(3 x 48 = 144 - 3 (for uplinks) = ~141 ports for devices)
You'll need a minimum of 4 ports for uplinks if you're using Ethernet. Plus one more for the link to the WAN connection.
Layer 3 switches are the way to go
Layer 3 switches are routers, what you need are layer 2 switches with management, but at 100 end points this will not be necessary, the only time you'd want management is if you had to VLAN off a VoIP network. but at 100 end points, unless you're running a call centre gigabit Ethernet should be able to hack it.
get a Cisco ASA 5505
Forget this, unless you're a cisco engineer most of it will be lost on you.
Get something simple like a Fortigate 60 and forget about Cisco's licensing model.
Cisco really is not built for a network of only 100 users. 1000 users perhaps, but not 100. The 48 port Cisco switches will be fine, but other brands will be just as good.
Dead simple installations, multitude of configuration options to do most everything. Still lets you get down and dirty if you need to.
Unless you're trying to do something like server publishing or VPN, in which case it will fail repeatedly and you'll get no support from Sonicwall. Not to mention the slow, pants on head retarded UI and poorly written help files.
Try a Foritgate instead. Fortinet publish comprehensive admin guides for their FortiOS and dedicated guides to connecting VPN. Easy to configure from scratch, have useful metrics and logging not to mention a command line built into the web based UI.
As a programmer I can assure you that the problem is never the network.
Damn straight,
It's never an easy job because we keep everything working so well.
Never mind the trace-route, pings, and FTP client log showing 100 byte/sec transfer speed I have provided
Takes end users machine, turns off torrent clients, twitter clients, RSS feeds and streaming radio on the users machine and watches the speed increase to normal levels. Finally I hit the user with a rather large wrench for wasting my time.
First rule of net admin, The problem is always the user.
the single green LED graphic on the monitoring tool indicates with absolute certainty that all things on the network are working swimmingly.
Second rule of net admin: The user lies. The user always lies.
However Nagios does not lie. Nagios does exactly what I tell it to (that includes not running torrent clients at work)
So when it comes down to you or Nagios, Nagios wins hands down.
Few companies have the capacity to advance open source, and at the same time work for the shareholders. Seems pretty obvious to me that Oracle isn't one of those companies. Maybe they should have looked at Redhat for pointers?
I dont think Oracle was looking to run Sun as an open source business at all. I think they were going to try and monetise their OSS offerings, possibly even close source them from the next version if possible.
What I think Oracle didn't count on was the amount of community support Sun relied on, possibly that was why Sun struggled. Whilst I think that OSS community help is a great thing, you still need a plan to make money as a business and this is quite possible to do without being evil like MS or Oracle or Apple.
Maybe Sun should have taken a few pointers from Red Hat.
Why are they trying to make amends? This is Oracle, hasn't splitting communities and driving projects into the ground been working out great for everything they got from Sun?
Looks like the purchase of Sun is going quite as planned. Goes to show just how much community support Sun relied on. If they were planning to monetise open source, they did it in the most pants on head retarded way possible.
See, what baffles me is that they lock Blurays, Consoles, Google TVs, handsets to no point. They know they are not good at it because (except for the GoogleTVs) all of them have been hacked already.
Yet they go around collecting information they know they are not good at protecting.
Acutally, they are just as good at securing personal information as they are at producing DRM.
I agree. The Phenom II line is just grossly underpowered compared to Sandy Bridge:
Also, the Phenom II line is over 2 years old. I bought a Phenom II 955 when it was first released in Oz, that was in Feb 2009.
Phenom II beat the old Core 2 Duo's at the time, it stands to reason that a new arch will be competitive with Intels new arch, not their old one.
Plus, I can stick this new proc into my old AM3 board, cant do that with an Intel board. If I wanted to upgrade from a C2D E8400, I'd need a new board. Not that I need a new proc, the 955 is still going strong, a new high end Geforce 500 I could use however (replacing a Geforce 285).
Depends on your principals. A) Preferring to pay more to lower your energy usage or B) Not willing to pay a company your dollar for doing things more than worthy of anti-trust investigations and/or anti-trust lawsuits on a regular basis. Over a year 140 dollars is nothing even for someone in poverty (which I am with less than 15000 a year). Its also a small pittance of a fraction of the KWh being used by unclean energy. Most the unclean energy you use is from the products you consume including gas, plastics and food. There has to be something you dropped money on worth more than 140 dollars this year that was actually more useless than giving your 140 to the electric company over choosing AMD. Mine would probably be beer.
I remember when Intel had a virual monopoly in the 90's and early 200's. Prices of chips were expensive. We complain about $10 on a $200 processor when 10 years ago the entry level proc was over $400 (now they are a scant above $50, take that with inflation). Only when AMD bought out their Athlon 64 proc's out did Intel start to take them seriously with a complete arch redesign (the core series), Intel was so far entrenched in monopoly that before the Core series was released AMD had their X2 series out. Of course Intel didn't complete the arch changes until the Core 2 series, Core Duo's were "enhanced" Pentium M's.
So the tool who modded this flamebait needs their head adjusted with $400 over-hearted Pentium microprocessor.
BTW: _NOT_ an AMD fanboy, I own several models of both brands of Proc's, including a few examples of the quite expensive Pentium III's and Xeon 5500 series as well as a cheap Core 2 Duo.
1 The people who write Zone Alarm for Windows get it.
2 Moxie Marlinspike gets it.
I get it.
3 The Linux devs simply do not get it.
They get it too.
The end user
They don't get it.
Totally unacceptable in 2011. All machines should have firewalls that allow the user full control of what applications are allowed to talk to the local network and/or the internet.
The problem is the end user will scream bloody murder if they have to do anything to get access to their precious pron and emails. If they have to think for themselves doubly so.
A popup box asking to the user to allow or disallow an application access to the internet will simply result in the users always clicking "accept" because the user has associated the accept button with pron and email.
I use Sunbelt Personal Firewall on my XP machine, it's good in that it not only monitors what programs are trying to access the net but what programs are launching other programs. This is fine for me because I understand what everything it tells me means but the average idiot will be completely dumbfounded by IP addresses and domain names. Unfortunately this program has been discontinued (bought by GFI) and I'm looking for an alternative for Win 7 x64
I thought those were dead, even apple says the iPOD revenue is declining. All the iPOD people now have iphones and iPADs so they dont need a dedicated music playback device when their phone is always in their pocket.
Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. All the people I know buying MP3 players are looking for cheaper, non Apple players.
But that's not the cause. Apple created an unexpected side effect of trying to combine an MP3 player and phone in that people went along with the idea and started using non-Apple phones for the same purpose, Now days I see more earphones sticking out of HTC and Nokia devices.
The Apple fanboys are going to hate this but it needs to be pointed out to them. No one gives a fat rats clacker about "snappiness", "Interfaces", "click wheels" and especially bollocks like "User Experience" when all they want to do is listen to music. Complaining about these issues is more annoying than BSD/GPL flame wars, the simple fact is the average person doesn't care, thus will listen to music on whatever they've got.
The Wired article a published a month or two ago claims that the suicide rate at American colleges is higher than at Foxconn.
Unless I'm missing something here.
Yep, you're missing the fact that the people who committed suicide at the Foxconn factory were working in the same area (the Apple plant is different to the Dell plant) doing the same thing and were in the same age group. Also the time frame was much shorter then the statistics in the Wired article (less then six months vs 1 year).
Because it's cheap as hell. Do you investigate the working conditions at the manufacturer for every product you buy? How about your toothbrush? Your underwear? Your ballpoint pen?
Well I do take notice of where things are manufactured. I have a basic understanding that places like China tend to use bad labour practices and places like Taiwan, Korea and Thailand have good labour practices, comparatively.
I avoid "made in China" when possible, do you?
Thus I'll chose a Taiwanese made HTC phone over a Chinese made Apple phone.
You're using the whole "guilt by association" thing to avoid admitting that you don't want to change your attitudes. Guilt by association does not stand up in a western court of law and it doesn't work here. Just because you're attitude is bad, does not make all our attitudes bad.
Unless you mean Judy Moran, but she murdered her own brother so I doubt she gives a shit.
you take LEADERSHIP, take the risk and do what is right. even if you don't get re-elected.
someone has to have balls. but we have had gonad-less leaders for decades, now. no one takes a risk like that anymore.
democracies don't always work. in this case, you need a 'benevolent king' to just take the initiative and do what is right, regardless of the populaces' complaints.
That's just pants on head retarded.
Same as the idea that protectionism will bring prosperity. We (being the western world in entirety) cannot compete with Asia for manufacturing so we have to compete on other grounds, automation, education, high tech and a whole bunch of stuff that China cannot do.
We are not:
we are guilty of short term thinking (again).
As much as you are guilty of thinking in the past.
If the west wants to stay ahead of China, it needs to think ahead of China, this is why we had such economic sucess in the 90's and early 00's. It was mismanagement of the US and Euro banking infrastructure that lead to the collapse, such as GWB artificially keeping interest rates low (when demand should have been driving them up) and allowing insecure loans to be made. Australia did none of those things and well, look at us now, the AUD is worth more than the USD.
All protectionism will bring is high prices and low choices. I doubt you remember the economic prosperity of the 70's, mainly because there wasn't any.
Google is also keeping all of the money for itself, and is not passing any of it on to the users who supplied the data.
Google pays with access to its services.
I think this companies should be legally required to provide warnings about such tracking before letting you use their services (and not hidden in the fourteenth page of its EULA), but to claim that they provide nothing in return is simply not true.
People forget that Google services are opt in. When you start up an unconfigured Android phone you have to tick that you accept that some data will be shared, if you dont tick it or sign onto a google account it doesn't do it.
Even when you turn on and off "use wireless networks" under Settings->Location you get a warning that data may be collected and a chance to say no.
It's not like some hacker found this info whilst messing around on something completely unrelated.
In my experience, Mac users are even more irresponsible then clueless Windows users. They think they are magically protected, which means they will ignore obvious signs of infection till the very end.
Can you please elaborate and share your experience of Mac users who were infected by a virus, but ignored it until the "very end"? What was the virus, and what were the symptoms they ignored, and what happened in "the very end"?
Yep, the infected pirated iLife that was around a few years back. The user abjectly refused to admit there was any problem with his Mac. Not that he should have been installing pirated software on a work machine (he didn't get iLife because he didn't need it to do his job) and this wasn't the only problem. He still refused to admit there was an issue when it Kernel Paniced in front of the two of us (this is how I knew the trojan wasn't the only issue, it didn't cause a KP).
As I was the tech and charged with fixing those infernal machines (I was the most junior tech, no-one wanted the job so I got "volunteered"), I simply re-imaged it, anything else would have taken too long to do. Even installing a Firey driver was a 3 hour ordeal to get it working properly, even then the users complained. In 12 months the Mac count went from 8 to 3 because we were spending too much money (read: my time isn't free) fixing Mac's.
Zombies indiscriminately target humans and are able to infect them all, at least in all the zombie stories I've heard of.
Congratulations you got the point.
Malware writers don't care about the ol' Mac v Windows flame war, they just want malware on as many machines as possible.
With the new Crimeware kit for OS X, the cost v returns ratio for Mac's just got a lot lower.
The user is the most common cause on infection, any sysadmin or half retarded tech support flunkie could tell you that or to carry on with my Zombie analogy, you don't just get infected by accident, you let the Zombie bite you.
"In my experience, Mac users are even more irresponsible then clueless Windows users. They think they are magically protected, which means they will ignore obvious signs of infection till the very end."
Considering I could count the number of Mac "viruses" (Trojan horses) in the wild on one hand, I must wonder: how many data points does your "experience" consist of?
Considering there's over 30 on Trend Micro's site alone, you must have some freakishly mishapen hand.
Secondly, Mac's are vunlerable to the same kind of threats as Windows (and Linux) as well as using the same infection vector, the user.
Now when presented with a trojan hidden within free porn or screensavers et al. both the Mac user and Windows user will install it. The critical difference is that the Windows user, when told they are infected believes it and takes action. The Mac user does not. This makes them more irresponsible, not to mention that they are more likely to ignore potentially infected programs because they beleive they are magically protected.
And my experience comes from almost 4 years of Mac OS X support. Even outnumbered 10 to 1 by Windows XP machines I spent more time fixing PEBKAC issues with Mac users and this was before the days of OS X crimeware kits. Not to mention the pain of trying to get it to use a network printer. Glad I'm out of that company.
Wow, no less then *FOURTY-EIGHT* OS X 'threats', some of which are 'proof of concept' malware and almost all others are simply Trojans or scripts that do absolutely nothing unless you start and authorize them yourself.
I guess I can still sleep at night without a virus scanner...
If you look at the cross section of modern Windows Malware you'll find the same thing, user installed keyloggers and spambots.
The user is the, has always been and will always be the biggest infection vector. Mac users are worse because like you, they refuse to take the risk of infection seriously.
No, I'm talking about Android and Bluetooth. Until audio is used beyond just regular phone calls and music streaming I'm keeping my perspective.
I've been able to pass any audio via BT on my HTC Desire and Motorola Milestone to a laptop? The inbuilt video player and Rock Player automatically passed through audio to a Windows laptop.
What are you on about.
The general overall speech to text engine?
Has nothing to do with BT?
it's nice but I generally use the USB cable because it's faster
BT FTP is for the times where you don't have a cable or are sending to another device. Doesn't happen every day but it does happen so it's a very nice feature to have.
#1. For a technically sane, and security aware user, most antivirus software only exists to make the system hog slow.
#2. Antivirus software is used as a placebo to make users feel they are safer. If anything, I suspect it would make users feel less responsible for their own actions because some AV software is supposedly protecting them.
#3. How is a Linux user supposed to run AV? With WINE? I know there is clamav, but it's not intended for those "active monitoring/scanning" things you have on Windows. Maybe the "shell script" placebo* will work equally well at "educating users" if that's what you want. No point in making a system slow.
You must work in sales, because you have no experience in the real world.
#1. Actual, technical users understand that AV is important, they just recognise the signs of infection as well as any AV does and will take steps when they detect them. For us, AV clients are just a way to be lazy.
#2. Just because AV will not protect against some 0-days does not make it useless. It's a method of protecting against old threats which are still quite prevalent thanks to people who dont use or ignore AV. Not to mention that many viruses are simply minor variations of old ones, the W32.Foo.F virus looks quite similar to W32.Foo.E.
#3. Umm... You do know that there are a variety of Linux clients out there. Clam AV, Trend Micro, AVG, Kaspersky and others have clients. Any AV vendor in the Enterprise space has a client as Enterprises use Linux servers quite a bit. Do a google search for "Linux Anti Virus" before launching on an ill informed rant.
Slashdot Mirror
iDink gadget of some kind,
No, no, no, no,
It's the "YouBuyMeiDink" application which the GGP is using.
(3 x 48 = 144 - 3 (for uplinks) = ~141 ports for devices)
You'll need a minimum of 4 ports for uplinks if you're using Ethernet. Plus one more for the link to the WAN connection.
Layer 3 switches are the way to go
Layer 3 switches are routers, what you need are layer 2 switches with management, but at 100 end points this will not be necessary, the only time you'd want management is if you had to VLAN off a VoIP network. but at 100 end points, unless you're running a call centre gigabit Ethernet should be able to hack it.
get a Cisco ASA 5505
Forget this, unless you're a cisco engineer most of it will be lost on you.
Get something simple like a Fortigate 60 and forget about Cisco's licensing model.
Cisco really is not built for a network of only 100 users. 1000 users perhaps, but not 100. The 48 port Cisco switches will be fine, but other brands will be just as good.
Dead simple installations, multitude of configuration options to do most everything. Still lets you get down and dirty if you need to.
Unless you're trying to do something like server publishing or VPN, in which case it will fail repeatedly and you'll get no support from Sonicwall. Not to mention the slow, pants on head retarded UI and poorly written help files. Try a Foritgate instead. Fortinet publish comprehensive admin guides for their FortiOS and dedicated guides to connecting VPN. Easy to configure from scratch, have useful metrics and logging not to mention a command line built into the web based UI.
Damn straight,
It's never an easy job because we keep everything working so well.
Takes end users machine, turns off torrent clients, twitter clients, RSS feeds and streaming radio on the users machine and watches the speed increase to normal levels. Finally I hit the user with a rather large wrench for wasting my time.
First rule of net admin, The problem is always the user.
Second rule of net admin: The user lies. The user always lies.
However Nagios does not lie. Nagios does exactly what I tell it to (that includes not running torrent clients at work)
So when it comes down to you or Nagios, Nagios wins hands down.
Few companies have the capacity to advance open source, and at the same time work for the shareholders. Seems pretty obvious to me that Oracle isn't one of those companies. Maybe they should have looked at Redhat for pointers?
I dont think Oracle was looking to run Sun as an open source business at all. I think they were going to try and monetise their OSS offerings, possibly even close source them from the next version if possible.
What I think Oracle didn't count on was the amount of community support Sun relied on, possibly that was why Sun struggled. Whilst I think that OSS community help is a great thing, you still need a plan to make money as a business and this is quite possible to do without being evil like MS or Oracle or Apple.
Maybe Sun should have taken a few pointers from Red Hat.
Why are they trying to make amends? This is Oracle, hasn't splitting communities and driving projects into the ground been working out great for everything they got from Sun?
Looks like the purchase of Sun is going quite as planned. Goes to show just how much community support Sun relied on. If they were planning to monetise open source, they did it in the most pants on head retarded way possible.
See, what baffles me is that they lock Blurays, Consoles, Google TVs, handsets to no point. They know they are not good at it because (except for the GoogleTVs) all of them have been hacked already.
Yet they go around collecting information they know they are not good at protecting.
Acutally, they are just as good at securing personal information as they are at producing DRM.
Neither works very well.
I agree. The Phenom II line is just grossly underpowered compared to Sandy Bridge:
Also, the Phenom II line is over 2 years old. I bought a Phenom II 955 when it was first released in Oz, that was in Feb 2009.
Phenom II beat the old Core 2 Duo's at the time, it stands to reason that a new arch will be competitive with Intels new arch, not their old one.
Plus, I can stick this new proc into my old AM3 board, cant do that with an Intel board. If I wanted to upgrade from a C2D E8400, I'd need a new board. Not that I need a new proc, the 955 is still going strong, a new high end Geforce 500 I could use however (replacing a Geforce 285).
Depends on your principals. A) Preferring to pay more to lower your energy usage or B) Not willing to pay a company your dollar for doing things more than worthy of anti-trust investigations and/or anti-trust lawsuits on a regular basis. Over a year 140 dollars is nothing even for someone in poverty (which I am with less than 15000 a year). Its also a small pittance of a fraction of the KWh being used by unclean energy. Most the unclean energy you use is from the products you consume including gas, plastics and food. There has to be something you dropped money on worth more than 140 dollars this year that was actually more useless than giving your 140 to the electric company over choosing AMD. Mine would probably be beer.
I remember when Intel had a virual monopoly in the 90's and early 200's. Prices of chips were expensive. We complain about $10 on a $200 processor when 10 years ago the entry level proc was over $400 (now they are a scant above $50, take that with inflation). Only when AMD bought out their Athlon 64 proc's out did Intel start to take them seriously with a complete arch redesign (the core series), Intel was so far entrenched in monopoly that before the Core series was released AMD had their X2 series out. Of course Intel didn't complete the arch changes until the Core 2 series, Core Duo's were "enhanced" Pentium M's.
So the tool who modded this flamebait needs their head adjusted with $400 over-hearted Pentium microprocessor.
BTW: _NOT_ an AMD fanboy, I own several models of both brands of Proc's, including a few examples of the quite expensive Pentium III's and Xeon 5500 series as well as a cheap Core 2 Duo.
well hell, you could just get a p4 chip for like $20, oh the savings!
It's getting into Winter down here, I could use a new space heater.
I get it.
They get it too.
The end user
They don't get it.
The problem is the end user will scream bloody murder if they have to do anything to get access to their precious pron and emails. If they have to think for themselves doubly so.
A popup box asking to the user to allow or disallow an application access to the internet will simply result in the users always clicking "accept" because the user has associated the accept button with pron and email.
I use Sunbelt Personal Firewall on my XP machine, it's good in that it not only monitors what programs are trying to access the net but what programs are launching other programs. This is fine for me because I understand what everything it tells me means but the average idiot will be completely dumbfounded by IP addresses and domain names. Unfortunately this program has been discontinued (bought by GFI) and I'm looking for an alternative for Win 7 x64
I thought those were dead, even apple says the iPOD revenue is declining. All the iPOD people now have iphones and iPADs so they dont need a dedicated music playback device when their phone is always in their pocket.
Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. All the people I know buying MP3 players are looking for cheaper, non Apple players.
But that's not the cause. Apple created an unexpected side effect of trying to combine an MP3 player and phone in that people went along with the idea and started using non-Apple phones for the same purpose, Now days I see more earphones sticking out of HTC and Nokia devices.
The Apple fanboys are going to hate this but it needs to be pointed out to them. No one gives a fat rats clacker about "snappiness", "Interfaces", "click wheels" and especially bollocks like "User Experience" when all they want to do is listen to music. Complaining about these issues is more annoying than BSD/GPL flame wars, the simple fact is the average person doesn't care, thus will listen to music on whatever they've got.
There is no way in hell that I will marry a supermodel this year. Just never going to happen.
I'm sure you could find a rake thin girl with an eating disorder, drug problem and anger management issues.
The Wired article a published a month or two ago claims that the suicide rate at American colleges is higher than at Foxconn.
Unless I'm missing something here.
Yep, you're missing the fact that the people who committed suicide at the Foxconn factory were working in the same area (the Apple plant is different to the Dell plant) doing the same thing and were in the same age group. Also the time frame was much shorter then the statistics in the Wired article (less then six months vs 1 year).
Because it's cheap as hell. Do you investigate the working conditions at the manufacturer for every product you buy? How about your toothbrush? Your underwear? Your ballpoint pen?
Well I do take notice of where things are manufactured. I have a basic understanding that places like China tend to use bad labour practices and places like Taiwan, Korea and Thailand have good labour practices, comparatively.
I avoid "made in China" when possible, do you?
Thus I'll chose a Taiwanese made HTC phone over a Chinese made Apple phone.
You're using the whole "guilt by association" thing to avoid admitting that you don't want to change your attitudes. Guilt by association does not stand up in a western court of law and it doesn't work here. Just because you're attitude is bad, does not make all our attitudes bad.
you don't explain it to the morans/masses.
* morons.
Unless you mean Judy Moran, but she murdered her own brother so I doubt she gives a shit.
you take LEADERSHIP, take the risk and do what is right. even if you don't get re-elected.
someone has to have balls. but we have had gonad-less leaders for decades, now. no one takes a risk like that anymore.
democracies don't always work. in this case, you need a 'benevolent king' to just take the initiative and do what is right, regardless of the populaces' complaints.
That's just pants on head retarded.
Same as the idea that protectionism will bring prosperity. We (being the western world in entirety) cannot compete with Asia for manufacturing so we have to compete on other grounds, automation, education, high tech and a whole bunch of stuff that China cannot do. We are not:
we are guilty of short term thinking (again).
As much as you are guilty of thinking in the past.
If the west wants to stay ahead of China, it needs to think ahead of China, this is why we had such economic sucess in the 90's and early 00's. It was mismanagement of the US and Euro banking infrastructure that lead to the collapse, such as GWB artificially keeping interest rates low (when demand should have been driving them up) and allowing insecure loans to be made. Australia did none of those things and well, look at us now, the AUD is worth more than the USD.
All protectionism will bring is high prices and low choices. I doubt you remember the economic prosperity of the 70's, mainly because there wasn't any.
Being against western beliefs doesnt mean that he was Amish; he simply believed that western culture and governments are "bad" (to put it mildly).
In lay terms,
He could use western technology, software and firearms but could not listen to American music.
No wonder he amassed so many followers, some of them even saw American Idol.
Google is also keeping all of the money for itself, and is not passing any of it on to the users who supplied the data.
Google pays with access to its services.
I think this companies should be legally required to provide warnings about such tracking before letting you use their services (and not hidden in the fourteenth page of its EULA), but to claim that they provide nothing in return is simply not true.
People forget that Google services are opt in. When you start up an unconfigured Android phone you have to tick that you accept that some data will be shared, if you dont tick it or sign onto a google account it doesn't do it.
Even when you turn on and off "use wireless networks" under Settings->Location you get a warning that data may be collected and a chance to say no.
It's not like some hacker found this info whilst messing around on something completely unrelated.
In my experience, Mac users are even more irresponsible then clueless Windows users. They think they are magically protected, which means they will ignore obvious signs of infection till the very end.
Can you please elaborate and share your experience of Mac users who were infected by a virus, but ignored it until the "very end"? What was the virus, and what were the symptoms they ignored, and what happened in "the very end"?
Yep, the infected pirated iLife that was around a few years back. The user abjectly refused to admit there was any problem with his Mac. Not that he should have been installing pirated software on a work machine (he didn't get iLife because he didn't need it to do his job) and this wasn't the only problem. He still refused to admit there was an issue when it Kernel Paniced in front of the two of us (this is how I knew the trojan wasn't the only issue, it didn't cause a KP).
As I was the tech and charged with fixing those infernal machines (I was the most junior tech, no-one wanted the job so I got "volunteered"), I simply re-imaged it, anything else would have taken too long to do. Even installing a Firey driver was a 3 hour ordeal to get it working properly, even then the users complained. In 12 months the Mac count went from 8 to 3 because we were spending too much money (read: my time isn't free) fixing Mac's.
Zombies indiscriminately target humans and are able to infect them all, at least in all the zombie stories I've heard of.
Congratulations you got the point. Malware writers don't care about the ol' Mac v Windows flame war, they just want malware on as many machines as possible.
With the new Crimeware kit for OS X, the cost v returns ratio for Mac's just got a lot lower.
The user is the most common cause on infection, any sysadmin or half retarded tech support flunkie could tell you that or to carry on with my Zombie analogy, you don't just get infected by accident, you let the Zombie bite you.
"In my experience, Mac users are even more irresponsible then clueless Windows users. They think they are magically protected, which means they will ignore obvious signs of infection till the very end."
Considering I could count the number of Mac "viruses" (Trojan horses) in the wild on one hand, I must wonder: how many data points does your "experience" consist of?
Considering there's over 30 on Trend Micro's site alone, you must have some freakishly mishapen hand.
Secondly, Mac's are vunlerable to the same kind of threats as Windows (and Linux) as well as using the same infection vector, the user.
Now when presented with a trojan hidden within free porn or screensavers et al. both the Mac user and Windows user will install it. The critical difference is that the Windows user, when told they are infected believes it and takes action. The Mac user does not. This makes them more irresponsible, not to mention that they are more likely to ignore potentially infected programs because they beleive they are magically protected.
And my experience comes from almost 4 years of Mac OS X support. Even outnumbered 10 to 1 by Windows XP machines I spent more time fixing PEBKAC issues with Mac users and this was before the days of OS X crimeware kits. Not to mention the pain of trying to get it to use a network printer. Glad I'm out of that company.
Wow, no less then *FOURTY-EIGHT* OS X 'threats', some of which are 'proof of concept' malware and almost all others are simply Trojans or scripts that do absolutely nothing unless you start and authorize them yourself.
I guess I can still sleep at night without a virus scanner...
If you look at the cross section of modern Windows Malware you'll find the same thing, user installed keyloggers and spambots.
The user is the, has always been and will always be the biggest infection vector. Mac users are worse because like you, they refuse to take the risk of infection seriously.
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/05/02/2120203/OS-X-Crimeware-Kit-Emerges
At least someone is taking the threat of malware on OS X seriously. Unfortunately for you it's the wrong someone.
I've been able to pass any audio via BT on my HTC Desire and Motorola Milestone to a laptop? The inbuilt video player and Rock Player automatically passed through audio to a Windows laptop.
What are you on about.
The general overall speech to text engine?
Has nothing to do with BT?
it's nice but I generally use the USB cable because it's faster
BT FTP is for the times where you don't have a cable or are sending to another device. Doesn't happen every day but it does happen so it's a very nice feature to have.
Like I said, Mac users find wonderful excuses not to take threats seriously, but other people are.
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/05/02/2120203/OS-X-Crimeware-Kit-Emerges
Cant wait for you to tell me this isn't real.
Have fun.
You must work in IT support.
My personal experience is:
#1. For a technically sane, and security aware user, most antivirus software only exists to make the system hog slow.
#2. Antivirus software is used as a placebo to make users feel they are safer. If anything, I suspect it would make users feel less responsible for their own actions because some AV software is supposedly protecting them.
#3. How is a Linux user supposed to run AV? With WINE? I know there is clamav, but it's not intended for those "active monitoring/scanning" things you have on Windows. Maybe the "shell script" placebo* will work equally well at "educating users" if that's what you want. No point in making a system slow.
* http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2119134&cid=35997968
You must work in sales, because you have no experience in the real world.
#1. Actual, technical users understand that AV is important, they just recognise the signs of infection as well as any AV does and will take steps when they detect them. For us, AV clients are just a way to be lazy.
#2. Just because AV will not protect against some 0-days does not make it useless. It's a method of protecting against old threats which are still quite prevalent thanks to people who dont use or ignore AV. Not to mention that many viruses are simply minor variations of old ones, the W32.Foo.F virus looks quite similar to W32.Foo.E.
#3. Umm... You do know that there are a variety of Linux clients out there. Clam AV, Trend Micro, AVG, Kaspersky and others have clients. Any AV vendor in the Enterprise space has a client as Enterprises use Linux servers quite a bit. Do a google search for "Linux Anti Virus" before launching on an ill informed rant.