There are several providers, in Sweden. That's why we are well ahead of the rest of the world in terms of clashes with the media industry. They won't sell content to reasonable prices so people share with each other.
Microsoft has stopped to support XP, That's their main advantage over Linux. Now they have none.
Vista is a failure, Windows 7 seem to be more of the same, so go with something you can buy support for after that the vendor no longer is interested in you.
You ask them why they should trust a company that makes an emailserver that surrender and hand over the entire server to someone that send a very special mail. They have big architectual problems.
That's what they find in the latest patch batch from Microsoft.
There is no reason for them to do it, other than squeezing money out of their customers. It would be cheeper to have one license, one modular version. There is no natural law that says that all versions have to cost the same as Ultimate.
Versioning make the cost for Microsoft greater than needed. The price reflect what Microsoft think they can get for it. It has nothing to do with cost. Versioning a benefit just for Microsoft not for you.
Besides that, few people pays what it says on the pricetag, those who pay for a full version has been roobed, as far I see it. The price is always negotiable. Where I work, we have been offered to run all Microsoft product without cost. It wouldnÂt cost Microsoft anything to do so, after all, the cost for them is Zero, nothing.
The real waste of money or grandma is to pay for Microsoft licenses, when she can use ubuntu for nothing
There is no benefit for anyone, but Microsoft. They could offer a modular windows and let everyone choose what they want for one price. In this way they want to squeeze more money from the market.
I have been using vista since shortly before it was released and I am not very happy about it. I am one of few that think that UAC is a good idea, but it is a bad implementation. I am tired of waiting for vista when it goes grey, and I do not think it is better than XP. It is not anything that you want to pay a lot of money for, when you already have XP.
From what I hear Windows 7 is not going to be any better. All our sysadmins has moved to Linux, our servers are moving to Linux, and when our users are ready, they will go to Linux as well.;)
You shouldn't have to review all spam, check it at smtp-time instead and reject. Mark the uncertain as Spam and send to the enduser.
We use exim with a config from http://www.jcdigita.com/eximconfig/
It works very good, most of it is automated and we use about two hours a month for administration, We have 450 users, and it is a wellknown domain since 1995.
The catch is that you need a good understanding for what spam is.
They are not outperforming their peers, they are a monopoly abusing their market power, and if I were in charge, seeing the reaction from EU and knowing that the protection enjoyed from the current administration was about to end, I would start looking for someone who could outperform others without monopoly.
Slashdot Mirror
There are several providers, in Sweden. That's why we are well ahead of the rest of the world in terms of clashes with the media industry. They won't sell content to reasonable prices so people share with each other.
I have a 100/100 fiber in to my livingroom for 15$/month. Don't pay for slow and capped connections. Demand what you want
Where have you got that idea from?
As far as I can see the last update is Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:39:58 +0200.
I would say that FAI is worth looking at. You will have full control over which updates are applied.
Shhh!!! Dont give them any idéas.
Microsoft has stopped to support XP, That's their main advantage over Linux. Now they have none.
Vista is a failure, Windows 7 seem to be more of the same, so go with something you can buy support for after that the vendor no longer is interested in you.
Nope
;)
Look at
http://stats.autonomica.se/mrtg/sums_max/all_year_sum.png
All the talk about filesharing must have spread the word. They could just as well try to sell air.
You are fried! You have to use dhcp.
Running Chrome or Firefox won't stop idiots from opening strange attachments.
Running Linux will.
You ask them why they should trust a company that makes an emailserver that surrender and hand over the entire server to someone that send a very special mail. They have big architectual problems. That's what they find in the latest patch batch from Microsoft.
There is no reason for them to do it, other than squeezing money out of their customers. It would be cheeper to have one license, one modular version. There is no natural law that says that all versions have to cost the same as Ultimate. Versioning make the cost for Microsoft greater than needed. The price reflect what Microsoft think they can get for it. It has nothing to do with cost. Versioning a benefit just for Microsoft not for you. Besides that, few people pays what it says on the pricetag, those who pay for a full version has been roobed, as far I see it. The price is always negotiable. Where I work, we have been offered to run all Microsoft product without cost. It wouldnÂt cost Microsoft anything to do so, after all, the cost for them is Zero, nothing. The real waste of money or grandma is to pay for Microsoft licenses, when she can use ubuntu for nothing
There is no benefit for anyone, but Microsoft. They could offer a modular windows and let everyone choose what they want for one price. In this way they want to squeeze more money from the market.
My point to comment was the fact that you went back to Windows! *gasp*
So how come that you did not test Gnome?
I have been using vista since shortly before it was released and I am not very happy about it. I am one of few that think that UAC is a good idea, but it is a bad implementation. I am tired of waiting for vista when it goes grey, and I do not think it is better than XP. It is not anything that you want to pay a lot of money for, when you already have XP. From what I hear Windows 7 is not going to be any better. All our sysadmins has moved to Linux, our servers are moving to Linux, and when our users are ready, they will go to Linux as well. ;)
This roll-out must be 5 years overdue, windows 2000 server?
People tend to judge people by their own standards, so if he think everyone do everything for an economic award, it is because that is how he thinks.
Right ;) Flamebait!
Google have experienced mail-administrators, while your work has someone who knows how to point and click?
You don't need all those gadgets, and you would save your self a lot of money in the future.
Oki
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j60x3C43Qao
You shouldn't have to review all spam, check it at smtp-time instead and reject. Mark the uncertain as Spam and send to the enduser.
We use exim with a config from http://www.jcdigita.com/eximconfig/ It works very good, most of it is automated and we use about two hours a month for administration, We have 450 users, and it is a wellknown domain since 1995.
The catch is that you need a good understanding for what spam is.
They are not outperforming their peers, they are a monopoly abusing their market power, and if I were in charge, seeing the reaction from EU and knowing that the protection enjoyed from the current administration was about to end, I would start looking for someone who could outperform others without monopoly.
If every domain that was used by persons published SPF, that would not be a problem. See solutions instead of problems. ;)
Well check again, because the worst problem is people who reject solutions on false grounds or because they dont want the problem solved.