A-ha!!! You *ARE* a microserf!! I knew it!! Admit it, you're in the marketing department, aren't you? You're the one spamming/. with OT replies (err... not like my off topic replies *cough*)! FUD at it's best!!
For a while, you had me going. I suspected a fellow linux weenie trying to make MS marketing seem worse than it is. Glad I was wrong...
Has anyone noticed that this resembles the "damages" companies report after a cracker ("hacker" for you media-philes) attack?
I'm not a fan of NT in the workplace, but please! If you're going to abuse math, do it with some class. An editorial's ass should never be the source of statistical data.
Ahhh... But if I were CTO in a public company, I have to worry about the quarter. Shouldn't I take the short term view, as long as it doesn't kill the company, and just deal with the lower productivity?
If I switch over to your system, there will be a learning curve, and I'll have to worry about actually keeping my employees from leaving after 6 months. That goes against the way we do business in Amayrica, sayr!!
In a few current management training classes, they've pointed out that workers in the US learn the same thing that a lot of kids learn.
If I do a lot of work or try new things, I'll probably screw something up. If I do, then my boss will jump down my throat. So, I shouldn't try anything [including extra work].
Apparently, this style is passed via upbringing. Usually, parents don't pay attention to a kid unless he's screwed the pooch. So, you see, the general feel of workplace America (according to this line of reason) is the art of not being seen.
I do agree that the "lost" productivity is probably going into hard to measure areas.
On the topic of MS OSes, having dealt with Countrywide Home Loans' database and internet departments I'm not so sure that you're company's experience with MS OSes is too universal. They had top of the line hardware in happy little server farms with MS employees on site to boot [sic]. But it was still a hassle. As I've mentioned in previous posts, every Friday (or was it Sunday?) was reboot night in the server room. SQL Server had many problems too.
If this was just an application problem, like another poster suggested, you should be able to reclaim that lost memory by stopping and restarting the process. The OS should know what belongs to it and throw it back into the unused bit bucket. That simply doesn't happen.
I'm trying to be a fair-minded optimist. Maybe W2K *will* fix the problems that traditionally plague Windoze boxes. MS has hired a *lot* of great programmers. Until I see it for myself, I'll keep all of my vital programs and data on a unix flavour.
As a hardened windows programmer, I can assure you that it's accurate. A common problem with developing on Win32 (with MSDev products) is that when things go wrong they tend to go whacky!
Frequently, installing a tool will change a system dll. This has undefined results.
If you're doing a long term test, it can get difficult to tell whether your code is buggy, or if NT is just going wierd. I've seen some very good programmers go nuts over this.
Let me qualify this: it's not all the OS's fault. A lot of it is the build environment, other apps, & the million+ lines of code you're compiling. But then, the OS should be solid enough to let user apps go totally berzerk and not die a terrible death.
I'm not trying to say anything about the common clerk plugging away at a Word document. I haven't been around them much and don't know how MS OSes act there. The closest I've been to taht is ISP tech support. Quite frankly, if I never do tech support for Win95/98 or the ilk again, it will be too soon.
(Also, it's funny that me writing this is contributing to the lack of productivity...)
True, compared to previous versions of NT, 4.0 is much much better. However there are some rather disturbing things that my co-workers and I have noticed.
1) User programs are allowed to write to the system directory. This can probably be stopped by setting the permissions of winnt\system[xx] but this keeps a lot of programs from installing at all.
2) NT 4.0 occasionally doesn't know that a process is gone. We've noticed this mostly with IE4, MSDev, and just a handful of others. Since they don't showup in the process list, it's unlikely that it's the app's fault. Anyone know more?
3) (Secutiry & a little off topic) Anyone can take ownership of files. I'm a little foggy on this point. I haven't tested it thoroughly. But, it seems that, as documented, any user can take ownership of a file. Hmmm... Can anyone tell me this isn't so? (Please do)
All in all, my experience is that MS OSes are far *FAR* from being the "install and walk away" boxes a previous poster claimed.
I hope whatever company I'm working at in '01 will be using your upgrade plan. I'd like to work in an IT department that didn't have to go around rebooting the racks after business on Friday.
However, all the execs in major corps I've worked at (read as: very few) don't have this kind of foresight. It's by the quarter here in the US. If moving to a unix/linux flavour will make them look bad for a quarter or two, then that's a quarter or two of shit that the VPs et al. will have to take from the stock holders.
IMHO there will be more small-mid sized businesses trying to save money on licenses and man hours moving over first.
3) They think it has something to do with modern OS wars, or...
4) They think Turing is some type of application.
Seriously. So much of the history of cryptology (and computer developments brought from it) is clouded in secrecy it's a relief for a cipher-geek like myself to get any scraps of knowledge I can. It's a shame the whole paper isn't posted... Anyone know where I can get the whole paper?
I don't know what's more amaizing: 1) These people don't know who Turning was, 2) They don't know what he did, 3) They think it has something to do with modern OS wars, or... 4) They think Turing is some type of application. Seriously. So much of the history of cryptology (and computer developments brought from it) is clouded in secrecy it's a relief for a cipher-geek like myself to get any scraps of knowledge I can. It's a shame the whole paper isn't posted... Anyone know where I can get the whole paper?
David Kahn's book "Code Breakers" covers the breaking of Enigma quite well (actually, it's considered to be _the_ book on the history of cryptography). IIR it was the Polish that got a machine from the pre-war manufacturer of the device (he had troubles selling it) (???). I don't remember who determined how the wiring of the wheels went (yes, wrong term - I know).
Please note that it has been a _long_ time since I read that chapter and my info could be fault.
I doubt the $25 boom box manufacturers would consider that proposal. Tamper resistant hardware cost a chunk of change. To the electronics industry, the cost of redesigning their lower end lines to make the record companies happy would sound ludacrous. Sanyo and friends generally don't care is an RC is screwed out of royalties as long as the sales are up.
Don't discourage companies from trying to enforce copyrights; it happens to pay a lot of programmers' salaries (and gives the rest of us a good laugh in the mean time). If you think a more realistic view of copyright technology will cause suits to price product fairly, you haven't attended a business class:)
Actually, there are a number of cases where police used information obtained through an unauthorized wiretap as evidence and claimed that it was from an informant (34 NY2d, p 181; see, People v Carpenito, supra, p 68; People v Fulton, 44 NY2d 914, 916, supra; People v Huggins, supra, p 828). I believe that the issue here is whether or not these devices can abused in a similar way.
Just because the law is on the books, doesn't mean that people are obeying it.
True, but if a cop *was* going into your house and realized his "People-o-meter" was being shielded, that'd probably make him a bit jumpy.
Hey, I'm a uberprivacy advocate too; but, I don't see a short range heart beat/breathing detector as a realistic threat to privacy. This could be due to a misunderstanding...
I'm sorry sir, but your flame-throwing, machine-gun mounted, automated tanklet isn't allowed in the arena. Didn't you get our memo?
Re:Here's Looking at You, Jon...
on
Quack!
·
· Score: 1
The great irony is that Patrick McGoohan used TV to distribute his ideas to the public, just as American Pediatric association's report will be heard via TV and the internet. Funny how the world works.
Slashdot Mirror
A-ha!!! You *ARE* a microserf!! I knew it!! Admit it, you're in the marketing department, aren't you? You're the one spamming /. with OT replies (err... not like my off topic replies *cough*)! FUD at it's best!!
:)
For a while, you had me going. I suspected a fellow linux weenie trying to make MS marketing seem worse than it is. Glad I was wrong...
(um.... sorry 'bout that. I'll stop now
I wonder howmany AC posts have been coming from 207.46.130 these last two days. It'd be worth knowing.
So who invited the psychotic Microserf?
Yes, I believe there is a make install for apache.
Indeed.
Has anyone noticed that this resembles the "damages" companies report after a cracker ("hacker" for you media-philes) attack?
I'm not a fan of NT in the workplace, but please! If you're going to abuse math, do it with some class. An editorial's ass should never be the source of statistical data.
I agree there's a problem here, but it's your mission critial digital information :)
Ahhh... But if I were CTO in a public company, I have to worry about the quarter. Shouldn't I take the short term view, as long as it doesn't kill the company, and just deal with the lower productivity?
If I switch over to your system, there will be a learning curve, and I'll have to worry about actually keeping my employees from leaving after 6 months. That goes against the way we do business in Amayrica, sayr!!
In a few current management training classes, they've pointed out that workers in the US learn the same thing that a lot of kids learn.
If I do a lot of work or try new things, I'll probably screw something up. If I do, then my boss will jump down my throat. So, I shouldn't try anything [including extra work].
Apparently, this style is passed via upbringing. Usually, parents don't pay attention to a kid unless he's screwed the pooch. So, you see, the general feel of workplace America (according to this line of reason) is the art of not being seen.
I do agree that the "lost" productivity is probably going into hard to measure areas.
On the topic of MS OSes, having dealt with Countrywide Home Loans' database and internet departments I'm not so sure that you're company's experience with MS OSes is too universal. They had top of the line hardware in happy little server farms with MS employees on site to boot [sic]. But it was still a hassle. As I've mentioned in previous posts, every Friday (or was it Sunday?) was reboot night in the server room. SQL Server had many problems too.
If this was just an application problem, like another poster suggested, you should be able to reclaim that lost memory by stopping and restarting the process. The OS should know what belongs to it and throw it back into the unused bit bucket. That simply doesn't happen.
I'm trying to be a fair-minded optimist. Maybe W2K *will* fix the problems that traditionally plague Windoze boxes. MS has hired a *lot* of great programmers. Until I see it for myself, I'll keep all of my vital programs and data on a unix flavour.
Cool, thanks. That actually answers quite a few of my questions.
For the record, NT occationally gives the "shall I wait?" dialog box when you execute a forced shutdown via the API. That's my main gripe.
Sorry for the confusion.
As a hardened windows programmer, I can assure you that it's accurate. A common problem with developing on Win32 (with MSDev products) is that when things go wrong they tend to go whacky!
Frequently, installing a tool will change a system dll. This has undefined results.
If you're doing a long term test, it can get difficult to tell whether your code is buggy, or if NT is just going wierd. I've seen some very good programmers go nuts over this.
Let me qualify this: it's not all the OS's fault. A lot of it is the build environment, other apps, & the million+ lines of code you're compiling. But then, the OS should be solid enough to let user apps go totally berzerk and not die a terrible death.
I'm not trying to say anything about the common clerk plugging away at a Word document. I haven't been around them much and don't know how MS OSes act there. The closest I've been to taht is ISP tech support. Quite frankly, if I never do tech support for Win95/98 or the ilk again, it will be too soon.
(Also, it's funny that me writing this is contributing to the lack of productivity...)
True, compared to previous versions of NT, 4.0 is much much better. However there are some rather disturbing things that my co-workers and I have noticed.
1) User programs are allowed to write to the system directory. This can probably be stopped by setting the permissions of winnt\system[xx] but this keeps a lot of programs from installing at all.
2) NT 4.0 occasionally doesn't know that a process is gone. We've noticed this mostly with IE4, MSDev, and just a handful of others. Since they don't showup in the process list, it's unlikely that it's the app's fault. Anyone know more?
3) (Secutiry & a little off topic) Anyone can take ownership of files. I'm a little foggy on this point. I haven't tested it thoroughly. But, it seems that, as documented, any user can take ownership of a file. Hmmm... Can anyone tell me this isn't so? (Please do)
All in all, my experience is that MS OSes are far *FAR* from being the "install and walk away" boxes a previous poster claimed.
I hope whatever company I'm working at in '01 will be using your upgrade plan. I'd like to work in an IT department that didn't have to go around rebooting the racks after business on Friday.
However, all the execs in major corps I've worked at (read as: very few) don't have this kind of foresight. It's by the quarter here in the US. If moving to a unix/linux flavour will make them look bad for a quarter or two, then that's a quarter or two of shit that the VPs et al. will have to take from the stock holders.
IMHO there will be more small-mid sized businesses trying to save money on licenses and man hours moving over first.
I thought W2K was a Service Pack...
I don't know what's more amaizing:
1) These people don't know who Turning was,
2) They don't know what he did,
3) They think it has something to do with modern OS wars, or...
4) They think Turing is some type of application.
Seriously. So much of the history of cryptology (and computer developments brought from it) is clouded in secrecy it's a relief for a cipher-geek like myself to get any scraps of knowledge I can. It's a shame the whole paper isn't posted... Anyone know where I can get the whole paper?
I don't know what's more amaizing: 1) These people don't know who Turning was, 2) They don't know what he did, 3) They think it has something to do with modern OS wars, or... 4) They think Turing is some type of application. Seriously. So much of the history of cryptology (and computer developments brought from it) is clouded in secrecy it's a relief for a cipher-geek like myself to get any scraps of knowledge I can. It's a shame the whole paper isn't posted... Anyone know where I can get the whole paper?
David Kahn's book "Code Breakers" covers the breaking of Enigma quite well (actually, it's considered to be _the_ book on the history of cryptography). IIR it was the Polish that got a machine from the pre-war manufacturer of the device (he had troubles selling it) (???). I don't remember who determined how the wiring of the wheels went (yes, wrong term - I know).
Please note that it has been a _long_ time since I read that chapter and my info could be fault.
(Off topic)
:)
No, you're just a Unix weenie like the rest of us
I doubt the $25 boom box manufacturers would consider that proposal. Tamper resistant hardware cost a chunk of change. To the electronics industry, the cost of redesigning their lower end lines to make the record companies happy would sound ludacrous. Sanyo and friends generally don't care is an RC is screwed out of royalties as long as the sales are up.
Thank Dog for greed!
Don't discourage companies from trying to enforce copyrights; it happens to pay a lot of programmers' salaries (and gives the rest of us a good laugh in the mean time). If you think a more realistic view of copyright technology will cause suits to price product fairly, you haven't attended a business class :)
Actually, there are a number of cases where police used information obtained through an unauthorized wiretap as evidence and claimed that it was from an informant (34 NY2d, p 181; see, People v Carpenito, supra, p 68; People v Fulton, 44 NY2d 914, 916, supra; People v Huggins, supra, p 828). I believe that the issue here is whether or not these devices can abused in a similar way.
Just because the law is on the books, doesn't mean that people are obeying it.
Yeah, the only city that gives out money for police abuse on a regular basis is my home town, Los Angeles!!
;)
True, but if a cop *was* going into your house and realized his "People-o-meter" was being shielded, that'd probably make him a bit jumpy.
Hey, I'm a uberprivacy advocate too; but, I don't see a short range heart beat/breathing detector as a realistic threat to privacy. This could be due to a misunderstanding...
Try Pleasanton, Ca. It's a place of total Yuppie desolation :)
I'm sorry sir, but your flame-throwing, machine-gun mounted, automated tanklet isn't allowed in the arena. Didn't you get our memo?
The great irony is that Patrick McGoohan used TV to distribute his ideas to the public, just as American Pediatric association's report will be heard via TV and the internet. Funny how the world works.