Actually, your base OS can be Hyper-V Server, which is a complete, freely (as in beer) downloadable and usable Hyper-V implementation on a much trimmed down free (as in beer) Windows Server 2008 edition. And you can configure it from... itself.
Is this a trick question? Surely you're aware that in order to run Microsoft Hyper-V, you must have Windows 2008 Server as the primary OS under the Hyper-V, and run a Windows desktop to be able to configure the hypervisor.
Or, be willing to visit a website and download Hyper-V Server for free. No Windows necessary. It uses Windows Server 2008 Core to host the hypervisor, but they give it to you for free. Same as ESX, really.
So anyone using the module are already fully Windows; no change needed. Contrast this with other commercial hypervisors like Xen and VMware, and you'll find that those are far less Windows-centric and lets users embrace both Linux and Windows, and switch either way if they so want.
I think you'll find that's not correct at all. And VMware sucks by the way. vSphere Administrator seems to be Windows only (we use vSphere here) and just outright sucks. We can't even find out what server our VMs are running on (VMware figures you don't need to know, thanks to live migration).
You know, we'd love it if your rural country about to go belly up would stop sending foreign aid to subsidize our legislative process. We rather liked our laws before the US government started writing and funding them.
Prescriptions are a fixed cost per-item (about £8, IIRC). If the item costs £1, the NHS is making a stonking profit; if it costs £50 it's making a stonking loss.
If you've got a system anything like ours in New Zealand, the government buys the drugs in mega-bulk and gets it for pennies on the dollar. Of course, the US pharmaceutical companies hate the practice because they can't overcharge us, and the US government is busy writing us some new laws to ban the practice while enshrining in law their own right to do it (yes, that's right Americans - your government is spending all your tax dollars writing legislation for every other country - and you wonder why no one likes your country. Write your senator. Tell them to shove their TPPA where the sun don't shine).
I'm not quite sure I'd call "spraying oneself with liquid nitrogen" easy, or even safe without training. One wrong move and you could crack a large portion of your skin (and muscle, and bone) off.
For what it's worth, my understanding of the US system is that the ridiculous cost is (aside from being due to the astronomical expense of "malpractice insurance") mostly down the the institution having to somehow recover the costs for treatments they aren't paid for that they can't avoid doing (e.g. someone showing up unconscious in an ambulance, which they're apparently legally required to treat - just like in a real first world country!), and something to do with Medicare, whatever that is.
Last I heard, only the Australian constitution ever referred to the country as The Commonwealth of Australia (and clarifies that to mean "the colonies of New South Wales, New Zealand, Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia and South Australia" - one of these does not belong, I leave it to you to work out which).
Oh bullshit. That thing in 2009 was about making it so the.NET Framework could actually work with Firefox. You know, compatibility? It's not fucking sabotaging at all.
You goddamn zealots bitch if Microsoft doesn't work to make things compatible (*ooh, I can't use this ClickOnce bullshit in Firefox, Microsoft is an evil monopoly*) and you bitch if they do work to make things compatible (*ooh, Microsoft installed a plugin to Firefox to make ClickOnce work, Microsoft is an evil monopoly*).
The only thing they did wrong is that they did exactly as Adobe, Sun, and Apple already do and installed it as a Firefox system plugin rather than a user plugin. You will of course bitch that they made it so you can't remove it, however that particular behaviour is by design of Firefox, not Microsoft.
Why don't you quit goddamn pretending to be rational and just admit that you'll claim that no matter what they do, it is clearly wrong because you don't agree with it.
Furthermore, they wrote key web properties of theirs like OWA and Windows Update to only function in IE.
I can't imagine how you could implement a standards compliant web based software update system really, so that argument is a wash. But thank fuck they did write OWA to only work in IE - you realise the Microsoft Exchange team actually invented XMLHTTPRequest for use in OWA, right? That lock-in created one of the most useful (open!) web technologies available today.
It's even more evil. HDCP. You aren't allowed to implement HDCP on anything but HDMI, and you can't call it HDMI unless it supports HDCP. So because the "cable" supports HDCP, they can stop it being sold by revoking the HDCP license.
Really? Got a name for one, I'd like to take a look (and smack our Apple contact with a big stick if what you're saying is what I think you're saying)?
Unfortunately this may spell the end of "cheap" Android phones since the LTE patents would need to be licensed. Google should have been more serious, but this kinda smells like they may not be committed to the Android platform.
You couldn't be more wrong. The manufacturers get the required radio patent licenses either directly or with their radio chipsets (Broadcom, etc), not with the OS. This won't affect anything at all.
It's also mentioned that Silver Lake is also one of the partners here. The same Silver Lake that just fired the entire Skype executive structure prior to the sale to Microsoft to reduce the amount of profit they have to share.
I can see this going badly for GoDaddy. More like GoneDaddy.
Google is not fighting any war here. All they are trying to do, give a more ad-infested piece of software free of recognisable cost to consumers. So, stop painting that google is on a war or something. We all know that most of the crappy software out there can be done with more ads.
FTFY. Don't delude yourself that Google gives a crap about you, or making functional software for free. They care about slamming their ads in front of you, and hiding the actual cost of their services behind that "free" moniker.
Spamhaus lets you submit your IP to be excluded from the PBL, with the disclaimer that you represent that the IP is static, yours, and you are running a legitimate mail server (and accept responsibility for the consequences).
Slashdot Mirror
You voted for Ron Paul, didn't you?
Actually, your base OS can be Hyper-V Server, which is a complete, freely (as in beer) downloadable and usable Hyper-V implementation on a much trimmed down free (as in beer) Windows Server 2008 edition. And you can configure it from... itself.
Is this a trick question? Surely you're aware that in order to run Microsoft Hyper-V, you must have Windows 2008 Server as the primary OS under the Hyper-V, and run a Windows desktop to be able to configure the hypervisor.
Or, be willing to visit a website and download Hyper-V Server for free. No Windows necessary. It uses Windows Server 2008 Core to host the hypervisor, but they give it to you for free. Same as ESX, really.
So anyone using the module are already fully Windows; no change needed.
Contrast this with other commercial hypervisors like Xen and VMware, and you'll find that those are far less Windows-centric and lets users embrace both Linux and Windows, and switch either way if they so want.
I think you'll find that's not correct at all. And VMware sucks by the way. vSphere Administrator seems to be Windows only (we use vSphere here) and just outright sucks. We can't even find out what server our VMs are running on (VMware figures you don't need to know, thanks to live migration).
To that I can only respond with an actual image of a Telecom New Zealand bill:
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020218/login/bill.jpg
So Walmart undercut Walgreens on a product they don't sell? That's some serious wizardry there...
You know, we'd love it if your rural country about to go belly up would stop sending foreign aid to subsidize our legislative process. We rather liked our laws before the US government started writing and funding them.
Prescriptions are a fixed cost per-item (about £8, IIRC). If the item costs £1, the NHS is making a stonking profit; if it costs £50 it's making a stonking loss.
If you've got a system anything like ours in New Zealand, the government buys the drugs in mega-bulk and gets it for pennies on the dollar. Of course, the US pharmaceutical companies hate the practice because they can't overcharge us, and the US government is busy writing us some new laws to ban the practice while enshrining in law their own right to do it (yes, that's right Americans - your government is spending all your tax dollars writing legislation for every other country - and you wonder why no one likes your country. Write your senator. Tell them to shove their TPPA where the sun don't shine).
I'm not quite sure I'd call "spraying oneself with liquid nitrogen" easy, or even safe without training. One wrong move and you could crack a large portion of your skin (and muscle, and bone) off.
For what it's worth, my understanding of the US system is that the ridiculous cost is (aside from being due to the astronomical expense of "malpractice insurance") mostly down the the institution having to somehow recover the costs for treatments they aren't paid for that they can't avoid doing (e.g. someone showing up unconscious in an ambulance, which they're apparently legally required to treat - just like in a real first world country!), and something to do with Medicare, whatever that is.
Last I heard, only the Australian constitution ever referred to the country as The Commonwealth of Australia (and clarifies that to mean "the colonies of New South Wales, New Zealand, Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia and South Australia" - one of these does not belong, I leave it to you to work out which).
Oh bullshit. That thing in 2009 was about making it so the .NET Framework could actually work with Firefox. You know, compatibility? It's not fucking sabotaging at all.
You goddamn zealots bitch if Microsoft doesn't work to make things compatible (*ooh, I can't use this ClickOnce bullshit in Firefox, Microsoft is an evil monopoly*) and you bitch if they do work to make things compatible (*ooh, Microsoft installed a plugin to Firefox to make ClickOnce work, Microsoft is an evil monopoly*).
The only thing they did wrong is that they did exactly as Adobe, Sun, and Apple already do and installed it as a Firefox system plugin rather than a user plugin. You will of course bitch that they made it so you can't remove it, however that particular behaviour is by design of Firefox, not Microsoft.
Why don't you quit goddamn pretending to be rational and just admit that you'll claim that no matter what they do, it is clearly wrong because you don't agree with it.
Furthermore, they wrote key web properties of theirs like OWA and Windows Update to only function in IE.
I can't imagine how you could implement a standards compliant web based software update system really, so that argument is a wash. But thank fuck they did write OWA to only work in IE - you realise the Microsoft Exchange team actually invented XMLHTTPRequest for use in OWA, right? That lock-in created one of the most useful (open!) web technologies available today.
HDMI has patents, and the big guns: HDCP.
It's even more evil. HDCP. You aren't allowed to implement HDCP on anything but HDMI, and you can't call it HDMI unless it supports HDCP. So because the "cable" supports HDCP, they can stop it being sold by revoking the HDCP license.
Interesting. Will have to research more (and perhaps smack our Apple contact with a stick).
Really? Got a name for one, I'd like to take a look (and smack our Apple contact with a big stick if what you're saying is what I think you're saying)?
The dot trick doesn't work for Apps accounts, although the plus trick does. For Apps, first.last@domain.com is different from fir.stlast@domain.com.
The radio patents don't come with the OS, they come with the radio chipsets. This has nothing to do with 4G patent protection for the OS vendors.
Nortel makes hardware. Many (most) of those patents would be hardware patents, completely unaffected by software patent reform.
Unfortunately this may spell the end of "cheap" Android phones since the LTE patents would need to be licensed. Google should have been more serious, but this kinda smells like they may not be committed to the Android platform.
You couldn't be more wrong. The manufacturers get the required radio patent licenses either directly or with their radio chipsets (Broadcom, etc), not with the OS. This won't affect anything at all.
The majority of Nortel's patents would be hardware - being a telecomms manufacturer and all. Software patents are completely irrelevant.
Google bid for Nortel, what the hell does that have to do with GoDaddy?
It's also mentioned that Silver Lake is also one of the partners here. The same Silver Lake that just fired the entire Skype executive structure prior to the sale to Microsoft to reduce the amount of profit they have to share.
I can see this going badly for GoDaddy. More like GoneDaddy.
Google is not fighting any war here. All they are trying to do, give a more ad-infested piece of software free of recognisable cost to consumers. So, stop painting that google is on a war or something. We all know that most of the crappy software out there can be done with more ads.
FTFY. Don't delude yourself that Google gives a crap about you, or making functional software for free. They care about slamming their ads in front of you, and hiding the actual cost of their services behind that "free" moniker.
No you didn't. Skype games is something completely different and nothing to do with Microsoft. But don't let that ruin your hating.
Spamhaus lets you submit your IP to be excluded from the PBL, with the disclaimer that you represent that the IP is static, yours, and you are running a legitimate mail server (and accept responsibility for the consequences).