I agree using a NAT is a pain if one needs direct P2P connectivity, but OTOH, it also gives you a basic one-way firewall so that outsiders won't be able to get in so easily.
For example, if a Windows box is behind a NAT, the chance of getting infected by a new RPC bug drops significantly.
In that sense, it's useful.
But then, there are so many more ways to get into a private network (Such as worms propagate through browser bugs...), and a basic NAT is not a replacement for those who need two-way access control.
I agree that using a NAT is a pain if you need direct P2P connectivity, but OTOH, it's also useful as it basically works like a one-way firewall so that outsiders won't be able to get into your network so easily.
For once, I didn't have to worry about those Windows RPC worms for my home network.
In that way, it's kind of useful.
But then, there are many more ways to infect a private network.
I think some of the programs loaded with spyware/adware are actually quite useful, and without the companions they would just not be free of upfront monetary charge.
The issue is that, one has to know what the spyware/adware does, its negatives, and weighs it against the positives to see if it's a viable option.
Another question, how does its interface stacks up? You know, these days, companies put out all kinds of weird interfaces to discourage users to actually use their products.
I have not personally spend more than 20 minutes on a Mac, but last time I heard, Apple's interface design is a strong point separating itself from would-be mimickers.
BTW, the barebone doesn't seem to have an optical drive, so you will need to add $30 to make it functional.
Win 2K/XP has IPSec support built-in, but it was a nightmare to configure (I persume it will be easier if you use L2TP/IPSec...?).
But you can use the following utility, it's not as polished as those $80 clients but it does the job, it's basically a front-end to configure the IPSec for you based on a simpler config file:
Slashdot Mirror
I agree using a NAT is a pain if one needs direct P2P connectivity, but OTOH, it also gives you a basic one-way firewall so that outsiders won't be able to get in so easily.
For example, if a Windows box is behind a NAT, the chance of getting infected by a new RPC bug drops significantly.
In that sense, it's useful.
But then, there are so many more ways to get into a private network (Such as worms propagate through browser bugs...), and a basic NAT is not a replacement for those who need two-way access control.
I agree that using a NAT is a pain if you need direct P2P connectivity, but OTOH, it's also useful as it basically works like a one-way firewall so that outsiders won't be able to get into your network so easily. For once, I didn't have to worry about those Windows RPC worms for my home network. In that way, it's kind of useful. But then, there are many more ways to infect a private network.
When there's no compression involved, maybe you don't have to actually send meaningful data to test the bandwidth?
Remind me of flood ping.
Just wonders, is there one CNN.com article talks about the good things that Palestinians are doing in the Land of Conflict?
I think some of the programs loaded with spyware/adware are actually quite useful, and without the companions they would just not be free of upfront monetary charge.
The issue is that, one has to know what the spyware/adware does, its negatives, and weighs it against the positives to see if it's a viable option.
As far as I recall, by default, SP2 only enables NX (Called DEP in Windows - Data Execution Prevention) for "essential" Windows components.
The reason is that, many programs will break if NX is enabled for everything.
SP2 also has a "software DEP", but how it works is beyond my knowledge.
Another question, how does its interface stacks up? You know, these days, companies put out all kinds of weird interfaces to discourage users to actually use their products.
I have not personally spend more than 20 minutes on a Mac, but last time I heard, Apple's interface design is a strong point separating itself from would-be mimickers.
BTW, the barebone doesn't seem to have an optical drive, so you will need to add $30 to make it functional.
How do they call it? Slashadvertisement? Slashvertisement? Slashdotadvertsiisfjlasjflasjflas...
I remember several notebooks have such functions long before (Maybe not DVD playing...)... It's a nice product but does it deserve a frontpage slot?
Win 2K/XP has IPSec support built-in, but it was a nightmare to configure (I persume it will be easier if you use L2TP/IPSec...?).
But you can use the following utility, it's not as polished as those $80 clients but it does the job, it's basically a front-end to configure the IPSec for you based on a simpler config file:
http://vpn.ebootis.de/