Well, this IS Slashdot so the rush to accept ANYTHING even remotely antiMS is to be expected but I'm suprised that so many haven't spent even a few minutes to think this through.
First, is it a real document downloaded while an FTP server had some unsecured directories exposed recently? Possibly. So what? Does this mean that this is official MS scripture? Do you mean that if we review every file on your hard drive we won't find something that a) wasn't written by you, b) you probably don't want us to see, c) doesn't represent your current thoughts.
Ahh the C option... perhaps this was really written by someone who happens to be an MS employee. Perhaps this guy was just given the job; take Hotmail and move it from BSD to Windows and this guy is like many who might say; but it works as it is. Lets not break it to fix it - lets leave it as it is so I'll write up every reason I can think of not to do this!
Has everyone missed/forgotten the MS papers describing the reasons why and exactly how Hotmail WAS moved from BSD to Windows 2000?
In this document you'll find how untrue so much of what was written in the stolen document. No scripting support in windows 2000 because it also includes a GUI? Are you fucking stupid or what? There is complete scripting control in windows 2000, always has been. You can control every part of windows 2000 networking and services and disks and users and security through scripting. Sure, you can use the GUI too. Does the fact that Linux can run a GUI mean that suddenly it's scripting goes away?
In the conversion to Hotmail they employeed scipts and automation tools builtin to windows. They moved because Windows 2000 was faster and more efficient. It is obviously stable as any honest person running W2K/XP can tell you.
I understand there is a need to attack MS at every step around here. I understand the desire to believe every antiMS piece ever submitted. But sometimes even the more ignorant *nix admin has to eventually read the facts and find that NO OS is perfect. That W2K is not utterly and totally flawed and that it actually is a real competitor for other Server OSes. Once you accept this you can drop the zealous approach and do things in a logic, calm and professional manner. If is really better - prove it to us with grown up responses and facts - not running around waving a copy of The Enquirer which tells us Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton were seperated at birth by aliens somewhere near Roswell.
Level 3 - highly overbuilt and under utilized. We rent two burstable Gigabit ports from them - oh yea, we can get a full gig of traffic down to our switch and split out into the web farm no problemo.
OK, let me quote from the Windows Media player help file: ==== Note: You should back up your licenses to a floppy disk periodically. If you reinstall or upgrade the operating system, your licenses could be lost. You can use the back up disks that you create to transfer licenses from an old computer to a new one, or to transfer licenses from a work computer to a home computer. ====
There is a very simple "backup licenses" function that'll let you copy them to a floppy. Then you can reinstall your OS and simply restore the licenses. Nothing to it. I've done it myself. *I* read the instructions. Judging from the vast majority of comments here I'd say no one else bothered to read the help and see how this is actually done - instead prefering to assume MS is being evil.
Now, I know this is/. so fairness and equal rights for all is out the door but.. I just had to write.
If someone was passing a law that ONLY allowed MS software in a government you guys would be up in arms! But here is a government passing a law that only allows open source software. They are actual mandating at the government level what type of software can be bought!
So, does this mean if congress tries to pass a law that says: "Only Windows allowed" - will everyone say, "oh, ok, fair is fair?" - - no of course not! They will say, ahha MS bought out congress and this is illegal and it's a monopoly and this would be listed under YRO!
Look - Let the market decide which software fits the bill best. Shouldn't the computer admins decide? Politicans should never decide what type of software to use - does that make sense to anyone? Please just remove the fact that "MS" is involved and imagine this was Puru saying, "Um, ok, you can ONLY run distribution X and distribution Y is illegal" or say they said: "Absolutely no IBM hardware or software, ONLY Mac."
This hipocracy should stop -- and anyone modding this a troll is contributing exactly to what I mean. Anyone who doesn't toe the "linux is everything, anything else is shit" line is a troll? Please don't be childish.
Welp... the truth of the matter is that I do drink about 4-6 and sometimes as many as 8 20 oz bottles of Diet Dew in a day (16 hours). Sure, after a point I start hittin' the can every couple of hours but... so what:) I get plenty of caffeine which makes me feel good and makes me enjoy Strongbad e-mail even more. I love the fact I'm getting 0 carbs out of my favorite drink. There is some justice in the world:) Now, yesterday, I got some exersize, had to move a 4U server loaded with SCSI drives out of the rack by myself - whew! 4 feet down and 2 feet back to a carrier. That was a workout, actually rewarded myself with half a bag of ultimate butter microwave popcorn (15g carbs).
My thing is I HATE warm pop. Diet Mt. Dew is the only warm pop that is even remotely good while warm but I still hate it. So I drink it fast while it's cold:)
OK, so this is one of those testimonial type posts where one person says, it worked for me so it must work for everyone. OK, so I'm not going to say that!
Let me put it this way.
I'm 6' 3" and I used to weight 299 lbs. I never exersize except to climb out of the viper and behind my 'puter then back into the viper. I cut my lawn with a riding mower and when I'm "roughing" it outdoors I do it riding a ATV. Stairs? Elevators! I mean, honestly... 44" waist and I couldn't get it to shrink.
I tried to eat "Low fat" - oh yea, all those "Low Fat" items at the store. Amazing, I actually GAINED more weight!!
So, then I switched overnight to low carb. Basically I'm doing about 30g of carbs a day. What DO I eat? Lesse, breakfast I have a 3 egg omlet with cheeze, bacon, ham and sausage. For lunch I eat a low-carb bar that I get from GNC and wash it back with the 4-6 Diet Mt. Dews I drink at the 'puter. For dinner? Let's see: Sloppy Joes, Steaks, Pork Chops, Shrimp by the boatload, Lobster tails, crab legs with LOTS of butter (real butter). I eat microwave bacon whenever I feel like a salty snack. Sometimes I get those single serving hot dogs and skip the bun and just dip some ketchup and eat up. I'm telling you - just like the diets claim. All the meat and seafood I want. I skip bread and avoid pasta (that hurt!) and no potatoes; no french fries:(. It's not an effortless diet, you would be amazed if you stopped and looked at the labels on food. Damn near everything has a Lot of carbs. Every soda you drink is 30+ carbs, that's my entire days carbs in a single Pepsi! Eating a burger is a bitch carbwise, unless you just throw away the bun (or at least one of them). Sure, it looks weird but... it works..
You know - how can people ignore the obvious facts. EVERYONE I know who has used a low fat diet has failed and everyone of them I have joining me on a low carb diet and it's working. I am personally, in 4 months, down to 240 and I am aiming for 205 before summer is over. This is not crazy weight loss, it's definately not "water loss". This is real pounds. I have to buy new cloths, my pants just don't stay up on me anymore.
To people who critisize Atkins diets: Pffftttt!!! Especially to fat people on low-fat diets who critisize low-carb I say: AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA
Low-carb works -- just my own experience... (forgive the typing, I have to get the heck outta here and get my butt home - got some thin-sliced smoked turkey breast in the fridge I'm gonna eat with some pickles).
Actually, it's sitting at 95 mb/s SOLID. There is a single 100 Mb/s full duplex ethernet connection to that box and that's the bottleneck. We got bandwidth to spare actually:) The box is actually just regular W2K Server, just a little Celeron 300A running at 450 with 256 megs of PC100 in it. Only thing "fancy" about it is the Cheeta it spins from.
Actually, there have been no new vulnerabilites for IIS since August and very few "nasty" ones at all for all of MS products since August. I think you'll find there are WAY more RedHat ones since then...
I had no idea it was that bad for RedHat - MS only had 51 in all of 2001 (and not all for the OS itself or even a particular version - that's 51 across all MS products).
Why don't people look at these stuff and make the obvious connection?
Actually Mart - I used to spend a lot of time in COMNA where the COLA nuts (hehe) cross posted a lot.
I do not consider these numbers debunked; not then and not now. They are valid numbers. What conclusions you draw from them is open to debate and that debate has never been settled to anyone's satisfaction in either group (no suprise there).
You missed the point one way but it still works. Yes, the newer software will go faster, in this case. The point I was making is that IIS5 was good and fast. Tux is much much faster and whipped MS's butt in benchmarks. So... MS Learned a lesson - it has now created IIS6 from the ground up (nearly complete rewrite) to be faster and more efficient in a style similar to how Tux acomplished it. MS learns...
Actually, IIS hasn't had a hole since last August and IIS 5.1 hasn't had one, period. XP has only had the UPnP hole (new technology, consider it a version 1.00 bug).
There are FAR fewer holes in W2K than people would like to admit. IE may have some problems but not the base OS. Even IIS has been tighted up a great deal.
People need to understand something, we know MS almost never get's it right the first time (see version 1.00 bug) and may not the second but eventually they do. OK, they sucked at security to begin but with all those resources and the pressure from the top and from outside - did you really think they'd sit still or get worse? Nope - ask Netscape what happens when you become their focus of attention. Tux comes out and smokes IIS 5 and everyone laughs... according to the results of my beta tests with IIS6, we'll see who's laughing when it's publically benched.
Your lesson is: MS learns. It's almost never right the first time but... it learns.
I seriously doubt you read "the whole thing" because then you wouldn't have made such an uninformed post.
The W2K/NT counts are for exactly that: W2K and NT4. There is a seperate category for W9x/3.x and that's seperate.
All the distribs have their own counts but the aggregate does NOT include duplicates of the same vulnerablity (simple math would have proved that to you had you bothered).
Your FUD and obvious bias obviously is the rule of the day here but couldn't you at least get simple math right?
You should take your own advice. Those numbers are facts, maek your opinion on what they mean but by simple count there are more vulnerabilities in linux distribs than on W2K/NT - deal with it. Your post is known as sour grapes.
(/.'s 20 seconds min to reply is the lamest thing I've ever seen... I'm typing this to slow down my submit clicking because I can actually read and type faster than a 1st grader... stupid...)
Slashdot Mirror
First, is it a real document downloaded while an FTP server had some unsecured directories exposed recently? Possibly. So what? Does this mean that this is official MS scripture? Do you mean that if we review every file on your hard drive we won't find something that a) wasn't written by you, b) you probably don't want us to see, c) doesn't represent your current thoughts.
Ahh the C option... perhaps this was really written by someone who happens to be an MS employee. Perhaps this guy was just given the job; take Hotmail and move it from BSD to Windows and this guy is like many who might say; but it works as it is. Lets not break it to fix it - lets leave it as it is so I'll write up every reason I can think of not to do this!
Has everyone missed/forgotten the MS papers describing the reasons why and exactly how Hotmail WAS moved from BSD to Windows 2000?
In this document you'll find how untrue so much of what was written in the stolen document. No scripting support in windows 2000 because it also includes a GUI? Are you fucking stupid or what? There is complete scripting control in windows 2000, always has been. You can control every part of windows 2000 networking and services and disks and users and security through scripting. Sure, you can use the GUI too. Does the fact that Linux can run a GUI mean that suddenly it's scripting goes away?
In the conversion to Hotmail they employeed scipts and automation tools builtin to windows. They moved because Windows 2000 was faster and more efficient. It is obviously stable as any honest person running W2K/XP can tell you.
I understand there is a need to attack MS at every step around here. I understand the desire to believe every antiMS piece ever submitted. But sometimes even the more ignorant *nix admin has to eventually read the facts and find that NO OS is perfect. That W2K is not utterly and totally flawed and that it actually is a real competitor for other Server OSes. Once you accept this you can drop the zealous approach and do things in a logic, calm and professional manner. If is really better - prove it to us with grown up responses and facts - not running around waving a copy of The Enquirer which tells us Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton were seperated at birth by aliens somewhere near Roswell.
Why don't articles actually post the URL to the site?!
http://www.nomoreaolcds.com/
Level 3 - highly overbuilt and under utilized. We rent two burstable Gigabit ports from them - oh yea, we can get a full gig of traffic down to our switch and split out into the web farm no problemo.
OK, let me quote from the Windows Media player help file:
====
Note: You should back up your licenses to a floppy disk periodically. If you reinstall or upgrade the operating system, your licenses could be lost. You can use the back up disks that you create to transfer licenses from an old computer to a new one, or to transfer licenses from a work computer to a home computer.
====
There is a very simple "backup licenses" function that'll let you copy them to a floppy. Then you can reinstall your OS and simply restore the licenses. Nothing to it. I've done it myself. *I* read the instructions. Judging from the vast majority of comments here I'd say no one else bothered to read the help and see how this is actually done - instead prefering to assume MS is being evil.
Now, I know this is /. so fairness and equal rights for all is out the door but.. I just had to write.
If someone was passing a law that ONLY allowed MS software in a government you guys would be up in arms! But here is a government passing a law that only allows open source software. They are actual mandating at the government level what type of software can be bought!
So, does this mean if congress tries to pass a law that says: "Only Windows allowed" - will everyone say, "oh, ok, fair is fair?" - - no of course not! They will say, ahha MS bought out congress and this is illegal and it's a monopoly and this would be listed under YRO!
Look - Let the market decide which software fits the bill best. Shouldn't the computer admins decide? Politicans should never decide what type of software to use - does that make sense to anyone? Please just remove the fact that "MS" is involved and imagine this was Puru saying, "Um, ok, you can ONLY run distribution X and distribution Y is illegal" or say they said: "Absolutely no IBM hardware or software, ONLY Mac."
This hipocracy should stop -- and anyone modding this a troll is contributing exactly to what I mean. Anyone who doesn't toe the "linux is everything, anything else is shit" line is a troll? Please don't be childish.
Welp... the truth of the matter is that I do drink about 4-6 and sometimes as many as 8 20 oz bottles of Diet Dew in a day (16 hours). Sure, after a point I start hittin' the can every couple of hours but... so what :) I get plenty of caffeine which makes me feel good and makes me enjoy Strongbad e-mail even more. I love the fact I'm getting 0 carbs out of my favorite drink. There is some justice in the world :) Now, yesterday, I got some exersize, had to move a 4U server loaded with SCSI drives out of the rack by myself - whew! 4 feet down and 2 feet back to a carrier. That was a workout, actually rewarded myself with half a bag of ultimate butter microwave popcorn (15g carbs).
:)
My thing is I HATE warm pop. Diet Mt. Dew is the only warm pop that is even remotely good while warm but I still hate it. So I drink it fast while it's cold
OK, so this is one of those testimonial type posts where one person says, it worked for me so it must work for everyone. OK, so I'm not going to say that!
:(. It's not an effortless diet, you would be amazed if you stopped and looked at the labels on food. Damn near everything has a Lot of carbs. Every soda you drink is 30+ carbs, that's my entire days carbs in a single Pepsi! Eating a burger is a bitch carbwise, unless you just throw away the bun (or at least one of them). Sure, it looks weird but... it works..
Let me put it this way.
I'm 6' 3" and I used to weight 299 lbs. I never exersize except to climb out of the viper and behind my 'puter then back into the viper. I cut my lawn with a riding mower and when I'm "roughing" it outdoors I do it riding a ATV. Stairs? Elevators! I mean, honestly... 44" waist and I couldn't get it to shrink.
I tried to eat "Low fat" - oh yea, all those "Low Fat" items at the store. Amazing, I actually GAINED more weight!!
So, then I switched overnight to low carb. Basically I'm doing about 30g of carbs a day. What DO I eat? Lesse, breakfast I have a 3 egg omlet with cheeze, bacon, ham and sausage. For lunch I eat a low-carb bar that I get from GNC and wash it back with the 4-6 Diet Mt. Dews I drink at the 'puter. For dinner? Let's see: Sloppy Joes, Steaks, Pork Chops, Shrimp by the boatload, Lobster tails, crab legs with LOTS of butter (real butter). I eat microwave bacon whenever I feel like a salty snack. Sometimes I get those single serving hot dogs and skip the bun and just dip some ketchup and eat up. I'm telling you - just like the diets claim. All the meat and seafood I want. I skip bread and avoid pasta (that hurt!) and no potatoes; no french fries
You know - how can people ignore the obvious facts. EVERYONE I know who has used a low fat diet has failed and everyone of them I have joining me on a low carb diet and it's working. I am personally, in 4 months, down to 240 and I am aiming for 205 before summer is over. This is not crazy weight loss, it's definately not "water loss". This is real pounds. I have to buy new cloths, my pants just don't stay up on me anymore.
To people who critisize Atkins diets: Pffftttt!!! Especially to fat people on low-fat diets who critisize low-carb I say: AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA
Low-carb works -- just my own experience... (forgive the typing, I have to get the heck outta here and get my butt home - got some thin-sliced smoked turkey breast in the fridge I'm gonna eat with some pickles).
OC-48 at the ready. I couldn't get the audio to convert, what did you use? I e-mailed you, reply and we'll get this up and running.
db
http://node2.callihq.net/
Go for it...
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.linu x64.com
bummer eh?
Actually, it's sitting at 95 mb/s SOLID. There is a single 100 Mb/s full duplex ethernet connection to that box and that's the bottleneck. We got bandwidth to spare actually :) The box is actually just regular W2K Server, just a little Celeron 300A running at 450 with 256 megs of PC100 in it. Only thing "fancy" about it is the Cheeta it spins from.
Don't make assumptions. I'm doing something beyond the little img...
Enjoy it... and please do not link directly to the file eh?
Dude. Please do not link directly to my .AVI file!!! I ask that visitors go to http://node2.callihq.net/ so I can generate some stats please.
http://node2.callihq.net/
PLEASE do not link directly to the files, I'm testing a new connection and box and would like to see how it responds to a huge, global demand.
Actually, there have been no new vulnerabilites for IIS since August and very few "nasty" ones at all for all of MS products since August. I think you'll find there are WAY more RedHat ones since then...
I stole this from someone else's post:
Microsoft security bulletins released in 2002:
MS02-001
Redhat security bulletins released in 2002:
2002-018
2002-015
2002-014
2002-012
2002-011
2002-009
2002-007
2002-004
2002-005
2002-003
2002-002
2001-171
2001-168
2001-165
Hmm... you like them apples now?
I had no idea it was that bad for RedHat - MS only had 51 in all of 2001 (and not all for the OS itself or even a particular version - that's 51 across all MS products).
Why don't people look at these stuff and make the obvious connection?
Actually Mart - I used to spend a lot of time in COMNA where the COLA nuts (hehe) cross posted a lot.
I do not consider these numbers debunked; not then and not now. They are valid numbers. What conclusions you draw from them is open to debate and that debate has never been settled to anyone's satisfaction in either group (no suprise there).
You missed the point one way but it still works. Yes, the newer software will go faster, in this case. The point I was making is that IIS5 was good and fast. Tux is much much faster and whipped MS's butt in benchmarks. So... MS Learned a lesson - it has now created IIS6 from the ground up (nearly complete rewrite) to be faster and more efficient in a style similar to how Tux acomplished it. MS learns...
Because UPnP on those OSes is an add-on/patch. It was not in the original OS. UPnP is a new technology.
Actually, IIS hasn't had a hole since last August and IIS 5.1 hasn't had one, period. XP has only had the UPnP hole (new technology, consider it a version 1.00 bug).
There are FAR fewer holes in W2K than people would like to admit. IE may have some problems but not the base OS. Even IIS has been tighted up a great deal.
People need to understand something, we know MS almost never get's it right the first time (see version 1.00 bug) and may not the second but eventually they do. OK, they sucked at security to begin but with all those resources and the pressure from the top and from outside - did you really think they'd sit still or get worse? Nope - ask Netscape what happens when you become their focus of attention. Tux comes out and smokes IIS 5 and everyone laughs... according to the results of my beta tests with IIS6, we'll see who's laughing when it's publically benched.
Your lesson is: MS learns. It's almost never right the first time but... it learns.
I seriously doubt you read "the whole thing" because then you wouldn't have made such an uninformed post.
The W2K/NT counts are for exactly that: W2K and NT4. There is a seperate category for W9x/3.x and that's seperate.
All the distribs have their own counts but the aggregate does NOT include duplicates of the same vulnerablity (simple math would have proved that to you had you bothered).
Your FUD and obvious bias obviously is the rule of the day here but couldn't you at least get simple math right?
You should take your own advice. Those numbers are facts, maek your opinion on what they mean but by simple count there are more vulnerabilities in linux distribs than on W2K/NT - deal with it. Your post is known as sour grapes.
Does "Ramen" ring a bell?
(/.'s 20 seconds min to reply is the lamest thing I've ever seen... I'm typing this to slow down my submit clicking because I can actually read and type faster than a 1st grader... stupid...)