The Hearst empire basically crumbled at the first serious criticism. It was a one-man thing, and he couldn't do anything against the release of `Citizen Kane' and at any rate there were lots of other newspapers in the US and abroad.
Standard Oil was the most powerful oil company in the US but not by far the only one in the world. They were nasty, sure. The anti-trust lawsuit reigned them in.
Microsoft controls the desktop of 95% of computer users in the entire world. They have managed to be convicted of anti-trust behaviour and to get away with it scott-free. They have a history of having bought or put out of business dozens of companies that were competing with them directly over the years. They are the leader of the information age. Their goal is to control your digital future, from embedded systems to the world's most powerful servers and supercomputers via your entertainment systems.
In the future, if Microsoft has its way, you will not be able to read anything or drive anything or see anything or work on anything if it is not veted by Microsoft. Its goal is to control *everything*, not just your silly newspaper or your silly car.
Finally, both WRH's empire and Standard Oil were brought down. No one knows how to do that yet with Microsoft.
Sorry, I've done a lot of classical physics in my time. I think your formula for Isp is wrong. Do you have a reference?
I have a book by G. Dyson right here that says that specific impulsion is `propellant exhaust velocity divided by the acceleration of gravity', i.e in units (m.s^-1)/(m.s^-2) = s.
A quick Google search returns the following link. In there it says that
Isp= Force/(mass flow rate * acceleration of gravity). In units this is:
(N/(kg.s^-1 . m.s^-2). As you know the Newton is the kg.m.s^-2. The whole expression evaluates to s
So there you go, there is no funny play with pounds of thrust vs. pounds of mass, not only do you get Isp in (s), you get there "legally".
Where did you get your information, are you a rocket scientist? I'm from Europe and I've always seen Isp in seconds. Strangely (not), both European and US rocket scientists have exactly the same values for Isp for various propellants as the second is the same in both sides of the Atlantic.
Be careful with your assumptions, according to UNESCO China's literary rate is 85.2% ; and that means for a farmer being able to read 1,500 different Chinese characters and 2,000 for an urban office worker. From memory this is enough to read the newspaper.
I have the memory of this old Chinese guy in a train carriage that could not believe we were students because we couldn't read as many characters as he could.
For a country so poor with so many people, China is quite literate.
> [.. in France...] Anything not expressively allowed is forbidden
This is actually not true, in France too whatever is not explicitely forbidden is allowed. Otherwise in this world most of anything would be forbidden or the written code would undergo gravitational collapse. The difference between the Continental (Napoleonian) and American/British system is the way laws are updated.
As I understand it, each time you go to trial in the US the law itself and its interpretation are on trial as well. Precedents have force of law and cannot be ignored in a subsequent trial. Feel free to comment on that if I'm wrong.
In France a trial cannot change the law, only an amendment voted in Parliament can. The judge can use discretion and precedents to hand down judgment and impose penalty if necessary as in the US (when allowed, re 3 strike laws, etc) but they can't change the law.
Maybe this is not very clear, so let's take the role of the Supreme Court in the US. That court decides what the Law of the Land is at a moment in time. Normally all the other court in between will settle most disputes, crimes, etc ; but if you are a defendant of a case with sufficient merit (and money) you can go all the way to the SC and have the law changed in your favor if you win. In Roe vs. Wade the SC's decision became Federal Law.
In France all what the Conseil Constitutionel can do is strike down a law as being anti-constitutional, and until recently they could only do that at the request of one of the houses of Parliament about a law that was in discussion. Now I know individuals can call upon that Conseil but I don't know the details, there are a lot of restrictions. I don't believe you can do that at any time.
In France the abortion debate was settled in Parliament (in 1976 I believe), and so was the Death Penalty and a raft of other issues that would have pretty much required a SC decision in the US.
Your definition of a `negative' code is applicable to fascist countries, not to Democracies in general (I don't know of any that has such a code).
Well, if you want to continue doing science in Imperial, then you need a way to define the foot as precisely as the meter is right now. The easiest way is to specify a multiplicative constant, end of problem.
In fact if you do the calculation, you'll find that if you find yourself at distance k from the centre of a rotationally symmetric body of radius r, with k <= r, then the gravity pull you experience is that of that portion of the body within radius k, which proves that at distank k=0 of the centre the gravity pull is also 0.
Hi, I don't particularly like GUIs either, however your example is not good:
Bring up file manager,
0- make new folder - 1 click, type name, return. 1- List directories details - 1 click 2- Sort by extension - 1 click 3- Click the first PDF file 4- Shift-click the last PDF file 5- Drag to new directory.
5 clicks, one drag, done. People do it in their sleep. You can do it in Konqueror too, BTW.
Now try to find all the files that have changed between two directories from the File Manager. Good luck if there are hundreds or lots of sub-directories. There are other still more convincing examples I'm sure.
With respect, they are different for the people living in the respective country, but they are the same if you happen to be oppressed by either. The European (both Eastern and Western) got a very good deal compared to other parts of the world. Try reading the non-US news sometimes. Would you have liked to be a Vietnamese in the 60's? Would it have been appreciately different to being an Afghani in the 80's?
May I remind you what happened in Chile on Tuesday the 11th of September 1973? Here is a 9/11 you may never have heard about. Like I said, the US domestic political model is good, life is great in the US, its democracy and its economic model has been a model for the rest of the world, but its foreign policies are as callous as they come. In the past other dominant Western nation did no better (France, Germany, Spain, Portugal or England had pretty drastic and often inhumane colonization policies), but the US is deluded if it thinks it's doing things any better.
Maybe the most positive thing the US ever did was help reconstruct Japan after WWII. Even then things aren't rosy, I suggest you read the book "Blowback", by fellow American Chalmers Johnson for an illustration of how things are at there at the moment (and why the Japan democracy really isn't working all that well, among other things). In that book you will learn that the US is running an empire behind the back of its population. I can't recall the number of nice Americans who told me in person: "you European should be ashamed of the way you conducted your affairs before and just after WWII (true enough), *WE* will never do the things you have done". Well there you go, read for yourself and see if I'm a crank.
BTW blowback is a CIA term. They know the consequences of what they do. although not often to the fullest extent.
Please understand that what the US is doing has nothing to do with the content of domestic policies, it's all about maintaining the US world economic position at whatever cost the US population will accept (so the people in power will be re-elected). There is no need for conspiracy theories to find out that the media in the US (like everywhere else) is biased. To find out what is being done in your name requires a bit of an effort, but it might be worth it.
Yes, allies don't mean we agree on everything. It doesn't mean friend either -- During WWII the US and the USSR were allies, remember? We're still allies because we have signed treaties together such as NATO's. Maybe it doesn't mean anything anymore.
In the case of the cold war there were two warring parties none of which had any other interest in mind than their own. Both were willing to lay waste to any part of the world as long as it furthered their interest, and they did too. Both were aggressive and ruthless. Both had (and still have actually) the power to destroy all life on Earth. The issue was control and dominance. It does not matter that much that one claimed to be a democracy and that the other didn't even try. From the point of view of the pawn in the middle who doesn't get a word in edgeways anyway, neither was friendly. So villain, yeah, sorry.
Things haven't changed much except there is only one big power now. But it's not friendly to anyone, it's just the biggest bully and we have to go along or be crushed.
"You are either with us or against us". How friendly is that?
Before I stop I must say that the villain is not the American People. They are one of the most amazing people on Earth, no doubt. The villain is the American Government, and particularly its foreign policies. Look around and you will find a lot of American who agree with that sentiment, not to mention a lot of foreigners who have been at the receiving end of a US missile, cluster bomb, anti-personal mine still active after 40 years after the conflict ended, or more simply policy.
Not so. In case of land invasion you want everything you can throw the enemy at. That includes conscripts, for sure. Look at Iraq, they did not stop at using the so-called elite republican guard.
> Yes, conscripts were useless in Vietnam.
I wish I could find the reference, but not long ago I read an article about conscripts vs. regulars, and the findings were that in a serious enough conflict (and they had looked at Vietnam too) the line between them blurs quickly. Provided regulars and conscripts are mixed, the reality of war makes everyone perform (or not). Regulars are better trained but not necessarily well enough prepared for a real conflict, except maybe the elite sections that do see a lot of action regularly.
Look in Iraq, only a few months ago, the difficulties did not come so much from the elite Iraqi sections, but from the conscript sections. At least that's what I read in the paper.
You have to realize that the US army is one of a kind. No other can stand in its way now, but look at the tag price too. No other economy can sustain such an expensive tool (if you can call it that way)
Look, like I said what Reagan did was right in hindsight, no question about it, but at the time it was felt that he was applying pressure on the USSR to increase its military pressure in turn and that thing would come to a showdown, a so-called limited nuclear conflict in Europe.
It was not obvious to the population in Europe that the USSR would bow to that pressure like it had for for the Cuba missile crisis. Maybe Reagan had top-notch intelligence that was telling him that his course of action was safe, but that was never told to anybody in Europe or anywhere AFAIK.
As a result Reagan may have been regarded as a hero in the US (for displacing the pressure from the homeland to somewhere else, and then the following success with the cold war), but in the `somewhere else' he is not remembered fondly.
All I'm saying is that this is a piece of the puzzle in the US-Europe relations. Sure we're allies and everything, but that sort of thing does not get forgotten lightly.
Sure the USSR was by all measures a worse villain, and we hated them too.
What I remember (from my MIT days), with kerberos you could only have one user on one machine by default. Sure the whole environment was multiuser but not every machine was a peer as it is with NFS.
Only some servers allowed multiple people to physically or remotely log in but it made a distinction between `workstation' on the one hand where only one person could be at any one time, and it had to be a physical person ; and servers on the other hand. It seemed incredibly wasteful.
At the time of Reagan it was pretty clear that he was preparing for a ground war in Europe against the USSR. He restarted tactical nuke programs, and various other military development, etc and there was the slight crisis about Pershing vs. SS20 missiles. I was a kid in Europe then and I can tell you everybody was very scared, the feeling was that the US was going to abandon us. This was also the time of the Solidarity union movement in Poland, everybody could see a new Prague coming (it didn't) ; this is also the time when the US dollar was so high that there was an energy crisis, oil was so expensive -- the US was flaunting its new buying power everywhere (from tourists to businesses acquisitions).
All the newspapers and magazines were showing maps of the respective military powers, there was a scent of doom in the air. It didn't seem as if the NATO alliance would matter all that much. Sure the US would fight by remote and by proxy, but the battlefield would be our homes, not yours. Germany in particular, it seems, would be completely razed. France wasn't in NATO anymore anyway.
Sure the gamble was to make the USSR bow to a new arms race. It worked, but it was a gamble, and Europe was the chip. While the US population was enjoying their new wealth, their new strong willed president and was slowly emerging as the winner of the cold war, Europe was suffering its worst crisis in 40 years.
Somehow some of this was partly blamed on the US. The people now in power in Europe remember this period very well -- It's not solely a question of relevance: there is a lot of resentment.
In 100 years we'll see where the US is too. If the human race make it that far it will be amazing.
Just to confirm I have the exact same experience. After a lot of effort and time spent, the recompile of our complete image analysis library (100% pure C) with the most aggressive optimizations we could find in the Intel documentation yielded a 5% improvement in speed in the final product over gcc-2.96. Not worth the effort.
However the recompilation effort with icc did point out some ANSI incorrectness and some outright bugs, so it was not completely wasted.
Re:Compile-time performance
on
GCC 3.3 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
That's all very nice to say that 3.x is slower to compile than 2.95.s, but the end result, the executable, is faster (by ~10% on SPEC benchmarks), and 3.x releases are a lot closer to the ISO standards (both C and C++) than 2.95.x, so I don't see why we should all weep.
IE still does not handle PNG transparency correctly. If you want to use a transparent-background icon somewhere and have no surprise, you still have to use GIF. Great eh?
> If anyone has root on ANY system or there are ANY > non-unix systems, forget it.
By that you mean that it's easy to read stuff off people's directory if you can spoof their UID. Sure. I think you'll find the same is true on a SMB network.
> The administrative functionality in NFS can't > compare to the features that have been available > to MacOS and Windows administrators for over a > decade,
Given that 10 years ago Windows for Workgroup had hardly been released and didn't even have TCP/IP by default I think you are exagerating a little bit. At the same time MacOS version 7 was the norm, and we all know how secure that one was, right?
Slashdot Mirror
The Hearst empire basically crumbled at the first serious criticism. It was a one-man thing, and he couldn't do anything against the release of `Citizen Kane' and at any rate there were lots of other newspapers in the US and abroad.
Standard Oil was the most powerful oil company in the US but not by far the only one in the world. They were nasty, sure. The anti-trust lawsuit reigned them in.
Microsoft controls the desktop of 95% of computer users in the entire world. They have managed to be convicted of anti-trust behaviour and to get away with it scott-free. They have a history of having bought or put out of business dozens of companies that were competing with them directly over the years. They are the leader of the information age. Their goal is to control your digital future, from embedded systems to the world's most powerful servers and supercomputers via your entertainment systems.
In the future, if Microsoft has its way, you will not be able to read anything or drive anything or see anything or work on anything if it is not veted by Microsoft. Its goal is to control *everything*, not just your silly newspaper or your silly car.
Finally, both WRH's empire and Standard Oil were brought down. No one knows how to do that yet with Microsoft.
Which one is scarier, again?
Sorry, I've done a lot of classical physics in my time. I think your formula for Isp is wrong. Do you have a reference?
I have a book by G. Dyson right here that says that specific impulsion is `propellant exhaust velocity divided by the acceleration of gravity', i.e in units (m.s^-1)/(m.s^-2) = s.
A quick Google search returns the following link. In there it says that
Isp= Force/(mass flow rate * acceleration of gravity). In units this is:
(N/(kg.s^-1 . m.s^-2). As you know the Newton is the kg.m.s^-2. The whole expression evaluates to s
So there you go, there is no funny play with pounds of thrust vs. pounds of mass, not only do you get Isp in (s), you get there "legally".
Where did you get your information, are you a rocket scientist? I'm from Europe and I've always seen Isp in seconds. Strangely (not), both European and US rocket scientists have exactly the same values for Isp for various propellants as the second is the same in both sides of the Atlantic.
Cheers.
Be careful with your assumptions, according to UNESCO China's literary rate is 85.2% ; and that means for a farmer being able to read 1,500 different Chinese characters and 2,000 for an urban office worker. From memory this is enough to read the newspaper.
I have the memory of this old Chinese guy in a train carriage that could not believe we were students because we couldn't read as many characters as he could.
For a country so poor with so many people, China is quite literate.
If what Novell claims is true then SCO has more than a few problems to handle. It will have to start with a global apology.
Hi,
> [.. in France...] Anything not expressively allowed is forbidden
This is actually not true, in France too whatever is not explicitely forbidden is allowed. Otherwise in this world most of anything would be forbidden or the written code would undergo gravitational collapse. The difference between the Continental (Napoleonian) and American/British system is the way laws are updated.
As I understand it, each time you go to trial in the US the law itself and its interpretation are on trial as well. Precedents have force of law and cannot be ignored in a subsequent trial. Feel free to comment on that if I'm wrong.
In France a trial cannot change the law, only an amendment voted in Parliament can. The judge can use discretion and precedents to hand down judgment and impose penalty if necessary as in the US (when allowed, re 3 strike laws, etc) but they can't change the law.
Maybe this is not very clear, so let's take the role of the Supreme Court in the US. That court decides what the Law of the Land is at a moment in time. Normally all the other court in between will settle most disputes, crimes, etc ; but if you are a defendant of a case with sufficient merit (and money) you can go all the way to the SC and have the law changed in your favor if you win. In Roe vs. Wade the SC's decision became Federal Law.
In France all what the Conseil Constitutionel can do is strike down a law as being anti-constitutional, and until recently they could only do that at the request of one of the houses of Parliament about a law that was in discussion. Now I know individuals can call upon that Conseil but I don't know the details, there are a lot of restrictions. I don't believe you can do that at any time.
In France the abortion debate was settled in Parliament (in 1976 I believe), and so was the Death Penalty and a raft of other issues that would have pretty much required a SC decision in the US.
Your definition of a `negative' code is applicable to fascist countries, not to Democracies in general (I don't know of any that has such a code).
Well, if you want to continue doing science in Imperial, then you need a way to define the foot as precisely as the meter is right now. The easiest way is to specify a multiplicative constant, end of problem.
Specific impulse is measured in seconds no matter what system you use, imperial or metric.
Except that further measurements of the speed of light make the definition of the meter more precise.
In fact if you do the calculation, you'll find that if you find yourself at distance k from the centre of a rotationally symmetric body of radius r, with k <= r, then the gravity pull you experience is that of that portion of the body within radius k, which proves that at distank k=0 of the centre the gravity pull is also 0.
Hi, I don't particularly like GUIs either, however your example is not good:
Bring up file manager,
0- make new folder - 1 click, type name, return.
1- List directories details - 1 click
2- Sort by extension - 1 click
3- Click the first PDF file
4- Shift-click the last PDF file
5- Drag to new directory.
5 clicks, one drag, done. People do it in their sleep. You can do it in Konqueror too, BTW.
Now try to find all the files that have changed
between two directories from the File Manager. Good luck if there are hundreds or lots of sub-directories. There are other still more convincing examples I'm sure.
I do that mistake a lot myself, but please do some more research before you post:
1- The cool hardware
2- The nice software product
3- The independent support site
Mac OS/X is quite a good server which is not encumbered by a stupid GUI when you don't need it.
So you don't like what I'm telling you?
With respect, they are different for the people living in the respective country, but they are the same if you happen to be oppressed by either. The European (both Eastern and Western) got a very good deal compared to other parts of the world. Try reading the non-US news sometimes. Would you have liked to be a Vietnamese in the 60's? Would it have been appreciately different to being an Afghani in the 80's?
May I remind you what happened in Chile on Tuesday the 11th of September 1973? Here is a 9/11 you may never have heard about. Like I said, the US domestic political model is good, life is great in the US, its democracy and its economic model has been a model for the rest of the world, but its foreign policies are as callous as they come. In the past other dominant Western nation did no better (France, Germany, Spain, Portugal or England had pretty drastic and often inhumane colonization policies), but the US is deluded if it thinks it's doing things any better.
Maybe the most positive thing the US ever did was help reconstruct Japan after WWII. Even then things aren't rosy, I suggest you read the book "Blowback", by fellow American Chalmers Johnson for an illustration of how things are at there at the moment (and why the Japan democracy really isn't working all that well, among other things). In that book you will learn that the US is running an empire behind the back of its population. I can't recall the number of nice Americans who told me in person: "you European should be ashamed of the way you conducted your affairs before and just after WWII (true enough), *WE* will never do the things you have done". Well there you go, read for yourself and see if I'm a crank.
BTW blowback is a CIA term. They know the consequences of what they do. although not often to the fullest extent.
Please understand that what the US is doing has nothing to do with the content of domestic policies, it's all about maintaining the US world economic position at whatever cost the US population will accept (so the people in power will be re-elected). There is no need for conspiracy theories to find out that the media in the US (like everywhere else) is biased. To find out what is being done in your name requires a bit of an effort, but it might be worth it.
Sorry for the rant.
Quantity has a quality all of its own.
J. Stalin
Yes, allies don't mean we agree on everything. It doesn't mean friend either -- During WWII the US and the USSR were allies, remember? We're still allies because we have signed treaties together such as NATO's. Maybe it doesn't mean anything anymore.
In the case of the cold war there were two warring parties none of which had any other interest in mind than their own. Both were willing to lay waste to any part of the world as long as it furthered their interest, and they did too. Both were aggressive and ruthless. Both had (and still have actually) the power to destroy all life on Earth. The issue was control and dominance. It does not matter that much that one claimed to be a democracy and that the other didn't even try. From the point of view of the pawn in the middle who doesn't get a word in edgeways anyway, neither was friendly. So villain, yeah, sorry.
Things haven't changed much except there is only one big power now. But it's not friendly to anyone, it's just the biggest bully and we have to go along or be crushed.
"You are either with us or against us". How friendly is that?
Before I stop I must say that the villain is not the American People. They are one of the most amazing people on Earth, no doubt. The villain is the American Government, and particularly its foreign policies. Look around and you will find a lot of American who agree with that sentiment, not to mention a lot of foreigners who have been at the receiving end of a US missile, cluster bomb, anti-personal mine still active after 40 years after the conflict ended, or more simply policy.
Not so. In case of land invasion you want everything you can throw the enemy at. That includes conscripts, for sure. Look at Iraq, they did not stop at using the so-called elite republican guard.
> Yes, conscripts were useless in Vietnam.
I wish I could find the reference, but not long ago I read an article about conscripts vs. regulars, and the findings were that in a serious enough conflict (and they had looked at Vietnam too) the line between them blurs quickly. Provided regulars and conscripts are mixed, the reality of war makes everyone perform (or not). Regulars are better trained but not necessarily well enough prepared for a real conflict, except maybe the elite sections that do see a lot of action regularly.
Look in Iraq, only a few months ago, the difficulties did not come so much from the elite Iraqi sections, but from the conscript sections. At least that's what I read in the paper.
You have to realize that the US army is one of a kind. No other can stand in its way now, but look at the tag price too. No other economy can sustain such an expensive tool (if you can call it that way)
Look, like I said what Reagan did was right in hindsight, no question about it, but at the time it was felt that he was applying pressure on the USSR to increase its military pressure in turn and that thing would come to a showdown, a so-called limited nuclear conflict in Europe.
It was not obvious to the population in Europe that the USSR would bow to that pressure like it had for for the Cuba missile crisis. Maybe Reagan had top-notch intelligence that was telling him that his course of action was safe, but that was never told to anybody in Europe or anywhere AFAIK.
As a result Reagan may have been regarded as a hero in the US (for displacing the pressure from the homeland to somewhere else, and then the following success with the cold war), but in the `somewhere else' he is not remembered fondly.
All I'm saying is that this is a piece of the puzzle in the US-Europe relations. Sure we're allies and everything, but that sort of thing does not get forgotten lightly.
Sure the USSR was by all measures a worse villain, and we hated them too.
Hi,
What I remember (from my MIT days), with kerberos you could only have one user on one machine by default. Sure the whole environment was multiuser but not every machine was a peer as it is with NFS.
Only some servers allowed multiple people to physically or remotely log in but it made a distinction between `workstation' on the one hand where only one person could be at any one time, and it had to be a physical person ; and servers on the other hand. It seemed incredibly wasteful.
At the time of Reagan it was pretty clear that he was preparing for a ground war in Europe against the USSR. He restarted tactical nuke programs, and various other military development, etc and there was the slight crisis about Pershing vs. SS20 missiles. I was a kid in Europe then and I can tell you everybody was very scared, the feeling was that the US was going to abandon us. This was also the time of the Solidarity union movement in Poland, everybody could see a new Prague coming (it didn't) ; this is also the time when the US dollar was so high that there was an energy crisis, oil was so expensive -- the US was flaunting its new buying power everywhere (from tourists to businesses acquisitions).
All the newspapers and magazines were showing maps of the respective military powers, there was a scent of doom in the air. It didn't seem as if the NATO alliance would matter all that much. Sure the US would fight by remote and by proxy, but the battlefield would be our homes, not yours. Germany in particular, it seems, would be completely razed. France wasn't in NATO anymore anyway.
Sure the gamble was to make the USSR bow to a new arms race. It worked, but it was a gamble, and Europe was the chip. While the US population was enjoying their new wealth, their new strong willed president and was slowly emerging as the winner of the cold war, Europe was suffering its worst crisis in 40 years.
Somehow some of this was partly blamed on the US. The people now in power in Europe remember this period very well -- It's not solely a question of relevance: there is a lot of resentment.
In 100 years we'll see where the US is too. If the human race make it that far it will be amazing.
> why is it that no programmer's editor cannot
> print the highlighting in color?
As everything else, Emacs does it just fine.
Hi Bill!,
Just to confirm I have the exact same experience. After a lot of effort and time spent, the recompile of our complete image analysis library (100% pure C) with the most aggressive optimizations we could find in the Intel documentation yielded a 5% improvement in speed in the final product over gcc-2.96. Not worth the effort.
However the recompilation effort with icc did point out some ANSI incorrectness and some outright bugs, so it was not completely wasted.
That's all very nice to say that 3.x is slower to compile than 2.95.s, but the end result, the executable, is faster (by ~10% on SPEC benchmarks), and 3.x releases are a lot closer to the ISO standards (both C and C++) than 2.95.x, so I don't see why we should all weep.
i386 is alive and well in the embedded market, which has been a strong supporter of gcc for a very long time.
Correct,
You can read all about it in this document.
Very interesting system.
IE still does not handle PNG transparency correctly. If you want to use a transparent-background icon somewhere and have no surprise, you still have to use GIF. Great eh?
> If anyone has root on ANY system or there are ANY > non-unix systems, forget it.
By that you mean that it's easy to read stuff off people's directory if you can spoof their UID. Sure. I think you'll find the same is true on a SMB network.
> The administrative functionality in NFS can't
> compare to the features that have been available
> to MacOS and Windows administrators for over a
> decade,
Given that 10 years ago Windows for Workgroup had hardly been released and didn't even have TCP/IP by default I think you are exagerating a little bit. At the same time MacOS version 7 was the norm, and we all know how secure that one was, right?
Maybe NFS4 is your answer?