and 10 years ago they were called javastations. sun trots it's thin clients out once or twice a decade, shakes it's fist at MS and then goes back to selling OMFG expensive servers:-)
Microsoft's domination on the desktop is based on marketing and not on any kind of technological merit
the corporate desktop itself is pretty much based on marketing and not any kind of technological merit. coincidentally, that is pretty much why MS will own it for the forseeable future.
innovative ideas like this just don't stand a chance, and it's really a pity.
couldn't agree more. your basic corporate MIS type is two or more parts "Management" and two or fewer parts "Information Systems". thin clients/open source/linux/[insert cool technology here] could appease the "Information Systems" requirement given the right implementation, but that pesky "Management" part is a whole other story.
that this is the year of linux on the desktop and that this is the year that sun's "whatever the hell we are calling thin clients this year" breaks the MS stranglehold on the corporate desktop.
i don't think either will happen, but some crackpot makes that prediction every year. this year, it would appear that cackpot is me:-)
if they have to give away their testing criteria, then people will just come up wih a way to invalidate it. also, the whole point of these raids is to ruin your life. if they have to tell you how long they will have your computer, promise not to destroy it or your other data, and even loan you a replacement, then they can't really ruin your life now, can they? why not just ask them to stop suing people while you're at it? look, all they are trying to do is terrorize people. is that so wrong?
it's whatever it takes to get you hippies to give away control of the internet. net neutrality supports terrorism and hillary clinton. and teen pregnancy.
every fantasy book/comic/video game ever made features at least one scantily clad "elf princess" which is pretty much a racy illustration of a 15 year old girl... with pointy ears. we have all seen them and gone on to lead normal lives. whole generations of nerds have been raised on this stuff and thus far real world child abuse has been the same as it ever was... tragic and deplorable, but rare. does this mean that all of those CGIpr0n sites can now photoshop in pointy ears and call it "elf porn"?
christians really will kill you if you don't convert! if you visit las vegas you will be captured and murdered by terrorists! you really can get an insane stunt bonus for jumping a car off the roof of a parking garage! aliens really will come down to earth and conquer us and it's up to duke nukem/master chief/samus aran to save us! that's it! i'm moving to norway!
i need to remind you that deception is as much a category of lies as it is a category of marketing.
that, sir, is preposterous! corporations don't lie! they have money! i do not think that you understand the gravitational pull of large amounts of money.
all money emits a small amount of positive energy. obviously, the larger the sum of money available to you, the greater the positive charge that is applied to your actions.
in your example, "Joe has deceived his girlfriend by telling her he did not have an affair with his Linux box" you are not taking in to account joe's wealth or social status. if joe is a poor student from a lower-middle class family then he is clearly pathetic and possibly in need of professional help. he, like many impoverished individuals, would be considered by many mental health professionals "crazy". if on the otherhand, joe is a famous millionaire his behavior would be considered harmless and we would call him "eccentric". his machine and behavior might be featured in a segment on "MTV Cribs".
take for example a young girl that indulges herself irresponsibly. if her parents are poor she is a "whore" and a "drug addict". if her parents are rich she is known as a "socialite". a middle class manager of a walmart who attempts to buy women's affections is a "sleaze" and a "perv". a billionaire real estate tycoon who attempts to buy women's affections is a "playboy". [see also: "creepy old man" v. "hugh hefner"] the same holds true for corporations. if a small local company uses half truths or falsehoods to sell you a product, that is known as "running a scam". a large multinational corporation using falsehoods and half truths to move products is "running a promotional campaign".
on the surface, all of these actions seem very similar. however, if you look closely (at the money) you will see that they are really quite different. "whores", "drug addicts", "sleazes" and "pervs" are all despicable things that should be pitied and/or punished. "socialites" and "playboys" are good and things that we should admire and perhaps aspire to one day be. poor people and businesses have to be held accountable for their actions and poor ethical and moral choices. wealthy companies and individuals have already demonstrated their worth (in terms of dollars) and are clearly beyond reproach.
if you're running windows virtualised then the odds are you're using the console
i log into and out of windows servers, both virtualized and not, all day long, and i couldn't tell you off the top of my head where they are in the rack, which machines what VM's are hosted on, and i don't recall the last time i physically (or virtually) touched the consoles for many of them. yes it is documented somewhere, but for day to day care and feeding it's just not necessary.
as for having the server be your workstation, using a VM to test on your development machine and using VMs as servers are not the same thing. that is why companies like VMWare and MS make workstation and server products. losing the console on a workstation is catastrophic for only one user and may require extraordinary measures to recover (like rebooting the host and restoring the VM from a snapshot or possibly even an offline backup), but losing the console on a server is not, so long as the server is still running. in fact, in most enterprises it will most likely go unnoticed by the general population, provided of course that the server is still performing it's intended function.
in either case, if your virtualization package is doing what it should, a VM should not be able to affect the host OS and should not be able to take out the host machine, virus or no virus. that is the point of virtualization, to have multiple guests share the same physical hardware without affecting one another.
I've had X servers totally lock up video cards which stay locked even once the X server process has been killed and no amount of X restarts solved it.
while i have never seen that in the wild, the fact remains that video failure does not necessarily take down a whole server. if you were able to kill the X server process after the display adapter froze, you were obviously still able to access the machine. if you can access the machine, presumably others can too. since you don't need X to run VMs, your guest OS's can still operate. there is a world of difference between having your X server panic and freeze of it's own accord and being able to write a virus for windows to reach out of the VM and into linux to cause similar mayhem.
So you don't think that screwing up the video would be a problem?
assuming that you are talking about crashing the X server, no, because you can just restart X without affecting the rest of the server. with packages like VMWare Server, you don't need to run an x server on the host. you can run the VMWare console app on a spearate machine to actually see and operate the guest operating systems. so you can run your VMs on a box with a rather rudimentary install and access it from a more robust linux or windows install with a GUI. in theory, even if a display mode error occurs, only the VM's console is inaccessible and can be restarted, or deleted and restored from a backup. even if you manage to crash the console app, the host and the VMs on it are still running fine.
perhaps this is an improvement in all of Xorg and not just ubuntu, but on my ubuntu machine i can log in multiple users at the same time from the console (display:0) and even ctrl+alt+backspace to restart the Xserver in one session and have the other logged in user not be affected.
i got into IT in the late 90's when companies were changing from win3x/win9x/novell to nt/2k/active directory, and leading up to y2k you could make $15 an hour just knowing how to turn on a computer. following y2k and into the dotcom bubble, many companies were desperate to import tech workers and there was all that drama over visas.
after the dot com bust a lot of work got offshored and moved the indian tech sector into y2k/dot com mode. i would imagine that if you offshore again, to some poorer country, it will start all over again. perhaps this time, it will only take 4 years instead of 8, you know, efficiency and all.
perhaps on the third or fourth iteration the US dollar will be so worthless that the work will be cheaper to source labour in the US, and the new economies of brazil, russia, india, and china will outsource their work back to us:-)
it's not the christian religion itself that irks me... what drives me crazy about christianity is the sense of entitlement that it creates in it's followers. i'm not usually one to go off on religion, especially someone as progressive in their thinking as you... but even your words smack of good old christian entitlement. that's the problem i have with christianity.
christians can spout off all they want about how they have been persecuted and excluded and whatever and feel entitled to point that out to us all, much like you have here. i don't know where you live, but here in midwestern america there is chirstianity plastered all over every flat surface, and we all just accept it... and yet that's still not enough. you still feel entitled to share your chistianity with us, as if we had forgotten for a moment that christianity is alive and well in america.
looking past the kooks and the bible thumpers, to the average rank and file christian, there is still that that self rightous sense of entitlement. the extremist rehetoric no longer phases me, in fact i much prefer it because it's so easy to tune out. but that subtle sense of entitlement, present in so much of american culture, always rings in my ears.
that was the precise logic behind chip modding my Xbox 2 years ago. i got the xbox for $140 and the chip for $60 installed. i was then able to load xbox media center, a ton of emulators, and some other ported games and run it quietly in my livingroom for $200. at that time (xmas 2004) i couldn't build a decent home theater PC for twice that price. oh, and my nifty home theater Xbox also plays xbox games and a ton of emulators. so many emulators that i ran it out of disk space:-(
assuming that the media stuff gets worked out on the PS3, or a suitable mod is found, then i may just get one once the price drops.
So tell me again why I'd want to continuously RENT my applications rather then buy software licenses and install/run the stuff on my OWN equipment?
because "software as a service" is the latest thing in technology. platform independant ajax enabled web2.0 podcast blog web operating system virtualizations are the newest way for businesses to give money to technology companies.
The problem is that 0.99 is not a fair price. Its easier for them to distribute yet the price per song is still higher than just buying the album. If an album has more than 15 songs on it, you're losing money. Forget about "boxed" sets that have ~100 songs on them but retail for ~$40.
i agree that music is too expensive, and i agree that online distribution is *way* cheaper, but the unit price argument has been used by both sides over the years. the unit price argument over the years has evolved something like this:
1999:CDs suck, they only feature 1 or 2 tracks that i am interested in, so if i spend $20 on a cd and only like 2 tracks, it's like paying $10 a track.
2003:iTunes is great it lets me get the tracks i want for a dollar each, which is like saving $18 on an album that sucks otherwise.
2007:iTunes sucks... if i want all the tracks off of "bob marley: legend" it's going to cost me $20, when i can buy the CD for $15, it's like buying the CD is only $0.75 a track, plus it's not compressed so i can listen to it on my OMFGexpensive stereo in joyjoy surround.
2011:bittorrent sucks... yeah i can get all the tracks i want for free, if i want to scarifice a whole day just to grab a dozen albums. i would totally pay some dude to just find shit for me so i can spend my time actually listening to my stuff rather than searching for it all the damn time.
yes music is overpriced. yes digital distribution costs almost nothing. yes, you are totally right about unfair pricing, but unit prices are a moving target, and we as consumers are moving the target faster than the industry can keep up.
google adwords are not exactly a bankable commodity... the fifth entry is often to "buy X on ebay" where X is the thing you are searching for. i currently have filed a class action lawsuit against ebay over their claims that they have the lowest prices on slarphdoojies.
500 million is not unreasonable if you count every im/spam/porn bot as a unique, then i would have figured their number of "users" is acutally in the billions.
Slashdot Mirror
and 10 years ago they were called javastations. sun trots it's thin clients out once or twice a decade, shakes it's fist at MS and then goes back to selling OMFG expensive servers :-)
the corporate desktop itself is pretty much based on marketing and not any kind of technological merit. coincidentally, that is pretty much why MS will own it for the forseeable future.
couldn't agree more. your basic corporate MIS type is two or more parts "Management" and two or fewer parts "Information Systems". thin clients/open source/linux/[insert cool technology here] could appease the "Information Systems" requirement given the right implementation, but that pesky "Management" part is a whole other story.
that this is the year of linux on the desktop and that this is the year that sun's "whatever the hell we are calling thin clients this year" breaks the MS stranglehold on the corporate desktop.
i don't think either will happen, but some crackpot makes that prediction every year. this year, it would appear that cackpot is me :-)
if they have to give away their testing criteria, then people will just come up wih a way to invalidate it. also, the whole point of these raids is to ruin your life. if they have to tell you how long they will have your computer, promise not to destroy it or your other data, and even loan you a replacement, then they can't really ruin your life now, can they? why not just ask them to stop suing people while you're at it? look, all they are trying to do is terrorize people. is that so wrong?
it's whatever it takes to get you hippies to give away control of the internet. net neutrality supports terrorism and hillary clinton. and teen pregnancy.
the very existence of the geeksquad proves that there are 'tards out there with more money than brains.
hell yes! i have wanted to live underwater since i was a kid. i would much prefer a water colony to an orbital one.
every fantasy book/comic/video game ever made features at least one scantily clad "elf princess" which is pretty much a racy illustration of a 15 year old girl... with pointy ears. we have all seen them and gone on to lead normal lives. whole generations of nerds have been raised on this stuff and thus far real world child abuse has been the same as it ever was... tragic and deplorable, but rare. does this mean that all of those CGIpr0n sites can now photoshop in pointy ears and call it "elf porn"?
especially motzart... he hasn't eaten in like a hundred years thanks to you criminals and your file sharing.
christians really will kill you if you don't convert! if you visit las vegas you will be captured and murdered by terrorists! you really can get an insane stunt bonus for jumping a car off the roof of a parking garage! aliens really will come down to earth and conquer us and it's up to duke nukem/master chief/samus aran to save us! that's it! i'm moving to norway!
that, sir, is preposterous! corporations don't lie! they have money! i do not think that you understand the gravitational pull of large amounts of money.
all money emits a small amount of positive energy. obviously, the larger the sum of money available to you, the greater the positive charge that is applied to your actions.
in your example, "Joe has deceived his girlfriend by telling her he did not have an affair with his Linux box" you are not taking in to account joe's wealth or social status. if joe is a poor student from a lower-middle class family then he is clearly pathetic and possibly in need of professional help. he, like many impoverished individuals, would be considered by many mental health professionals "crazy". if on the otherhand, joe is a famous millionaire his behavior would be considered harmless and we would call him "eccentric". his machine and behavior might be featured in a segment on "MTV Cribs".
take for example a young girl that indulges herself irresponsibly. if her parents are poor she is a "whore" and a "drug addict". if her parents are rich she is known as a "socialite". a middle class manager of a walmart who attempts to buy women's affections is a "sleaze" and a "perv". a billionaire real estate tycoon who attempts to buy women's affections is a "playboy". [see also: "creepy old man" v. "hugh hefner"] the same holds true for corporations. if a small local company uses half truths or falsehoods to sell you a product, that is known as "running a scam". a large multinational corporation using falsehoods and half truths to move products is "running a promotional campaign".
on the surface, all of these actions seem very similar. however, if you look closely (at the money) you will see that they are really quite different. "whores", "drug addicts", "sleazes" and "pervs" are all despicable things that should be pitied and/or punished. "socialites" and "playboys" are good and things that we should admire and perhaps aspire to one day be. poor people and businesses have to be held accountable for their actions and poor ethical and moral choices. wealthy companies and individuals have already demonstrated their worth (in terms of dollars) and are clearly beyond reproach.
i log into and out of windows servers, both virtualized and not, all day long, and i couldn't tell you off the top of my head where they are in the rack, which machines what VM's are hosted on, and i don't recall the last time i physically (or virtually) touched the consoles for many of them. yes it is documented somewhere, but for day to day care and feeding it's just not necessary.
as for having the server be your workstation, using a VM to test on your development machine and using VMs as servers are not the same thing. that is why companies like VMWare and MS make workstation and server products. losing the console on a workstation is catastrophic for only one user and may require extraordinary measures to recover (like rebooting the host and restoring the VM from a snapshot or possibly even an offline backup), but losing the console on a server is not, so long as the server is still running. in fact, in most enterprises it will most likely go unnoticed by the general population, provided of course that the server is still performing it's intended function.
in either case, if your virtualization package is doing what it should, a VM should not be able to affect the host OS and should not be able to take out the host machine, virus or no virus. that is the point of virtualization, to have multiple guests share the same physical hardware without affecting one another.
this shit is fucked up.
i think you have your terms confused.
when a prominent media figure uses lawyers and journalists to avoid telling the truth, that's called spin .
when a government official enlists the help of others to not tell the truth, that's called a national security .
when a huge multi-national corporation doesn't tell the truth, that's called marketing .
when a regular person, doesn't tell the truth and has no money, politcal affiliation or legal representation that's lying .
lying is bad. spinning, marketing, and national security are what keeps us safe at night.
assuming that you are talking about crashing the X server, no, because you can just restart X without affecting the rest of the server. with packages like VMWare Server, you don't need to run an x server on the host. you can run the VMWare console app on a spearate machine to actually see and operate the guest operating systems. so you can run your VMs on a box with a rather rudimentary install and access it from a more robust linux or windows install with a GUI. in theory, even if a display mode error occurs, only the VM's console is inaccessible and can be restarted, or deleted and restored from a backup. even if you manage to crash the console app, the host and the VMs on it are still running fine.
perhaps this is an improvement in all of Xorg and not just ubuntu, but on my ubuntu machine i can log in multiple users at the same time from the console (display:0) and even ctrl+alt+backspace to restart the Xserver in one session and have the other logged in user not be affected.
i got into IT in the late 90's when companies were changing from win3x/win9x/novell to nt/2k/active directory, and leading up to y2k you could make $15 an hour just knowing how to turn on a computer. following y2k and into the dotcom bubble, many companies were desperate to import tech workers and there was all that drama over visas.
after the dot com bust a lot of work got offshored and moved the indian tech sector into y2k/dot com mode. i would imagine that if you offshore again, to some poorer country, it will start all over again. perhaps this time, it will only take 4 years instead of 8, you know, efficiency and all.
perhaps on the third or fourth iteration the US dollar will be so worthless that the work will be cheaper to source labour in the US, and the new economies of brazil, russia, india, and china will outsource their work back to us :-)
according to dan brown jesus was married to a female prostitute :-)
agreed, i lost interest in redhat when they released fedora.
it's not the christian religion itself that irks me... what drives me crazy about christianity is the sense of entitlement that it creates in it's followers. i'm not usually one to go off on religion, especially someone as progressive in their thinking as you... but even your words smack of good old christian entitlement. that's the problem i have with christianity.
christians can spout off all they want about how they have been persecuted and excluded and whatever and feel entitled to point that out to us all, much like you have here. i don't know where you live, but here in midwestern america there is chirstianity plastered all over every flat surface, and we all just accept it... and yet that's still not enough. you still feel entitled to share your chistianity with us, as if we had forgotten for a moment that christianity is alive and well in america.
looking past the kooks and the bible thumpers, to the average rank and file christian, there is still that that self rightous sense of entitlement. the extremist rehetoric no longer phases me, in fact i much prefer it because it's so easy to tune out. but that subtle sense of entitlement, present in so much of american culture, always rings in my ears.
that was the precise logic behind chip modding my Xbox 2 years ago. i got the xbox for $140 and the chip for $60 installed. i was then able to load xbox media center, a ton of emulators, and some other ported games and run it quietly in my livingroom for $200. at that time (xmas 2004) i couldn't build a decent home theater PC for twice that price. oh, and my nifty home theater Xbox also plays xbox games and a ton of emulators. so many emulators that i ran it out of disk space :-(
assuming that the media stuff gets worked out on the PS3, or a suitable mod is found, then i may just get one once the price drops.
because "software as a service" is the latest thing in technology. platform independant ajax enabled web2.0 podcast blog web operating system virtualizations are the newest way for businesses to give money to technology companies.
i agree that music is too expensive, and i agree that online distribution is *way* cheaper, but the unit price argument has been used by both sides over the years. the unit price argument over the years has evolved something like this:
yes music is overpriced. yes digital distribution costs almost nothing. yes, you are totally right about unfair pricing, but unit prices are a moving target, and we as consumers are moving the target faster than the industry can keep up.
like most complex issues, penny arcade captures it best.
google adwords are not exactly a bankable commodity... the fifth entry is often to "buy X on ebay" where X is the thing you are searching for. i currently have filed a class action lawsuit against ebay over their claims that they have the lowest prices on slarphdoojies.
500 million is not unreasonable if you count every im/spam/porn bot as a unique, then i would have figured their number of "users" is acutally in the billions.