It sounds like service is pretty high up on the list. What about price?
There is everything from CACert.org, which offers free certs, but supported is limited to the community it serves, to budget providers to full-service providers like Verisign.
Do you need more than just a few certificates? Do you need someone to be available 24x7 for phone support or is e-mail support good enough? What do you need?
Like anything else in life, you decide based on what your needs are and how well that, in this case, a particular CA fits your needs.
That being said, Solaris scales on single nodes like its nobodies business if you follow the best practices and know what your doing. I've seen big Sun boxes hit loads in excess of 300 and keep chugging. I *still* havent seen a Solaris box that was well maintained crash. (cant say that about Linux -- if anything its getting less stable).
I can say the same thing of Linux on the stability end. Again, the box must be well-maintained, admin knows what he's doing.
Also, a lot of it depends on hardware. A lot of people want to throw Linux on cheap whitebox hardware with bargain-basement motherboards and expect it's going to be as stable as Solaris running on an E-series server. Ha! If you want the stability of Solaris running on E-series server out of Linux, you gotta run it on similar hardware -- hardware built for high availability. Your typical BIOSTAR or even ASUS MicroATX PC desktop motherboard isn't built to do that. Try looking at real enterprise-class hardware from IBM or HP. Hell, I know for certain Solaris running on an E series can't touch the performance and reliability of Linux on the IBM z-series mainframes.
Not to mention Diebold's ATM business != Diebold's voting machine business (now called Premier Election Systems). The voting machine business is a small sideline business for Diebold. Diebold makes LOTS and LOTS of stuff. For one, they are a U.S. government contractor that makes physical access control systems and all sorts of things. The ATM business is an offshoot of that.
The voting booths have nothing to do their mainline business.
This a bit like AM General admitting that their LSSVs aren't as robust as their HMMWV's (:HumVee's") -- of course they aren't, their completely different business lines.
Yes, but that was ADWARE, not true SPYWARE in the sense that it didn't ACTIVELY collect data other than what you clicked on when it popped up ads 10 times per second.
Right, but some of what it popped up contained drive-by downloads of real malware/spyware, so calling it ADWARE isn't quite accurate -- I think the GP is right to call it 'grayware'.
Meh. Having been a Solaris, HP-UX and AIX admin, IMHO, there is no better OS for high availability and high scalability than AIX. Solaris is okay, but it's not any better than Linux in that regard. Moreso now that most of the AIX code that counts for HA and HPC are included in the Linux kernel thanks to IBM.;) In fact, one might (easily) argue that Linux is rather better than Solaris in the clustering department.
Not only that, but many people will simply ask "why?" There are already several fabulous free/open source software communities gathered around several fabulous free/open source operating systems, each having its own niche:
- Linux, which is geared around being the UNIX-like Swiss Army Knife OS for PC people, built around good hardware support and solid application support.
- FreeBSD, which is geared around bringing genetic UNIX on a PC (note the not-entirely-semantical difference), which aims for pretty good hardware support and concentrates on being the best UNIX it can for the PC, built around being a good, solid, tested and stable server software
- OpenBSD, which aims to be the most secure OS on the face of the planet, built around solid, stable security mechanisms
- NetBSD -- Well, nobody really knows what NetBSD is about except for those nutty NetBSD people;)
- ReactOS, which aims to be a complete free/open source Windows replacement OS
Haiku and co., which are aimed at reviving the BeOS community
So where does OpenSolaris fit in? It seems to be an OS lacking a niche.
Similar thoughts, paraphrased from a priest in Nazi Germany:
When they came for the pedophiles, I remained silent, for I was not a pedophile. When they came for the terrorists, I remained silent, for I was not a terrorist. When they came for the file-sharers, I remained silent, for I was not a file-sharer. When they came for me, I cried out, but there was no one left to listen.
Nostradamus is also cited as having many of his predictions come true.
Nostramus said some extremely vague shit in code. It has been poorly translated and deciphered by people who either A) want to make a big name for themselves or B) have the aforementioned elsewhere in this thread religious rootkits installed and seem to have a vested interest in the world coming to an end just to prove that their religion is "right" and everyone else is "wrong."
Then where the hell is my flying car, and why do 80% of my countrymen still believe in bronze-age myths?
Would you people give it up on the flying car already? People have invented flying cars. Flying cars aren't the problem. The problem is that people are too stupid to navigate in 3D space, especially when you consider how "well" they seem to be coping with 2D space.
Based on this very appropros commentary from Arthur C. Clarke himself:
If we have learned one thing from the history of invention and discovery, it is that, in the long run - and often in the short one - the most daring prophecies seem laughably conservative.
I'd have to say probably all of them. Even the far-fetched ones like the telekinesis you allude to.
NT is very portable. MS originally wrote NT for the MIPS and i860 architectures and only began the i386 work when they were nearing release. There was even a (unreleased) Sparc port.
You didn't read what I wrote. As I said, NT is portable. The current code isn't all based on NT -- much of it is new, and they didn't bother with portability the way Dave Cutler did for NT. What you're operating on here is very outdated knowledge -- there's a very good reason why the Early XBOX 360 kits were running NT 4 and not 2000 or XP.
(BTW--My knoweldge comes from individuals inside Microsoft, so I know it's accurate.)
Apple has demonstrated twice now how well they can adapt their OS for any architecture. Would be nice if Microsoft took up the challenge..
OS X is based on FreeBSD/Darwin, so ultimately it is based on UNIX. UNIX was written to be very portable. OTOH, while Windows NT wayyy a long time ago had support for Alpha, MIPS, etc., the real story is that the reason those never got updated is that the Windows NT codebase has become increasing saddled with platform-specific crap as Microsoft has had to add things for backward-compatibility.
There will probably never be another Windows version that's not tied to x86.
Nah, I doubt this has much to do with Mac except maybe some notebooks. I think this has more to do with a new product, possibly even a new category or a category killer. Big stuff.
I doubt it. I think it's far more likely that Macs will continue to use Intel for quite sometime, and I think the only really possible change in that is that Apple may start bringing in alternate sources like AMD or VIA, especially in its lower-end line of machines, if only to beat Intel up on pricing.
Apple is increasing moving into embedded and mobile markets more and more with iPhone, iPod, etc. I think we're going to start to see more small footprint devices from Apple in the future, maybe even something that creates a whole new product category. Information-based devices and appliances are the future, and Apple is one of the companies poised to do great things in this market.
This is a precursor to some big things and I think Apple is taking itself in an entirely new direction.
The general public will not know what "geometric" means*.
Oh, gimme a freaking break. I am sooooo sick of everyone worrying about pandering to the lowest common denominator. But I have a solution to this particular problem.
Here's my plan: cleanse the gene pool. We'll just eliminate warning labels from everything and when the stupid freaking idiots fry themselves blow-drying their hair in the bathtub because there was no warning label on the hair dryer saying "WARNING: RISK OF DEATH!!! DO NOT USE IN OR NEAR WATER!!!", Darwin's theory of survival of the fittest will kick in and we'll be rid of the bloody morons.
You don't need to stop it, just stop watching/listening to 'mainstream' news sources and tune in to things like Democracy Now, which has, to its credit, consistently either ignored or have outright debunked TV analysts.
Maybe where you are. I'm the U.S. and I'm currently paying somewhere around US $3.50/gallon. If I could get gas for $2, I, along with a few million of my closest friends, would literally shit bricks.
Right. The PFIF agreement contains a section called "Exhibit A", which details all the protocols covered by the agreement, including the SMB and CIFS protocols.
Note that Samba 3 does not just implement SMB -- it implements CIFS, MSDFS, several challenge-response and key-exchange protocols, Microsoft's extensions to Kerberos for ADS integration, some stuff to support point-and-print, etc. In addition, Samba 4, which focuses on being an ADS server, implements several more important Microsoft protocols required to support serving ActiveDirectory.
Samba does a LOT more than SMB, as you can see.
However, the list isn't a comprehensive list of protocols that are covered by patents. As you say, they're not licensing the patents, they're just providing documentation under NDA and agreeing not to sue and to indemnify against third-party suits.
That being said, I really doubt that SMBv1 is patented by Microsoft. It originates with the unholy IBM/Microsoft marriage, and even then, it's derived from some old DEC protocol. I doubt very much that anybody has any patents on SMBv1 that have survived to date.
Slashdot Mirror
What are your priorities?
It sounds like service is pretty high up on the list. What about price?
There is everything from CACert.org, which offers free certs, but supported is limited to the community it serves, to budget providers to full-service providers like Verisign.
Do you need more than just a few certificates? Do you need someone to be available 24x7 for phone support or is e-mail support good enough? What do you need?
Like anything else in life, you decide based on what your needs are and how well that, in this case, a particular CA fits your needs.
I can say the same thing of Linux on the stability end. Again, the box must be well-maintained, admin knows what he's doing.
Also, a lot of it depends on hardware. A lot of people want to throw Linux on cheap whitebox hardware with bargain-basement motherboards and expect it's going to be as stable as Solaris running on an E-series server. Ha! If you want the stability of Solaris running on E-series server out of Linux, you gotta run it on similar hardware -- hardware built for high availability. Your typical BIOSTAR or even ASUS MicroATX PC desktop motherboard isn't built to do that. Try looking at real enterprise-class hardware from IBM or HP. Hell, I know for certain Solaris running on an E series can't touch the performance and reliability of Linux on the IBM z-series mainframes.
Not to mention Diebold's ATM business != Diebold's voting machine business (now called Premier Election Systems). The voting machine business is a small sideline business for Diebold. Diebold makes LOTS and LOTS of stuff. For one, they are a U.S. government contractor that makes physical access control systems and all sorts of things. The ATM business is an offshoot of that.
The voting booths have nothing to do their mainline business.
This a bit like AM General admitting that their LSSVs aren't as robust as their HMMWV's (:HumVee's") -- of course they aren't, their completely different business lines.
Right, but some of what it popped up contained drive-by downloads of real malware/spyware, so calling it ADWARE isn't quite accurate -- I think the GP is right to call it 'grayware'.
Meh. Having been a Solaris, HP-UX and AIX admin, IMHO, there is no better OS for high availability and high scalability than AIX. Solaris is okay, but it's not any better than Linux in that regard. Moreso now that most of the AIX code that counts for HA and HPC are included in the Linux kernel thanks to IBM. ;) In fact, one might (easily) argue that Linux is rather better than Solaris in the clustering department.
So where does OpenSolaris fit in? It seems to be an OS lacking a niche.
Nostramus said some extremely vague shit in code. It has been poorly translated and deciphered by people who either A) want to make a big name for themselves or B) have the aforementioned elsewhere in this thread religious rootkits installed and seem to have a vested interest in the world coming to an end just to prove that their religion is "right" and everyone else is "wrong."
Or both.
Would you people give it up on the flying car already? People have invented flying cars. Flying cars aren't the problem. The problem is that people are too stupid to navigate in 3D space, especially when you consider how "well" they seem to be coping with 2D space.
I'd have to say probably all of them. Even the far-fetched ones like the telekinesis you allude to.
(BTW--My knoweldge comes from individuals inside Microsoft, so I know it's accurate.)
There will probably never be another Windows version that's not tied to x86.
Nah, I doubt this has much to do with Mac except maybe some notebooks. I think this has more to do with a new product, possibly even a new category or a category killer. Big stuff.
Who says the politicians won't be going out with them?
I doubt it. I think it's far more likely that Macs will continue to use Intel for quite sometime, and I think the only really possible change in that is that Apple may start bringing in alternate sources like AMD or VIA, especially in its lower-end line of machines, if only to beat Intel up on pricing.
Apple is increasing moving into embedded and mobile markets more and more with iPhone, iPod, etc. I think we're going to start to see more small footprint devices from Apple in the future, maybe even something that creates a whole new product category. Information-based devices and appliances are the future, and Apple is one of the companies poised to do great things in this market.
This is a precursor to some big things and I think Apple is taking itself in an entirely new direction.
Just me $0.02.
Here's my plan: cleanse the gene pool. We'll just eliminate warning labels from everything and when the stupid freaking idiots fry themselves blow-drying their hair in the bathtub because there was no warning label on the hair dryer saying "WARNING: RISK OF DEATH!!! DO NOT USE IN OR NEAR WATER!!!", Darwin's theory of survival of the fittest will kick in and we'll be rid of the bloody morons.
Hey, at least I tried.
At least you have the option of running biodiesel. Some diesel engines will even run on biodiesel unmodified.
Just say "No" to mainstream media cartel.
Gods, how I love freedom of speech.
Maybe where you are. I'm the U.S. and I'm currently paying somewhere around US $3.50/gallon. If I could get gas for $2, I, along with a few million of my closest friends, would literally shit bricks.
Right. The PFIF agreement contains a section called "Exhibit A", which details all the protocols covered by the agreement, including the SMB and CIFS protocols.
Note that Samba 3 does not just implement SMB -- it implements CIFS, MSDFS, several challenge-response and key-exchange protocols, Microsoft's extensions to Kerberos for ADS integration, some stuff to support point-and-print, etc. In addition, Samba 4, which focuses on being an ADS server, implements several more important Microsoft protocols required to support serving ActiveDirectory.
Samba does a LOT more than SMB, as you can see.
However, the list isn't a comprehensive list of protocols that are covered by patents. As you say, they're not licensing the patents, they're just providing documentation under NDA and agreeing not to sue and to indemnify against third-party suits.
That being said, I really doubt that SMBv1 is patented by Microsoft. It originates with the unholy IBM/Microsoft marriage, and even then, it's derived from some old DEC protocol. I doubt very much that anybody has any patents on SMBv1 that have survived to date.