a dead code base, and its numbers will only shrink.
Someone in the counter bug report got all huffy about using Win32 API calls (in response to another developer saying there are APIs that would help reduce code complexity alot, but can't use b/c its not compatible with 9x). I'm not sure what people expect; at some point, you're going to have to make calls to the OS, especially for a GUI app.
According to FCC standards, the microwave "may not cause harmful interference." I would think that means it shouldn't interfer with other devices nearby.
Any mircowave that is putting out that much EM noise I would consider defective. I don't think absorbing mircowaves all day is very good for you.
Please, stop pushing Linux as an alternative to Windows. Its not. It has some applications that provide the same or better functionality than Windows equivlents, but only some, not most. Also unlike Windows, there's still a large chunk of hardware which isn't supported or which is only partially supported.
Yes. If you fail to read the contracts you agree to, you may very well have your first-born taken away from you.
Continuing the stupidity I see? The only way to terminate your parental rights is to file something with a court. A contract selling your child would not be legal, since its illegal to sell your child.
By denying Microsoft the rights you agreed to granting them, you are indeed in breach of contract.
I'm not aware of anything that reconizes an EULA as a contract.
If you have a problem with this stuff - buy a Mac (and read the contract/EULA before you start using it) or run Linux (the same applies here).
Great, then people will have a power hungry brick that doesn't do what they want it to.
and you refuse to give me the car, pointing out the fine print that I had apparently agreed to fellate you daily and kill your in-laws
Even a lay-man like me knows that you can't write a contract and enforce points which are illegal. Prositution and murder are illegal, and all you'd have to do is go to court and they would invaliate that part of the contract (technically, its invalid the minute its inked, I believe). Then you'll get the car.
So you're saying that if MS decides to revoke your license, you should get your money back right? because you don't own it.
If you break or lose the installation CD, they should send you one costing you only shipping charges, right?
Your final point is stupid as well; no license can tell you what to do with hardware you own. Just like Acura can't force you to buy only Exxon gas. They can't even force you to take the car back to the dealer for service. So the reason not to add a clause is because it would never hold up.
Less commercial free channels than who, Clear Chanel?
Than XM Radio. Which isn't Clear Channel by the way.
Over 5 years, that's about 100 Million a year, there are lots of greater overspending in the sports world, and Howard has a 20 year track record of bringing in loyal listeners. It certainly was a gamble, but one that seems to be paying off.
What happens in the sports world is irrelevent. Sirrus is a company which was already in financial trouble and major debt before hiring Stern. And his track record is pretty much ruined, since MOST of his audience didn't follow him (and it doesn't look like they are going to either). Wasn't he bashing his former fans for not following him recently?
Another reason its not paying off like it should; Canada won't let Sirrus sell units, because Sirrus doesn't have channel blocking and they specifically won't allow Stern's broadcast in. Meanwhile XM was able to expand into Canada.
Broadcast radio 38 minutes an hour about 4.5 hours a day 5 days a week = 14.25 hours a week Sirius, 54 minutes an hour 5+ hours a day 4 days a week = 18 hours a week or 22.5 hours when he does work Friday, which has been about 1/2 the time so far. And even when he takes Friday off, the Friday show is quite entertainging, doing some behind the sceens stuff from earlier in the week and classic stuff from the WNBC days, which is great for those of us who've only been listening for 10 years.
Your point? O&A are now doing about 5 or 6 hours of radio a day which ends up being about 30 hours a week. he's alternating Friday's now because thats what his contract says he can do. Soon his contract will allow him to never work Friday's. Once that happens, he won't be on Friday's period. And you should realize most of his fans have been listening for more than 10 years, and probably have heard his old stuff more than enough.
Interesting that you became a fan 10 years ago, when he started doing sub-par radio (by his own admission). Personally I used to be a Stern fan, but in the late 90s to 2001 I was already starting to get bored of his show. It devolved into nothing by him saying how great he was, and how he couldn't do anything from the FCC and bitching about imitators. It really hit home when O&A started broadcasting afternoons on the same station (in Philly) that Stern was. They were doing some great radio under the same restrictions, and Stern became even more of a whinny bitch.
I have and I will
Well, enjoy sirrus while they last. I don't think it will be much longer..
No, but I'd expect them to know who their customers were. At the very least, they're going to need to have a credit card number in the ISP example. For online dating, anybody can just come along, say they're an 18yo virgin, then get some idiot to pay the dating site to contact the fraudster. Ironically, that's in the dating site's advantage - some bozo has just paid for their service, and the dating site has made profit from the fraudster being there.
The dating services do know who their paying customers are. Usually they also indicate who's a paying member or who isn't. I doubt people sign up because there is just one and only one profile they like. I'd think you would sign up for the dating that has a lot of people in the area. At any rate, would anyone sue my ISP because I'm trying to send scams out over the email? I haven't heard of a case like this yet. They'd contact my ISP to find out who I was, but they wouldn't use the ISP.
Furthermore, the case in the courts at the moment is claiming that a dating site paid for people to contact people. They are in a prime position to take advantage of people, and they shouldn't be able to do that.
Well, there's one valid complaint. But personally, if I used a dating service and wasn't getting actual dates out of it in a reasonable amount of time, I'd cancel it. No, the sites shouldn't be paying people who would never meet you to send flirty emails to keep you from canceling.
Really? I could have sworn you were guilty of that rather than me. I explicitly said that there are other reasons (and agendas) for introducing any kind of regulation, but that something being illegal is not a good reason to not regulate against it. I provided a single example of this. You claim that since my example does not cover the case of some other example, my entire reason is fallacious.
So let me understand. You put forth a thesis, attempt to prove it and I call you out on your proof. You come back with a response which is 'well, my proof is wrong but the thesis still stands.' Nice argument skills there. You might also notice that portion of my reply didn't actually claim your thesis was wrong, just that your argument supporting it sucked (which it does). I provide my own argument to why your thesis is wrong, independant of your example.
Because individually those bugs might not allow remote root, but in clever combination they would? Or perhaps there's also a hidden issue which wasn't widely known that the patch also fixes?
Also, you don't need to reboot Windows as much; often times you are told to because of a file lock, but you could easily unlock the file by stopping services which are using it at the time.
There are very very few servers in the world that need 100% uptime; if your server is that critical, why isn't there a fallback server you can rely on to bring the orginal down?
There really isn't any excuse not to patch, unless you want to leave yourself open.
I notice you never answered the question though; perhaps there is a security patch which you've not applied?
Implied in the article then, a Windows 2003 server would have to be "up" approximately 20% more to satisfy the "claim". Now, I am not a calendar "expert", but I'm having a difficult time believing that Windows 2003 server is up an average of 364 * 1.2, or 436.8 days a year. If it is, I'm buying.
I can't believe that, when so many other people have posted uptime calculations based on the numbers, that you got this completely wrong, and try to say there are more days in a year that there really are.
Hmmmmmn, so how many MS shops with an evaluation linux server (installed by their clueless MSCE) were included in this "survey"
I would hope the same number of Linux shows which had a Server 2k3 evaluation running.
Perhaps the MSCE wouldn't be so clueless if there was better documentation out there, which is the reason they believe the Linux servers were down more.
If Canada can receive the signal, I think it would stand to reason that Alaska can.
I live in Vermont, very close to canada, and while there are no repeaters here, I rarely have a problem (unless i'm surrounded by rock on both sides of the road).
Slashdot Mirror
Yes I often wonder why high schoolers don't have the education that a college graduate has.
And when the man page doesn't exist, or isn't clear on what exactly the command will do?
Or better yet, how about when you get a 20 page man document and trying to find the one option you want in that mess.
I think a better system is to click on a control and hit F1, which can explain to you everything you need to know about that input.
Another one that misses the point. I was responding to the fact that the OP says the survey is invalid because it didn't include HIS public web servers (and if it did, he thinks that would somehow change the #s).
I'm trying to say that the survey is totally pointless, because it doesn't give you a real idea of how many servers are deployed (because it can't).
I'd think an intranet site used to store R&D notes on drug research is more important than a public website which is parked, but if you think overwise that is certainly your choice.
Netcraft numbers are totally useless.
We didn't do private intranet sites exclusively; there's a large soup company whose public sites I had a hand in mantaining and adding new functionality. There are others I can't mention because of NDA, but I can promise you know who they are. And we were an exclusively MS shop.
And you're missing the point; is a intranet web server which is critical for a company to do business less important than a public web site serving static content?
Maybe you've got a spare £100 to waste on an OS, but as a student I don't have this sort of spare money laying around.
When I was in college, I certainly could afford a $300 computer (not that they had any at the time). That includes the OS.
Not everyone has a couple grand they are able to flop down at the drop of a hat in order to get the latest and greatest, some people have very tight budgets.
No one said 'latest and greatest', but it IS possible to buy a new computer capable of running WindowsXP for $300. I don't think its THAT hard to scrap up $300.
If the white trash on welfare can afford a brand new truck and low profile tires and all that other shit, I'm sure they can use some of our money to buy a computer.
Nothing you said contradicts the statement (or the FCC rule) that the mircowave shouldn't be giving off harmful interference in the first place. What exactly is your point?
I spent 7 years of my career building web applications for intranet or private internet usage only; I bet none of those are counted either.
No one is saying throw it away. But to expect an application to support your legacy junk is unreasonable. You can still use Firefox, you just won't be able to upgrade after a certain point.
If you want to keep running your old hardware on your almost 10 year old OS, go ahead, but don't keep everyone else back that wants to move forward by demanding FF to support you.
Part of the argument for dropping Win9x support is that it doesn't run on Linux from 1995-1998 either.
I think its smart to drop support for Win9x; its a dead code base, and its numbers will only shrink.
Someone in the counter bug report got all huffy about using Win32 API calls (in response to another developer saying there are APIs that would help reduce code complexity alot, but can't use b/c its not compatible with 9x). I'm not sure what people expect; at some point, you're going to have to make calls to the OS, especially for a GUI app.
According to FCC standards, the microwave "may not cause harmful interference." I would think that means it shouldn't interfer with other devices nearby.
Any mircowave that is putting out that much EM noise I would consider defective. I don't think absorbing mircowaves all day is very good for you.
Please, stop pushing Linux as an alternative to Windows. Its not. It has some applications that provide the same or better functionality than Windows equivlents, but only some, not most. Also unlike Windows, there's still a large chunk of hardware which isn't supported or which is only partially supported.
At this moment, I'm really trying to see the advantage I had in buying the software.
I assume the advantage is being able to run the software you want with just about any hardware you will buy in the future.
Yes. If you fail to read the contracts you agree to, you may very well have your first-born taken away from you.
Continuing the stupidity I see? The only way to terminate your parental rights is to file something with a court. A contract selling your child would not be legal, since its illegal to sell your child.
By denying Microsoft the rights you agreed to granting them, you are indeed in breach of contract.
I'm not aware of anything that reconizes an EULA as a contract.
If you have a problem with this stuff - buy a Mac (and read the contract/EULA before you start using it) or run Linux (the same applies here).
Great, then people will have a power hungry brick that doesn't do what they want it to.
and you refuse to give me the car, pointing out the fine print that I had apparently agreed to fellate you daily and kill your in-laws
Even a lay-man like me knows that you can't write a contract and enforce points which are illegal. Prositution and murder are illegal, and all you'd have to do is go to court and they would invaliate that part of the contract (technically, its invalid the minute its inked, I believe). Then you'll get the car.
So you're saying that if MS decides to revoke your license, you should get your money back right? because you don't own it.
If you break or lose the installation CD, they should send you one costing you only shipping charges, right?
Your final point is stupid as well; no license can tell you what to do with hardware you own. Just like Acura can't force you to buy only Exxon gas. They can't even force you to take the car back to the dealer for service. So the reason not to add a clause is because it would never hold up.
Its pretty easy to figure out he meant 2006.
Reversing the 6 for day and month doesn't change the date. It will still be June 6, regardless of the first being month or day.
Just a nitpick; one lawyer wanted the deposition to happen in his office, the other wanted it to happen at the court clerks office down the street.
Less commercial free channels than who, Clear Chanel?
Than XM Radio. Which isn't Clear Channel by the way.
Over 5 years, that's about 100 Million a year, there are lots of greater overspending in the sports world, and Howard has a 20 year track record of bringing in loyal listeners. It certainly was a gamble, but one that seems to be paying off.
What happens in the sports world is irrelevent. Sirrus is a company which was already in financial trouble and major debt before hiring Stern. And his track record is pretty much ruined, since MOST of his audience didn't follow him (and it doesn't look like they are going to either). Wasn't he bashing his former fans for not following him recently?
Another reason its not paying off like it should; Canada won't let Sirrus sell units, because Sirrus doesn't have channel blocking and they specifically won't allow Stern's broadcast in. Meanwhile XM was able to expand into Canada.
Broadcast radio 38 minutes an hour about 4.5 hours a day 5 days a week = 14.25 hours a week Sirius, 54 minutes an hour 5+ hours a day 4 days a week = 18 hours a week or 22.5 hours when he does work Friday, which has been about 1/2 the time so far. And even when he takes Friday off, the Friday show is quite entertainging, doing some behind the sceens stuff from earlier in the week and classic stuff from the WNBC days, which is great for those of us who've only been listening for 10 years.
Your point? O&A are now doing about 5 or 6 hours of radio a day which ends up being about 30 hours a week. he's alternating Friday's now because thats what his contract says he can do. Soon his contract will allow him to never work Friday's. Once that happens, he won't be on Friday's period. And you should realize most of his fans have been listening for more than 10 years, and probably have heard his old stuff more than enough.
Interesting that you became a fan 10 years ago, when he started doing sub-par radio (by his own admission). Personally I used to be a Stern fan, but in the late 90s to 2001 I was already starting to get bored of his show. It devolved into nothing by him saying how great he was, and how he couldn't do anything from the FCC and bitching about imitators. It really hit home when O&A started broadcasting afternoons on the same station (in Philly) that Stern was. They were doing some great radio under the same restrictions, and Stern became even more of a whinny bitch.
I have and I will
Well, enjoy sirrus while they last. I don't think it will be much longer..
No, but I'd expect them to know who their customers were. At the very least, they're going to need to have a credit card number in the ISP example. For online dating, anybody can just come along, say they're an 18yo virgin, then get some idiot to pay the dating site to contact the fraudster. Ironically, that's in the dating site's advantage - some bozo has just paid for their service, and the dating site has made profit from the fraudster being there.
The dating services do know who their paying customers are. Usually they also indicate who's a paying member or who isn't. I doubt people sign up because there is just one and only one profile they like. I'd think you would sign up for the dating that has a lot of people in the area. At any rate, would anyone sue my ISP because I'm trying to send scams out over the email? I haven't heard of a case like this yet. They'd contact my ISP to find out who I was, but they wouldn't use the ISP.
Furthermore, the case in the courts at the moment is claiming that a dating site paid for people to contact people. They are in a prime position to take advantage of people, and they shouldn't be able to do that.
Well, there's one valid complaint. But personally, if I used a dating service and wasn't getting actual dates out of it in a reasonable amount of time, I'd cancel it. No, the sites shouldn't be paying people who would never meet you to send flirty emails to keep you from canceling.
Really? I could have sworn you were guilty of that rather than me. I explicitly said that there are other reasons (and agendas) for introducing any kind of regulation, but that something being illegal is not a good reason to not regulate against it. I provided a single example of this. You claim that since my example does not cover the case of some other example, my entire reason is fallacious.
So let me understand. You put forth a thesis, attempt to prove it and I call you out on your proof. You come back with a response which is 'well, my proof is wrong but the thesis still stands.' Nice argument skills there. You might also notice that portion of my reply didn't actually claim your thesis was wrong, just that your argument supporting it sucked (which it does). I provide my own argument to why your thesis is wrong, independant of your example.
Because individually those bugs might not allow remote root, but in clever combination they would? Or perhaps there's also a hidden issue which wasn't widely known that the patch also fixes?
Also, you don't need to reboot Windows as much; often times you are told to because of a file lock, but you could easily unlock the file by stopping services which are using it at the time.
There are very very few servers in the world that need 100% uptime; if your server is that critical, why isn't there a fallback server you can rely on to bring the orginal down?
There really isn't any excuse not to patch, unless you want to leave yourself open.
I notice you never answered the question though; perhaps there is a security patch which you've not applied?
Implied in the article then, a Windows 2003 server would have to be "up" approximately 20% more to satisfy the "claim". Now, I am not a calendar "expert", but I'm having a difficult time believing that Windows 2003 server is up an average of 364 * 1.2, or 436.8 days a year. If it is, I'm buying.
I can't believe that, when so many other people have posted uptime calculations based on the numbers, that you got this completely wrong, and try to say there are more days in a year that there really are.
Care to tell us what distro / version you're using? It'd be interesting to see how many security holes were plugged in the past year.
Hmmmmmn, so how many MS shops with an evaluation linux server (installed by their clueless MSCE) were included in this "survey"
I would hope the same number of Linux shows which had a Server 2k3 evaluation running.
Perhaps the MSCE wouldn't be so clueless if there was better documentation out there, which is the reason they believe the Linux servers were down more.
If Canada can receive the signal, I think it would stand to reason that Alaska can.
I live in Vermont, very close to canada, and while there are no repeaters here, I rarely have a problem (unless i'm surrounded by rock on both sides of the road).