That's unfortunate, because.NET does not require DCOM at all.
DCOM uses RPC which means that firewalls have to allow the entire high port range
Yes, well, you can always open DCOMCNFG, switch to the protocols tab, select the TCP/IP entry and set the port range that suits you. Wow.
MS consultant all insisted this was standard and typical
An "MS consultant" told you you needed DCOM to jump over tiers with.NET and failed to tell you that you can select a port range to play nice with your firewall over the DMZ? Crap, I would have called his boss or the TAM at the regional office and have his ass fired.
consultant strongly urged not doing multi-tiered
You know what, while I don't doubt that there's someone dumb enough to recommend something like that out there, I really doubt it was an "MS consultant". Microsoft is moving away from heavy physical tier designs to avoid the wire overhead (which admittedly makes them look slightly stupid after years of telling everyone to use as many boxes as possible), but to recommend running the application and the database server on the same box is just plain retarded. MSCS (or whomever you were supposedly talking to) has some dumb people in the file and rank, but not *that* dumb.
I'm gonna have to call bullshit on your apocryphal story here, unless by "MS consultant" you mean some random dude that has an MCSD and has read "Software Fortresses" five times while moving his lips.
I can deal with the 12-year olds and their technically challenged invective "OMFG M$ Winblows BSOD'ed 23 times T0DAY!! LOLOLOL!!!1" bullshit.
I can deal with the insightful-sounding blogorrheic shallow crap regurgitated from the darkest depths of "teh interweb" for the sake of a chuckle from the peanut gallery and a shitload of ad impressions for OSDN.
I can deal with the hysterical flamebait shit that gets posted day in and day out that later turns out to be "oops, here's a three line correction in Slashback three days later" factually wrong.
I can deal with the smug, hippy liberal "we are so cool, we know better and you suck" unchecked editorializing.
I can deal with the nutcases who run their "Technology as a religion 101" courses at the sound of clapping and +5 mods from retard fanboys.
I can deal with a bunch of stuff, mostly because developers.slashdot.org seems to keep me informed about what's happening out there beyond my normal areas of interest and work. And of course, it's all free.
But this - this is as bad as it gets. What, filing it under "Biotech" and the "outsourcing" bullshit addendum were supposed to legitimize this piece of crap?
I don't blame the asshole who submitted this, no. It's the asshole that posted it. And little by little this place is becoming the running joke of the tech world.
TP monitoring systems including CICS, Tuxedo, and Encina
Q: What does a transaction processing system have to do with a binary-level interop system? A: Not much.
DCOM, MTS, COM+, the MSDTC and all of that are simply higher-level implementations of the interoperability mechanism afforded by the COM spec. Marshaling policies, explicit contracts through descriptors (IDL), threading rules and a common type system. ActiveX, OLE, OCX '96 and ADS are examples other systems that use COM as their transport/interop core. Microsoft built a lot of their infrastructure on top of COM. But COM has nothing to do with transactions, nor is it an app server. You confuse specifications with implementations.
There are other ways to do IPC on Windows that have nothing to do with COM. Named pipes, mailslots, sockets, the window messaging subsystem, DDE. Take your pick.
Unix has nothing that even begins to resemble COM. Otherwise maybe the GNOME folks wouldn't have had to reinvent the wheel when they came up with bonobo, wich is a badly done copy of COM.
Finally, COM does not have to be "hosted" in DLLs, nor is the Win32 library model tied to COM or viceversa. You can happily do cross-process COM using standalone executables.
If someone gave you the courtesy of actually modding you up, perhaps you could give us the courtesy of explaining just what in Unix is similar to COM. And here's a free hint to get you started - COM is not simply an IPC mechanism.
Let's go then, we're all waiting with bated breath and all that.
I'm not entirely sure how it works, but I'll tell you how I think it works...
Basically if you're using Blogger as a service and publishing through on your own server, it will index it every time you re-publish the index. That's what I think happens from observation and monitoring the Google cache. I might be wrong.
If you use the Blogspot service then you need at least *one* incoming external link to be indexed. A friend of mine created a blog there, and I linked to it from my blog published to my own server. Within a few days the "page rank" for his blog jumped from "not indexed" or zero to two. Most Blogspot blogs are not linked to from anywhere and so Google does not index them at all.
Take this with a grain of salt - it's just based on my observations over the past few months. It could be just a bunch of coincidences.
Blogspot is overflowing with these. Take a look at this this for example(don't want to go there with IE, BTW), or this one or this one.
If you use the 'next blog' randomizing feature on blogs you'll see that roughly one out of five 'blogs' are nothing but link farms, worm repositories and bullshit like that.
And this has been going on for quite a while. We all know that Google has a fondness for indexing Blogger content rather quickly, and so do the spammers. It's about time the company did something about it.
Really, so according to you if they were using Linux, OS X or BSD they'd be patching like there's no tomorrow. Ah, yes. Using non-Microsoft OSes automagically increases corporate IQ by 200 points. I forgot about that. Yes, because if you use Windows, you're "lazy or ignorant or both".
I know that being a typical slashbot involves blindly believing any flamebait FUD about "M$" you happen read on your favorite website (and boy, do you get material these days, eh?), but do try to use other sources for your information and keep some perspective. It helps.
OMG, you people really crack me up. You have it all figured out.
It's so convenient to ignore that this worm affects a 7-year old operating system, and that XP SP2/2003 are not affected. No, instead we just keep mumbling the mantra.
Someone from the Mozilla Foundation should probably take a gander at this and disavow it (if it is false, I'm assuming parent is a troll). The problem is that if it is modded up further it will become part of the final archived static page, which is what Google and Yahoo and all the others index.
Or, just mod this guy down to -1 so he's not successful at spreading dumb rumours.
Yes, I know the party line. You, Richard Stallman and everyone else has been claiming for years that Microsoft is about to unleash patent hell on everyone.
I would believe your insightful argument if it actually addressed my original question and - more importantly - it wasn't Microsoft getting hit every other month by IP farms and submarine patents and having to fight or pay them off in order to do business. I'd buy it if it wasn't for the fact that IBM has about 10 times more patents that Microsoft, and your little example is pointless - RMS himself did an op-ed piece about how releasing those patents (and that includes the ones released by CA) was just a PR show with little value. Sorry, but you don't get to use those things as sound bytes to add credence to your argument that Microsoft is theoretically more evil than they are.
Until something actually happens, all your apocalyptic endgame blabber is just that: blabber. The patent system is broken and Microsoft is playing the game because they have to, unlike other companies that make the game their principal source of income.
Let's take them to task about the things they actually do instead of spreading FUD about them (like we claim they do) and behave like retarded children who have nothing better to do. The more bullshit claims and conspiracy theories you try to use against them, the less people will believe you when you actually raise the alarm about something important.
They did not attempt anything. Did you notice a sudden drop in the production of FAT-based devices? No. Did you hear about Microsoft "pressuring" Lexar to ship Windows with their USB keychain drives? No. There was a Slashdork article (which I'm sure everyone remembers) that claimed the sky was falling and "M$" was "teh evil", as usual. Nothing came of it.
Bogus as the patent might be (and most software patents are anyway), it does not constitute proof that "Microsoft is using patents to pressure their competitors", which was the original bullshit claim.
They do enough bad things for everyone to claim they also eat babies. You lose credibility every time you say things like that, because the next time you make a real claim everyone remembers your past FUD.
Sure, maybe we can do that later. We'll do the Nostradamus "they're doing X so then they'll do Y because of Z" theoretical paranoid-type of discussion you probably enjoy very much. In the meantime, what part of:
Please provide some examples of Microsoft using patents to pressure their competitors
Remember, there is no such thing as a "slashdot community", so there is no such thing as a "fellow slashdotter". This is the line I've been given when attempting to explore the Slashdot Groupthink theory. So I could hardly be doing what you say I'm doing.
In any case, "retarded asswipe" does not smack of hysterical quasi-elitism wrapped in a lame and childish attempt at humor. It just stipulates that the recipient is... well, a retarded asswipe.
Let me repeat the question, since you seem to have missed it: Show me an instance of Microsoft using a patent to "pressure competitors". Not "show me examples of Microsoft patents", even stupid ones (which those admittedly are).
and people bitch and moan when I use the abbreviation M$
That's pretty funny, especially considering where you're at. But to clarify, I would hardly "bitch and moan" about that, I'd point out that by using it you make it clear that you're just another retarded asswipe who uses a "joke" that ceased to be "funny" in 1997 to "fit in" and feel "l33t", just like all the other retarded asswipes on "teh interweb" that use terms like "Winblows" and "Microshaft" and whatnot because they figure they're making some sort of social statement.
Other than that, you seem to have some sick fixation with posting on Slashdork. If it's getting too bad I suggest you seek professional help.
Please provide some examples of Microsoft using patents to prssure their competitors. Other than the ASF case, which was hardly "pressure" and hardly a "competitor".
Not only that, but Slashdork has been reduced to parroting stories from OSNews. I saw this one there days ago.
I never thought I'd say that something run by Loli-Queru would be better than anything else, but OSNews is really becoming the place to get these types of news, without the "OMFG TEH SKY IS TEH FALLING!!1!!" bullshit and the ever-prevalent childish attitude.
Having worked extensively in the education market (both private in public) and with the AZ/NV/NM departments of education, I think this is a very good idea. Schools have to find ways to cut their spiraling costs, and this is a good place to start. The next place would be to stop funding sloppy fly-by-night charter schools, but that's another rant.
I prefer the Microsoft platform for application development, but it makes no difference what the students and teachers are using the access the applications, since they're all web-based. Be it curriculum delivery, school management systems (SMS) or even internal administration applications.
I say more power to the schools. They should be concentrating on educating our kids and saving more of our taxes.
The real issue is that I do not want a case-sensitive file system, or one that requires me to do all sorts of command line incantations to run a script. It's not my fault that Joe User and his 1,000,000 friends are stupid.
In any case, I can send you a tarball with the execute bit turned on and ask you to unpack it and run the REAL COOL ANNA KOURNIKOVA SCREENSAVER!!!, and chances are you'll do it. Chances are when Linux hits the "big time" there will be something slightly more functional than FileRoller out there. Chances are you'll give me your root password if I ask for it nicely. Chances are your assumptions or superiority are unfounded. People got infected with worms that came in on password protected zip files. Do you think you can engineer away user stupidity? That's scary.
to hide the file extension from the user
Bad design call, yes. OTOH, I could care less, I always turn it off.
But very few of the most widespread viruses in the world rely on vulnerabilities.
Right, and assuming you are Hypponen, how does this affect you (or not)? I was making a comment about Slashdot, not you.
OTOH, assuming you are who you say you are, let me just say that I'm hardly the first person in the world to point out that companies like F-Secure tend to be on the unfortunate side of hysteria when it comes to reporting vulnerabilities. So don't be offended by that, we understand how the business works. It's OK.
Slashdot Mirror
That's unfortunate, because .NET does not require DCOM at all.
DCOM uses RPC which means that firewalls have to allow the entire high port range
Yes, well, you can always open DCOMCNFG, switch to the protocols tab, select the TCP/IP entry and set the port range that suits you. Wow.
MS consultant all insisted this was standard and typical
An "MS consultant" told you you needed DCOM to jump over tiers with .NET and failed to tell you that you can select a port range to play nice with your firewall over the DMZ? Crap, I would have called his boss or the TAM at the regional office and have his ass fired.
consultant strongly urged not doing multi-tiered
You know what, while I don't doubt that there's someone dumb enough to recommend something like that out there, I really doubt it was an "MS consultant". Microsoft is moving away from heavy physical tier designs to avoid the wire overhead (which admittedly makes them look slightly stupid after years of telling everyone to use as many boxes as possible), but to recommend running the application and the database server on the same box is just plain retarded. MSCS (or whomever you were supposedly talking to) has some dumb people in the file and rank, but not *that* dumb.
I'm gonna have to call bullshit on your apocryphal story here, unless by "MS consultant" you mean some random dude that has an MCSD and has read "Software Fortresses" five times while moving his lips.
- I can deal with the 12-year olds and their technically challenged invective "OMFG M$ Winblows BSOD'ed 23 times T0DAY!! LOLOLOL!!!1" bullshit.
- I can deal with the insightful-sounding blogorrheic shallow crap regurgitated from the darkest depths of "teh interweb" for the sake of a chuckle from the peanut gallery and a shitload of ad impressions for OSDN.
- I can deal with the hysterical flamebait shit that gets posted day in and day out that later turns out to be "oops, here's a three line correction in Slashback three days later" factually wrong.
- I can deal with the smug, hippy liberal "we are so cool, we know better and you suck" unchecked editorializing.
- I can deal with the nutcases who run their "Technology as a religion 101" courses at the sound of clapping and +5 mods from retard fanboys.
I can deal with a bunch of stuff, mostly because developers.slashdot.org seems to keep me informed about what's happening out there beyond my normal areas of interest and work. And of course, it's all free.But this - this is as bad as it gets. What, filing it under "Biotech" and the "outsourcing" bullshit addendum were supposed to legitimize this piece of crap?
I don't blame the asshole who submitted this, no. It's the asshole that posted it. And little by little this place is becoming the running joke of the tech world.
Q: What does a transaction processing system have to do with a binary-level interop system? A: Not much.
DCOM, MTS, COM+, the MSDTC and all of that are simply higher-level implementations of the interoperability mechanism afforded by the COM spec. Marshaling policies, explicit contracts through descriptors (IDL), threading rules and a common type system. ActiveX, OLE, OCX '96 and ADS are examples other systems that use COM as their transport/interop core. Microsoft built a lot of their infrastructure on top of COM. But COM has nothing to do with transactions, nor is it an app server. You confuse specifications with implementations.
There are other ways to do IPC on Windows that have nothing to do with COM. Named pipes, mailslots, sockets, the window messaging subsystem, DDE. Take your pick.
Unix has nothing that even begins to resemble COM. Otherwise maybe the GNOME folks wouldn't have had to reinvent the wheel when they came up with bonobo, wich is a badly done copy of COM.
Finally, COM does not have to be "hosted" in DLLs, nor is the Win32 library model tied to COM or viceversa. You can happily do cross-process COM using standalone executables.
Hope that helps.
Let's go then, we're all waiting with bated breath and all that.
Basically if you're using Blogger as a service and publishing through on your own server, it will index it every time you re-publish the index. That's what I think happens from observation and monitoring the Google cache. I might be wrong.
If you use the Blogspot service then you need at least *one* incoming external link to be indexed. A friend of mine created a blog there, and I linked to it from my blog published to my own server. Within a few days the "page rank" for his blog jumped from "not indexed" or zero to two. Most Blogspot blogs are not linked to from anywhere and so Google does not index them at all.
Take this with a grain of salt - it's just based on my observations over the past few months. It could be just a bunch of coincidences.
Firefox kept asking me if I wanted to "launch the application".
If you use the 'next blog' randomizing feature on blogs you'll see that roughly one out of five 'blogs' are nothing but link farms, worm repositories and bullshit like that.
And this has been going on for quite a while. We all know that Google has a fondness for indexing Blogger content rather quickly, and so do the spammers. It's about time the company did something about it.
~ NO CARRIER
That's all very insightful. Maybe I could borrow your crystal ball one of these days.
"Rogue element" indeed. It always helps to have IBM and Novell behind your idealistic destroyer of evil commercial software empires, doesn't it?
Sometimes I wonder if you people really believe this "viva la revolucion" sophistic drivel.
Really, so according to you if they were using Linux, OS X or BSD they'd be patching like there's no tomorrow. Ah, yes. Using non-Microsoft OSes automagically increases corporate IQ by 200 points. I forgot about that. Yes, because if you use Windows, you're "lazy or ignorant or both".
I know that being a typical slashbot involves blindly believing any flamebait FUD about "M$" you happen read on your favorite website (and boy, do you get material these days, eh?), but do try to use other sources for your information and keep some perspective. It helps.
It's so convenient to ignore that this worm affects a 7-year old operating system, and that XP SP2/2003 are not affected. No, instead we just keep mumbling the mantra.
What a hoot.
Or, just mod this guy down to -1 so he's not successful at spreading dumb rumours.
I would believe your insightful argument if it actually addressed my original question and - more importantly - it wasn't Microsoft getting hit every other month by IP farms and submarine patents and having to fight or pay them off in order to do business. I'd buy it if it wasn't for the fact that IBM has about 10 times more patents that Microsoft, and your little example is pointless - RMS himself did an op-ed piece about how releasing those patents (and that includes the ones released by CA) was just a PR show with little value. Sorry, but you don't get to use those things as sound bytes to add credence to your argument that Microsoft is theoretically more evil than they are.
Until something actually happens, all your apocalyptic endgame blabber is just that: blabber. The patent system is broken and Microsoft is playing the game because they have to, unlike other companies that make the game their principal source of income.
Let's take them to task about the things they actually do instead of spreading FUD about them (like we claim they do) and behave like retarded children who have nothing better to do. The more bullshit claims and conspiracy theories you try to use against them, the less people will believe you when you actually raise the alarm about something important.
Bogus as the patent might be (and most software patents are anyway), it does not constitute proof that "Microsoft is using patents to pressure their competitors", which was the original bullshit claim.
They do enough bad things for everyone to claim they also eat babies. You lose credibility every time you say things like that, because the next time you make a real claim everyone remembers your past FUD.
Sure, maybe we can do that later. We'll do the Nostradamus "they're doing X so then they'll do Y because of Z" theoretical paranoid-type of discussion you probably enjoy very much. In the meantime, what part of:
Did you manage to miss back there?
Remember, there is no such thing as a "slashdot community", so there is no such thing as a "fellow slashdotter". This is the line I've been given when attempting to explore the Slashdot Groupthink theory. So I could hardly be doing what you say I'm doing.
In any case, "retarded asswipe" does not smack of hysterical quasi-elitism wrapped in a lame and childish attempt at humor. It just stipulates that the recipient is... well, a retarded asswipe.
Let me repeat the question, since you seem to have missed it: Show me an instance of Microsoft using a patent to "pressure competitors". Not "show me examples of Microsoft patents", even stupid ones (which those admittedly are).
That's pretty funny, especially considering where you're at. But to clarify, I would hardly "bitch and moan" about that, I'd point out that by using it you make it clear that you're just another retarded asswipe who uses a "joke" that ceased to be "funny" in 1997 to "fit in" and feel "l33t", just like all the other retarded asswipes on "teh interweb" that use terms like "Winblows" and "Microshaft" and whatnot because they figure they're making some sort of social statement.
Other than that, you seem to have some sick fixation with posting on Slashdork. If it's getting too bad I suggest you seek professional help.
Thanks.
I smell another great "Ask Slashdot" entry coming.
I never thought I'd say that something run by Loli-Queru would be better than anything else, but OSNews is really becoming the place to get these types of news, without the "OMFG TEH SKY IS TEH FALLING!!1!!" bullshit and the ever-prevalent childish attitude.
And yet here I am posting, eh. Sigh.
I prefer the Microsoft platform for application development, but it makes no difference what the students and teachers are using the access the applications, since they're all web-based. Be it curriculum delivery, school management systems (SMS) or even internal administration applications.
I say more power to the schools. They should be concentrating on educating our kids and saving more of our taxes.
The real issue is that I do not want a case-sensitive file system, or one that requires me to do all sorts of command line incantations to run a script. It's not my fault that Joe User and his 1,000,000 friends are stupid.
In any case, I can send you a tarball with the execute bit turned on and ask you to unpack it and run the REAL COOL ANNA KOURNIKOVA SCREENSAVER!!!, and chances are you'll do it. Chances are when Linux hits the "big time" there will be something slightly more functional than FileRoller out there. Chances are you'll give me your root password if I ask for it nicely. Chances are your assumptions or superiority are unfounded. People got infected with worms that came in on password protected zip files. Do you think you can engineer away user stupidity? That's scary.
to hide the file extension from the user
Bad design call, yes. OTOH, I could care less, I always turn it off.
Does longcock
OMFG, you're hilarious.
Am I suppose to believe you're him?
But very few of the most widespread viruses in the world rely on vulnerabilities.
Right, and assuming you are Hypponen, how does this affect you (or not)? I was making a comment about Slashdot, not you.
OTOH, assuming you are who you say you are, let me just say that I'm hardly the first person in the world to point out that companies like F-Secure tend to be on the unfortunate side of hysteria when it comes to reporting vulnerabilities. So don't be offended by that, we understand how the business works. It's OK.
Cheers.