Yes, but that would be the PowerPC variant, so now you want to emulate a processor architecture in addition to the OS (and an out-of-date version of the OS at that) Still comes under the "stupid party tricks" heading.
Given that Apple doesn't make the OS available separately, the only way this would happen is if somebody was sufficiently masochistic to install Windows as the native OS on a Mac then install OSX on top of that. The question is why on earth would anybody want to do this except as a weird party trick. If your thought was that Windows users on any old hardware(tm) might want to do this, then you run up against the fact that Apple doesn't the OS unbundled, so now you've got to buy a Mac to get the OS, in which case, why not run OSX on it, rather than in a virtualization layer?
> 2. How come tab, arrow keys, and F3 keys don't work in command.com/CLI? I miss being able to recall history and hit tab for autocomplete.
> 3. In command.com, I cannot seem to change long paths with cd command like: cd "Program Files". It says: Parameter not correct - "program.
You do know that command.com & cmd.exe are two completely different beasts. Command.com is the old (way old) 16-bit shell, cmd.exe is what you should be using and will not give you the problems outlined above.
You are quite correct, there is no requirement for SCSI drives in an iSCSI implementation, iSCSI refers the protocol, not the drive interface, i.e. it's the SCSI command protocol implemented over TCP/IP. So yes, you can build an iSCSI system out of commodity parts and many people are doing so. if you want get an idea of the options out there for doing this, take a look at:
http://www.byteandswitch.com/document.asp?doc_id=9 6342&WT.svl=spipemag2_1
If you set the upper & lower limits of a Windows swap file to the same value, then the entire pagefile is allocated on the disk which solves your probelm and makes the Windows pagefile work much like the LINUX partition.
It's a tradeoff, consume less space on disk vs. pre-allocate. The benefit of doing it through the filesystem like Windows (and many commercial UNIX implementations) is that you aren't locked in to a specific size, i.e. you don't have to re-partition the disk or find an unused partition when you add a lot more memory.
I hope you continue to feel so charitable when the feds come knocking on your door to ask about those child porn site vistis tracked back to your router's external IP address.
SO your saying that all development code from all source should come out with zero security problems, no matter waht stage of development its in? Can I get some of what you're smoking?
The article is also incorrect in stating that the testing was done with the latest version. The testing was done with build 5270 which was a CTP build from back in March.
At the end of the day, I'd have been amazed if Symantec hadn't found security problems with a interim build dating to before the public release of Beta-2.
I think the idea that LINUX is ready for the average desktop is bordering on delusional. Before I start, I don't consider myself an average desktop user, far from it, my UNIX experince goes back at least 20 years and I've been involved in the WIndows world for about 15 years. Anyway, I recently decided to replace XP on my old box (new box now in service with VISTA) to run the latest Dapper Drake Ubuntu release. I chose Ubuntu because it's often positioned as being the simplest & most consumer friendly distribution. So...
Installation was a nightmare, the system booted from the CD happily and appeared to find all the hardware, so I went ahead with the install. Four days later after numerous failed installs, a trashed XP partition and several years off my life expectancy I had a working system. I could understand if this was new untried hardware, but this is a 1.9GHz P4 system that is at least 4-years old!
To say that the current graphics configuration methods are clunky is a gross understatement. Yes, it recognised the 4-year old NVIDIA graphics, but for reasons best known to the designers it decided to limit resolution to 1024x768 @ 60HZ, no problem I thought, surely there's a simple GUI to select screeen resolution, nope, you have to reconfigure the X server through a text based utility, common folks this is the 21st century! Don't get me started on what I had to go through when I changed the monitor from an LCD to a older CRT!
The package management is nice, but the descriptions of the packages need massive amounts of work if Joe User is going to have a clue about what he may/may not want to install. For example it comes with a bunch of different development tool packages including at least two versions of GCC and no hint as to which one would be a better choice!
My Microtek scanner isn't supported at all and no sign of when or if it will ever be supported.
I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but what the heck;-)
> IIRC, Microsoft bought TiVO a ways back (didn't they?).
You "recaller" must not be working to well, perhaps you should try oiling it. TIVO is a publically traded company and to the best of my knowledge, MS has no stake in them, so any excessive "thumbing" you are suffering from is entirely the fault of TIVO and it's unconscionable attempts to make money from its products.
If we make the fans big enough and tie them into the shock sensors that Laptops like my IBM have, then we can have the fans turn on really hard when the laptop is been dropped so that it hovers rather than crashing to the floor:-)
> If Microsoft published a defective software, the least they should do is to offer
> FREE UPGRADES to Windows XP-SP2 for Windows 98 users.
Pointless, most of the people unfortunate enough to still be running Win98 are doing on hardware that is from that era and hopelessly inadequate for running XP on.
> Or otherwise, give the users their money back.
First, vast majority never bought it directly from MS, so exactly what money should they get back and from whom? Second, these Win98 users have had the best part of 9 years of use of the OS, so expecting to get money back seems a tad unreasonable at this point!
> Nothing I've heard about intel's plans to use flash technology would improve any system performace
> other then boot time.
This really more a feature of Vista which lets you use flash memory (typically on USB2 I/F) as an intelligent, non-volatile cache. Apparently Vista will put frequently used applications and data onto the flash device to speed up application start times etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but that would be the PowerPC variant, so now you want to emulate a processor architecture in addition to the OS (and an out-of-date version of the OS at that) Still comes under the "stupid party tricks" heading.
Given that Apple doesn't make the OS available separately, the only way this would happen is if somebody was sufficiently masochistic to install Windows as the native OS on a Mac then install OSX on top of that. The question is why on earth would anybody want to do this except as a weird party trick. If your thought was that Windows users on any old hardware(tm) might want to do this, then you run up against the fact that Apple doesn't the OS unbundled, so now you've got to buy a Mac to get the OS, in which case, why not run OSX on it, rather than in a virtualization layer?
> 2. How come tab, arrow keys, and F3 keys don't work in command.com/CLI? I miss being able to recall history and hit tab for autocomplete. > 3. In command.com, I cannot seem to change long paths with cd command like: cd "Program Files". It says: Parameter not correct - "program. You do know that command.com & cmd.exe are two completely different beasts. Command.com is the old (way old) 16-bit shell, cmd.exe is what you should be using and will not give you the problems outlined above.
You are quite correct, there is no requirement for SCSI drives in an iSCSI implementation, iSCSI refers the protocol, not the drive interface, i.e. it's the SCSI command protocol implemented over TCP/IP. So yes, you can build an iSCSI system out of commodity parts and many people are doing so. if you want get an idea of the options out there for doing this, take a look at: http://www.byteandswitch.com/document.asp?doc_id=9 6342&WT.svl=spipemag2_1
If you set the upper & lower limits of a Windows swap file to the same value, then the entire pagefile is allocated on the disk which solves your probelm and makes the Windows pagefile work much like the LINUX partition. It's a tradeoff, consume less space on disk vs. pre-allocate. The benefit of doing it through the filesystem like Windows (and many commercial UNIX implementations) is that you aren't locked in to a specific size, i.e. you don't have to re-partition the disk or find an unused partition when you add a lot more memory.
What about runnoing the web site text through an "en-chefarizer" bork, bork.
I hope you continue to feel so charitable when the feds come knocking on your door to ask about those child porn site vistis tracked back to your router's external IP address.
>Old nerds with lots of money and few vices Hey, I resent that, I have quite a lot of vices!
Or C) Developing graphic cards that use less power
SO your saying that all development code from all source should come out with zero security problems, no matter waht stage of development its in? Can I get some of what you're smoking?
The article is also incorrect in stating that the testing was done with the latest version. The testing was done with build 5270 which was a CTP build from back in March. At the end of the day, I'd have been amazed if Symantec hadn't found security problems with a interim build dating to before the public release of Beta-2.
Hmm, as a model of how Microsoft kills it's competition, I don't think I'd pick Citrix who seem to be doing quite nicely with a market cap of $6+B
I think the idea that LINUX is ready for the average desktop is bordering on delusional. Before I start, I don't consider myself an average desktop user, far from it, my UNIX experince goes back at least 20 years and I've been involved in the WIndows world for about 15 years. Anyway, I recently decided to replace XP on my old box (new box now in service with VISTA) to run the latest Dapper Drake Ubuntu release. I chose Ubuntu because it's often positioned as being the simplest & most consumer friendly distribution. So... Installation was a nightmare, the system booted from the CD happily and appeared to find all the hardware, so I went ahead with the install. Four days later after numerous failed installs, a trashed XP partition and several years off my life expectancy I had a working system. I could understand if this was new untried hardware, but this is a 1.9GHz P4 system that is at least 4-years old! To say that the current graphics configuration methods are clunky is a gross understatement. Yes, it recognised the 4-year old NVIDIA graphics, but for reasons best known to the designers it decided to limit resolution to 1024x768 @ 60HZ, no problem I thought, surely there's a simple GUI to select screeen resolution, nope, you have to reconfigure the X server through a text based utility, common folks this is the 21st century! Don't get me started on what I had to go through when I changed the monitor from an LCD to a older CRT! The package management is nice, but the descriptions of the packages need massive amounts of work if Joe User is going to have a clue about what he may/may not want to install. For example it comes with a bunch of different development tool packages including at least two versions of GCC and no hint as to which one would be a better choice! My Microtek scanner isn't supported at all and no sign of when or if it will ever be supported. I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but what the heck ;-)
Agree completely about Elite, I still have the PC version which runs nicely under DOSBOX
> IIRC, Microsoft bought TiVO a ways back (didn't they?). You "recaller" must not be working to well, perhaps you should try oiling it. TIVO is a publically traded company and to the best of my knowledge, MS has no stake in them, so any excessive "thumbing" you are suffering from is entirely the fault of TIVO and it's unconscionable attempts to make money from its products.
If we make the fans big enough and tie them into the shock sensors that Laptops like my IBM have, then we can have the fans turn on really hard when the laptop is been dropped so that it hovers rather than crashing to the floor :-)
> If Microsoft published a defective software, the least they should do is to offer > FREE UPGRADES to Windows XP-SP2 for Windows 98 users. Pointless, most of the people unfortunate enough to still be running Win98 are doing on hardware that is from that era and hopelessly inadequate for running XP on. > Or otherwise, give the users their money back. First, vast majority never bought it directly from MS, so exactly what money should they get back and from whom? Second, these Win98 users have had the best part of 9 years of use of the OS, so expecting to get money back seems a tad unreasonable at this point!
> I looked for equivilant functionality under windows recently & just couldn't find it Check out http://www.gratis-webserver.de/ClonyPage/2.html seems to work pretty well.
Perhaps because 5000 dedicated render nodes can render a s**tload more frames than 250 nodes each running 20 VMs!!!!
> Nothing I've heard about intel's plans to use flash technology would improve any system performace > other then boot time. This really more a feature of Vista which lets you use flash memory (typically on USB2 I/F) as an intelligent, non-volatile cache. Apparently Vista will put frequently used applications and data onto the flash device to speed up application start times etc.