OK, I've been gone for two weeks on vacation, so there's little sense in replying now, but here goes.
No, you're speaking of shares. We're talking about file systems.
No, I'm speaking of both shares and files. On my Win2K system at work, every file automatically gets "Full Control" granted to "Everyone". I never set this up - it's the out of the box behavior after a fresh install. If your system works differently, then somebody changed the configuration.
NTFS is not that way at all. Initial permissions are based on basically two things:
1. If you own the file, you get full control.
2. The rest of the permissions are *inherited* from their parent, assuming the parent is set up to propogate it's permissions. If you don't want to give everyone permissions to files in a certain folder, you have that folder set not to allow propogation.
NTFS is exactly like that. Under W2K, by default EVERYONE has "Full Control" to every file. When you create a new share, by default EVERYONE has "Full Control" of the share.
You mention rights inheritance in a subsequent post. But Windows didn't get it until W2K. Before then, you had to sit and wait while Windows applied changes throughtout a directory structure, updating the ACL of each individual file. And you had to use that awful CACLS command-line tool if you didn't want to clobber existing privileges when applying changes to all subdirectories. NetWare had rights inheritance back in the mid 1980's, and its inheritance was superior to that in Windows, because you could filter out the individual privileges inherited by any given directory. So you could easily allow read privileges to flow down the directory structure, while filtering out write priviledges so they aren't inherited.
They had a Novell rep who was so insistent about them NOT killing off Netware, he got quite offended whenever anyone made even the slightest quip about it.
It's bad enough when people don't RTFA, but you didn't even RTFS (Read The Flippin' Summary). It said:
"We are still committed to it (NetWare) and it is not going away. Our new Open Enterprise Server offering will have two components to it: SuSE Linux Enterprise Server and NetWare. NetWare is here for a long time to come."
Netware clinet stores credentails in RAM IN THE CLEAR?
That's a pretty outrageous claim. Care to back it up with a link or two? Now if you were claiming that Microsoft's client for NetWare did this, I'd be less skeptical, but Novell's been pretty intelligent about security for many years.
Yeah, I'll bet the archair CEO's are anxious to go after Steve for doing such a thing. I mean, it might be different if Pixar's last quarterly financial results were record-setting, or if they made over 50% profit.
That's because it doesn't look like most corporate logos (because its cartoonish etc.) I said that the message it conveyed was one of childishness and amateurishness. It is memorable for the same reasons that it doesn't convey professionalism and a commitment to quality.
I can think of lots of technology that comes with really slick, professional logos that is total crap.
How many of us have visited fancy websites for overpriced "enterprise" solutions that end up being complete junk?
I find the Tux logo to be refreshingly non-commercial. The logo tells me "we didn't spend all our money developing logos and using focus groups to ensure the logos convey the right qualities - we're more concerned with actually delivering those qualities."
Oh, I'm skeptical alright, a few spelling mistakes yes, but this looks like it was written by a high school kid, not some MBA. I know educational standards are slipping, but *this* far?
I'm not skeptical at all based on the general sloppiness of this memo.
First, I've known plenty in management (and technical people, as well) whose spelling and grammar are horrendous. On top of that, few of them take the time to proofread their stuff.
Second, if this were some top notch guy, would he have to resort to this kind of sleazy behavior to make a decent living? No, he'd instead be a productive member of society.
One of the facts of life in the enterprise is that it is heterogeneous in terms of platforms, operating systems and (maybe) network technologies.
I agree 100%.
Neither J2EE nor.NET is satisfactory in this environment.
Care to elaborate on how J2EE doesn't fit into a hetogeneous environment? Java's had CORBA support for about 5 years now. And J2EE has its J2EE Connector APIs to define a standard way to interface with those heterogeneous systems.
And with the limited resources at Microsoft (huge as it is), that have to be divided into all the different parts of all the different software projects, it's really a hard sell to convince someone to look through all the gazillions of lines of code that have "Just Worked" in the past.
Last I heard, MS had plenty of resources. Like, around 50 billion of them. Sorry, there's no excuse for this lack of quality other than pure greed.
And MS has put out bounties for anyone turning in a virus writer, so don't you think they could put a bounty on internally found security flaws? I think $1000 per flaw should "convince" somebody to do their job.
No, Schmidt should never IPO at all. Publicly traded companies stop doing what makes the most business sense, especially long-term, and start doing whatever it takes to look good in the short term to Wall Street, for the sake of pleasing shareholders and analysts.
I know, there are probably venture capitalists who expect that big payoff from the IPO, so maybe it's unrealistic to think that this could happen, but it's just sad to keep seeing the same stupidity repeated again and again in publicly traded companies (think layoffs, offshoring, etc., followed by jumps in stock price).
Re:RTFM? - pre-emptive strike
on
KISS
·
· Score: 1
even though they're cost is next to nothing
And before anyone points it out, yeah, I know, it's their, not they're.
Figures - the one time I skip previewing and just submit.
True. That's because they're not competing. What we have here is a handful of service providers who absolutely refuse to compete on price.
They can afford to put a retail outlet in every mall (and strip mall) in the US, but they can't afford to give us unlimited local calling for $15 a month, even though they're cost is next to nothing.
Duh. You're paying for the phone in the contract you signed. Sheesh.
If all the phones didn't have all that crap, and all the service providers actually competed, maybe we'd be paying $20 - $30 less per month than we are now.
That's why there can be two companies named Apple, one who makes pies and the other computers.
Wow, some company owns the trademark for "Apple" pies? Man, my local grocery store better stop selling what they call apple pies in their bakery dept, or they'll get sued for trademark infringement.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, I've been gone for two weeks on vacation, so there's little sense in replying now, but here goes.
No, you're speaking of shares. We're talking about file systems.
No, I'm speaking of both shares and files. On my Win2K system at work, every file automatically gets "Full Control" granted to "Everyone". I never set this up - it's the out of the box behavior after a fresh install. If your system works differently, then somebody changed the configuration.
NTFS is not that way at all. Initial permissions are based on basically two things:
1. If you own the file, you get full control.
2. The rest of the permissions are *inherited* from their parent, assuming the parent is set up to propogate it's permissions. If you don't want to give everyone permissions to files in a certain folder, you have that folder set not to allow propogation.
NTFS is exactly like that. Under W2K, by default EVERYONE has "Full Control" to every file. When you create a new share, by default EVERYONE has "Full Control" of the share.
You mention rights inheritance in a subsequent post. But Windows didn't get it until W2K. Before then, you had to sit and wait while Windows applied changes throughtout a directory structure, updating the ACL of each individual file. And you had to use that awful CACLS command-line tool if you didn't want to clobber existing privileges when applying changes to all subdirectories. NetWare had rights inheritance back in the mid 1980's, and its inheritance was superior to that in Windows, because you could filter out the individual privileges inherited by any given directory. So you could easily allow read privileges to flow down the directory structure, while filtering out write priviledges so they aren't inherited.
They had a Novell rep who was so insistent about them NOT killing off Netware, he got quite offended whenever anyone made even the slightest quip about it.
It's bad enough when people don't RTFA, but you didn't even RTFS (Read The Flippin' Summary). It said:
"We are still committed to it (NetWare) and it is not going away. Our new Open Enterprise Server offering will have two components to it: SuSE Linux Enterprise Server and NetWare. NetWare is here for a long time to come."
Netware clinet stores credentails in RAM IN THE CLEAR?
That's a pretty outrageous claim. Care to back it up with a link or two? Now if you were claiming that Microsoft's client for NetWare did this, I'd be less skeptical, but Novell's been pretty intelligent about security for many years.
Yeah, I'll bet the archair CEO's are anxious to go after Steve for doing such a thing. I mean, it might be different if Pixar's last quarterly financial results were record-setting, or if they made over 50% profit.
Oh wait, Pixar did all those things.
Never mind. Maybe he's not such a bad leader after all.
Why settle for less, if you can settle on most?
Yeah, most's feature list is pretty impressive. And just look at the screenshots!!!
That's because it doesn't look like most corporate logos (because its cartoonish etc.) I said that the message it conveyed was one of childishness and amateurishness. It is memorable for the same reasons that it doesn't convey professionalism and a commitment to quality.
I can think of lots of technology that comes with really slick, professional logos that is total crap.
How many of us have visited fancy websites for overpriced "enterprise" solutions that end up being complete junk?
I find the Tux logo to be refreshingly non-commercial. The logo tells me "we didn't spend all our money developing logos and using focus groups to ensure the logos convey the right qualities - we're more concerned with actually delivering those qualities."
Would you put this guy on your payroll?
If he can bring in $86,000,000? Yeah, I'd consider hiring him.
Honest to god people, look at it. Have you ever seen such painfully careful mis-spellongs?
I disagree entirely. I see mis-spellongs like these in numerous emails within my company.
Typical RMS FUD
Wow, so you're saying Richard Stallman authored this email and sent it anonymously to Eric Raymond? The cad!
Why was parent modded as funny? Insightful, certainly, but it's more sad than funny, because it's so true.
I can still remember once receiving. A memo from the director of HR. Who apparently didn't know. Basic sentence structure. Like the need for a verb.
Oh, I'm skeptical alright, a few spelling mistakes yes, but this looks like it was written by a high school kid, not some MBA. I know educational standards are slipping, but *this* far?
I'm not skeptical at all based on the general sloppiness of this memo.
First, I've known plenty in management (and technical people, as well) whose spelling and grammar are horrendous. On top of that, few of them take the time to proofread their stuff.
Second, if this were some top notch guy, would he have to resort to this kind of sleazy behavior to make a decent living? No, he'd instead be a productive member of society.
Hasn't the store historically sold PowerPC, etc., CDs? Right now it only has x86 and AMD. Are the others coming?
One of the facts of life in the enterprise is that it is heterogeneous in terms of platforms, operating systems and (maybe) network technologies.
I agree 100%.
Neither J2EE nor .NET is satisfactory in this environment.
Care to elaborate on how J2EE doesn't fit into a hetogeneous environment? Java's had CORBA support for about 5 years now. And J2EE has its J2EE Connector APIs to define a standard way to interface with those heterogeneous systems.And with the limited resources at Microsoft (huge as it is), that have to be divided into all the different parts of all the different software projects, it's really a hard sell to convince someone to look through all the gazillions of lines of code that have "Just Worked" in the past.
Last I heard, MS had plenty of resources. Like, around 50 billion of them. Sorry, there's no excuse for this lack of quality other than pure greed.
And MS has put out bounties for anyone turning in a virus writer, so don't you think they could put a bounty on internally found security flaws? I think $1000 per flaw should "convince" somebody to do their job.
I think you perhaps meant 1995, not 1985, which predates Windows by some time.
Yeah, 1985 predates Windows by -1 years, since Windows 1.0 came out in 1984.
What makes you think that sponsoring == hosting?
This? Specifically, the part where it indicates the Netblock Owner is Microsoft.
And the other site seems to be running JSP.
Which site is that? The only other links I saw went to sites that were either static HTML or ASP.
No, Schmidt should never IPO at all. Publicly traded companies stop doing what makes the most business sense, especially long-term, and start doing whatever it takes to look good in the short term to Wall Street, for the sake of pleasing shareholders and analysts.
I know, there are probably venture capitalists who expect that big payoff from the IPO, so maybe it's unrealistic to think that this could happen, but it's just sad to keep seeing the same stupidity repeated again and again in publicly traded companies (think layoffs, offshoring, etc., followed by jumps in stock price).
even though they're cost is next to nothing
And before anyone points it out, yeah, I know, it's their, not they're.Figures - the one time I skip previewing and just submit.
True. That's because they're not competing. What we have here is a handful of service providers who absolutely refuse to compete on price.
They can afford to put a retail outlet in every mall (and strip mall) in the US, but they can't afford to give us unlimited local calling for $15 a month, even though they're cost is next to nothing.
Duh. You're paying for the phone in the contract you signed. Sheesh.
If all the phones didn't have all that crap, and all the service providers actually competed, maybe we'd be paying $20 - $30 less per month than we are now.
That's why there can be two companies named Apple, one who makes pies and the other computers.
Wow, some company owns the trademark for "Apple" pies? Man, my local grocery store better stop selling what they call apple pies in their bakery dept, or they'll get sued for trademark infringement.
(I think maybe you meant Apple records?)
You mean like Uzi Nissan?
Read more here.
I was going to post this blog entry by the author of JSPWiki software.
OK, I guess I still posted it, didn't I? My brain's fried. THANK GOD IT'S FRIIIDAAAAYYYYEEEEEEAAAAHHHHH!!!! (Howard Dean primal scream)
Dang it. You beat me to it. I need to spend less time working and more time on Slashdot. I could have had all that Karma!
I was going to post this blog entry by the author of JSPWiki software.