As far as i know, IIS patches will not require a reboot or won't even be found as "has to be applied" if you're not using IIS.
And then, there's basically something every patch tuesday which you need. Yeah, you might not need 5 out of 6 patches, but the sixt one might apply, so you just go and install all of them.
It could be doable with a hypervisor, and limiting the i7 CPU to what the Atom can do.
I know you can Vmotion VMs from a Xeon 5500 to a Xeon 5400 if you enable processor compatibility mode, so i see no reason why this shouldn't be possible on a laptop.
But i don't think the increase in complexity will justify the power savings.
The switch to Symphony has been a standing order for a long time. It's just that nobody cared. Now they've set a very short ultimatum, which is something positive. But i've always seen them as an extremely slow company.
Previously, the used MS Office but actually recommended their customers to use Symphony. That's just a laughable position.
I'm glad the finally changed this, but i'm not sure if this actually means anything. IBM's slow as molasses in regards to everything. Want a server from them? Better wait 4-6 weeks.
There are several tiling window managers available for Windows. I've tried one on my laptop (1920x1200 15" screen) for a while. It was a nice idea, but didn't work correctly (yet) on Windows 7 RC.
I was happy to install and use SharePoint but as soon as I found that I couldn't add the info for my mailserver (mailenable) it lost all its luster.
Sharepoint can send mail using any SMTP server. Receiving mail just requires a drop folder, that can be provided using the built-in SMTP Server or any other software that can provide a drop folder.
Sure it integrates with MS Outlook but Outlook is the devil himself so why would you want to? Burdening peoples PC and laptops with 2gb PST files instead of leaving mail on the server where it belongs causes heaps of problems IMHO.
Erm, disable Cached Exchange Mode if you don't want any mails on the client.
Unfortunately, these kind of comparisons are very hard to do, because people that are familiar with Exchange usually aren't as familiar with other products, even if they looked at them or evaluated them.
From my perspective as someone who works for a small Microsoft Partner, the main advantage of Exchange over the competition is "it just works". Getting a small company with 10-50 employees up and running on Microsoft's Small Business Server 2008 is something that can be done in a few days, and it offers much more than just Groupware (managed updates, group policies, file sharing, intranet using Sharepoint services).
Outlook integrates into Sharepoint, Active Directory, etc. without the need to configure anything. You can easily get a fairly standardized setup without much hassle or the necessity to develop or create deployment plans, default configurations, etc. in house, as SBS already ships with a very decent configuration that only needs slight adjustments.
My most extensive experience with another Groupware product was Lotus Notes, using both the native Notes Client and the Outlook Connector. Notes gives you several things that Outlook does not have (e.G. offline capable applications that can replicate their database when the network is back up), but it's much more of a hassle to use. The Outlook plugin sometimes just doesn't work, lags behind released Outlook versions (took forever till they got a 2007 version out), etc.
I know that the Slashdot groupthink here disagrees, but Microsoft does indeed products that work together very well. You can all your non line of business infrastructure from Microsoft, and you'll get a pretty decent system, even though there are some suppliers out there that offer partially better products (e.G. VMware).
Slashdot Mirror
You have never worked in a large enterprise, haven't you?
They're as bad as most governments. Sometimes even worse.
Custom ADM templates don't work for Firefox because Firefox doesn't use the registry for most settings, instead the prefs.js in %APPDATA%\Mozilla\.
Enterprise Deployment isn't anything Firefox, Opera or Chrome are aiming for.
My ThinkPad W500 has about 8 seconds from pressing the power button to booting Windows.
Luckily it doesn't do that when coming up from standby.
As far as i know, IIS patches will not require a reboot or won't even be found as "has to be applied" if you're not using IIS.
And then, there's basically something every patch tuesday which you need. Yeah, you might not need 5 out of 6 patches, but the sixt one might apply, so you just go and install all of them.
So you won't have to wait until it has booted the next morning. :)
It could be doable with a hypervisor, and limiting the i7 CPU to what the Atom can do.
I know you can Vmotion VMs from a Xeon 5500 to a Xeon 5400 if you enable processor compatibility mode, so i see no reason why this shouldn't be possible on a laptop.
But i don't think the increase in complexity will justify the power savings.
Or a Tx00 or Wx00 series Thinkpad.
The i7-920 can theoretically go to 3.06 Ghz (2 Bins) on a single core. You won't see that unless you:
* Have an aftermarket heatsink
* A properly cooled case
* An OS that supports core parking, such as Windows 7
The newer Lynnfield i7 (i7-8xx) are much more agressive at turbo boost.
I think Overclocking is definitively the wrong word for this. It implies running something out of spec - which turbo boost isn't.
Limux wants to disagree: http://limuxwatch.blogspot.com/
Erm, your company doesn't have internal firewalls?
From what i've seen, this seems standard on companies with more than 500 PCs.
Well, all the IBM sales reps i've dealt with had to purchase Office 2007 through their expense account, because IBM wouldn't buy a volume license.
None of them used Symphony. All the stuff up on PartnerWorld is in .ppt too, created by PowerPoint.
The switch to Symphony has been a standing order for a long time. It's just that nobody cared. Now they've set a very short ultimatum, which is something positive. But i've always seen them as an extremely slow company.
Many IBM sales reps here are using Powerpoint 2007. Most of them bought MLK licenses through their expenses account.
Previously, the used MS Office but actually recommended their customers to use Symphony. That's just a laughable position.
I'm glad the finally changed this, but i'm not sure if this actually means anything. IBM's slow as molasses in regards to everything. Want a server from them? Better wait 4-6 weeks.
But there are some generic cards:
http://www.daxten.com/us/single-server-remote-administration.html
My question about all those 5% numbers..
Wouldn't it be possible to run an old diesel engine (not common rail, turbo loaded) on 10% water or something?
There are several tiling window managers available for Windows. I've tried one on my laptop (1920x1200 15" screen) for a while. It was a nice idea, but didn't work correctly (yet) on Windows 7 RC.
HP's iLO or IBM's IMM are just a few bucks on top of the nominal server cost.
Well, it all makes sense now! It's a conspiracy to sell more hardware!
Sharepoint can send mail using any SMTP server. Receiving mail just requires a drop folder, that can be provided using the built-in SMTP Server or any other software that can provide a drop folder.
Erm, disable Cached Exchange Mode if you don't want any mails on the client.
If you want version control and such, you'll need Sharepoint. Exchange is not equal to Google Apps.
Exchange + Sharepoint + Office is.
Unfortunately, these kind of comparisons are very hard to do, because people that are familiar with Exchange usually aren't as familiar with other products, even if they looked at them or evaluated them.
From my perspective as someone who works for a small Microsoft Partner, the main advantage of Exchange over the competition is "it just works". Getting a small company with 10-50 employees up and running on Microsoft's Small Business Server 2008 is something that can be done in a few days, and it offers much more than just Groupware (managed updates, group policies, file sharing, intranet using Sharepoint services).
Outlook integrates into Sharepoint, Active Directory, etc. without the need to configure anything. You can easily get a fairly standardized setup without much hassle or the necessity to develop or create deployment plans, default configurations, etc. in house, as SBS already ships with a very decent configuration that only needs slight adjustments.
My most extensive experience with another Groupware product was Lotus Notes, using both the native Notes Client and the Outlook Connector. Notes gives you several things that Outlook does not have (e.G. offline capable applications that can replicate their database when the network is back up), but it's much more of a hassle to use. The Outlook plugin sometimes just doesn't work, lags behind released Outlook versions (took forever till they got a 2007 version out), etc.
I know that the Slashdot groupthink here disagrees, but Microsoft does indeed products that work together very well. You can all your non line of business infrastructure from Microsoft, and you'll get a pretty decent system, even though there are some suppliers out there that offer partially better products (e.G. VMware).
It does... Entourage Web Service Edition uses this too.
Microsoft is transitioning away from MAPI.
Well, people that have an air-conditioned home aren't exactly of average income...