Well, the VideoLAN association president Jean-Baptiste Kempf have posted an analysis that indicates that Rémi Denis-Courmonts "defence of his chosen license" might be misguided.
Getting a developer's license has nothing to do with this; Apple is distributing a binary of a ported VLC in contravention of VLC's license. Apple's App Store rules are the heart of the issue: Apple's App Store rules prohibit them from complying with the GNU GPL which disallows adding restrictions to its (now longstanding) terms
According to this discussion, Apple has actually changed their rules in order to allow GPL like licences:
"You agree that the terms of the Licensed Application End User License Agreement will apply to each Apple Product and to each Third-Party Product that you license through the App Store Service, unless the App Store Product is covered by a valid end user license agreement entered into between you and the licensor of the App Store Product (the “Licensor”), in which case the Licensor’s end user license agreement will apply to that App Store Product."
ZFS concatenates many small random writes into large sequential write operations. This clearly gives better write performance. As for file defragmentation, WAFL features automatic defragmentation. Similar defragmentation is also in the works for ZFS.
In fact, when you modify a file, you write a whole new block, leaving the old block which contained the old data in place. This will not introduce more used blocks (as the old block is freed) and will in fact give a better write performance as the disk head does not jump around seeking blocks to edit.
Whether copy on write can be introduced in NTFS or not is completely beside the point. NTFS does not currently have this feature.
NFSv4 was released in December 2000, almost 10 years ago. The fact that people still use NFSv3 is that it simply works and it suits most peoples needs. And NFSv3 is not the only protocol that is vulnerable to spoofing.
Yes, because caching app data, inserting exif data in pictures, offering location service API to applications, storing SMS messages and storing browser history are unique to the iOS. As for "the new Safari html 5 database" storing unique IDs in Web SQL databases, this is a W3C specification also currently supported by Opera and Google Chrome. Not to forget that other browsers also stores unique IDs through flash-cookies.
Why do you think that other mobile OSs like Android does not suffer from the same "problems"? Perhaps it is your obvious Apple hate that clouds your reasoning?
Actually, Lala extingushed themselves due to a business model that did not include a "profit" part. But why be rational when you can bash Apple for picking up the pieces?
As ext4 is definetly not a zfs replacement, your options seems to be:
Run OpenSolaris on current hardware
Buy Sun hardware
Both
Replace ZFS with the immature BTRFS
We have had a very positive experience with galaxy-based servers. Given that Solaris/OpenSolaris predicitve self-healing simply works better on Sun hardware, I would pick the "Both" option.
(With a Sun partner agreement and through Suns Volume Campaigns you can get X4170s and J4200s with up to 35% discount rate. These prices are highly competitive with similar Dell/IBM/HP servers)
Patch Tuesday streamlines the update process in large companies. It would be really bad solution from MS to force the update randomly, possibly breaking things.
You seem to confuse "offer" with "force". Why not offer a patch when it is ready and let the companies decide themselves when and how often to patch? Just like every other OS vendor on the face of the planet?
Linux doesn't even have automated update at all - you have to run your update tool when its convenient for you, or go and compile the new kernel.
If by "Linux" you mean every major Linux distribution, then you are simply wrong.
no distinction between executables and normal files
Just like Linux doesn't have either. You can set executable bit on any file and it happily runs.
Actually, the executable bit is the distinction between executables and normal files. You cannot run a normal file without specifically setting the executable bit. It is a "security feature".
complex database for configuration
Specifically for what? MySQL also has pretty complex database (inside itself) for its settings and users.
Windows and MacOSX has APIs from a single provider with a single controlled release schedule. Linux has APIs from hundreds of providers with different release schedules. Linux distributions are efforts to bridge this problem and present a stable API within a distro release.
If you want an extremely stable distro, go for Ubuntu LTS or a RedHat/CentOS release. If you want the latest features and releases of software, pick a non LTS Ubuntu / Linux Mint or Fedora release.
Ubuntu releases are usually upgradeable, while I usually reinstall my Fedora installation every second release.
Compiling a piece of software yourself is really not that complicated. Most of the time its simply: install required dev packages, then run configure; make; make install. As for OpenOffice it seems to be: install required dev packages, then run./configure;./bootstrap; source LinuxX86Env.Set.sh; dmake
I have not tried it, but it might do the trick. Proceed at your own risk.
Note: the original source had an additional aptitude -y dist-upgrade command which I removed from the above code.
Support for open-source solutions is definetly cheaper because anyone can offer that support without any prior agreement with the originators. With a closed-source solution, you are locked into the vendors support regime. Think Oracle vs. PostgreSQL.
Actually MacOSX has a nice tool that lets you trace the function calls any program makes. Additionally, the MacOSX kernel is opensource and lets you instrument and inspect any of these calls.
In fact, it wasn't until France was attacked 8 months later that they even started fighting.
In fact, besides the Saar offensive, France sent soldiers to Narvik where they fought alongside Norwegian, Polish and British forces.
Hell, France lasted a little over two weeks longer than Poland and it did not have the soviet union to deal
with (and had eight months of knowing that Germany was on the military move.)
You also seem to forget that the Dutch, British and Belgian armies were crushed alongside the French. The Germans won every campaign they fought at the time. Pretty much the only thing that stopped these guys were overextended supply lines.
Yes, you give a link for one vulnerability. That's a single data point. What is it supposed to show? That IIS has vulnerabilities? I did not claim otherwise.
Your claim was that IIS5 used to be unsafe. With IIS5 having an unpatched DOS exploit currently under attack, I'm trying to point out that your statement is rather inaccurate.
It's good that I also compared how critical vulnerabilities are, and where they can be used from, then. Do you have any specific objections to the numbers quoted in my previous post (and also those on the pages I've linked), or my analysis of them? If so, then please write your own, to demonstrate where I am wrong.
Vendors rate the criticality themselves - don't they? Additionally - Microsoft seems higly reluctant to acknowledge and patch flaws. Comparing the flaws that leaks out this regime to a open source project which hides nothing yields a result that will invariably favour the secretive part. Your "analysis" is deeply flawed.
Apache was a stable solution for much longer than IIS - IIS5 was bad in terms of security, among other things
IIS5 and IIS6 still is bad in terms of security. As an aside - Secunia explicitly warns that comparing vulnerability counts will lead to misrepresentation. As I am sure you are aware of.
According to your logic, a TV remote control is a DRM tool.
Here is a quote from one of the references in the OPs article:
However, there is no DRM in this new control chip, according to Monster Cable's Kevin Lee, who added, "In fact, it's not even authentication. It just gives us a way to control the iPod."
As an owner of an old Mac laptop that still Run OS X 10.1.8 let me say, that I still think that 10.2 should have been free, because 10.1.8 is so buggy and it will newer be fixed. Using NFS to mount a disk will almost always crash my kernel within an hour.
There is no 10.1.8 release. The last 10.1 relase was 10.1.5.
And XP bugfixes don't ever require new hardware unlike Mac OS X, where even if I wanted to buy the newest Mac OS X upgrade for Power PC, my laptop could not use it because its graphics chip is to slow.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, the VideoLAN association president Jean-Baptiste Kempf have posted an analysis that indicates that Rémi Denis-Courmonts "defence of his chosen license" might be misguided.
According to this discussion, Apple has actually changed their rules in order to allow GPL like licences:
It is the syntax that defines the language, not the runtime environment. If I run ruby in a jvm through jruby, I still run ruby.
Hyperbole much?
ZFS concatenates many small random writes into large sequential write operations. This clearly gives better write performance. As for file defragmentation, WAFL features automatic defragmentation. Similar defragmentation is also in the works for ZFS.
In fact, when you modify a file, you write a whole new block, leaving the old block which contained the old data in place. This will not introduce more used blocks (as the old block is freed) and will in fact give a better write performance as the disk head does not jump around seeking blocks to edit.
Whether copy on write can be introduced in NTFS or not is completely beside the point. NTFS does not currently have this feature.
Read up on the features of ZFS and Btrfs. Copy-on-write would be a start.
NFSv4 was released in December 2000, almost 10 years ago. The fact that people still use NFSv3 is that it simply works and it suits most peoples needs. And NFSv3 is not the only protocol that is vulnerable to spoofing.
Yes, because caching app data, inserting exif data in pictures, offering location service API to applications, storing SMS messages and storing browser history are unique to the iOS. As for "the new Safari html 5 database" storing unique IDs in Web SQL databases, this is a W3C specification also currently supported by Opera and Google Chrome. Not to forget that other browsers also stores unique IDs through flash-cookies.
Why do you think that other mobile OSs like Android does not suffer from the same "problems"? Perhaps it is your obvious Apple hate that clouds your reasoning?
Xserves are hardware, Sun Messaging Server is a piece of software written in C.
Actually, Lala extingushed themselves due to a business model that did not include a "profit" part. But why be rational when you can bash Apple for picking up the pieces?
Have you considered Alfresco?
As ext4 is definetly not a zfs replacement, your options seems to be:
We have had a very positive experience with galaxy-based servers. Given that Solaris/OpenSolaris predicitve self-healing simply works better on Sun hardware, I would pick the "Both" option.
(With a Sun partner agreement and through Suns Volume Campaigns you can get X4170s and J4200s with up to 35% discount rate. These prices are highly competitive with similar Dell/IBM/HP servers)
You seem to confuse "offer" with "force". Why not offer a patch when it is ready and let the companies decide themselves when and how often to patch? Just like every other OS vendor on the face of the planet?
If by "Linux" you mean every major Linux distribution, then you are simply wrong.
Actually, the executable bit is the distinction between executables and normal files. You cannot run a normal file without specifically setting the executable bit. It is a "security feature".
The OP is talking about the Registry.
Windows and MacOSX has APIs from a single provider with a single controlled release schedule. Linux has APIs from hundreds of providers with different release schedules. Linux distributions are efforts to bridge this problem and present a stable API within a distro release.
If you want an extremely stable distro, go for Ubuntu LTS or a RedHat/CentOS release. If you want the latest features and releases of software, pick a non LTS Ubuntu / Linux Mint or Fedora release. Ubuntu releases are usually upgradeable, while I usually reinstall my Fedora installation every second release.
Compiling a piece of software yourself is really not that complicated. Most of the time its simply: install required dev packages, then run configure; make; make install. As for OpenOffice it seems to be: install required dev packages, then run ./configure; ./bootstrap; source LinuxX86Env.Set.sh; dmake
Pasted from comment #3 on this page:
I have not tried it, but it might do the trick. Proceed at your own risk.
Note: the original source had an additional aptitude -y dist-upgrade command which I removed from the above code.
Support for open-source solutions is definetly cheaper because anyone can offer that support without any prior agreement with the originators. With a closed-source solution, you are locked into the vendors support regime. Think Oracle vs. PostgreSQL.
Actually, Apple allows other browsers on the iPhone as long as they are based on WebKit. There are a bunch of them in the App Store.
Actually MacOSX has a nice tool that lets you trace the function calls any program makes. Additionally, the MacOSX kernel is opensource and lets you instrument and inspect any of these calls.
Except for the 6888 games Steve hosts and serves for free.
In fact, besides the Saar offensive, France sent soldiers to Narvik where they fought alongside Norwegian, Polish and British forces.
You also seem to forget that the Dutch, British and Belgian armies were crushed alongside the French. The Germans won every campaign they fought at the time. Pretty much the only thing that stopped these guys were overextended supply lines.
Your claim was that IIS5 used to be unsafe. With IIS5 having an unpatched DOS exploit currently under attack, I'm trying to point out that your statement is rather inaccurate.
Vendors rate the criticality themselves - don't they? Additionally - Microsoft seems higly reluctant to acknowledge and patch flaws. Comparing the flaws that leaks out this regime to a open source project which hides nothing yields a result that will invariably favour the secretive part. Your "analysis" is deeply flawed.
IIS5 and IIS6 still is bad in terms of security. As an aside - Secunia explicitly warns that comparing vulnerability counts will lead to misrepresentation. As I am sure you are aware of.
According to your logic, a TV remote control is a DRM tool.
Here is a quote from one of the references in the OPs article:
There is no 10.1.8 release. The last 10.1 relase was 10.1.5.
10.1 and 10.2 had the same hardware requirements.