Although MS has suffered from a lot of spectacular failures latelly, anything they do is in danger of becoming main stream. A monopoly on the desktop and office software is a tremendous weapon to wield against the rest of the world.
I agree that netinfo is an interesting technology but apple seems to be backing away from it. Plus it has a reputation for being corruptable and has no versioning.
As for the rest it's applied unevenly for the configuration files for the system itself but certainly not for the apps. For example the mounts are still controlled by mtab and there is still the BSD style rc.conf. Some stuff is XML some stuff is plist based (I find plist easier to read myself). Some information comes from netinfo, other stuff from ldap.
So I disagree that there is one uniform, smooth mac os x configuration framework. It's a mishmash of stuff. Some fresh, some from next, some from BSD and yet others from the individual projects (apache, postfix etc).
'Also on the Mac, there has always been a pretty strong sense that preferences are optional and that an application should work out of the box with absolutely no configuration."
As a corrolary I have found by painful experience that you should never ever configure any apple server product to do anything the GUI doesn't let you do. If you do you are taking your life into your hands. Just use the GUI. If the GUI doesn't give you an option to configure it then don't use the mac.
Ideally all confi files would follow the same format and syntax (god no please don't say XML).
Ideally there would be a uniform way for programs to retrieve configuration information from a centrallized location.
Ideally local users and machines would be able to merge their prefs and config with the master to override certain prefs.
Ideally the hierarcy of administrators would be able to prevent entitities under them from overriding certain configuration options.
Ideally all of that could be done with plain text files which are automatically checked into a version control repository so you can roll back any change in a jiffy.
While Apple has done a great job for the casual desktop user mac os x has a long way to go before it can be considered a reliable server platform.
Hopefully they will have a decent port/package system for tiger, hopefully not every update will require a reboot, hopefully updates will not require to agree to EULAS, hopefully their GUI helpers will not clobber your carefully crafted conf files.
I keep hoping anyway. Till then I have chosen to go back to freebsd for my sever needs. The xserves are now for java based services only and only if the code does not require 1.5.
It's been what? Two years? Two years into a process and the trial isn't even scheduled till the end of next year, SCO hasn't had to show any evidence, both companies have spent tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars for what? Nothing.
All you have to do is make baseless allegations and you can drag a company through hell for for a few years and make them spend a million or two.
MS has really good education discounts, the prices you received are not indicitive of the prices a corporation would receive.
having said that you have only quoted the exchange part. The grandparent was talking about project and project server as well as many other products MS offers. As I said why not price project and project server for 4000 employees and post it here. Add to that office, SQL server, and the rest of the products the grandparent talked about.
Finally 1000K + 5K per month is an insane amount to spend on email and calendering for 4K people especially when there are free and low cost alternatives. Almost all the school districts in my state are flat out broke it seems like an awful waste of taxpayers money to throw away that kind of money.
.NET is already being phased out. When longhorn comes out it's all new stuff. Of course.NET will be supported but it will have no buzz and all the developers will be encouraged to abandon it.
What you fail to mention is that you need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to get that functionality.
Just price the whole project/project server thing for a company with 200 employees and then post it here for everyone to see.
Aside from that if you buy into an all MS solution then you have just handed the fate of your organization to one vendor and you will never be able to leave that vendor and none of your stuff will ever work with anything else in your network not made by MS.
Right now there are several open source alternatives to exchange. Amongst them are Kolab, suse open exchange, bill workgroup server and citadel.
There are already moves towards getting evolution hooked up to kolab so I would not be surprised if moz hooks up to one of those projects too.
BTW evolution already does everything lightning will and more. I vastly prefer it over outlook even when you are hooked up to exchange. The only thing is that there isn't a windows version.
If you buy support from oracle are they going to assign more then 35 people to you?
At best, if you pay through the nose they will assign one person to be your primary contact. That's only if you pay through the nose. Most contracts are of the "you get who is available at that moment and if you are lucky we will start you on level 2 tech support" variety.
With pgsql contracts you can get the cell number of a developer for way less.
1) Soap and provide an RPC mechanism for complex objects not just simple values like strings and numbers. For example if you had a method that returned an object the SOAP client would provide a stub for that object for you automatically.
2) The proper propagation of exceptions back to the client.
There is also the fact that SOAP is theoretically transport independent. In other words you ought to be able to call soap objects via SMTP for example.
Most soap implementation fall far short of these laudable goals however. In the case of python it may actually be easier to use CORBA then soap.
Slashdot Mirror
Although MS has suffered from a lot of spectacular failures latelly, anything they do is in danger of becoming main stream. A monopoly on the desktop and office software is a tremendous weapon to wield against the rest of the world.
I looked at it. It sounds promising. Let's hope people start using it.
It's not quite like you say it is.
I agree that netinfo is an interesting technology but apple seems to be backing away from it. Plus it has a reputation for being corruptable and has no versioning.
As for the rest it's applied unevenly for the configuration files for the system itself but certainly not for the apps. For example the mounts are still controlled by mtab and there is still the BSD style rc.conf. Some stuff is XML some stuff is plist based (I find plist easier to read myself). Some information comes from netinfo, other stuff from ldap.
So I disagree that there is one uniform, smooth mac os x configuration framework. It's a mishmash of stuff. Some fresh, some from next, some from BSD and yet others from the individual projects (apache, postfix etc).
'Also on the Mac, there has always been a pretty strong sense that preferences are optional and that an application should work out of the box with absolutely no configuration."
As a corrolary I have found by painful experience that you should never ever configure any apple server product to do anything the GUI doesn't let you do. If you do you are taking your life into your hands. Just use the GUI. If the GUI doesn't give you an option to configure it then don't use the mac.
Obviously you have never worked on a real production environment.
For some machines every minute of downtime can costs tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The guy can't install freebsd (a 20 minute process for most people). I reccomended xandros which my dog could install and use.
What's wrong with that?
Ideally all confi files would follow the same format and syntax (god no please don't say XML).
Ideally there would be a uniform way for programs to retrieve configuration information from a centrallized location.
Ideally local users and machines would be able to merge their prefs and config with the master to override certain prefs.
Ideally the hierarcy of administrators would be able to prevent entitities under them from overriding certain configuration options.
Ideally all of that could be done with plain text files which are automatically checked into a version control repository so you can roll back any change in a jiffy.
If you are a windows person don't try and install BSD. BSD is not designed for you.
Get xandros and install that. It's the ideal distro for windows people.
In windows files may go to program files, common files, system, windows directories. Plus the really important stuff goes to the registry.
Deleting the install directory doesn't do jack.
That's why windows has uninstallers.
How long did you say you used windows? Seems like you ought to know this by now.
How about drop boxes. You can write to them but you can't read from them.
While Apple has done a great job for the casual desktop user mac os x has a long way to go before it can be considered a reliable server platform.
Hopefully they will have a decent port/package system for tiger, hopefully not every update will require a reboot, hopefully updates will not require to agree to EULAS, hopefully their GUI helpers will not clobber your carefully crafted conf files.
I keep hoping anyway. Till then I have chosen to go back to freebsd for my sever needs. The xserves are now for java based services only and only if the code does not require 1.5.
Alas the US has a legal system that lets anyone sue for anything. This alone shuts up many people.
It also happened on christmas. Clearly god is unhappy with the asians.
Only if the US had a legal system that worked.
It's been what? Two years? Two years into a process and the trial isn't even scheduled till the end of next year, SCO hasn't had to show any evidence, both companies have spent tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars for what? Nothing.
All you have to do is make baseless allegations and you can drag a company through hell for for a few years and make them spend a million or two.
MS has really good education discounts, the prices you received are not indicitive of the prices a corporation would receive.
having said that you have only quoted the exchange part. The grandparent was talking about project and project server as well as many other products MS offers. As I said why not price project and project server for 4000 employees and post it here. Add to that office, SQL server, and the rest of the products the grandparent talked about.
Finally 1000K + 5K per month is an insane amount to spend on email and calendering for 4K people especially when there are free and low cost alternatives. Almost all the school districts in my state are flat out broke it seems like an awful waste of taxpayers money to throw away that kind of money.
.NET is already being phased out. When longhorn comes out it's all new stuff. Of course .NET will be supported but it will have no buzz and all the developers will be encouraged to abandon it.
What you fail to mention is that you need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to get that functionality.
Just price the whole project/project server thing for a company with 200 employees and then post it here for everyone to see.
Aside from that if you buy into an all MS solution then you have just handed the fate of your organization to one vendor and you will never be able to leave that vendor and none of your stuff will ever work with anything else in your network not made by MS.
Right now there are several open source alternatives to exchange. Amongst them are Kolab, suse open exchange, bill workgroup server and citadel.
There are already moves towards getting evolution hooked up to kolab so I would not be surprised if moz hooks up to one of those projects too.
BTW evolution already does everything lightning will and more. I vastly prefer it over outlook even when you are hooked up to exchange. The only thing is that there isn't a windows version.
If you want to get into a pissing match about enterprise level support I'll be happy to duke it with you story by story.
I have always found that you get the best support from smaller companies that are nearby.
More then once I have found the answer I needed searching the web while on hold.
The man is a politician. He is not going to say "I am for censorship". he isn't going to say 'I have to keep the christian right happy".
he is going to say what he expects you to hear. It's not like he has principles or morals or anything. he is a politician.
If you buy support from oracle are they going to assign more then 35 people to you?
At best, if you pay through the nose they will assign one person to be your primary contact. That's only if you pay through the nose. Most contracts are of the "you get who is available at that moment and if you are lucky we will start you on level 2 tech support" variety.
With pgsql contracts you can get the cell number of a developer for way less.
It's nice.
I have seen several forks of the project. I keep thinking there must be something not quite right with it if people keep forking it.
Maybe you could shed some light on this.
No just buy from artists that don't belong to the RIAA. You know the independent people who are trying to sell music without labels.
How are you supposed to put anything on top of this thing?
Anybody know how much? I bet it's pricey.
Basically two things.
1) Soap and provide an RPC mechanism for complex objects not just simple values like strings and numbers. For example if you had a method that returned an object the SOAP client would provide a stub for that object for you automatically.
2) The proper propagation of exceptions back to the client.
There is also the fact that SOAP is theoretically transport independent. In other words you ought to be able to call soap objects via SMTP for example.
Most soap implementation fall far short of these laudable goals however. In the case of python it may actually be easier to use CORBA then soap.