I'll respect your ojbection on the account you are civil. Thanks for that by the way. I have experienced this behavior in theaters as well and I just tell them to take their call outside. More often than not when the phone rings everyone around them glares at them so 9/10 times they change their phones to vibrate after this. It's most often more about them forgetting about their cell phone alltogether than an etiquette issue. Of course there are always people that just don't care and those people will be disruptive no matter what.
I try not to make assumptons about people so please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. You don't wish to confront them because you are unsure of how they'll react so you choose not to subject yourself to this environment. A perfectly reasonable reaction that I'd say the majority of people would have. This is why I was saying we need ushers or more aptly, bouncers. It would be the job of these people to ensure everyone is having a decent experience. I propose that technology is not the solution. Disable their phones and they start talking to people around them and then we're back where we started before cell phones.
There are many ways people could contact me in an emergency so yes, since I'm telling people that I'm going to the movies they could send someone but my time isn't so critical as a doctor's might be. It's all about the ifs when it comes to this discussion I think. How many doctors are ever paged while they're at the theater? Probably not a lot but one life lost is more than enough to make me think its a bad idea to block such things. There are countless situations ranging in severity from critical to just pure informational. Why should a stock broker not know his stock is crashing just because he decided to go to a matinee during his lunch break?
I was trying to make this point elsewhere as well. Thank you for recognizing it as a symptom and not a problem. I have had the same experience at the theaters. Occasionally there are a few movies that have been disrupted but mostly everyone glares at the person and they change their phone to vibrate and then its all good. I don't understand why everyone here seems to think this passive-aggressive technology route is wise? It doesn't accomplish anything.
I'm still in utter shock as to the reply I got from a simple comment with people attacking me. At least this thread seems more civil. The parent had an honest reply to my post. They chose to avoid the theater because they aren't aggressive enough to do anything about it. But at the same time they didn't try to go around the problem with passive-aggressive behavior. Good deal I say!
Again, more with the assumptions. You know what happened 10 years ago? The parents came home only to find their kid not there. Technology has made this completely unnecessary so why should they have to be inconvenienced with something life threatening just so you don't have to listen to the idiots that don't understand etiquette.
Sorry, but for every person talking on their cell phone in the theater there are usually a hundred that aren't. You get a call in a theater you pickup, say hold on, then walk outside. It's common courtesy which seems to be a concept completely lost on you. Technology won't solve the problem because it only treats the symptom. When they don't get phone calls they'll go back to talking to the people around them. Those people have always been in a theater and you are a fool if you think otherwise.
I go to a movie to enjoy myself, I set my phone to vibrate so if I get a text from my mail server it disrupts no one by myself. It's never happened but hey, it could and thats more than enough. Completely ignore all the people like Doctors, EMTs, firefighters and anyone else who has a job where lives are at stake 24/7. Are they not allowed to go to the movies now? That's fucking ridiculous. So next time you see someone talking on their cell phone in the theater why not tell them to take it outside? Don't tell them to stop because that will result in a fuck off. When you remove their options you will only make them act out in other ways. Like it or not there are a lot of different kinds of people out there and most of them like to see movies.
So yes, its annoying, but not as annoying as people making assumptions about me despite knowing nothing about me. I'm for personal responsibility and just because my job requires me to be on call 24/7 doesn't mean shouldn't be able to go out and have a good time every now and then. Especially since I can do it without shouting to four rows can hear me instead of the movie.
Apparently you like to make assumptions about people you don't know. You know what that makes you?
At any rate I set my phone to vibrate like most people do and guess what? I tell people to shut the fuck up in the theater when they are talking on their cell phones. Problem solved. It's really easy especially when you get a few people surrounding the person to agree with you.
So please, continue to make your assumptions because that will help everyone. Of course firefighters, EMTs, and doctors won't be allowed to go to theaters but who cares? You get to listen to your movie. Sounds to me like you're the self important asshole thinking your experience is more important than other people's. Common curtesy is the simple solution rather than passive-aggressively enforcing what should be proper etiquette. Please refrain from looking like an idiot in the future by making assumptions about which you know nothing about.
Thank you for playing the attack me attack you game. It was fun wasn't it?
I'll say the opposite considering my cell phone is used for all my communication and that means emergencies. If my phone won't work in a theater, guess what? I'm not going to that theater anymore plain and simple. If a server crashes and I'm unreachable because someone is passive-aggressive then they'll see their attendence drop considerably. I know plenty of people with children that hire a babysitter for the night so they can go and see a movie. These people would not be very happy if little Johnny was hit by a car and the sitter couldn't get in touch with them.
I'll say that an usher would be much more affective and would not need to be there for the entire movie. A single usher could easily monitor multiple screens and at 7/hour I don't imagine would be very costly in the grand scheme of things.
I'm with the grand parent here. Technology problems to solve cultural or etiquette issues will always fail. They are never a good idea and worse yet, they can be very destructive at the cost of a quiet theater. I don't see the ends justifying those means at all.
For the price difference just buy a couple of the same DVDs. Of course this wouldn't be a problem if you were allowed to copy the media. You'd buy the dvd, copy it, then out the original away only bringing it to make a new copy because your old one got scratched.
The funny thing, I know a lot of people that still have tape players in their cars because tapes are more durable than cd. Even though the quality is less they stick with tapes. So you may be on to something here but I think Blu-Ray places itself out of the market with its pricing both for media, burners, and players. $1,000 to playback, $2,000 to burn? Thats insane considering the technology that is currently available. I could buy 10 DVD burners, put them in a stack and bam, I have the recording capacity of Blu-Ray without the DRM, that can be read back by ubiquitous DVD players, and I don't have to pay an arm and a leg for media. Sony is also targeting this at the data center where I think they will fall flat on there asses as well. They are abusing a market and there are too many alternatives in existence these days for this to be acceptable.
That's just semantics but I concede your point. The fact is we are allowed though since my actions may infringe the freedom of another citizen; that citizen is then free to protect their freedoms using reasonable means. So if I buy that new computer from them they are allowing me to purchase it because they don't see it as a loss of freedom despite a loss of property.
The only problem with this definition is that public education, roads, and military don't fall under restricted rights. Of course the government isn't told that it can't do it in the constitution so if consensus says they can then the area gets foggy rather quick.
It is definitely time to update myself on the finer points of civics as I've been focused on systems engineering for quite a while. The facts still stand though that I can do whatever I want as long as it doesn't infringe upon the freedoms of another American. Ideally it would be the freedoms of every other person not just Americans but hey, they are in a different country under a different rule of government.
I like your style. That is a great idea. Of course getting to that point I've got no insight to provide. It looks like another responder might have the step 1 part down.
I'd be all for that idea. Get rid of the damned party names and then people are forced to do at least a little research.
Ideally we should just ban political parties and create some rule that says individuals must aquire their own funding locally. They'd spend a lot less money and probably produce a much better election process. There would still be nothing to stop richy rich from running with his own money but the playing field would at least be more even. Presidential elections would probably have to have different rules since its kinda hard to have local funding in that environment.
I would almost say that elections should be tax payer funded requiring that each candidate would petition the people of his/her district and if they get enough signatures they are on the ballot and can receive a set amount of funds. Only problem here is any number of people could do this and then you run into a funding problem again.
The constitution doesn't give us rights, its restricts what government can do. This is something that's been lost on most people for some reason. By default we're allowed to do whatever we want. The constiution merely says the government can do this to stop you because your freedom is interfering with the freedom of another citizen. That is the judge of whether something is constitutional or not.
Granted, I have not done an in-depth study of the constitution either, that was just how I was taught about it in school.
Of course, just because something isn't constitution doesn't mean it won't happen anyways.
Even the most clueless PHB would care that proprietary corporate information could leave their office through a Windows update. They have a nice big company they can blame for this and they have lots of lawyers that would show Microsoft it's not all powerful. Microsoft understands this and so it listens to its large corporate customers when they introduce features which could potentially devistate privacy as we know it. Microsoft will not introduce a feature unless it can be shut off and shut off via policy of domain. So I'm really not worried about WGA. All my software is legal so I don't need to crack it and updates only occur after I approve them. Running the update through tripwire is an easy way to make sure what's being changed is exactly what Microsoft says is being changed. It happens a lot that the documentation isn't complete but thats why we go through our own approval process.
Last I checked updates were 100% optional on Windows. If you don't want WGA abritrarily executing MS code then don't download and install any updates that have anything to do with it.
As for corporate America which uses SMS or WSUS all updates go through an approval process first and then are authorized to be installed on clients. Sorry but when a client on my network does a DNS lookup they aren't go out to the Internet everytime. Yes the NSA can and probably does monitor anything and everything but that is a completely different conversation.
So yes, Microsoft gives the user the ability to choose what code gets run on their own system. What is your point exactly? Vista even takes this very concept even further and thanks to Eolas some of this will happen on 2k/XP as well. No more automatic ActiveX. You seem to be a little confused about what Microsoft has the power to do. Yes, technically they have the ability to do anything with their operating system but they have a huge install base with some very very large companies that pretty much dictate the changes that need to be made. Despite what you may thing changes don't occur on the whim of Mr Gates.
I agree that WGA does nothing to solve the problem of piracy but thats not its entire goal. It's goal is to educate users to show them that they bought a copy from an unscrupulous shot and that their money is not to be trusted with this entity. This happens far more often than you may thing and is where their economic statement would show the decrease in piracy. It's hard and harder these days for a small shop to pass off a copy of Windows as being validly licensed. That's the goal of WGA.
Because this behavior is totally undetectable and it wouldn't cause a single issue in corporate America. You can't seriously believe what you're saying. There would be a such a backlash from this behavior if anyone ever found out that the majority of Microsoft's business would dry up in short order. I don't care how clever it is in hiding itself, anyone running Tripwire or the likes will detect the change and Microsoft would be liable especially if that computer was carrying sensitive information.
The only thing to semi-worry about is DNS hijacking and hosting of Windows Update site by a 3rd party phisher or the likes. Anything beyond that is just pure speculation about activity that cannot and will not happen. Microsoft is not all powerful.
Last I checked couldn't you just remove the ability for anything and everything to execute a file? That would give you your control. Furthermore you can disable the ability for SYSTEM to run the process along with NETWORK SERVICE and a few other built in accounts. You could explicitly disable their ability to execute to then an application can only be executed by a specified user. Not quite as granular as something like BlackICE, ZA, Sygate, or any of the other personal firewall devices but it works especially with the ability to script the runas command.
I imagine creating a UI for this would be fairly simple and could be done without any complicated system calls.
Actually they can and do provide documentation for this since the framework is a development platform. That's what Microsoft's technet and MSDN are all about.
As for Samba that's a poor example since since its interfacing with proprietary technology that Microsoft developed. The.Net Framework is not a proprietary standard despite what you seem to think. Also, in addition to this I seem to recall current versions of Samba work flawlessly with current Windows systems. The only times MS changes CIFS is when there are new security concerns that need to be addressed. So people bash MS for not securing their product and then bash then for securing it at the cost of compatibility. Which is it?
I come for a Novell background mostly but I've always been into Linux and Windows as well, as many platforms as I can get my hands on, the BSDs, OS X, BeOS, and countless others just to see how everyone else does it. Personally I don't think the platform changes you, I think you change the platform. A lot of great things can be done with both Linux and Windows but only if there are creative people that try new things in either of them. Fortunately for both platforms there are tons of people always trying to new things.
With that said I'll agree with another person that responded here in saying that expanding your horizon's just plain makes sense and deminishes your abilities in no way, odds are your previous experience will help you in writing clean code since you come from an environment which is historically been known for not being very forgiving to develop for.
Re:Microsoft just seems to be kind of flailing.
on
Web 2.0, Meet .Net 3.0
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
You're definitely new to the.Net world and appear to have completely missed the whole existence of Mono which works with Apache on Linux. I believe other platforms are getting it soon as well but your statement is already out of date. A lot of apps will work in mono without much if any trouble. So where's the vendor lock-in exactly?
Of course with us we were running a web server with the 1.1 framework on a 32bit server when we ran into performance issues because we were more than 1000 times the traffic we regularly get. Fortunately this was an Opteron box so we popped on 64bit Windows and the 2.0 framework since 1.1 isn't available. Everything worked without having to make a single change to any of our code.
That is not to say their aren't some funky things that won't transfer over but you speak out of just plain ignorance or prefer to focus on minor details that affect but a few people. With that said I've never had a Windows update break any.Net app unless you chose to code around bugs which were later fixed. That should be easy to determine since every update tells you what is changed and in the case of a framework update which occur rarely you are told exactly what it will break so it should be easy. Your code is documented right?
Of course this is all moot considering updates in any corporate setting don't occur automatically but after happen after approval and testing so you'll know if it'll break your app assuming you have a proper testing environment which I definitely know a few don't. Of course I don't know any development houses which don't since staging on a production server is well, you know, not wise;)
Don't mean to be harsh but realistic here. You're gripes are completely inaccurate so if you really want to gripe go ahead and find valid gripes. I'm not sure what they would be with the framework but I'm sure there are some out there.
That is almost exactly what I was getting at. My mother is a public school teacher and she doesn't do badly at all. When the school backs the teachers instead of caving into the parents every demand then progress can be made. It's a bit like teaching the non-science of creation in a science class. A lot of parents would like schools to do that but it deviates from what we consider science. Critical thinking is a different issue and should be taught very early in a child's career. My mother has the fortune of teaching 8th graders which can be quite a challenge because a lot of times their parents and previous teachers have already induced bad habits for the child. It's rarely ever intentional and I think that should be the distinction between public and private education. In a private school parents could theoretically set the criteria for their child and in exchange for this they have to pay the school which will undoubtedly have to hire more teachers to properly service students with varying levels of competency.
I definitely think options need to exist but it tends to look like the education system would need a lot more money instead of less and I don't see a lot of America at least willing to put that much money into a system that can easily fail if mismanaged and often times will be mismanaged.
That is the next trick I think that needs to be solved. Pushing out experienced teachers because they cost too much is just plain assinine and I see this with my mother. She has been teaching for almost 25 years and now they are making it more and more unpleasant an environment for her. She even won teacher of the year a few years back along with about half the teachers at her school. Amazing how they are all being forced to retire now when they have proven success records. Schools should not be run as a business as education is a basic common good. Uneducated people especially today have very limited options and that doesn't help anyone.
Your analogy here would make sense if everyone was only running one server per task rather than using fail-over technology. Just because a server goes down for an hour doesn't mean the service is dead. This is why people like having two toilets in their houses so if one gets stocked up you can use the other one while the first one is getting fixed. That way you don't have to do the doody dance.
Now for further analysis of this analogy. I am part of a rather large event with hundreds of thousands of people that attend. We do indeed shutdown the toilets for preventative maintenance and we do it during peak use. Of course we have lots of toilets so few people are bothered unless they had too much to drink.
Server uptimes are meaningless in these modern times as long as they don't all go down at once. So I guess its not completely meaningless but I mean that it means less. You have your virtual servers or your network load balancing in place so you take a server down and the end user doesn't have to notice. This is the same regardless of Windows or Linux. Linux has always been good t this functionality but only recently Windows has come into its own in this regard. Clustering for fail-over actually works now for instance and it works fast. Network load balancing in addition to the MS definition of clustering and you've got yourself a cluster with 99.999% uptime. There are occasionally times when it may be necessary to take the whole cluster down like perhaps a disaster preparedness test or god only knows.
You don't think this would result in kids just not going to school? Pretty sure that happened in Hong Kong as well. That really doesn't sound like a good idea to me. I've been known to be a little crazy though.
If you're backing up tons of data HD or BD won't be a good choice for you either. Everything about both formats is utterly pathetic. Why would I want to buy HD/BD for backing up 60tb of data? That would suck, give me LTO-3 or some other high density tape. SDLT-2 is also good. The only trick will be the cost of media and by association the cost of burners. Everything says they are ridiculously priced thus far so tape will probably be the best bet especially if you look at the pricing on dual layer DVDs.
Yes I have, and with a proper unattend file all of it can be accomplished without needing to enter a single key or ip address. Cleaning an infected machine is almost never faster unless there are only small bits of spyware with low TAC ratings.
Particularly in a corporate setting with roaming profiles or folder redirection. Wipe the machine with custom install image that can be pulled over the network with PXE for a super fast install medium. The package comes with all software needed on the machine since of course an SMS client is installed with Windows. After about 20 minutes you have yourself a new fully function workstation the user can login and assuming either of the two options above they can go to work without having lost a thing. Since the new machine has latest definitions whatever got introduced should get reintroduced with the user's registry. If you'd rather not risk it then wipe the user registry and the user has to click okay when they open apps instead of just being able to get into them. Application Data will hold all of the actual configuration.
So I guess I ask, which default settings are you referring to? Microsoft gives you all the tools to set your own defaults which is obviously better than what MS thinks it should be. Same goes for any OS vendor though. Lotta Linux installs aren't suitable for work after a default install either. Not the fault of the distro. You create a script to set all your own defaults and then a linux-based workstation can be up and running in the same amount of time.
Slashdot Mirror
I try not to make assumptons about people so please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. You don't wish to confront them because you are unsure of how they'll react so you choose not to subject yourself to this environment. A perfectly reasonable reaction that I'd say the majority of people would have. This is why I was saying we need ushers or more aptly, bouncers. It would be the job of these people to ensure everyone is having a decent experience. I propose that technology is not the solution. Disable their phones and they start talking to people around them and then we're back where we started before cell phones.
There are many ways people could contact me in an emergency so yes, since I'm telling people that I'm going to the movies they could send someone but my time isn't so critical as a doctor's might be. It's all about the ifs when it comes to this discussion I think. How many doctors are ever paged while they're at the theater? Probably not a lot but one life lost is more than enough to make me think its a bad idea to block such things. There are countless situations ranging in severity from critical to just pure informational. Why should a stock broker not know his stock is crashing just because he decided to go to a matinee during his lunch break?I'm still in utter shock as to the reply I got from a simple comment with people attacking me. At least this thread seems more civil. The parent had an honest reply to my post. They chose to avoid the theater because they aren't aggressive enough to do anything about it. But at the same time they didn't try to go around the problem with passive-aggressive behavior. Good deal I say!
Sorry, but for every person talking on their cell phone in the theater there are usually a hundred that aren't. You get a call in a theater you pickup, say hold on, then walk outside. It's common courtesy which seems to be a concept completely lost on you. Technology won't solve the problem because it only treats the symptom. When they don't get phone calls they'll go back to talking to the people around them. Those people have always been in a theater and you are a fool if you think otherwise.
I go to a movie to enjoy myself, I set my phone to vibrate so if I get a text from my mail server it disrupts no one by myself. It's never happened but hey, it could and thats more than enough. Completely ignore all the people like Doctors, EMTs, firefighters and anyone else who has a job where lives are at stake 24/7. Are they not allowed to go to the movies now? That's fucking ridiculous. So next time you see someone talking on their cell phone in the theater why not tell them to take it outside? Don't tell them to stop because that will result in a fuck off. When you remove their options you will only make them act out in other ways. Like it or not there are a lot of different kinds of people out there and most of them like to see movies.So yes, its annoying, but not as annoying as people making assumptions about me despite knowing nothing about me. I'm for personal responsibility and just because my job requires me to be on call 24/7 doesn't mean shouldn't be able to go out and have a good time every now and then. Especially since I can do it without shouting to four rows can hear me instead of the movie.
At any rate I set my phone to vibrate like most people do and guess what? I tell people to shut the fuck up in the theater when they are talking on their cell phones. Problem solved. It's really easy especially when you get a few people surrounding the person to agree with you.
So please, continue to make your assumptions because that will help everyone. Of course firefighters, EMTs, and doctors won't be allowed to go to theaters but who cares? You get to listen to your movie. Sounds to me like you're the self important asshole thinking your experience is more important than other people's. Common curtesy is the simple solution rather than passive-aggressively enforcing what should be proper etiquette. Please refrain from looking like an idiot in the future by making assumptions about which you know nothing about.Thank you for playing the attack me attack you game. It was fun wasn't it?
Also, is it just me or are the paragraph tags broken here? I used one set on the middle paragraph of my post and it looks like that? Makes no sense.
I'll say that an usher would be much more affective and would not need to be there for the entire movie. A single usher could easily monitor multiple screens and at 7/hour I don't imagine would be very costly in the grand scheme of things.
I'm with the grand parent here. Technology problems to solve cultural or etiquette issues will always fail. They are never a good idea and worse yet, they can be very destructive at the cost of a quiet theater. I don't see the ends justifying those means at all.The funny thing, I know a lot of people that still have tape players in their cars because tapes are more durable than cd. Even though the quality is less they stick with tapes. So you may be on to something here but I think Blu-Ray places itself out of the market with its pricing both for media, burners, and players. $1,000 to playback, $2,000 to burn? Thats insane considering the technology that is currently available. I could buy 10 DVD burners, put them in a stack and bam, I have the recording capacity of Blu-Ray without the DRM, that can be read back by ubiquitous DVD players, and I don't have to pay an arm and a leg for media. Sony is also targeting this at the data center where I think they will fall flat on there asses as well. They are abusing a market and there are too many alternatives in existence these days for this to be acceptable.
Yes it will, that's why we invented reverse-DNS and more importantly SPF. This issue was resolved years ago.
The only problem with this definition is that public education, roads, and military don't fall under restricted rights. Of course the government isn't told that it can't do it in the constitution so if consensus says they can then the area gets foggy rather quick.
It is definitely time to update myself on the finer points of civics as I've been focused on systems engineering for quite a while. The facts still stand though that I can do whatever I want as long as it doesn't infringe upon the freedoms of another American. Ideally it would be the freedoms of every other person not just Americans but hey, they are in a different country under a different rule of government.
Ammendments are clarification of what is expected of the government. So the rights did already exist but they needed to be clarified to prevent abuse.
I like your style. That is a great idea. Of course getting to that point I've got no insight to provide. It looks like another responder might have the step 1 part down.
Ideally we should just ban political parties and create some rule that says individuals must aquire their own funding locally. They'd spend a lot less money and probably produce a much better election process. There would still be nothing to stop richy rich from running with his own money but the playing field would at least be more even. Presidential elections would probably have to have different rules since its kinda hard to have local funding in that environment.
I would almost say that elections should be tax payer funded requiring that each candidate would petition the people of his/her district and if they get enough signatures they are on the ballot and can receive a set amount of funds. Only problem here is any number of people could do this and then you run into a funding problem again.Granted, I have not done an in-depth study of the constitution either, that was just how I was taught about it in school.
Of course, just because something isn't constitution doesn't mean it won't happen anyways.Even the most clueless PHB would care that proprietary corporate information could leave their office through a Windows update. They have a nice big company they can blame for this and they have lots of lawyers that would show Microsoft it's not all powerful. Microsoft understands this and so it listens to its large corporate customers when they introduce features which could potentially devistate privacy as we know it. Microsoft will not introduce a feature unless it can be shut off and shut off via policy of domain. So I'm really not worried about WGA. All my software is legal so I don't need to crack it and updates only occur after I approve them. Running the update through tripwire is an easy way to make sure what's being changed is exactly what Microsoft says is being changed. It happens a lot that the documentation isn't complete but thats why we go through our own approval process.
As for corporate America which uses SMS or WSUS all updates go through an approval process first and then are authorized to be installed on clients. Sorry but when a client on my network does a DNS lookup they aren't go out to the Internet everytime. Yes the NSA can and probably does monitor anything and everything but that is a completely different conversation.
So yes, Microsoft gives the user the ability to choose what code gets run on their own system. What is your point exactly? Vista even takes this very concept even further and thanks to Eolas some of this will happen on 2k/XP as well. No more automatic ActiveX. You seem to be a little confused about what Microsoft has the power to do. Yes, technically they have the ability to do anything with their operating system but they have a huge install base with some very very large companies that pretty much dictate the changes that need to be made. Despite what you may thing changes don't occur on the whim of Mr Gates.I agree that WGA does nothing to solve the problem of piracy but thats not its entire goal. It's goal is to educate users to show them that they bought a copy from an unscrupulous shot and that their money is not to be trusted with this entity. This happens far more often than you may thing and is where their economic statement would show the decrease in piracy. It's hard and harder these days for a small shop to pass off a copy of Windows as being validly licensed. That's the goal of WGA.
The only thing to semi-worry about is DNS hijacking and hosting of Windows Update site by a 3rd party phisher or the likes. Anything beyond that is just pure speculation about activity that cannot and will not happen. Microsoft is not all powerful.
I imagine creating a UI for this would be fairly simple and could be done without any complicated system calls.
As for Samba that's a poor example since since its interfacing with proprietary technology that Microsoft developed. The .Net Framework is not a proprietary standard despite what you seem to think. Also, in addition to this I seem to recall current versions of Samba work flawlessly with current Windows systems. The only times MS changes CIFS is when there are new security concerns that need to be addressed. So people bash MS for not securing their product and then bash then for securing it at the cost of compatibility. Which is it?
I come for a Novell background mostly but I've always been into Linux and Windows as well, as many platforms as I can get my hands on, the BSDs, OS X, BeOS, and countless others just to see how everyone else does it. Personally I don't think the platform changes you, I think you change the platform. A lot of great things can be done with both Linux and Windows but only if there are creative people that try new things in either of them. Fortunately for both platforms there are tons of people always trying to new things.With that said I'll agree with another person that responded here in saying that expanding your horizon's just plain makes sense and deminishes your abilities in no way, odds are your previous experience will help you in writing clean code since you come from an environment which is historically been known for not being very forgiving to develop for.
Of course with us we were running a web server with the 1.1 framework on a 32bit server when we ran into performance issues because we were more than 1000 times the traffic we regularly get. Fortunately this was an Opteron box so we popped on 64bit Windows and the 2.0 framework since 1.1 isn't available. Everything worked without having to make a single change to any of our code.
That is not to say their aren't some funky things that won't transfer over but you speak out of just plain ignorance or prefer to focus on minor details that affect but a few people. With that said I've never had a Windows update break anyOf course this is all moot considering updates in any corporate setting don't occur automatically but after happen after approval and testing so you'll know if it'll break your app assuming you have a proper testing environment which I definitely know a few don't. Of course I don't know any development houses which don't since staging on a production server is well, you know, not wise ;)
Don't mean to be harsh but realistic here. You're gripes are completely inaccurate so if you really want to gripe go ahead and find valid gripes. I'm not sure what they would be with the framework but I'm sure there are some out there.I definitely think options need to exist but it tends to look like the education system would need a lot more money instead of less and I don't see a lot of America at least willing to put that much money into a system that can easily fail if mismanaged and often times will be mismanaged.
That is the next trick I think that needs to be solved. Pushing out experienced teachers because they cost too much is just plain assinine and I see this with my mother. She has been teaching for almost 25 years and now they are making it more and more unpleasant an environment for her. She even won teacher of the year a few years back along with about half the teachers at her school. Amazing how they are all being forced to retire now when they have proven success records. Schools should not be run as a business as education is a basic common good. Uneducated people especially today have very limited options and that doesn't help anyone.Now for further analysis of this analogy. I am part of a rather large event with hundreds of thousands of people that attend. We do indeed shutdown the toilets for preventative maintenance and we do it during peak use. Of course we have lots of toilets so few people are bothered unless they had too much to drink.
Server uptimes are meaningless in these modern times as long as they don't all go down at once. So I guess its not completely meaningless but I mean that it means less. You have your virtual servers or your network load balancing in place so you take a server down and the end user doesn't have to notice. This is the same regardless of Windows or Linux. Linux has always been good t this functionality but only recently Windows has come into its own in this regard. Clustering for fail-over actually works now for instance and it works fast. Network load balancing in addition to the MS definition of clustering and you've got yourself a cluster with 99.999% uptime. There are occasionally times when it may be necessary to take the whole cluster down like perhaps a disaster preparedness test or god only knows.You don't think this would result in kids just not going to school? Pretty sure that happened in Hong Kong as well. That really doesn't sound like a good idea to me. I've been known to be a little crazy though.
If you're backing up tons of data HD or BD won't be a good choice for you either. Everything about both formats is utterly pathetic. Why would I want to buy HD/BD for backing up 60tb of data? That would suck, give me LTO-3 or some other high density tape. SDLT-2 is also good. The only trick will be the cost of media and by association the cost of burners. Everything says they are ridiculously priced thus far so tape will probably be the best bet especially if you look at the pricing on dual layer DVDs.
Particularly in a corporate setting with roaming profiles or folder redirection. Wipe the machine with custom install image that can be pulled over the network with PXE for a super fast install medium. The package comes with all software needed on the machine since of course an SMS client is installed with Windows. After about 20 minutes you have yourself a new fully function workstation the user can login and assuming either of the two options above they can go to work without having lost a thing. Since the new machine has latest definitions whatever got introduced should get reintroduced with the user's registry. If you'd rather not risk it then wipe the user registry and the user has to click okay when they open apps instead of just being able to get into them. Application Data will hold all of the actual configuration.
So I guess I ask, which default settings are you referring to? Microsoft gives you all the tools to set your own defaults which is obviously better than what MS thinks it should be. Same goes for any OS vendor though. Lotta Linux installs aren't suitable for work after a default install either. Not the fault of the distro. You create a script to set all your own defaults and then a linux-based workstation can be up and running in the same amount of time.