Well, yes, it does matter. Currently if the SBS machine goes down, their vendor app will stop working, but their Citrix desktops, their email and groupware platform and everything else will be completely unaffected, allowing them to work perfectly well on other things for the day or two it will take to restore the other server.
Why on earth you think a second domain is needed is beyond me..
Why not just make the samba a member of the domain and be done with it? The vendor app should install just fine there.
Because the existing hardware has one PIII processor, single volume drives (no RAID) and, most importantly, isn't provided by us or maintained by... anyone that we can work out. Making our new system entirely dependant on this one, unreliable system would be foolish in the extreme. House on sand and all that.
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. The domain to which I refer is the new samba controlled domain that I put in for them, to move core components critical to the integrity of their network off the machine running their slightly flakey, Progress based, vendor app, which has one PIII processor and no RAID, to a newer, dual core machine with RAID. The SBS machine hosting the progress DB (and some associated file shares) cannot be a member, or have a trust with, this new domain.
One of my primary problems with SBS is that most businesses end up running extra services off that machine, for example Invu (a document management system) or a vendor provided DB, which by rights should never be put on a domain controller.
The number companies that can actually live within the tight restrictions on the use of SBS are small, and getting ever smaller the more that businesses learn to rely on IT, and the systems required by these businesses get ever more complex.
There was no way I was going to have the domain controlled by the flakey-ass SBS server. Domain Control is handled by the samba server, and the SBS machine CANNOT join that domain, nor can it enter into a trust with it (a deliberately coded restriction to SBS). You CAN bodge it to allow a trust, but the process is extremely complicated and violates Microsoft's licensing agreement (which is out of the question since part of the project was to bring their licensing into compliance).
I've recently been butting heads with SBS. Put in a samba server and a terminal server for a client to expand their business and bring some sanity to their IT setup. Their existing database app is hosted on a machine running Windows 2000 SBS, and I'm not allowed to move it. The server can't join their new domain - it's not even allowed to be part of a domain trust. The whole situation is hideous. I want to meet the person who recommended it and smack them round the face with the installation media.
Recently, I found myself in the slightly bizarre situation of assisting a gentleman of Caribbean heritage in configuring and using Dragon Naturally Speaking. His accent started in the Caribbean, wandered through London, and took a left in Birmingham. *I* couldn't understand half of what he said, but Dragon understood him perfectly, even with him BELLOWING! EACH! WORD! Of course, he couldn't READ, so I had to dictate the on screen prompts to him, but still, I was impressed.
(Turns out he wanted this to dictate letters to anyone he could think of - including Clare Short MP, Her Majesty the Queen, the Prime Minister and several journalists who just had the misfortune to have their name on an article that caught his eye - about the chip he believed had been put in his head. But that's another story...)
According to a Belgian Microsoft-spokesman, Microsoft is considering supporting ODF (article in Dutch)
Four little words. Cold day in Hell. Some reason will be found in a few months to delay the decision until Microsoft's format can be considered instead. When it comes to governments, money still talks... *sigh*
of course, I'd LOVE to be proved wrong, but where is the great German Linux migration, hmm?
So, they're raping you illegally. Been doing it for years. Now, they're offering to rape you a lot more thoroughly, and remove your legal right to complain or stop them, but it's OK, cos they promise to use a condom, and after all, they have proved very trustworthy in the past, so why not?
IBM are deliberately platform agnostic. In fact, one of the reasons they facilitated Novell acquiring SuSE was because they wanted Redhat to have a decent competitor.
There are plenty actually. What kind of stupid-ass mail system is designed to store calendaring anyway? Just get a decent component that integrates well with whatever platform you use and you're away. We crazy linux users manage just fine without Exchange, thanks.
in some secret masonic temple lacking euclidian geometry hidden away from common knowledge.... in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "beware of the leopard".
Not to be too picky, but the correct word, I believe, is "bricked". Although whether there's an actual dictionary definiton of the word in this context I do not know.
Slashdot Mirror
... people won't buy! Unsigned bands have enough trouble getting their music heard when they're GIVING it away!
Well, yes, it does matter. Currently if the SBS machine goes down, their vendor app will stop working, but their Citrix desktops, their email and groupware platform and everything else will be completely unaffected, allowing them to work perfectly well on other things for the day or two it will take to restore the other server.
Because the existing hardware has one PIII processor, single volume drives (no RAID) and, most importantly, isn't provided by us or maintained by
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. The domain to which I refer is the new samba controlled domain that I put in for them, to move core components critical to the integrity of their network off the machine running their slightly flakey, Progress based, vendor app, which has one PIII processor and no RAID, to a newer, dual core machine with RAID. The SBS machine hosting the progress DB (and some associated file shares) cannot be a member, or have a trust with, this new domain.
One of my primary problems with SBS is that most businesses end up running extra services off that machine, for example Invu (a document management system) or a vendor provided DB, which by rights should never be put on a domain controller.
The number companies that can actually live within the tight restrictions on the use of SBS are small, and getting ever smaller the more that businesses learn to rely on IT, and the systems required by these businesses get ever more complex.
There was no way I was going to have the domain controlled by the flakey-ass SBS server. Domain Control is handled by the samba server, and the SBS machine CANNOT join that domain, nor can it enter into a trust with it (a deliberately coded restriction to SBS). You CAN bodge it to allow a trust, but the process is extremely complicated and violates Microsoft's licensing agreement (which is out of the question since part of the project was to bring their licensing into compliance).
I've recently been butting heads with SBS. Put in a samba server and a terminal server for a client to expand their business and bring some sanity to their IT setup. Their existing database app is hosted on a machine running Windows 2000 SBS, and I'm not allowed to move it. The server can't join their new domain - it's not even allowed to be part of a domain trust. The whole situation is hideous. I want to meet the person who recommended it and smack them round the face with the installation media.
Recently, I found myself in the slightly bizarre situation of assisting a gentleman of Caribbean heritage in configuring and using Dragon Naturally Speaking. His accent started in the Caribbean, wandered through London, and took a left in Birmingham. *I* couldn't understand half of what he said, but Dragon understood him perfectly, even with him BELLOWING! EACH! WORD! Of course, he couldn't READ, so I had to dictate the on screen prompts to him, but still, I was impressed.
...)
(Turns out he wanted this to dictate letters to anyone he could think of - including Clare Short MP, Her Majesty the Queen, the Prime Minister and several journalists who just had the misfortune to have their name on an article that caught his eye - about the chip he believed had been put in his head. But that's another story
Four little words. Cold day in Hell. Some reason will be found in a few months to delay the decision until Microsoft's format can be considered instead. When it comes to governments, money still talks
of course, I'd LOVE to be proved wrong, but where is the great German Linux migration, hmm?
[gets his metaphor on]
So, they're raping you illegally. Been doing it for years. Now, they're offering to rape you a lot more thoroughly, and remove your legal right to complain or stop them, but it's OK, cos they promise to use a condom, and after all, they have proved very trustworthy in the past, so why not?
Clicking on "Start" to shut your computer down? They could patent that ...
IBM are deliberately platform agnostic. In fact, one of the reasons they facilitated Novell acquiring SuSE was because they wanted Redhat to have a decent competitor.
... namely one Commander Samuel Vimes: "Coffee is merely a way of stealing time that by rights should belong to your slightly older self".
'No. You are not `just` a user. I am a user, you are a user, and we all are users
... and then he threw himself into the MCP and we were all saved!
There are plenty actually. What kind of stupid-ass mail system is designed to store calendaring anyway? Just get a decent component that integrates well with whatever platform you use and you're away. We crazy linux users manage just fine without Exchange, thanks.
The only supporting argument for this oft-repeated fallacy is that Windows has the biggest market share and the biggest number of security holes.
Far be it for me to shatter your little bubble, but Apache Web Server is more popular than IIS, and has significantly less critical exploits.
God, it feels like Karma whoring just pointing out something so bloody obvious.
but don't think that running an "obscure" OS makes you safe
*sigh* We don't. We think running an operating system with proper security makes us safe.
in some secret masonic temple lacking euclidian geometry hidden away from common knowledge. ... in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "beware of the leopard".
I'm British you insensitive clod ...
Not to be too picky, but the correct word, I believe, is "bricked". Although whether there's an actual dictionary definiton of the word in this context I do not know.
Weebl and Peabo lecture at Cambridge University ...
No, it really isn't. The original XBox was. The 360 has quite a lot of custom technology inside it.
I had high expectations when I read this book, and I'm pleased to say that I was more than satisfied. My Visual Studio "Hello World" program ROCKS!
this ...
To paraphrase a certain mercenary, where's the percentage in that?
"the internet is going very slow"
Seriously, man, didn't you get the email about the internet cleaning days?