I should imagine the person involved in coordinating this interview would have forwarded "Interview Questions" to the PR man to get his talking points ready, rather than the system administrators (if they have them).
"UK Gov. Representative Clueless About Own Internet Blacklist"
I'm well aware that the representative is meant to represent the views of the entire UK Home Office but I think in this case it appears he is most likely a PR man armed with some talking points. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a PR man to understand the finer points of internet censorship, or to respond to questions perfectly from what appears to be a much more technically able interviewer.
I do think it's reasonable to expect the policy makers and the people pushing this policy to understand how it works.
By default, Server 2008 runs user-mode applications with a higher priority than service-mode. This is for initial configuration, and useful if the server is going to become a terminal services server. If the machine is going to become a dedicated web or Exchange server, you change the priority as part of the configuration.
Windows Server 2008 makes a good workstation OS, I've used it myself as a workstation for a while, training for the MCITP. This was my home PC, so it had a GeForce 9600 in it. All that it took to set it up as a workstation OS:
Enabled Desktop Experience
Enable WLAN manager
Start themes + audio services
Install Vista audio drivers
Install Crysis, UT3
???
Profit
Works like a charm. I wouldn't use it for any period of time, applications like MSN Messenger are blocked from installing on '08 but with a bit of hacking away with Orca MSI you can make them install.
Slashdot advertises itself as a high quality technology news site. They ask for financial support in the form of subscriptions to be a high quality technology news site.
The problem is the article kdawson posted was not high quality at all, and even though I don't pay for this service my argument is what incentive do I have to pay when shit like this comes through the "editorial" process?
Could you please proof-read the stories you submit from now on, "Buzz as been building" should be "Buzz has been building" instead. Also the Windows 7 DRM article you submitted was crap. It was debunked within the first handful of comments, that:
1. Replacing a DLL in a third party app which causes it to stop working is not Windows' fault, it's yours 2. The folder in question is not accessible in explorer.exe, it is for legacy systems 3. Shitty sound, in beta software? Sounds like (no pun intended) a Creative sound card.
I'm curious as to what size organisation you have experienced this with. As I have said before, we have about 6,000 desktops/laptops and a similar number of mailboxes (staff and resource) for one of our clients. In the past six months, I have observed the server go down during business hours once.
Our Exchange server has gone down once during business hours due to a hardware fault. Two of our clients had a problem with the Exchange outbound delivery service. Mail was not being delivered outside the organisation. A restart of the service fixed this; no mail was lost, it just queued up.
Outside of business hours the services have short downtime a couple of times a month for patching.
On the Exchange server I run, I have redundancy by having mail delivered to a cheap GoDaddy POP service. I let the MX records do the work. Mail is stored there, and then when the server is back up the mail is taken from POP3 and put in to their Exchange accounts.
For sending mail redundancy I rely on the clients' Outlook to keep the item in "Outbox" until the server comes back up. For users dependent on OWA they don't benefit but since the redundancy is for the 30 minute or so outages when installing Exchange 2007 Update Rollout-XX at 3am, I haven't had any complaints. If the server goes down during business hours there is no redundancy for OWA users.
Perfect? No. Works well? Yes.
Q: Can you connect to the server with other browsers or other clients? A: No
As of Exchange 2007, you can. I can access the web interface from Safari (Mac), Safari (iPhone, I also use ActiveSync), Firefox and Chrome. Only Internet Explorer will give you the full AJAX/ActiveX feature set but the Basic version of OWA is just as powerful albeit less elegant.
As for desktop clients, any that support IMAP will be able to integrate with Exchange. Any desktop clients that support ActiveSync will be able to integrate with the Exchange server a little more closely, or anything built on libmapi.
As I said before, I'm curious as to what size organisation you have experienced this with.
Clearly you've never managed Exchange servers. Or Windows desktops, for that matter.
It's really not that hard. Granted, Exchange is a bit of a beast to install and manage initially, but once everything is set up and the other servers know each other it works pretty smoothy. Exchange 2007 has some pretty cool features like integration with PABX phone systems that you can't get anywhere else.
As far as Windows desktops go, group policy objects with Windows XP SP2 (or even SP1) and later works out pretty well. For PCs off the domain it gets a little bit tricky for "hard" problems like virus infections, but with a copy of VNC and the end user restarting the PC over the phone when VNC dies you can generally nut out the worst virus infection.
All up it scales pretty well, we have 6,000 PCs (most on a domain, a handful of laptops and others not), a similar number of mailboxes and we manage IT1 (Helpdesk) stuff with 6 people and IT2 (Systems) with 5.
I've also heard horror stories of the number of Active Directory objects companies like Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton have, and it's about 1 million AD user objects across 500 domain controllers with a lot of administration managed automatically by group policy.
FYI - 1 million across 500 DC's is anecdotal. I can't confirm this.
The large corner cube reflectors would be destroyed. Reflection involves absorption and then re-emission. With normal light it's not a problem, but with powerful laser beams the energy will heat up the reflection surface and then destroy it.
As long as it's aimed so it doesn't reflect straight back there shouldn't be much of a problem.
So helpful was your advice that I travelled back in time and availed myself of Google to make this post.
If you had bothered to Google this you would have seen that cheap, platform independent and real time frames do not exist. They are not real time, they are not platform independent and they are not in the $50 price range.
Do not make a recommendation for a platform independent, real time, $50 USB frame when they do not exist
Then again, the only thing to do with good advice is pass it on. It is never any use to oneself, so I guess it's forgivable that you did not know that real time, platform independent, $50 USB frames do not exist, right?
Then recommend a $50 USB frame that supports platform independent real time display instead of USB monitors that require Windows XP. That's the only way to "do the same job".
No, you can't "do the same job" with a $50 photoframe. The $50 USB photo frames you talk about are not real time displays. The USB link is to transfer photos to/from the memory card. If you want to get real time on a USB photo frame you need one capable of Vista SideShow, and that will set you back $200.
So even if you happen to be a Computer Science major and reverse engineer your own drivers, you're advocating using an entire monitor to replace a $50 4x20 LCD that runs entirely off a USB port. Why?
Your mouse is a device. If it works with Linux, it's a Linux device. That seems fair enough. If it doesn't work with Linux, it's clearly not a Linux device. So off you go, tell your friends.
I just got one-upped by my friend. While I have a Microsoft "Linux Device" mouse, he has an Intel "Windows Vista Chip" ICH7 Southbridge controller.
According to the article you posted, support for *nix is patchy:
Windows XP (the drivers for Vista were under development at the time of our tests; the support for alternative OSes was not even on the agenda
Furthermore, using an entire monitor defeats the entire purpose of these devices. These are small, compact devices that are meant to show some vital information at all times with minimum power drain. Running a monitorless server? Put the server load onto one of these things. The server's a spam filter? Put the number of rejected emails per hour on it.
It doesn't serve as a substitute for performance alerts, but for $40 it's not bad for real-time monitoring when you don't have a monitor or terminal available
What about them? How is this a Linux "device"? It doesn't run Linux, it comes with drivers that make it compatible with LCDproc.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're going to set the bar that low I'm going to go out and tell my friends that my Microsoft mouse is a "Linux device" because there's driver support for it on that platform.
Slashdot Mirror
I find it amusing that in this case it appears the inability to run Photoshop on Linux is a good thing.
I refer you to my signature:
I agree. Once Microsoft open source's their software it will be 10x faster. Oh, wai-
I should imagine the person involved in coordinating this interview would have forwarded "Interview Questions" to the PR man to get his talking points ready, rather than the system administrators (if they have them).
You don't think that policy makers should understand how it works? What nonsense!
I hope you're being sarcastic:
"UK Gov. Representative Clueless About Own Internet Blacklist"
I'm well aware that the representative is meant to represent the views of the entire UK Home Office but I think in this case it appears he is most likely a PR man armed with some talking points. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a PR man to understand the finer points of internet censorship, or to respond to questions perfectly from what appears to be a much more technically able interviewer.
I do think it's reasonable to expect the policy makers and the people pushing this policy to understand how it works.
Windows Server 2008 makes a good workstation OS, I've used it myself as a workstation for a while, training for the MCITP. This was my home PC, so it had a GeForce 9600 in it. All that it took to set it up as a workstation OS:
Works like a charm. I wouldn't use it for any period of time, applications like MSN Messenger are blocked from installing on '08 but with a bit of hacking away with Orca MSI you can make them install.
Slashdot advertises itself as a high quality technology news site. They ask for financial support in the form of subscriptions to be a high quality technology news site. The problem is the article kdawson posted was not high quality at all, and even though I don't pay for this service my argument is what incentive do I have to pay when shit like this comes through the "editorial" process?
You forget Slashdot is a subscription site - see?
Now I see!
K: I take it all back
Hi K,
Could you please proof-read the stories you submit from now on, "Buzz as been building" should be "Buzz has been building" instead. Also the Windows 7 DRM article you submitted was crap. It was debunked within the first handful of comments, that:
1. Replacing a DLL in a third party app which causes it to stop working is not Windows' fault, it's yours
2. The folder in question is not accessible in explorer.exe, it is for legacy systems
3. Shitty sound, in beta software? Sounds like (no pun intended) a Creative sound card.
Kind Regards,
Kawahee
Our Exchange server has gone down once during business hours due to a hardware fault. Two of our clients had a problem with the Exchange outbound delivery service. Mail was not being delivered outside the organisation. A restart of the service fixed this; no mail was lost, it just queued up.
Outside of business hours the services have short downtime a couple of times a month for patching.
On the Exchange server I run, I have redundancy by having mail delivered to a cheap GoDaddy POP service. I let the MX records do the work. Mail is stored there, and then when the server is back up the mail is taken from POP3 and put in to their Exchange accounts.
For sending mail redundancy I rely on the clients' Outlook to keep the item in "Outbox" until the server comes back up. For users dependent on OWA they don't benefit but since the redundancy is for the 30 minute or so outages when installing Exchange 2007 Update Rollout-XX at 3am, I haven't had any complaints. If the server goes down during business hours there is no redundancy for OWA users.
Perfect? No. Works well? Yes.
As of Exchange 2007, you can. I can access the web interface from Safari (Mac), Safari (iPhone, I also use ActiveSync), Firefox and Chrome. Only Internet Explorer will give you the full AJAX/ActiveX feature set but the Basic version of OWA is just as powerful albeit less elegant.
As for desktop clients, any that support IMAP will be able to integrate with Exchange. Any desktop clients that support ActiveSync will be able to integrate with the Exchange server a little more closely, or anything built on libmapi.
As I said before, I'm curious as to what size organisation you have experienced this with.
It's really not that hard. Granted, Exchange is a bit of a beast to install and manage initially, but once everything is set up and the other servers know each other it works pretty smoothy. Exchange 2007 has some pretty cool features like integration with PABX phone systems that you can't get anywhere else.
As far as Windows desktops go, group policy objects with Windows XP SP2 (or even SP1) and later works out pretty well. For PCs off the domain it gets a little bit tricky for "hard" problems like virus infections, but with a copy of VNC and the end user restarting the PC over the phone when VNC dies you can generally nut out the worst virus infection.
All up it scales pretty well, we have 6,000 PCs (most on a domain, a handful of laptops and others not), a similar number of mailboxes and we manage IT1 (Helpdesk) stuff with 6 people and IT2 (Systems) with 5.
I've also heard horror stories of the number of Active Directory objects companies like Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton have, and it's about 1 million AD user objects across 500 domain controllers with a lot of administration managed automatically by group policy.
FYI - 1 million across 500 DC's is anecdotal. I can't confirm this.
You should have used me instead.
Queue Windows jokes...
Holy shit, my brain.
I'm not a physicist, but as I understand it...
The large corner cube reflectors would be destroyed. Reflection involves absorption and then re-emission. With normal light it's not a problem, but with powerful laser beams the energy will heat up the reflection surface and then destroy it.
As long as it's aimed so it doesn't reflect straight back there shouldn't be much of a problem.
I hope this has been helpful.
So helpful was your advice that I travelled back in time and availed myself of Google to make this post.
If you had bothered to Google this you would have seen that cheap, platform independent and real time frames do not exist. They are not real time, they are not platform independent and they are not in the $50 price range.
Do not make a recommendation for a platform independent, real time, $50 USB frame when they do not exist
Then again, the only thing to do with good advice is pass it on. It is never any use to oneself, so I guess it's forgivable that you did not know that real time, platform independent, $50 USB frames do not exist, right?
I read your entire post over three times (just to make sure) but couldn't find a $50 USB frame that supports platform independent real time display.
Then recommend a $50 USB frame that supports platform independent real time display instead of USB monitors that require Windows XP. That's the only way to "do the same job".
No, you can't "do the same job" with a $50 photoframe. The $50 USB photo frames you talk about are not real time displays. The USB link is to transfer photos to/from the memory card. If you want to get real time on a USB photo frame you need one capable of Vista SideShow, and that will set you back $200.
So even if you happen to be a Computer Science major and reverse engineer your own drivers, you're advocating using an entire monitor to replace a $50 4x20 LCD that runs entirely off a USB port. Why?
Your mouse is a device. If it works with Linux, it's a Linux device. That seems fair enough. If it doesn't work with Linux, it's clearly not a Linux device. So off you go, tell your friends.
I just got one-upped by my friend. While I have a Microsoft "Linux Device" mouse, he has an Intel "Windows Vista Chip" ICH7 Southbridge controller.
According to the article you posted, support for *nix is patchy:
Furthermore, using an entire monitor defeats the entire purpose of these devices. These are small, compact devices that are meant to show some vital information at all times with minimum power drain. Running a monitorless server? Put the server load onto one of these things. The server's a spam filter? Put the number of rejected emails per hour on it.
It doesn't serve as a substitute for performance alerts, but for $40 it's not bad for real-time monitoring when you don't have a monitor or terminal available
What about them? How is this a Linux "device"? It doesn't run Linux, it comes with drivers that make it compatible with LCDproc.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're going to set the bar that low I'm going to go out and tell my friends that my Microsoft mouse is a "Linux device" because there's driver support for it on that platform.
So you bought it for it's internet connectivity, even though every other 3G device is capable of this as well?