I think Windows Vista & 7 requires UEFI + GPT simultaneously to boot.
IMO, it's good for the most popular OS to be really conservative on the issue of how booting is performed because it is so easy to mess up. I cannot count how many times, when experimenting with dual and triple booting, I've rendered a system disabled or nearly so. While recent tools (SuperGRUB, for example) make it easier, it's still a veritable minefield.
I don't know if an object oriented command line interface in which objects, not text, is piped from one command to another is quite the same thing as the "Unix way." It adds an enormous level of complexity.
Not that it isn't interesting or useful. And we'll see how well it takes off in the coming years as more Microsoft management tools become GUI interfaces that write Powershell scripts.
Sounds like your key was leaked and being perpetually added to their list.
Did you call and tell them as much?
I've got several copies from the launch event, plus at least one of the fake Steve Ballmer signed copies, and Technet keys (both Volume License MAK and Retail) that all work fine.
I'm sure they would be interested in the bug, however, they wouldn't be interested in you as a customer on account of you violating the terms of your agreement. You would have no grounds to go back to them and complain about anything.
And if it doesn't work on one of your servers and renders it unbootable, and you go back to them they'll say,
"What do you mean you ran it on all your computers? You were only paying for one subscription. We won't support all of your computers for just $5 a month, that was in the agreement."
The issue is that they're Mark's tools, not anyone else's, and so they conform to what he wants or needs in an application. It doesn't meet the Windows guidelines, nor should it fall under Microsoft's Support Lifecycle. Believe it or not, everything installed in Windows by default falls under that. If diskpart is having a problem, they will use Windows Update to patch it and make it not a problem.
With how frequently sysinternals stuff is updated, it'd be a ton of unnecessary windows updates for changes to programs only the IT department is going to use, ever.
And that's a relatively isolated example. Most of the entries on the top 100 supercomputers today will not be there in five years or ten years. They will probably not even be on the top 500 list at all within ten fifteen.
No one wants to run their business apps on such volatile hardware. For scientists doing one-off simulations, one-off hardware is fine.
I have to admit to, ahem, "loling" at your response. I know open source has the benefit of driving down costs, but adapting your software from commodity hardware to enterprise hardware, and, to go even further and run it on esoteric and specialized hardware is expensive. Whether it's proprietary or not. In fact, it might even be cheaper to get a vendor to rewrite their proprietary code because they've got teams of devs that already know the software in and out. Paying an outside team to write an existing application is always cost prohibitive.
If they can make a supercomputer appear to be a huge cluster of commodity machines, that's pretty big. It's big because it enables that easy scale-up from commodity to esoteric hardware.
Who knows, if it works well enough we might see Google change their minds and deploy a supercomputer because of the higher bandwidth interconnects than commodity hardware currently supports. The reason no one runs line of business on a supercomputer is because they're very nearly one-off deals. At least with a mainframe you know IBM (or whoever) will allow you to keep writing them checks to maintain and provide an upgrade path. Supercomputers are far more rarely upgraded, I think they typically run until they're obsolete.
On the other half is something like the Free Republic, where there's a lot of crazy, some level-headed people trying to beat the crazy, etc. People with extreme viewpoints are loud (their views, after all, are extreme.) They can drown out a quiet centrist majority. Regrettably, the parties have to pander to the loud extremists because they produce the echo chamber through which the centrists hear their news.
Just my thoughts on the matter. 2012 sure will be fun though if the tea-party Republicans continue to dictate terms in the GOP.
Nah, network isn't even close to capacity. Gigabit will work fine for a few years at least or until 10GbE comes down in price.
What I meant to say by "network utilization" was that any given machine can initiate a file transfer or what-have-you with any other given machine, and get 95% network utilization. That is, they get around 900 to 950 megabits per second over the adapter. Virtual machines do just as well. XP does just as well. Windows 7 does just as well.
I run a mixed infrastructure of Windows (XP, 7, 2003 and 2008 R2) and Linux machines and see >95% network utilization on our gigabit network with mixed Intel, Realtek and Broadcom network adapters. We have 100 clients on the network however and I don't know if we have every combination of OS and adapter.
Slashdot Mirror
I think Windows Vista & 7 requires UEFI + GPT simultaneously to boot.
IMO, it's good for the most popular OS to be really conservative on the issue of how booting is performed because it is so easy to mess up. I cannot count how many times, when experimenting with dual and triple booting, I've rendered a system disabled or nearly so. While recent tools (SuperGRUB, for example) make it easier, it's still a veritable minefield.
I don't know if an object oriented command line interface in which objects, not text, is piped from one command to another is quite the same thing as the "Unix way." It adds an enormous level of complexity.
Not that it isn't interesting or useful. And we'll see how well it takes off in the coming years as more Microsoft management tools become GUI interfaces that write Powershell scripts.
Does your 32 and 64-bit promo have the same key?
If so, you were given one promo with both disks. I've received that before.
Sounds like your key was leaked and being perpetually added to their list.
Did you call and tell them as much?
I've got several copies from the launch event, plus at least one of the fake Steve Ballmer signed copies, and Technet keys (both Volume License MAK and Retail) that all work fine.
I challenge you, sir, to an Anecdote Battle.
What would you recommend looking at for virtualization/clustering on Linux these days? XenServer or a particular distro with KVM? Management?
Just curious.
After a few months gaming purely with free software, you'll think even Apple has a plethora of games available on Mac OS X.
You are so lucky to have a completely homogeneous environment in which every service runs on every machine.
It's absolutely a support issue.
I'm sure they would be interested in the bug, however, they wouldn't be interested in you as a customer on account of you violating the terms of your agreement. You would have no grounds to go back to them and complain about anything.
And if it doesn't work on one of your servers and renders it unbootable, and you go back to them they'll say,
"What do you mean you ran it on all your computers? You were only paying for one subscription. We won't support all of your computers for just $5 a month, that was in the agreement."
As long as Infineon et al. are not using an old version of Debian to generate the certs, you're fine.
What kind of IT admin at a stock exchange decides to patch the system in the middle of the trading day?
So I have to release the Visual Studio source code because I wrote a program in it?
Err...
I think your interpretation of the GPL was taken a little far.
The issue is that they're Mark's tools, not anyone else's, and so they conform to what he wants or needs in an application. It doesn't meet the Windows guidelines, nor should it fall under Microsoft's Support Lifecycle. Believe it or not, everything installed in Windows by default falls under that. If diskpart is having a problem, they will use Windows Update to patch it and make it not a problem.
With how frequently sysinternals stuff is updated, it'd be a ton of unnecessary windows updates for changes to programs only the IT department is going to use, ever.
And that's a relatively isolated example. Most of the entries on the top 100 supercomputers today will not be there in five years or ten years. They will probably not even be on the top 500 list at all within ten fifteen.
No one wants to run their business apps on such volatile hardware. For scientists doing one-off simulations, one-off hardware is fine.
I have to admit to, ahem, "loling" at your response. I know open source has the benefit of driving down costs, but adapting your software from commodity hardware to enterprise hardware, and, to go even further and run it on esoteric and specialized hardware is expensive. Whether it's proprietary or not. In fact, it might even be cheaper to get a vendor to rewrite their proprietary code because they've got teams of devs that already know the software in and out. Paying an outside team to write an existing application is always cost prohibitive.
If they can make a supercomputer appear to be a huge cluster of commodity machines, that's pretty big. It's big because it enables that easy scale-up from commodity to esoteric hardware.
Who knows, if it works well enough we might see Google change their minds and deploy a supercomputer because of the higher bandwidth interconnects than commodity hardware currently supports. The reason no one runs line of business on a supercomputer is because they're very nearly one-off deals. At least with a mainframe you know IBM (or whoever) will allow you to keep writing them checks to maintain and provide an upgrade path. Supercomputers are far more rarely upgraded, I think they typically run until they're obsolete.
On the other half is something like the Free Republic, where there's a lot of crazy, some level-headed people trying to beat the crazy, etc. People with extreme viewpoints are loud (their views, after all, are extreme.) They can drown out a quiet centrist majority. Regrettably, the parties have to pander to the loud extremists because they produce the echo chamber through which the centrists hear their news.
Just my thoughts on the matter. 2012 sure will be fun though if the tea-party Republicans continue to dictate terms in the GOP.
The one on Hulu was different from the one on Youtube. I suspect this is the case elsewhere.
It's one of their many April Fool's releases.
Surprise! They fooled you.
F#CK!
And Accelerator, a MS Research project, can be used inline with F# to run code on a GPU.
Nah, network isn't even close to capacity. Gigabit will work fine for a few years at least or until 10GbE comes down in price.
What I meant to say by "network utilization" was that any given machine can initiate a file transfer or what-have-you with any other given machine, and get 95% network utilization. That is, they get around 900 to 950 megabits per second over the adapter. Virtual machines do just as well. XP does just as well. Windows 7 does just as well.
I'd guess that the problem is his driver.
So your solution is to make contributing to open source not free?
I run a mixed infrastructure of Windows (XP, 7, 2003 and 2008 R2) and Linux machines and see >95% network utilization on our gigabit network with mixed Intel, Realtek and Broadcom network adapters. We have 100 clients on the network however and I don't know if we have every combination of OS and adapter.
Problem ain't the OS.
Why did you install the Enterprise RC when you knew that it was a volume license only deal, because they said so and have always said so?
In fact, the only way you could have downloaded the Windows 7 Enterprise RC legally was through MSDN/Technet where it specifically said "VL Build."
http://books.google.com/books?id=MB0PAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=jules+verne&as_brr=4&ei=J5NnS7CdPIXQMtD4pL0M&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Public domain books are full view and they don't charge a thing.