Absoludidoodly. But he is not a state-criminal, neither a evil demon or anything the like as most of the./'ers like to call him. He is no better or worse then _any_ other ceo from _any_ other software firm, be it Sun, Apple, IBM or Linspire expect that one from SCO that one is a nutcase.
What do you expect if you where the CEO of world biggest software company? Ofcourse he is out there to make money and to sell Windows. He would say anything to make sure his biz stays in biz, just like any other CEO but besides that he is perfectly reasonable, in real live. That man is not stupid neither evil, he sells his product in which he believes. The only "crime" he would be guilty of is the crime of commerce.
Well yes and no, but my current employment is at high-schools (9 locations), the servers I administrate have been installed via a customized (it isn't that hard) Server 2003 CD and deployed on the machine with an unattended PXE boot. The unix install (FreeBSD) does the same but (if needed) has the serial console as its standard in/out, so far never used but you never know. The servers are in the 2000-3500 EUR price range.
NT4 deployment without PXE and the expensive admin tools was a nightmare but luckily that is long time ago, actually I wasn't in the windows server biz before 2000 (unix is another thing).
Perhaps I don't have not enough experience with "real" server but every single server I had layed my fingers on in the last 6 years (did no servers before that), had at least 1 remote solution. Yeah I forgot the management NIC port in my first list. But it could be that in my view remote management is a requisit for a "real" server, so actually self creating truth:-)
Webmin is nice but I am talking about (SCSI) bios with a tiny webserver in it. This is how it could go: Place the machine in the rack Write down the mac of the management NIC Kick the machine on with WOL Configure the bios and scsi via web The machine installs via PXE boot (you got that on your site don't you?) Configure it Test it Configure it Test it (repeat as long as needed) Then take it out of your test rack and place in the "Live" rack (what you don't have a test site?!?)
there are null-modem, lom ports, web-enabled bios configuration, web-enabled SCSI configuration, Ssh, remote desktop (free for admin usage) and you still wonder what the best solution is? Try talking up with a _good_ admin who shows you in _real_live_ the 1 & 2's. KVM switches are handy for non-server hardware misplaced in the network architecture, but any serious stuff has some or all of the above list. "Real" servers are not that expensive by the way, especially compared to the price of IP-KVM.
So , if understand this correctly,in the US you have to pay for sms you send and recieve,even without knowing that you wanted to recieve that message? Do you guys also have to pay for recieving post (with a stamp)?
Solution:
Use another product.
At least that is what their site said.
They also mention workarounds, but that would imply that I have to work... hmmm, no I'll accept the risk and reimage the machines who are affected.
So, costumers will not hire you when they see how your work is written? I am sure that your not that bad.
I implement and administrate software for a living, customers want custom solution and they willing to pay for it, but they won't pay for vapor ware and they do want access to the source so that they do not have to bind them to 1 contractor.
You would be amazed how many customers are willing to hire someone just to reposition/rename a couple of buttons for there main administrative program. As long as the price is right.
Being better than the rest or just more available is the key strategy in here, do not close your customers into a dead trap, they will leave you sooner or later.
So what would I rather have? Free software, it is already out there and people are willing to develop it in there spare time, sorry your business strategy is going to have a rough time in the future. Perhaps its time to rethink your position towards your customers and deliver service instead of software. Imagine that your car brakes down on the highway, would you prefer to pay for a tool set (software) or for someone getting you the hell out of the highway and repair your car for you (service)?
Mine was near there:
Steven "Harley" Davidson said, "If Microsoft keeps on pushing back the dates for Longhorn and removing features from it, they might as well just promise to bundle Duke Nukem Forever with the OS."
In the freebsd mailing list there was a troll using this test to come down on a couple of highly skilled developers. Being lazy by nature I copy/paste my respone in the mailing list for the/. folks to enjoy:
Benchmark are made to be put into perspective, although everybody has a right to say what (s)he wants to say, this doesn't mean that you have to say it. It seems to me that FreeBSD is focusing it performance onto MP 64bit processors. As we can see in the benchmark it has in comparison to other projects a negative impact on UP system.
But just put it in the perspective of processor developments, AMD (followed by Intel) is heading towards a multi-core 64 bit systems, what probably becomes mainstream at the end of next year. With this technology the FreeBSD model could have a winner on there hands.
Doing the same job but not having the same philosophy on it, is always inefficient, but in the real world it leads to the Darwin effect. What means that the best solution gets there chance of survival against the test of time. Luckily these are all BSD's, good solution will spread, just take a look at PF. OpenBSD has a good user base but not compatible to the sum of user base of the other BSD's. Still PF has spread there wings beyond the user base of OpenBSD.
FreeBSD is just a name for an OS, if any other OS can give me more "bang for the buck" and provides a full solution, I will use it. Be it DragonFly/Free/Open/Net, MacOsX, GNU+Linux, Windows or any of the other hundreds of OS'es out there. I like the BSD license so I will tend to stick to "gratis" BSD OS'es.
All of the disagreements in development is a healthy process to make sure the sort "BSD" an not the specie *BSD will survive. Sure I have my disappointments about some decision, but hey so is live, this ain't a fan club for next biggest boy band (he he BSD-Boyz), where using an OS to provide solution for our technologic problems, you favor your solution but don't blind yourself.
And when you don't blind yourself you re-evaluate your situation and move forward with the best solution for your problem. Sure it is a pain to migrate my boxes to another OS (well that is the fun part) and do some massive rewriting of my documentation, but thats my job and I tend to like it. Just standing still and not progress has its attractiveness when you had a very rough ride, but it gets dull very soon and then you find yourself back on the dirty tracks.
But these are my opinion only, however I like to share them;-)
On the technet workshop I've been this week their roadmap showed that when SP1 for 2003 server is released it will be followed by a generic 64 bit 2003 server release and a generic 64 bit release for xp.
This means that itanium, emt64, amd64 -opteron- will be surported by the same install.
Slashdot Mirror
The clients that are affected will not dare to tell me.
One buggy suid will do too, saves the hassle of chmod.
My point was that I misread your post and thus gave a wrong reply
Middle of nowhere is the atlantic in this case, or what do you think is between americas and europe?
Ooh and ofcourse they do slow down over populated areas.
Absoludidoodly. But he is not a state-criminal, neither a evil demon or anything the like as most of the ./'ers like to call him.
He is no better or worse then _any_ other ceo from _any_ other software firm, be it Sun, Apple, IBM or Linspire expect that one from SCO that one is a nutcase.
What do you expect if you where the CEO of world biggest software company?
Ofcourse he is out there to make money and to sell Windows.
He would say anything to make sure his biz stays in biz, just like any other CEO but besides that he is perfectly reasonable, in real live.
That man is not stupid neither evil, he sells his product in which he believes.
The only "crime" he would be guilty of is the crime of commerce.
Well yes and no, but my current employment is at high-schools (9 locations), the servers I administrate have been installed via a customized (it isn't that hard) Server 2003 CD and deployed on the machine with an unattended PXE boot.
The unix install (FreeBSD) does the same but (if needed) has the serial console as its standard in/out, so far never used but you never know.
The servers are in the 2000-3500 EUR price range.
NT4 deployment without PXE and the expensive admin tools was a nightmare but luckily that is long time ago, actually I wasn't in the windows server biz before 2000 (unix is another thing).
You do have your own adapted installation via PXE don't you?
Don't blame MS for not reading their technet documents.
Perhaps I don't have not enough experience with "real" server but every single server I had layed my fingers on in the last 6 years (did no servers before that), had at least 1 remote solution. :-)
Yeah I forgot the management NIC port in my first list.
But it could be that in my view remote management is a requisit for a "real" server, so actually self creating truth
Webmin is nice but I am talking about (SCSI) bios with a tiny webserver in it. This is how it could go:
Place the machine in the rack
Write down the mac of the management NIC
Kick the machine on with WOL
Configure the bios and scsi via web
The machine installs via PXE boot (you got that on your site don't you?)
Configure it
Test it
Configure it
Test it
(repeat as long as needed)
Then take it out of your test rack and place in the "Live" rack (what you don't have a test site?!?)
there are null-modem, lom ports, web-enabled bios configuration, web-enabled SCSI configuration, Ssh, remote desktop (free for admin usage) and you still wonder what the best solution is?
Try talking up with a _good_ admin who shows you in _real_live_ the 1 & 2's.
KVM switches are handy for non-server hardware misplaced in the network architecture, but any serious stuff has some or all of the above list.
"Real" servers are not that expensive by the way, especially compared to the price of IP-KVM.
So , if understand this correctly,in the US you have to pay for sms you send and recieve,even without knowing that you wanted to recieve that message?
Do you guys also have to pay for recieving post (with a stamp)?
Solution: Use another product. At least that is what their site said. They also mention workarounds, but that would imply that I have to work... hmmm, no I'll accept the risk and reimage the machines who are affected.
For there excellent and extensive documentation. Give's the project for the public a huge kickstart. But what happend to volume 1?
So, costumers will not hire you when they see how your work is written? I am sure that your not that bad.
I implement and administrate software for a living, customers want custom solution and they willing to pay for it, but they won't pay for vapor ware and they do want access to the source so that they do not have to bind them to 1 contractor.
You would be amazed how many customers are willing to hire someone just to reposition/rename a couple of buttons for there main administrative program. As long as the price is right.
Being better than the rest or just more available is the key strategy in here, do not close your customers into a dead trap, they will leave you sooner or later.
So what would I rather have? Free software, it is already out there and people are willing to develop it in there spare time, sorry your business strategy is going to have a rough time in the future.
Perhaps its time to rethink your position towards your customers and deliver service instead of software. Imagine that your car brakes down on the highway, would you prefer to pay for a tool set (software) or for someone getting you the hell out of the highway and repair your car for you (service)?
Mine was near there: Steven "Harley" Davidson said, "If Microsoft keeps on pushing back the dates for Longhorn and removing features from it, they might as well just promise to bundle Duke Nukem Forever with the OS."
No, I just recently created an account after 3 years of reading along
In the freebsd mailing list there was a troll using this test to come down on a couple of highly skilled developers. /. folks to enjoy:
;-)
Being lazy by nature I copy/paste my respone in the mailing list for the
Benchmark are made to be put into perspective, although everybody has a right to say what (s)he wants to say, this doesn't mean that you have to say it.
It seems to me that FreeBSD is focusing it performance onto MP 64bit processors. As we can see in the benchmark it has in comparison to other projects a negative impact on UP system.
But just put it in the perspective of processor developments, AMD (followed by Intel) is heading towards a multi-core 64 bit systems, what probably becomes mainstream at the end of next year.
With this technology the FreeBSD model could have a winner on there hands.
Doing the same job but not having the same philosophy on it, is always inefficient, but in the real world it leads to the Darwin effect.
What means that the best solution gets there chance of survival against the test of time.
Luckily these are all BSD's, good solution will spread, just take a look at PF.
OpenBSD has a good user base but not compatible to the sum of user base of the other BSD's. Still PF has spread there wings beyond the user base of OpenBSD.
FreeBSD is just a name for an OS, if any other OS can give me more "bang for the buck" and provides a full solution, I will use it.
Be it DragonFly/Free/Open/Net, MacOsX, GNU+Linux, Windows or any of the other hundreds of OS'es out there.
I like the BSD license so I will tend to stick to "gratis" BSD OS'es.
All of the disagreements in development is a healthy process to make sure the sort "BSD" an not the specie *BSD will survive.
Sure I have my disappointments about some decision, but hey so is live, this ain't a fan club for next biggest boy band (he he BSD-Boyz), where using an OS to provide solution for our technologic problems, you favor your solution but don't blind yourself.
And when you don't blind yourself you re-evaluate your situation and move forward with the best solution for your problem.
Sure it is a pain to migrate my boxes to another OS (well that is the fun part) and do some massive rewriting of my documentation, but thats my job and I tend to like it. Just standing still and not progress has its attractiveness when you had a very rough ride, but it gets dull very soon and then you find yourself back on the dirty tracks.
But these are my opinion only, however I like to share them
On the technet workshop I've been this week their roadmap showed that when SP1 for 2003 server is released it will be followed by a generic 64 bit 2003 server release and a generic 64 bit release for xp. This means that itanium, emt64, amd64 -opteron- will be surported by the same install.