I have a 40" Samsung LCD that can do 1080p. Before that, i had a 32" Sony CRT (SD). Neither of them where cheap at the time i bought them, but they also weren't that expensive.
When watching SD TV, the picture quality is IMHO a bit worse. I think this is mostly due to the larger picture size, which makes the low SD resolution looks worse.
On the other hand, watching HD Content really *does* make a difference:
* Xbox 360 - well, now i can read the text in Dead Rising, and everything looks a lot better, sharper, clearer. * Broadcast HD Content - HD Suisse looks amazing (http://www.sf.tv/unternehmen/hdsuisse/index.php), other HD Channels (SAT1, Pro7) not so much * PS3 Blueray content in 1080p. I didn't see a difference between playback in 1080p and 720p. I somewhat expected that. Blueray movies look a lot better than DVDs _if_ they were transferred properly - that only the case with recently published titles. 300 is a great example.
Well, i'm not a sales, i doubt i'd be able to persuade you that Windows is always the better choice, but for me a technician there are several reasons to run servers on Windows.
I've never seen small businesses that run Linux on their desktops, and most of them are currently not able to do so, usually because of third party software. So i'll assume that the clients already run Windows. Microsoft Office is usually also required, mostly to run huge-ass Excel spreadsheets for calculations provided by suppliers, customers, etc. These experiences come from my dayjob working with SMBs in Switzerland. Situation might be different in other countries.
* Active Directory
Price included in Windows Server license
Active Directory allows me to manage users of Windows machines centrally, including a lot of application settings, network configuration, etc. through group policy. For example, i can configure the Windows Firewall and it's exception centrally using a simple Group Policy, and apply it to my clients - it doesn't matter if i have 1 client, 100 clients or 100'000 clients.
Samba is a limited OSS Alternative here. Samba doesn't support group policies, only at the NT4 level.
* Exchange 2007
Priced seperately
Outlook/Exchange are in my opinion a very nice and finished groupware package. Full integration into Active Directory makes Exchange easy to manage, and offers single sign on without any additional work. Great web based access interface, and a great client software that customers are familiar with and already like to use.
There are several OSS alternatives, a few of them even offer MAPI compatibility. I've never worked with them, so i can't say if they're good or not.
* WSUS
Price included in Windows Server license
Windows Server Update Services are a nice way to manage and deploy Windows updates in smaller environments. This allows me to conserve bandwidth and make sure that only updates and applications are rolled out that i WANT to be rolled out.
No OSS alternative.
* Sharepoint Services
Price included in Windows Server license
Microsoft's Sharepoint Services are a scaled down, free offering of Office Sharepoint Server. They allow collaboration and document versioning with full Microsoft Office integration. Very nice in mid-sized environments.
O3Spaces is said to be kinda the same thing for OpenOffice. Never worked with it.
* File Sharing, DFS and DFS Replication
Price included in Windows Server license
File Sharing on Windows is in my opinion done much better than on Linux. This is an opinion, not a fact. With DFS i can build a single share tree, redirecting clients to whatever server i want. DFS can be domain hosted, making it fully redundant without need for clustering or similar solutions. DFS Replication allows me to replicate data in real time to and from branch offices without much hassle, and saves bandwidth using algorithms such as cross file RDC. Permission management on Windows can easily be delegated, and the powerful group structures in Active Directory allow to customize all permissions exactly to your organizations needs.
Samba allows basic Windows filesharing. Supports DFS, but not domain based DFS. Doesn't support DFS-R. Read only replication probably possible using rsync, but a full r/w multimaster replication does not exist.
* WDS
Price included in Windows Server license
WDS allows easy and automated deployment of Windows Client and Server systems. Again, full integration into Active Directory is already there. With Windows Vista, Windows deployment is finally there were Linux was 5 years ago. RIS (the WDS predecessor) sucked.
No OSS alternative.
* Central Antivirus policy management
Third party software. Priced seperately.
If you have Windows Clients, a central AV solution allows you to manage all clients from a single place. This is something i'd consider a necessity, but then again currently only Windows even needs AV.
No OSS alternative.
So, that's what came to my mind right now. But again, i'm not a sales.
I never worked with Notes, but i DO know that it does not depend on Windows or Active Directory, and as such is probably more suited for a Linux environment than Exchange.
we have asterisk running on our cheapest desktop machine, and it runs our offices great
I prefer to use professional hardware to run production environments.
So every instance in which the client has to pay more money for running the apps in production actually comes out of what they would otherwise be paying us.
I'm not a developer though - my target is to make sure that the software we sell to our customers fulfills their in terms of administrative overhead, integration, etc. That's where Microsoft products in my opinion shine best.
Also, the thing I also forgot to mention is managing licenses. First of all, isn't this knowledge you have about Microsoft's licensing schemes totally artificial?
It is. And i absolutely hate dealing with licensing in any way or form, it just makes my job more complicated. Most of this stuff is handled by our Sales staff luckily, so i don't have to deal with everything. But still, i would prefer it if all Microsoft products where free and i wouldn't have to worry about licensing.
This is an advantage of open source, but for larger corporations especially with development going on, you'll still have a legal mess (that doesn't involve admins or developers, though).
aving to keep in mind all of the licensing requirements and which ways I can best license something is one less brain cell I can devote to actually solving a problem.
If you're a developer, you shouldn't have to think about licensing. Leave that to your architect, sales staff, or whoever deals with licensing in your company. But again, the licensing mess that Microsoft has still IS a problem.
You also have to get all of your staff certified in various MS products. How much do those certifications cost?
Yeah, 250US$ for two people, 125US$ per exam. No preparation, classes, or anything else necessary, if you have a halfway competent staff. The other way, which is more expensive but would also fulfill that need is to certify your application. You know, the "Works with Windows Vista" stickers, or whatever program you'd enroll in. This is an marketing advantage too.
Finally, i would like to say that Microsoft isn't perfect, but a lot of their products can provide you with a very nice infrastructure thats completely standardized and you can get off-the-shelf personnel to support it - supporting even a mid-scale Linux deployment often leads to A LOT of custom code, this isn't the case with Windows - this helps keeping costs down. Compatibility and inter operation is also a lot better in a Microsoft environment (Sharepoint, Office, Outlook, Communicator, etc. just all work nicely together, no extra work required). This is usually not the case in an OSS environment, leading to a lot of custom code, which again leads to higher cost.
Well, that's a bit of a harsh way to put it. Lotus Notes can be an alternative to Exchange in such scenarios, because it doesn't depend on Active Directory, or Windows in general.
I'll agree with you that there are a lot of overpaid windows administrators out there that don't know anything.
The same is usually true for Linux admins working on Windows - many of them are blinded by their religious hate when trying to solve a problem, that often has an obvious and easy solution.
Good Windows admins are harder to come by, mostly because most of the bad ones are in it for the money - you don't see many Linux admins that are in it for the money, most like to do their job out of zealotry (which has the disadvantages outlined above).
Just FYI, Windows 2003 for Small Business Server was available in 2003, which would've reduced your cost figures immensively (around 1400US$ starting price (premium) including 5 clients, plus 700US$ for each additional 5 clients).
SBS Premium includes SQL Server 2005 Workgroup Edition, Exchange Server 2003, and runs on a single machine. SBS CALs are also valid for other Windows Server 2003 servers in your network, e.G. if you would've bought a Web Edition machine, you wouldn't need to purchase any CALs and run it either against a local SQL Server Express instance or against the Workgroup Edition on the SBS Server.
Back in 2004, Office Communication Server 2007 wasn't released, but right now it's a full blown voip solution from Microsoft (which works pretty well, and integrates nicely). It isn't expensive either, at around 1000US$ per Server, and around 20US$ per CAL.
I don't intend to change your mind, just wanted to show you that the stuff isn't as expensive as you're trying to make it. Also, if you're a development shop that sells application based on Microsoft Windows, you can apply to become an MS Partner, which costs around 1500 US$ per year, and gives you all the licenses you might want (for internal production use), plus an MSDN subscription.
The writing style is standard for MS KB entries, i don't really get where the problem is. I've been working with Windows for a few yours though, and probably got used to it.
Profits from child porn sites support producers of child pornography. This hurts other people.
Yeah. And the international banking system that allows child pron producers to get paid also supports child porn producers. And ages ago, when VHS tapes were sent around, the Postal Office also abetted child porn.
In the end, the internet is just a carrier. It's neither good nor bad.
Insecure systems can be used to attack SCADA control systems and sites supporting emergency services and severe weather prediction capability. This can actually kill other people.
Why are these systems connected to the internet, if they're so important? Organ transplants aren't sent by Fedex, and for good reason. Because they're too important.
It seems to me if you can't download porn and:fap::fap: on your free time, all that energy is just going to get built up. Shouldn't we be ENCOURAGING these people to release that tension in the privacy of their own homes, not taking an outlet away? (NOTE: I am not endorsing the legalization of child porn. I think that's a different story altogether)
It isn't as easy and clear cut as people always try to make it.
As such, it is incurable. But just because someone is a pedophile he isn't a child molester - actually, only around 30-50% of all child molesters are pedophile, the rest is a power/dominance thing.
This might also have something to do with driving style (and of course the type of motorbike).
If he uses the Prius for daily commuting and just drives around the blocks, and uses the motorbike for high-speed, full throttle tours in his free time, this could be perfectly reasonable.
You're most likely using Cached Exchange Modes on 2003/2007. Outlook 2000 only knows Online Mode, where all the stuff happens on the (fast) server. Cached Exchange Mode moves most of the IO heavy stuff to the client. Especially with a large mailbox and a shitty old computer, speed will then be abysmal.
Dude, if you've drank THAT much MSFT kool-aid then you're very VERY far off from considering Linux seriously for anything! Hey, i could say the same. I've made my share of experiences, and i think that many of the products that MS releases are pretty good on solving real business problems without being too expensive. That doesn't mean that i hate Linux. I've made very good experiences with using Linux in Network infrastructure (Routing, Packetfiltering, VPN, etc.) and Webserving (mostly LAMP). I've also had Linux on my primary desktop for about two years (which changed when i got a job).
BTW, Typically you wouldn't put WSUS, sharepoint, Exhange and Communication Server on a Windows Server configured as a domain controller I'd never think about doing this. It'd be pretty stupid and a nightmare to maintain. In my testsetup i'm running OCS and SPS on the same OS instance, and that alone causes enough problems.
and have ALL of the above as member servers on the Samba domain And fight with the compatibility nightmare? Why? To save 1200 bucks in WS2003 Std Licensing costs?
Citadel can be set up in a fraction of the time it takes to set up Exchange Aww, come on. I can live with all your others comments, but this is just plain FUD.
For a non-profit org office or struggling small business with 6 to 20 users the difference is enough to be of concern. I disagree. I primarely work for Small Businesses. SBS with 5 users costs about 700 CHF here. My company charges 185.- CHF for each hour i work (which is a pretty reasonable rate, Switzerland has a very high salary niveau), so an SBS License equals 4 working hours of an on-site technician. That's not much money in my book.
It's pretty sad nowadays that people brag about needing "only" 256MB as somehow being efficient My mobile phone has 256MB RAM. A standard Lenovo desktop ships with 2GB RAM. 256MB is nothing. We're at the end of 2007, not 2001.
Code Red and Slammer come to mind That was ages ago, and both only applied to machines that weren't kept up to date.
You then also disagree with notable industry experts. Yeah. I do, even though hat you say is correct - but it doesn't apply to smaller Businesses, with an extremely low risk of targetted attacks, and just not enough spare change to maintain multiple platforms just for the sake of adding resilience against something that will likely never happen.
Wouldn't you think, in an Active Directory situation, if you had a mix of Windows and Samba AD domain controllers handling your domains it would be more robust in an attack? I think it would be a support nightmare. I'm sure MS won't support it, and the OSS World/Samba folks just can't - because they don't have access to the MS side of things.
I'm sorry, but your point doesn't make that much sense to me. If you have folks that are "completely unfamiliar" with Windows, i wouldn't want them to administrate Servers OR Clients. You'll get a security nightmare either way.
I use a Linux server with Windows clients and haven't found it to be all that burdensome And how do you e.G. deploy Windows updates (WSUS), provide Office document versioning (Sharepoint), Groupware that is fully integrated with Microsoft Office (Exchange) or a fully integrated IM & VoIP Solution (Office Communication Server)?
and for a small outfit Windows Server licensing is a significant investment No, it isn't. Microsoft's Small Business Server offering is dirt cheap - nothing compared to the manhours required to setup a Windows OR Linux solution.
Linux with Samba has much smaller resource requirements Reusing old desktops isn't what i'd want in a corporate IT environment. But you can run a WS2003 DC on pretty much anything with a hard disk and 256MB memory.
Invulnerability to malware is a pretty valuable characteristic for a system that is as critical as a domain controller or major server. Most of the vulnerabilities that exist for Windows do not affect Windows servers (e.G. any IE or Office exploit doesn't matter on a server, because you don't surf or edit documents on them). Nonetheless, Windows's history ain't the best, but MS has shown very big improvements in the past few years.
but it is probably most important to have a diverse array of architectures in I disagree. The more complexity a system has, the higher is the chance that a security vulnerability is introduced. Remember, security is not only dependent upon Software, but also upon Configuration.
Even then, doing so would be really, really stupid, as such a setup won't be supported by anyone:)
Using Samba as a fully-fledged fileserver would be a start, but currently doesn't support any of the advanced features like DFS-R.
Then again, using Windows as a fileserver works well, and isn't that expensive.
I've never really understood why i'd want to use a Linux server with Windows clients - it just doesn't work all that good, causes way more headaches than you save in terms of money.
Slashdot Mirror
There were Sex Scenes in Mass Effect?
I didn't even see breasts.
I fear people like you. Hope you don't ever get near important infrastructure.
Always those damned Zune ads.
I have a 40" Samsung LCD that can do 1080p. Before that, i had a 32" Sony CRT (SD). Neither of them where cheap at the time i bought them, but they also weren't that expensive.
When watching SD TV, the picture quality is IMHO a bit worse. I think this is mostly due to the larger picture size, which makes the low SD resolution looks worse.
On the other hand, watching HD Content really *does* make a difference:
* Xbox 360 - well, now i can read the text in Dead Rising, and everything looks a lot better, sharper, clearer.
* Broadcast HD Content - HD Suisse looks amazing (http://www.sf.tv/unternehmen/hdsuisse/index.php), other HD Channels (SAT1, Pro7) not so much
* PS3 Blueray content in 1080p. I didn't see a difference between playback in 1080p and 720p. I somewhat expected that. Blueray movies look a lot better than DVDs _if_ they were transferred properly - that only the case with recently published titles. 300 is a great example.
Well, i'm not a sales, i doubt i'd be able to persuade you that Windows is always the better choice, but for me a technician there are several reasons to run servers on Windows.
I've never seen small businesses that run Linux on their desktops, and most of them are currently not able to do so, usually because of third party software. So i'll assume that the clients already run Windows. Microsoft Office is usually also required, mostly to run huge-ass Excel spreadsheets for calculations provided by suppliers, customers, etc. These experiences come from my dayjob working with SMBs in Switzerland. Situation might be different in other countries.
* Active Directory
Price included in Windows Server license
Active Directory allows me to manage users of Windows machines centrally, including a lot of application settings, network configuration, etc. through group policy. For example, i can configure the Windows Firewall and it's exception centrally using a simple Group Policy, and apply it to my clients - it doesn't matter if i have 1 client, 100 clients or 100'000 clients.
Samba is a limited OSS Alternative here. Samba doesn't support group policies, only at the NT4 level.
* Exchange 2007
Priced seperately
Outlook/Exchange are in my opinion a very nice and finished groupware package. Full integration into Active Directory makes Exchange easy to manage, and offers single sign on without any additional work. Great web based access interface, and a great client software that customers are familiar with and already like to use.
There are several OSS alternatives, a few of them even offer MAPI compatibility. I've never worked with them, so i can't say if they're good or not.
* WSUS
Price included in Windows Server license
Windows Server Update Services are a nice way to manage and deploy Windows updates in smaller environments. This allows me to conserve bandwidth and make sure that only updates and applications are rolled out that i WANT to be rolled out.
No OSS alternative.
* Sharepoint Services
Price included in Windows Server license
Microsoft's Sharepoint Services are a scaled down, free offering of Office Sharepoint Server. They allow collaboration and document versioning with full Microsoft Office integration. Very nice in mid-sized environments.
O3Spaces is said to be kinda the same thing for OpenOffice. Never worked with it.
* File Sharing, DFS and DFS Replication
Price included in Windows Server license
File Sharing on Windows is in my opinion done much better than on Linux. This is an opinion, not a fact. With DFS i can build a single share tree, redirecting clients to whatever server i want. DFS can be domain hosted, making it fully redundant without need for clustering or similar solutions. DFS Replication allows me to replicate data in real time to and from branch offices without much hassle, and saves bandwidth using algorithms such as cross file RDC. Permission management on Windows can easily be delegated, and the powerful group structures in Active Directory allow to customize all permissions exactly to your organizations needs.
Samba allows basic Windows filesharing. Supports DFS, but not domain based DFS. Doesn't support DFS-R. Read only replication probably possible using rsync, but a full r/w multimaster replication does not exist.
* WDS
Price included in Windows Server license
WDS allows easy and automated deployment of Windows Client and Server systems. Again, full integration into Active Directory is already there. With Windows Vista, Windows deployment is finally there were Linux was 5 years ago. RIS (the WDS predecessor) sucked.
No OSS alternative.
* Central Antivirus policy management
Third party software. Priced seperately.
If you have Windows Clients, a central AV solution allows you to manage all clients from a single place. This is something i'd consider a necessity, but then again currently only Windows even needs AV.
No OSS alternative.
So, that's what came to my mind right now. But again, i'm not a sales.
I never worked with Notes, but i DO know that it does not depend on Windows or Active Directory, and as such is probably more suited for a Linux environment than Exchange.
All LAMP systems are completely insecure, did you see how many times phpbb based websites have been hacked in the past?
Same bullshit, different direction.
I prefer to use professional hardware to run production environments.
I'm not a developer though - my target is to make sure that the software we sell to our customers fulfills their in terms of administrative overhead, integration, etc. That's where Microsoft products in my opinion shine best.
It is. And i absolutely hate dealing with licensing in any way or form, it just makes my job more complicated. Most of this stuff is handled by our Sales staff luckily, so i don't have to deal with everything. But still, i would prefer it if all Microsoft products where free and i wouldn't have to worry about licensing.
This is an advantage of open source, but for larger corporations especially with development going on, you'll still have a legal mess (that doesn't involve admins or developers, though).
If you're a developer, you shouldn't have to think about licensing. Leave that to your architect, sales staff, or whoever deals with licensing in your company. But again, the licensing mess that Microsoft has still IS a problem.
Yeah, 250US$ for two people, 125US$ per exam. No preparation, classes, or anything else necessary, if you have a halfway competent staff. The other way, which is more expensive but would also fulfill that need is to certify your application. You know, the "Works with Windows Vista" stickers, or whatever program you'd enroll in. This is an marketing advantage too.
Finally, i would like to say that Microsoft isn't perfect, but a lot of their products can provide you with a very nice infrastructure thats completely standardized and you can get off-the-shelf personnel to support it - supporting even a mid-scale Linux deployment often leads to A LOT of custom code, this isn't the case with Windows - this helps keeping costs down. Compatibility and inter operation is also a lot better in a Microsoft environment (Sharepoint, Office, Outlook, Communicator, etc. just all work nicely together, no extra work required). This is usually not the case in an OSS environment, leading to a lot of custom code, which again leads to higher cost.
Well, that's a bit of a harsh way to put it. Lotus Notes can be an alternative to Exchange in such scenarios, because it doesn't depend on Active Directory, or Windows in general.
I'll agree with you that there are a lot of overpaid windows administrators out there that don't know anything.
The same is usually true for Linux admins working on Windows - many of them are blinded by their religious hate when trying to solve a problem, that often has an obvious and easy solution.
Good Windows admins are harder to come by, mostly because most of the bad ones are in it for the money - you don't see many Linux admins that are in it for the money, most like to do their job out of zealotry (which has the disadvantages outlined above).
Just FYI, Windows 2003 for Small Business Server was available in 2003, which would've reduced your cost figures immensively (around 1400US$ starting price (premium) including 5 clients, plus 700US$ for each additional 5 clients).
SBS Premium includes SQL Server 2005 Workgroup Edition, Exchange Server 2003, and runs on a single machine. SBS CALs are also valid for other Windows Server 2003 servers in your network, e.G. if you would've bought a Web Edition machine, you wouldn't need to purchase any CALs and run it either against a local SQL Server Express instance or against the Workgroup Edition on the SBS Server.
Back in 2004, Office Communication Server 2007 wasn't released, but right now it's a full blown voip solution from Microsoft (which works pretty well, and integrates nicely). It isn't expensive either, at around 1000US$ per Server, and around 20US$ per CAL.
I don't intend to change your mind, just wanted to show you that the stuff isn't as expensive as you're trying to make it. Also, if you're a development shop that sells application based on Microsoft Windows, you can apply to become an MS Partner, which costs around 1500 US$ per year, and gives you all the licenses you might want (for internal production use), plus an MSDN subscription.
So, female circumcision is legal in the US?
Yeah, that's why nobody uses youtube.
You can find a table of possible nFib Values here:
http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B938810&x=16&y=18
(Search for the string "Blocked file format")
The writing style is standard for MS KB entries, i don't really get where the problem is. I've been working with Windows for a few yours though, and probably got used to it.
Yeah. And the international banking system that allows child pron producers to get paid also supports child porn producers.
And ages ago, when VHS tapes were sent around, the Postal Office also abetted child porn.
In the end, the internet is just a carrier. It's neither good nor bad.
Why are these systems connected to the internet, if they're so important? Organ transplants aren't sent by Fedex, and for good reason. Because they're too important.
It isn't as easy and clear cut as people always try to make it.
According to http://www.kein-taeter-werden.de/ (Sorry, it's all in German) and this NDR podcast about the former project ( http://213.200.64.229/ndr/mp3/podcast/ndrinfo_dasforum/20071220_ndrinfo_dasforum.mp3 ), paedophilia is a sexual preference - just like being gay or straight.
As such, it is incurable. But just because someone is a pedophile he isn't a child molester - actually, only around 30-50% of all child molesters are pedophile, the rest is a power/dominance thing.
At least Outlook files (.pst) are unsupported on Network Shares, for various reasons:
Read
http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2007/01/21/network-stored-pst-files-don-t-do-it.aspx
I'll agree that a normal home user does not know this, but any IT professional that's working with Outlook should know this.
This might also have something to do with driving style (and of course the type of motorbike).
If he uses the Prius for daily commuting and just drives around the blocks, and uses the motorbike for high-speed, full throttle tours in his free time, this could be perfectly reasonable.
Buy a faster computer.
You're most likely using Cached Exchange Modes on 2003/2007. Outlook 2000 only knows Online Mode, where all the stuff happens on the (fast) server. Cached Exchange Mode moves most of the IO heavy stuff to the client. Especially with a large mailbox and a shitty old computer, speed will then be abysmal.
See http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/12/17/447750.aspx
There CF bulbs that can be dimmed...
e.G.
http://www.vosslighting.com/storefrontB2BWEB/browse.do?action=refresh_browse&ctg_id=547
I'm sorry, but your point doesn't make that much sense to me. If you have folks that are "completely unfamiliar" with Windows, i wouldn't want them to administrate Servers OR Clients. You'll get a security nightmare either way.
Even then, doing so would be really, really stupid, as such a setup won't be supported by anyone :)
Using Samba as a fully-fledged fileserver would be a start, but currently doesn't support any of the advanced features like DFS-R.
Then again, using Windows as a fileserver works well, and isn't that expensive.
I've never really understood why i'd want to use a Linux server with Windows clients - it just doesn't work all that good, causes way more headaches than you save in terms of money.
Well, a day has 24 hours and if that isn't enough there's still the night ;)