Obviously in a business setting you'd policy the hell out of it so the user doesn't get to see a "Do you want to allow this?" dialog; it's simply allowed/disallowed as per policy.
Stopping incoming stuff is relatively easy and far less likely to cause a problem. Stopping outgoing traffic on a per-application level is much harder - perhaps some kind of application signing mechanism where signed applications are automatically granted certain privs?
The problem with that, of course, is that if Microsoft decides they want to compete with someone who's application does use the Internet and is signed, all they need to do is release an urgent update which "accidentally" breaks the signature of the relevant application. Of course, they'll post a fix a week or so later, but they'll do the same thing again 3-6 months down the line.
If that were to ever happen, I bet you anything you like the international minimum wage would look nothing like the minimum wage in most Western countries.
Funny, their European brands are quite capable of producing vehicles which get reasonable milage and are well designed.
I, along with many thousands of others, drive a Vauxhall Astra. It's probably one of the most popular cars on Britain's roads, and Vauxhall is owned by GM.
Most of the NT-derived server OSes are fine if you select reliable applications, install everything properly, and then just leave it running and don't change anything.
Exactly. Or if you do have to change anything (such as install a patch), you do so on a test system which is running as a replica of the live system first.
Installing unreliable applications, installing them incorrectly and changing things when it's not necessary are also extremely good ways to screw up more or less any system - it just might take longer to bite you on a Linux system.
Sounds like Google Desktop Search only built into the OS.
Putting it like that, I'm surprised they are dropping WinFS. Didn't Steve Ballmer want to fucking bury Google under a fucking pile of fucking office chairs?
does anybody trust microsoft to actually produce a firewall that stops everything either way that isn't explicitly authorised by the user?
Yes. But I also think such a feature is a complete disaster waiting to happen.
It'll just be another "Do you want to allow this? Yes/No" button, which people have long since learned to blindly click through without paying any attention to. There's a damn good reason why so many faults reported to helpdesks don't include anything like an error message - many have become so used to clicking error messages away that they barely register that the message came up in the first place.
Net result - most people's shiny new Vista PCs, within a couple of months of purchase, will have so many exceptions allowed through the firewall that it might as well not be there.
enterprises rely on this company's OS, which is so internally complicated that its own developers call it "broken."
Cite?
With '9x, I could well believe it. With any of the server editions, I'd like to see hard evidence.
It's amazing the economy came to rely on a company so unreliable.
Properly managed, Windows can be a perfectly acceptable server OS. The keyword here is "properly managed" - Windows is rather less forgiving of being run on flaky hardware or poor management than most Linux distributions.
Whether or not the application(s) you run on it are any good is a separate issue altogether, but that's more the application's problem than the OS's.
Step 4: Realize that you have no product, no top level management and no lawsuit to help keep the money rolling in from a certain Redmond-based software house. Step 5: Bankrupt.
- The app is crucial to the business. - The business isn't prepared or able to port it to something more sensible (After all, why bother? It works, doesn't it?)
Then there is a strong chance that the grandparent is left with no option: just get the damn thing working.
Of course, if the gp has any sense he's got a plan up his sleeve for when the box dies and he can't find anything which SCO will run on, but that's another matter altogether.
The UK (and, I believe, most of the EU), has a Data Protection Act.
Briefly, this states that data must be:
* fairly and lawfully processed;
* processed for limited purposes;
* adequate, relevant and not excessive;
* accurate and up to date;
* not kept longer than necessary;
* processed in accordance with the individual's rights;
* secure;
* not transferred to countries outside the European Economic area, unless there is adequate protection.
Does such a thing really not exist in the US, an economy where information is king?
UK spec petrol engined cars routinely achieve 40-50 MPG at 55mph - but remember that's imperial gallons, not US gallons. (1 imperial gallon is about 1.2 US gallons). Don't know about the US, but a typical UK car will have an engine somewhere between 1.3 and 1.8l and weigh between 1-1.3 tons. Diesel engined cars generally achieve somewhat better mileage, but tend to be noisier, slower, more expensive to buy and maintain and generate more emissions (though a lot of those problems are alleviated in the most modern diesel engines).
So you can be made redundant by downsizing, or by new technology or processes, but not by outsourcing.
You'd better tell the former call centre staff for most major banks, building societies and insurance companies that. They think they were made redundant as a direct result of their job moving overseas.
In the case of the parent you're referring to, the most visible backpeddalled outsourcing has been of customer-facing roles. The BoA roles aren't customer facing, so it may not impact the bottom line as quickly.
Except Linux users typically do not run random executables
Only because there are rather fewer of us and most of us have more sense than to do this. I think the point the parent is making is to pre-empt the incoming band of drones who say "But if Linux was as popular as Windows, this couldn't have happened!"
Windows by default hides the file extension
Linux doesn't even use file extensions all the time.
lets a program show whichever icon it wants.
Which has had a side effect - that a computer user who doesn't quite understand what the purpose of icons is forced to conclude that it's just supposed to be a pretty picture, rather than giving any inkling of what will happen when you click on it. The only way to find that out is to click on it..... Transplanting this misunderstanding wholesale (and let's face it, if Linux were to become popular this is exactly what would happen) to Linux won't help.
Only reason I can think of is 1. ignorance or 2. using some weird plugin which doesn't like being restarted (There exist closed-source plugins for Apache to connect to proprietary systems. Not all of them are of the same quality as the open source plugins).
The question is: if we all really are such anti-social techno creeps, why haven't we done that already?
The answer is: There is a difference between being antisocial and being downright sociopathic.
Also I can't think of anything worse than having to understand Windows sufficiently to write such a worm. Urrgh, I feel dirty even thinking about it. I'm off to take a shower in Jeyes Fluid. (Lysol for you US folks).
See, I know far too little about system administration.
I can tell you now that this is by no means a barrier to becoming a systems administrator. In quite a few organisations, you just need to know more than the person hiring you - who may not be a sysadmin.
And it is these people that run systems with huge downtimes.
The only way that makes any sense is if it's been misread by someone who's lousy at maths but good at producing meaningless reports. Such as a "business analyst".
If you think of it as "20% less downtime", then every hour of downtime on Windows equates to 1 hour and 12 minutes on Linux.
Note they haven't defined "downtime". Some businesses don't include planned maintenance in downtime statistics, some do. Some may not include downtime out of hours (if they don't run 24x7), some may. So unless they've ensured that everyone is counting downtime the same way, the entire survey is completely meaningless from the off.
I may be totally wrong but what about an apache reinstall requires a reboot?
You are totally wrong. Regardless of Linux distribution, no apache install requires a reboot.
It does require you to stop apache and restart it, and if you haven't tested that the upgrade works, downtime may be more than a few seconds, but it doesn't require a reboot.
If you're upgrading production services without testing that the upgrade works first, you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a server anyway.
Hmmm. That being the case, here's my prediction for June 2008:
"iPod owners across the USA were up in arms today when the RIAA successfully sued Apple for copies of customer records detailing everyone who had purchased an iPod in the last 5 years.
'We think it's very unlikely that these people have licenses to copy their music to these devices', said RIAA spokeswoman Mary Hinge, 'and filling one up through legitimate downloads would have cost around $20,000. There's a lot of people who've just copied their CDs to their iPod and without a license, that's illegal. We plan to sue every single iPod owner who has not bought a license. By the way, what's that white headphone wire sticking out of your coat pocket?'."
Presumably, therefore, if Apple are selling iPods in countries where no iTunes music store has been set up, and those countries have no "fair usage" legislation, there's a bunch of people wandering around with iPods that have absolutely no music on?
OK, so I haven't read the link. But AIUI, "the proposed blanket license..." is effectively saying "Any organisation which operates a cache for Internet access needs to buy a licence".
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately I'm not sure I can.
Obviously in a business setting you'd policy the hell out of it so the user doesn't get to see a "Do you want to allow this?" dialog; it's simply allowed/disallowed as per policy.
Stopping incoming stuff is relatively easy and far less likely to cause a problem. Stopping outgoing traffic on a per-application level is much harder - perhaps some kind of application signing mechanism where signed applications are automatically granted certain privs?
The problem with that, of course, is that if Microsoft decides they want to compete with someone who's application does use the Internet and is signed, all they need to do is release an urgent update which "accidentally" breaks the signature of the relevant application. Of course, they'll post a fix a week or so later, but they'll do the same thing again 3-6 months down the line.
Be careful what you wish for - you might get it.
If that were to ever happen, I bet you anything you like the international minimum wage would look nothing like the minimum wage in most Western countries.
Funny, their European brands are quite capable of producing vehicles which get reasonable milage and are well designed.
I, along with many thousands of others, drive a Vauxhall Astra. It's probably one of the most popular cars on Britain's roads, and Vauxhall is owned by GM.
Exactly. Or if you do have to change anything (such as install a patch), you do so on a test system which is running as a replica of the live system first.
Installing unreliable applications, installing them incorrectly and changing things when it's not necessary are also extremely good ways to screw up more or less any system - it just might take longer to bite you on a Linux system.
Sounds like Google Desktop Search only built into the OS.
Putting it like that, I'm surprised they are dropping WinFS. Didn't Steve Ballmer want to fucking bury Google under a fucking pile of fucking office chairs?
does anybody trust microsoft to actually produce a firewall that stops everything either way that isn't explicitly authorised by the user?
Yes. But I also think such a feature is a complete disaster waiting to happen.
It'll just be another "Do you want to allow this? Yes/No" button, which people have long since learned to blindly click through without paying any attention to. There's a damn good reason why so many faults reported to helpdesks don't include anything like an error message - many have become so used to clicking error messages away that they barely register that the message came up in the first place.
Net result - most people's shiny new Vista PCs, within a couple of months of purchase, will have so many exceptions allowed through the firewall that it might as well not be there.
enterprises rely on this company's OS, which is so internally complicated that its own developers call it "broken."
Cite?
With '9x, I could well believe it. With any of the server editions, I'd like to see hard evidence.
It's amazing the economy came to rely on a company so unreliable.
Properly managed, Windows can be a perfectly acceptable server OS. The keyword here is "properly managed" - Windows is rather less forgiving of being run on flaky hardware or poor management than most Linux distributions.
Whether or not the application(s) you run on it are any good is a separate issue altogether, but that's more the application's problem than the OS's.
(That sound you heard was my karma evaporating).
Step 4: Realize that you have no product, no top level management and no lawsuit to help keep the money rolling in from a certain Redmond-based software house.
Step 5: Bankrupt.
If:
- The app is crucial to the business.
- The business isn't prepared or able to port it to something more sensible (After all, why bother? It works, doesn't it?)
Then there is a strong chance that the grandparent is left with no option: just get the damn thing working.
Of course, if the gp has any sense he's got a plan up his sleeve for when the box dies and he can't find anything which SCO will run on, but that's another matter altogether.
The UK (and, I believe, most of the EU), has a Data Protection Act.
Briefly, this states that data must be:
* fairly and lawfully processed;
* processed for limited purposes;
* adequate, relevant and not excessive;
* accurate and up to date;
* not kept longer than necessary;
* processed in accordance with the individual's rights;
* secure;
* not transferred to countries outside the European Economic area, unless there is adequate protection.
Does such a thing really not exist in the US, an economy where information is king?
UK spec petrol engined cars routinely achieve 40-50 MPG at 55mph - but remember that's imperial gallons, not US gallons. (1 imperial gallon is about 1.2 US gallons). Don't know about the US, but a typical UK car will have an engine somewhere between 1.3 and 1.8l and weigh between 1-1.3 tons. Diesel engined cars generally achieve somewhat better mileage, but tend to be noisier, slower, more expensive to buy and maintain and generate more emissions (though a lot of those problems are alleviated in the most modern diesel engines).
So you can be made redundant by downsizing, or by new technology or processes, but not by outsourcing.
You'd better tell the former call centre staff for most major banks, building societies and insurance companies that. They think they were made redundant as a direct result of their job moving overseas.
In the case of the parent you're referring to, the most visible backpeddalled outsourcing has been of customer-facing roles. The BoA roles aren't customer facing, so it may not impact the bottom line as quickly.
Except Linux users typically do not run random executables
Only because there are rather fewer of us and most of us have more sense than to do this. I think the point the parent is making is to pre-empt the incoming band of drones who say "But if Linux was as popular as Windows, this couldn't have happened!"
Windows by default hides the file extension
Linux doesn't even use file extensions all the time.
lets a program show whichever icon it wants.
Which has had a side effect - that a computer user who doesn't quite understand what the purpose of icons is forced to conclude that it's just supposed to be a pretty picture, rather than giving any inkling of what will happen when you click on it. The only way to find that out is to click on it..... Transplanting this misunderstanding wholesale (and let's face it, if Linux were to become popular this is exactly what would happen) to Linux won't help.
sorry.
Only reason I can think of is 1. ignorance or 2. using some weird plugin which doesn't like being restarted (There exist closed-source plugins for Apache to connect to proprietary systems. Not all of them are of the same quality as the open source plugins).
Contrary to popular /. belief, Internet Explorer and Outlook can both be locked down. That's the whole point of Group Policy Editor.
Few other mail clients provide a plugin for Group Policy Editor.
The answer is: There is a difference between being antisocial and being downright sociopathic.
Also I can't think of anything worse than having to understand Windows sufficiently to write such a worm. Urrgh, I feel dirty even thinking about it. I'm off to take a shower in Jeyes Fluid. (Lysol for you US folks).
I can tell you now that this is by no means a barrier to becoming a systems administrator. In quite a few organisations, you just need to know more than the person hiring you - who may not be a sysadmin.
And it is these people that run systems with huge downtimes.
AIUI what you're saying is your Linux support team tends to go ahead and make changes in a production environment without testing it first.
I do not think Linux can be held responsible for this.
The only way that makes any sense is if it's been misread by someone who's lousy at maths but good at producing meaningless reports. Such as a "business analyst".
If you think of it as "20% less downtime", then every hour of downtime on Windows equates to 1 hour and 12 minutes on Linux.
Note they haven't defined "downtime". Some businesses don't include planned maintenance in downtime statistics, some do. Some may not include downtime out of hours (if they don't run 24x7), some may. So unless they've ensured that everyone is counting downtime the same way, the entire survey is completely meaningless from the off.
I may be totally wrong but what about an apache reinstall requires a reboot?
You are totally wrong. Regardless of Linux distribution, no apache install requires a reboot.
It does require you to stop apache and restart it, and if you haven't tested that the upgrade works, downtime may be more than a few seconds, but it doesn't require a reboot.
If you're upgrading production services without testing that the upgrade works first, you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a server anyway.
Unfortunately, not all CDs which do follow the standard display the logo.
Hmmm. That being the case, here's my prediction for June 2008:
"iPod owners across the USA were up in arms today when the RIAA successfully sued Apple for copies of customer records detailing everyone who had purchased an iPod in the last 5 years.
'We think it's very unlikely that these people have licenses to copy their music to these devices', said RIAA spokeswoman Mary Hinge, 'and filling one up through legitimate downloads would have cost around $20,000. There's a lot of people who've just copied their CDs to their iPod and without a license, that's illegal. We plan to sue every single iPod owner who has not bought a license. By the way, what's that white headphone wire sticking out of your coat pocket?'."
Presumably, therefore, if Apple are selling iPods in countries where no iTunes music store has been set up, and those countries have no "fair usage" legislation, there's a bunch of people wandering around with iPods that have absolutely no music on?
OK, so I haven't read the link. But AIUI, "the proposed blanket license..." is effectively saying "Any organisation which operates a cache for Internet access needs to buy a licence".
They'd target the ISPs first. Then, who knows?