There is something to the phrase that, no support is better then shity support. While I sympothize with your plight, as many others have said, vote with your wallet.
Let me start off by saying that I totaly agree with you, but chances are that both you and I are tech types, yes? BIOS Flashing is fine, if you are a Techy, not so much if you are Joe or Sally average user.
The overriding goals for Linux must be the OOBE if we want to drive a superior OS to a wider audience and give people a compelling reason to migrate other then Linux's superior tech as compaired to Windows.
Lets say for instance you are BroadCom. You create a NIC or LOM chip set, lets say all the firmware is built in. Later you discover a bug, not super critical, but its enough of a PITA to cause you support problems, well then what? You now have several million cards or chipsets out there that need fixing. BIOS flash? PROM patch? Most all of those need to be applied with nothing happening on the card and bare bones system running, ie: A Bootable diskette ( when is the last time you saw a floppy drive in a machine if you did not specificaly order it ), or a bootable CD image. Now basic CD-ROM burners are pretty much on every new machine, but that leads to lots more complications, now they have to distribute something that will boot ( Free-DOS, Micro Linux Kernel, whatever ) and then that CD has to be burned. Again this is a PITA for the end user.
So without going through comparisons to WinModems, this is a good idea. Download the update, on windows install and re-boot, on Linux, Netware or another *nix just re-start the ethernet system, and bug fix applied, life is good.
BroadCom does in fact provide Windows, Linux, Netware, FreeBSD, Solaris. DOS, OS/2 and SCO drivers for:
NetXtreme Desktop/Mobile
NetXtreme Server
NetXtreme II
NetLink 57xx
NetLink 4401
As for the other mentioned, a quick look at the Intel web site shows me tons of drivers for Linux, FreeBSD, etc. etc. So I fail to see what everyone is bitching about. I have loaded several Distro's on various hardware and it just works. Performance is more then satisfactory.
Case in point. I have a old IBM thinkpad A-21M. I loaded NLED 9.x on it and the only thing that was a problem was the built in ATI video system. One call to the Novell's FREE support line and it was fixed in under 30 seconds. I stuffed a Netgear wireless card in it ( WG511T to be exact ), and it booted and ran perfectly.
Now all of that being said, I do understand some peoples desire to have Open Source drivers for these cards. There are lots of really good open source programmers out there that arguably could construct a better driver then the manufacturer, but I am thinking people with those kind of chops are fairly rare ( how many Linus's are there?? ) and they have lots bigger fish to fry.
I have yet to see a NIC or wireless chipset that there was just ZERO Linux support for. Would life be better and easier if support for EVERY OS out there was just perfect, well yes it would. Is that an economic reality? Not by any means. If it were the case BroadCom and Intel would be providing drivers for BeOS ( which I personaly love ), Amiga, DR-DOS, MS-DOS, PC-DOS etc., for their latest and greatest tech, but they don't because it takes 1000's of man hours ( read BIG dollars ) to do so and the last time I checked these companies were not charitiable organizations.
Now to the point of them providing the specifications for their products. Yes life would be nice if every interface was published and nicely documented and I really have no idea WHY they are being cluby about this. it would be totaly in their benefit to do so, for the following reasons:
Broader market acceptance for their hardware and more sales
Less support burden for them. After all they did not write the driver!
Less cost for the product, since they would not have to write drivers for lots of
different OS's, only Windows
All in all, I see providing detailed interface specifications to their hardware as being a total upside for them and I don't see a downside.
Now before everyone goes off, lets really look at this. Just how reliable is your internet connection? How reliable is anyones? I do lots of consulting and have clients that have DSL to connect their various offices. The problem with DSL is that in their never ending effort to gather market share they are fire saleing the service. Get your AT&T/Yahoo ( or whomever is offering it ) DSL for next to nothing! Well the problem with that model is that your support is, next to nothing
As an example of the problems that are being faced today. I started off lots of my customers with UU.Net. Remember them? ROCK solid, support was fantastic you actualy got someone on the other end of the 800 number who actualy knew something, AND had the tools to fix your problem, in other words, you got an engineer. You also paid for the service to the tune of about $175.00 a month for 384kb business grade SDSL with a/29, more if you asked for it. Then UU.Net was purchased by MCI and things were still good, but not quite AS good. Then there was the whole problem of insider trading, etc. and then MCI became WorldCom. The whole thing got swallowed up by Verizon.
Now originaly UU.Net used Covad to provide the local DSL loop and that was good too because Covad in the beginning had over 100 mobile techs in the SF bay area. When UU.Net got swallowed by MCI, MCI also purchased a DSL provider call Rythms since they wanted to be an end to end provider. Now that Verizon is calling the shots, they no longer wnat to be an end to end provider. They disolved Rythms and are moving everyone back over to Covad.
No normaly these migrations work out fine. They bring you a knew router, you keep your same IP block and your down for about 10 minutes. In this particualr case, the script that was sent out to Covad to provision the router, was wrong. it had NAT enabled on the WAN side of the router?!? The Covad tech, which there are now a total of 6 mobile techs for the entire SF Bay Area, didn't catch this, nor is he expected to, since he is way overworked and way underpaid.
So all of the sudden the e-mail & web servers are not visable to the outside world. So since I have the techs number I call him, and he says, hey you could surf the net! So hit Verizons 800 number and try and get support. Now mind you this is aroud 3pm PST. Verizons DSL support hours are 8am to 8pm EST! So I get the support "coordinator" who dutifly takes my info and tells me someone will call me back in with 24 working hours. At this point I start to get a bit testy. I ask to speak with her supervisor and this takes about 20 minutes of hold time. I explain everything to this person and after another 20 minutes of hold time I get a 1st level support person. I explain everything, yet again, and the golden question comes, "Can you surf the net?". At this point I calmly explain to him that yes, we can surf the net and thats not the problem. The problem is they that nothing can be seen from the outside world! His reply is still, "well you can surf so I dont see the problem". At this point my calmness simply vaishes and I demand HIS supervisor. Well his supervisor is busy, would I like to hold? As you dear reader might imagine my teeth are now grinding.
So after a few more rounds with this guy he says he is now on overtime and that he can't stay on the line any longer, but he will leave a note for his supervisor. So I hang up, call my client and tell them the unfortunate news. I get up at 4am PST the next day so I can be ready to catch the call that will be comming from Verizon, only the call never comes. So I hit the 800 number at 5AM PST and at this point I just start demanding everyones supervisor. I finaly get someone in the DNS group ( oh yeah, you can only make DNS changes, M-F, 8am to 8pm EST and ONLY via e-mail ) because he happened to come in early to clean up some paper work. Now as it turns out, he is an old school from the original UU.net cre
It comes in the box or downloadable from Novell SLED
$50.00 Gets you a year of updates, patches etc. This also includes phone support for install.
As to hardware... As others have said, RAM is the biggest issue, get as much as your budget allows. Make sure the video card you get has linux drivers as well as the mulit-media system.
The install is pretty painless and the defaults are pretty solid and have security uppermost in the priority list.
Despite any official designations, Tokyo is a city...
No, It is a prefecture! And yes, you, are insulting an entire country because of your backwards and very small western mind that refuses to accept their definition of their own space.
GroupWise is completely modular. You can have many PO's and MTA's in a single World Wide Domain all interconnected across the the internet. It is proven tech, its clusterable, its rock solid and has no real limitations with the exception of the amount of disk space you can throw at it, which in native NetWare w/the Novell Storage System is pretty much as huge a RAID as you can buy. Couple that with either NAS or iSCSI and you have a pretty much unstopable solution.
Not only that its completely cross platform so regardless of the fact that you might be an OSX or Linux or Windows shop, you will have a GroupWise client for your machine. Now admitedly, they are currently a bit behind in getting all the other platforms on par with the feature set of the windows client, but this is shortly to be remedied.
Web Access? again built right in, it come with the software, a complete J2EE implentation on Tomcat & Apache. Use any browser from anywhere in the world to access your e-mail, complete with attachment viewing, no Active-X required, no requirement for the machine to have anything installed.
Wireless Access? You betcha it supports damn near every PDA and cellphone out there.
Now if that wasn't enough, there is no way for a e-mail trojan or virus to start working its way through your system just because it hapened to land in your in-box. GroupWise has purposefully never built an interface to allow code to run in its underlying structure, unlike some other E-Mail programs we all know about.
Remote mail boxes, caching mail boxes, yep we got those as well, and guess what, I really hope you have a BIG hard drive on your laptop, because I have seen caching DB's on laptops in excess of 20 gigs and that is not an exageration.
Evidence chain? Discovery chains? all there. backups and restores? Yes to the user level, while the system is on-line!
Standards... Yup GroupWise is fully complient with the RFC's for SMTP, POP3, IMAPI, SSL etc. Mailbomb Protection built in. ORDB, Spamhause etc. IP checking, built in.
Classes of Service? You bet, again built right in. You only want some of your users sending internet mail, you got it. You want some of your user to have limited visibility? Built in.
If you haven't checked out GroupWise in a while or you never have, I suggest you have a looksee at it and give it an honest evaluation.
Ohh yeah, I forgot to mention that it runs on NetWare, Linux & Windows servers. The entire GroupWise system is x-platform. Who knows they might even be building it for X-Servers too!
The GroupWise storage engine will grow to the limit of the Servers Maximim volume size. On NSS that is someplace WAY over a terrabyte. PST files are just stupid. Its *corporate* e-mail not the employees e-mail. I have lots of clients who's GroupWise system are well over 500 gigs and still growing. You say your server crashed? Grab last nights tape, restore the Groupwise system onto a new server just put into the tree, change a few paths and IP addresses and your right back in business. The MOST you will lose ( if its not on a cluster ) is the amount of e-mail since the last backup.
Nothing to be shattered here, I am not a "profession" web designer. I am a programmer trying to learn a new class of "languages" for lack of a better term I suppose. I appreciate your comments, well except for the last one. I don't do CSS consulting. I consult on things I know well, obviously CSS is not one of them, since to me it seems like quite a bit of jibberish when compaired to object oriented programming languages which are very concrete in the way things are done, at least from the object perspective.
Yes i agree the box model on IE is totaly hosed, well for that matter, pretty much anything that wasn't invented by MS to be run through IE is kinda hosed. I don't like IE and I don't use it if I can avoid it but there are those times...
I guess one of the things I find objectionable about CSS is its lack of declaratives verbs like Column(...) or Box(...) which clearly describe what you are trying to accomplish. HTML tables I find very clear, you define columns and rows which work very nicely. I also like the notion of Frames which very neatly devide up the space you are working in and also makes it easier to maintain with things like header frames for menus that are defined once in one file. I guess this could be fixed by having an include syntax without having to use something like Java Script, to sniff out broswer versions and then pull in the correct style sheet or whatnot. This lack, at least with my understanding, leads to very large monolithic HTML pages that have to be repeated over and over again is the various files when they are called with an HREF tag.
I dont find the notion of CSS objectional at all, I find the current implementation objectional because it is confusing and muddled. Of course, everyones millage will very because lots of people look at things in different ways and there really is no single perfect way to implement things. I guess one could resolve this to the difference between i++ and i = i + 1 since they both generate the same machine code in the end and it becomes a stylistic issue.
Just more pennies from my brain, albeit a somtimes fuzzy brain, but one that functions never the less.
Here I am with mod points and I am frittering away my time to use them by replying to this.
CSS... Ah yes the grand attempt to make HTML more usefull. It has been somewhat successful, but thats the problem then isn't it, its only somewhat successful, and all of the finer points that would make web sites really functional are left to chance.
My basic problem with CSS is that in its laudable attempt to make something from a thing that was never meant to be what it has been twisted and shoe-horned into, is that no one will call a rather well polished turd, well, a turd.
CSS at best is marginaly comprehensable. The Documentation is horrible. The grammer for the various incarnations of weak hacks is totaly unrelated to itself. I have made a solid attempt at using CSS. Some of it is pretty straight up, yet the finer points of it are black alchemy. Now I am not saying I am the sharpest tool in the box, but neither am I the dullest.
Sadly CSS is help together contextualy. For example, Position Relative. Well relative to what? The preceeding DIV? The immediately preceeding line of HTML? It needs to be glued together better, objectified if you will. In my opinion if something is declared relative, it should be a requirement that it be declared what it is relative to, instead realying on simply the preceeding line, ie: position relative(object). This glues it firmly to another object and therefor cements the relationship and each object knows what it should be relative to and can behave accordingly.
Ok and then there is the whole EM -v- PX debate, and the CSS people can't even make up their own minds about the best usage of it. Now this is not quite the same as a discussion about using i++ -v- i = i + 1. This is about fundamental behavior of the user agent in its interaction with the content! Should padding around an object be some relative to the size of the font as in this example
which shows a padding: 1.5em?? I was under the impression that pixels are used to deal with the placement of an object within the browser window, relative to its upper left hand corner being 0,0 and its lower right hand extreme ( even if it is beyond the viewport and must be scrolled to ) being the x,y limit of the virtual screen space.
CSS extends standard HTML tags, yet one can create completely new things with CS. Then as I aluded to previously there are the grammer conventions..content which is shorthand for document.content ( once again everthing being relative ) and the statements that beging with pound symbols (#) or not as the case may be, again non intuitive useage.
Then there are the various browser work arounds. Now clearly this is not the problem of CSS or its designers, this is the problem of user agent implimentations and their programemrs, or really is it... Lets ponder this for a moment with the PX - EM debate, or the position absolute debate. it would seem that CSS designers and the actual spec authors want to use everyhting with everthing else except where they don;t want it and then only if condition X exists. Now from a programers point of view, this is what we call, out worst nightmare. We like to write code that is straight forward and follows a given set of rules. We handle exceptions when the input violates those rules and handle them accordingly, usualy by showing some sort of message that is minimly explanitory and at least somehwat polite. I for one would really like to see a CSS rule matrix, developed by the CSS people that is coprehensive to the layout process. It would an interesting exercise and programemrs who try to write code to interpret this hodge-podge would probably be eternaly greatfull, well as greatfull as a programmer can get when people screw up their well ordered world.
All in all I think the goals of both HTML and CSS are laudable, but they are fundementaly broken. No
This is where about $5.00 worth of parts and a soldering iron will help you out.
Most all chassis have at least ONE empty slot. Buy a simple miniature SPST toggle switch and some thin wire. Take a jumper and split it electricaly, then solder a wire to each jumper socket. Solder each end of the two wires to the pins on the toggle switch. Drill an approprate hole in the slot dust cover and mount the switch, or just feed the wires out and mount the switch on something close to the box. You now have on the fly flipping from r/w to r/o, provided the SCSI or SATA or SAS or whatever drive interface you are using doesn't freak out when its flipped.
Not only is this simple but its also hacker proof unless they have physical access to your server, and even then they have to know what that little toggle switch does!
I like consistancy as much as the next guy, but telling Apple to use a model that is Windows, which has their own UI issues, is a bit like telling Ford to make their cars like GM does, aye?
I use it all, Macs, Windoze, KDE, GNome all of them. Each have the pluses and minuses. Rather than bitch like a baby, what did I do? Uhmmm I spent the sum total of about 30 minutes reading through a quick start guide for each. Guess what happened? I learned their pradigm! Hot damn, imagine that, reading! Who knew it would be a usefull skill!
So get a clue, dust off those littte gray cells, and actualy fucking learn something you fucking ludite!
As I quietly chuckle, yes I can see some poor sod screeming into the abys as he follows the 500 lb boulder that just came loose that he can't let go of.
What does a computer do, after all. It manipulates data. That is ALLcode does.
It doesn't matter what language you use: Machine Code, Assembler, C, C++, Pascal, Java, C#, VB, Fourth, ADA, COBAL, Fortran, Ruby, Perl, Python any of them, its all just verbs and nouns. Some are more or less elegant, some are more or less useful. But none of them are anything without data structures.
There is NO substitute for properly designed and abstracted data structures, for without those your subsequent code as efficient and elegant as it might be, the resulting program will be useless.
Look at any program out there. Look at the source if you can get it. The vast majority of the modules are defining the various data structures required to organize and keep track of what the hell you are doing, not how to do it.
I totally agree, it will advance climbing quite a bit and scrambling will reach new levels of speed. But if you think about how climbing works, the mechanics of it, you will begin to see why it wont be that extraordinary. Climbers use leverage, grip and lots of compression force to keep their bodies firmly on the rocks. What are the resting positions of a climber? A Hand Jam, wedging toes into cracks and fissures into a rock face, or in a vertical crack that you can wedge your whole body into, not hanging upside down.
Every tried hanging upside down AND crawling? You need Gecko knee pads, not Gecko shoes. Our muscle mass is designed to hold us upright, not, upside down.
1st of all this is not going to work for your average adult human.
Why you might ask? Well I knew you would, well at least in your head.
Besides sticking to things, you have to take into consideration basic human body mechanics. Yeah I know, reality is so pesky! Consider things that climb, and climb well. Lizards, Monkeys, insects, all the fauna in natures lovely wild kingdom. What do they all in common? Well, since you asked, and I knew you would, even if it was in your own head. Here is your answer:
ALL of these creatures have equal length limbs!
Yes even or favorite relative, the chimpanzee. Also, in proportion to their size, they are all also endowed with vastly more muscle strength then humans. Ever seen your favorite monkey / gorilla play with a steel belted radial? They fling the thing around like we would a hula-hoop!
No not wanting to be a TOTAL kill-joy, I can see where humans could have lots of fun with this, but don't expect to see your average nerd/geek scaling a glass tower anytime soon. Our legs are way to long. Our arms are way to short and week in comparison to our legs and or climbing posture would be all wrong, with our asses hanging out into the breeze.
Being a pretty damn good rock climber myself, I can see some wonderful advantages I could have, but its not as great as everyone things its going to be. Gloves and shoes? Well that great and all, but you have to consider what is taking our full body weight. Good climbers, and I know some really good ones, can do one finger pull-ups, they are that strong, but a glove is going to exert the wrong kind of pressure/grip. Perhaps you might not slip, but you will have to keep your fingers curled over whatever you are using for a hand hold, and that still will lead to finger / hand fatigue that every climber experiences.
Perhaps a glove and shoe will be engineered that will evenly distribute the strain along the length of the forearm and the length and contours of the ankle and calf, but until then its going to still be a clumsy system that will put even more strain on our joints and limbs that already badly designed for climbing vertical surfaces.
"Its the market dummy"! 99.9% of all SPAM points to the person or business trying to get you to but something.
You want to bering SPAM to a pretty much screaching halt? Dont prosocute the spammers, prosocute the companies that use their services.
It is easy enough to do. Simply set up a few accounts on various AOL, MSN, Hotmail, GMail accounts and let the SPAM roll on in. For every SPAM there is a good or service item trying to be sold. There is a company trying to sell it. Fine them $10,000.00 for every SPAM caught by these accounts. Put teeth into the law, "Oh Mr. Business person, you say you don't have that kind of money?, Well lets see your house, your buildings, fixtures, computers, etc. will be taken and sold to pay your fines, or maybe we will just put you in prison."
Yeah it was called Kylix. Fast full on IDE for either Delphi ( Object Pascal ) or C++. It worked realy well and I still use it. Sadly, they priced it out of almost everyones price range unless you downloaded the free version which was missing all the good stuff.
I picked up a copy of Kylix Enterprise ( in the shrink wrap ) on E-bay for a little over $100.00 and regsitered it. Now its no longer supported by Borland. Now with Borland spinning off the developer tools to CodeGear it *might* get revived but I wouldn't count on it.
Borland created the IDE benchmark for everyone to meet and it started with Object Pascal 1.0 and then they took it from there.
As far as IDE's for Linux one of the problems is that everyone tries to create them in Java, ie: Eclipse. The IDE is HUGE and unweildly. Borland was on the right track, lets just hope they pick it up again.
If you want to do C++ or Object Pascal Development on Linux I would suggest you get a copy and try it. You have to do some tweeking to get it to run on the latest builds of Linux, but its not that hard, mostly it has to do that database connectivity and goobering around with Oracle drivers.
From the WC3...
"Extensible Markup Language (XML) is a simple, very flexible text format derived from SGML (ISO 8879). Originally designed to meet the challenges of large-scale electronic publishing, XML is also playing an increasingly important role in the exchange of a wide variety of data on the Web and elsewhere."
Hmmm moving data...., I guess I am not far off the mark.
Lets see and there is this which goes on at length about whay its a cool way to, wait for it..... Move Data!
But wait, there's more! You guessed it ladies and gentlement, the WC3 goes to great pains to tell you that only XML is X-Platform and is an excellent way to store, manipulate and transmit data! I would site this as a major push for XML to do exactly what I said it was trying to do.
As to you, fucktard, I was moving data between systems, more then likely, while the best part of you was running down your momma's leg. So shut your fucking cakehole and READ up.
No matter what sort of input devide you use, does the following not seem to hold true:
Lets say you are running a simple capture of FName,LName,Address,City,St,Zip, let each be an input to a PHP Script beased on a web form.
Your SQl statement will consist of the following in the PHP Script: $Query = "insert into NewContact (Firstname,Lastname,Address,City,State,zip)";
$Query.= "values($FName,$LName,$Address,$City,$State,$Zip)" ;
Now scrubbed or unscrubbed how can this insert result in anything other then bad data in the table? Even supposing you tried to write an entire script in say the address field, how can it possibly be executed? Does not "values" make a one to one correlation to the input mechanism? I have always believed, that anything in the "values" parens is only validated for data type correctness, ie: string -v- number etc and not if it a properly formatted query.
Slashdot Mirror
And that IS the beauty of NetWare, it just works
There is something to the phrase that, no support is better then shity support. While I sympothize with your plight, as many others have said, vote with your wallet.
Hey Salsaman!
Let me start off by saying that I totaly agree with you, but chances are that both you and I are tech types, yes? BIOS Flashing is fine, if you are a Techy, not so much if you are Joe or Sally average user.
The overriding goals for Linux must be the OOBE if we want to drive a superior OS to a wider audience and give people a compelling reason to migrate other then Linux's superior tech as compaired to Windows.
And Object Pascal STILL kicks ass!
This is not a bad thing
Lets say for instance you are BroadCom. You create a NIC or LOM chip set, lets say all the firmware is built in. Later you discover a bug, not super critical, but its enough of a PITA to cause you support problems, well then what? You now have several million cards or chipsets out there that need fixing. BIOS flash? PROM patch? Most all of those need to be applied with nothing happening on the card and bare bones system running, ie: A Bootable diskette ( when is the last time you saw a floppy drive in a machine if you did not specificaly order it ), or a bootable CD image. Now basic CD-ROM burners are pretty much on every new machine, but that leads to lots more complications, now they have to distribute something that will boot ( Free-DOS, Micro Linux Kernel, whatever ) and then that CD has to be burned. Again this is a PITA for the end user.
So without going through comparisons to WinModems, this is a good idea. Download the update, on windows install and re-boot, on Linux, Netware or another *nix just re-start the ethernet system, and bug fix applied, life is good.
BroadCom does in fact provide Windows, Linux, Netware, FreeBSD, Solaris. DOS, OS/2 and SCO drivers for:
As for the other mentioned, a quick look at the Intel web site shows me tons of drivers for Linux, FreeBSD, etc. etc. So I fail to see what everyone is bitching about. I have loaded several Distro's on various hardware and it just works. Performance is more then satisfactory.
Case in point. I have a old IBM thinkpad A-21M. I loaded NLED 9.x on it and the only thing that was a problem was the built in ATI video system. One call to the Novell's FREE support line and it was fixed in under 30 seconds. I stuffed a Netgear wireless card in it ( WG511T to be exact ), and it booted and ran perfectly.
Now all of that being said, I do understand some peoples desire to have Open Source drivers for these cards. There are lots of really good open source programmers out there that arguably could construct a better driver then the manufacturer, but I am thinking people with those kind of chops are fairly rare ( how many Linus's are there?? ) and they have lots bigger fish to fry.
I have yet to see a NIC or wireless chipset that there was just ZERO Linux support for. Would life be better and easier if support for EVERY OS out there was just perfect, well yes it would. Is that an economic reality? Not by any means. If it were the case BroadCom and Intel would be providing drivers for BeOS ( which I personaly love ), Amiga, DR-DOS, MS-DOS, PC-DOS etc., for their latest and greatest tech, but they don't because it takes 1000's of man hours ( read BIG dollars ) to do so and the last time I checked these companies were not charitiable organizations.
Now to the point of them providing the specifications for their products. Yes life would be nice if every interface was published and nicely documented and I really have no idea WHY they are being cluby about this. it would be totaly in their benefit to do so, for the following reasons:
All in all, I see providing detailed interface specifications to their hardware as being a total upside for them and I don't see a downside.
Now before everyone goes off, lets really look at this. Just how reliable is your internet connection? How reliable is anyones? I do lots of consulting and have clients that have DSL to connect their various offices. The problem with DSL is that in their never ending effort to gather market share they are fire saleing the service. Get your AT&T/Yahoo ( or whomever is offering it ) DSL for next to nothing! Well the problem with that model is that your support is, next to nothing
As an example of the problems that are being faced today. I started off lots of my customers with UU.Net. Remember them? ROCK solid, support was fantastic you actualy got someone on the other end of the 800 number who actualy knew something, AND had the tools to fix your problem, in other words, you got an engineer. You also paid for the service to the tune of about $175.00 a month for 384kb business grade SDSL with a /29, more if you asked for it. Then UU.Net was purchased by MCI and things were still good, but not quite AS good. Then there was the whole problem of insider trading, etc. and then MCI became WorldCom. The whole thing got swallowed up by Verizon.
Now originaly UU.Net used Covad to provide the local DSL loop and that was good too because Covad in the beginning had over 100 mobile techs in the SF bay area. When UU.Net got swallowed by MCI, MCI also purchased a DSL provider call Rythms since they wanted to be an end to end provider. Now that Verizon is calling the shots, they no longer wnat to be an end to end provider. They disolved Rythms and are moving everyone back over to Covad.
No normaly these migrations work out fine. They bring you a knew router, you keep your same IP block and your down for about 10 minutes. In this particualr case, the script that was sent out to Covad to provision the router, was wrong. it had NAT enabled on the WAN side of the router?!? The Covad tech, which there are now a total of 6 mobile techs for the entire SF Bay Area, didn't catch this, nor is he expected to, since he is way overworked and way underpaid.
So all of the sudden the e-mail & web servers are not visable to the outside world. So since I have the techs number I call him, and he says, hey you could surf the net! So hit Verizons 800 number and try and get support. Now mind you this is aroud 3pm PST. Verizons DSL support hours are 8am to 8pm EST! So I get the support "coordinator" who dutifly takes my info and tells me someone will call me back in with 24 working hours. At this point I start to get a bit testy. I ask to speak with her supervisor and this takes about 20 minutes of hold time. I explain everything to this person and after another 20 minutes of hold time I get a 1st level support person. I explain everything, yet again, and the golden question comes, "Can you surf the net?". At this point I calmly explain to him that yes, we can surf the net and thats not the problem. The problem is they that nothing can be seen from the outside world! His reply is still, "well you can surf so I dont see the problem". At this point my calmness simply vaishes and I demand HIS supervisor. Well his supervisor is busy, would I like to hold? As you dear reader might imagine my teeth are now grinding.
So after a few more rounds with this guy he says he is now on overtime and that he can't stay on the line any longer, but he will leave a note for his supervisor. So I hang up, call my client and tell them the unfortunate news. I get up at 4am PST the next day so I can be ready to catch the call that will be comming from Verizon, only the call never comes. So I hit the 800 number at 5AM PST and at this point I just start demanding everyones supervisor. I finaly get someone in the DNS group ( oh yeah, you can only make DNS changes, M-F, 8am to 8pm EST and ONLY via e-mail ) because he happened to come in early to clean up some paper work. Now as it turns out, he is an old school from the original UU.net cre
This is SUSE
It comes in the box or downloadable from Novell SLED
$50.00 Gets you a year of updates, patches etc. This also includes phone support for install.
As to hardware... As others have said, RAM is the biggest issue, get as much as your budget allows. Make sure the video card you get has linux drivers as well as the mulit-media system.
The install is pretty painless and the defaults are pretty solid and have security uppermost in the priority list.
No, It is a prefecture! And yes, you, are insulting an entire country because of your backwards and very small western mind that refuses to accept their definition of their own space.
You insensative lout!
Yet another reason to use GroupWise
GroupWise is completely modular. You can have many PO's and MTA's in a single World Wide Domain all interconnected across the the internet. It is proven tech, its clusterable, its rock solid and has no real limitations with the exception of the amount of disk space you can throw at it, which in native NetWare w/the Novell Storage System is pretty much as huge a RAID as you can buy. Couple that with either NAS or iSCSI and you have a pretty much unstopable solution.
Not only that its completely cross platform so regardless of the fact that you might be an OSX or Linux or Windows shop, you will have a GroupWise client for your machine. Now admitedly, they are currently a bit behind in getting all the other platforms on par with the feature set of the windows client, but this is shortly to be remedied.
Web Access? again built right in, it come with the software, a complete J2EE implentation on Tomcat & Apache. Use any browser from anywhere in the world to access your e-mail, complete with attachment viewing, no Active-X required, no requirement for the machine to have anything installed.
Wireless Access? You betcha it supports damn near every PDA and cellphone out there.
Now if that wasn't enough, there is no way for a e-mail trojan or virus to start working its way through your system just because it hapened to land in your in-box. GroupWise has purposefully never built an interface to allow code to run in its underlying structure, unlike some other E-Mail programs we all know about.
Remote mail boxes, caching mail boxes, yep we got those as well, and guess what, I really hope you have a BIG hard drive on your laptop, because I have seen caching DB's on laptops in excess of 20 gigs and that is not an exageration.
Evidence chain? Discovery chains? all there. backups and restores? Yes to the user level, while the system is on-line!
Standards... Yup GroupWise is fully complient with the RFC's for SMTP, POP3, IMAPI, SSL etc. Mailbomb Protection built in. ORDB, Spamhause etc. IP checking, built in.
Classes of Service? You bet, again built right in. You only want some of your users sending internet mail, you got it. You want some of your user to have limited visibility? Built in.
If you haven't checked out GroupWise in a while or you never have, I suggest you have a looksee at it and give it an honest evaluation.
Ohh yeah, I forgot to mention that it runs on NetWare, Linux & Windows servers. The entire GroupWise system is x-platform. Who knows they might even be building it for X-Servers too!
The GroupWise storage engine will grow to the limit of the Servers Maximim volume size. On NSS that is someplace WAY over a terrabyte. PST files are just stupid. Its *corporate* e-mail not the employees e-mail. I have lots of clients who's GroupWise system are well over 500 gigs and still growing. You say your server crashed? Grab last nights tape, restore the Groupwise system onto a new server just put into the tree, change a few paths and IP addresses and your right back in business. The MOST you will lose ( if its not on a cluster ) is the amount of e-mail since the last backup.
Netware... It does a server good.
Because web design is driver by sales weenies, thats why.
Hey there,
Nothing to be shattered here, I am not a "profession" web designer. I am a programmer trying to learn a new class of "languages" for lack of a better term I suppose. I appreciate your comments, well except for the last one. I don't do CSS consulting. I consult on things I know well, obviously CSS is not one of them, since to me it seems like quite a bit of jibberish when compaired to object oriented programming languages which are very concrete in the way things are done, at least from the object perspective.
Yes i agree the box model on IE is totaly hosed, well for that matter, pretty much anything that wasn't invented by MS to be run through IE is kinda hosed. I don't like IE and I don't use it if I can avoid it but there are those times...
I guess one of the things I find objectionable about CSS is its lack of declaratives verbs like Column(...) or Box(...) which clearly describe what you are trying to accomplish. HTML tables I find very clear, you define columns and rows which work very nicely. I also like the notion of Frames which very neatly devide up the space you are working in and also makes it easier to maintain with things like header frames for menus that are defined once in one file. I guess this could be fixed by having an include syntax without having to use something like Java Script, to sniff out broswer versions and then pull in the correct style sheet or whatnot. This lack, at least with my understanding, leads to very large monolithic HTML pages that have to be repeated over and over again is the various files when they are called with an HREF tag.
I dont find the notion of CSS objectional at all, I find the current implementation objectional because it is confusing and muddled. Of course, everyones millage will very because lots of people look at things in different ways and there really is no single perfect way to implement things. I guess one could resolve this to the difference between i++ and i = i + 1 since they both generate the same machine code in the end and it becomes a stylistic issue.
Just more pennies from my brain, albeit a somtimes fuzzy brain, but one that functions never the less.
Here I am with mod points and I am frittering away my time to use them by replying to this.
CSS... Ah yes the grand attempt to make HTML more usefull. It has been somewhat successful, but thats the problem then isn't it, its only somewhat successful, and all of the finer points that would make web sites really functional are left to chance.
My basic problem with CSS is that in its laudable attempt to make something from a thing that was never meant to be what it has been twisted and shoe-horned into, is that no one will call a rather well polished turd, well, a turd.
CSS at best is marginaly comprehensable. The Documentation is horrible. The grammer for the various incarnations of weak hacks is totaly unrelated to itself. I have made a solid attempt at using CSS. Some of it is pretty straight up, yet the finer points of it are black alchemy. Now I am not saying I am the sharpest tool in the box, but neither am I the dullest.
Sadly CSS is help together contextualy. For example, Position Relative. Well relative to what? The preceeding DIV? The immediately preceeding line of HTML? It needs to be glued together better, objectified if you will. In my opinion if something is declared relative, it should be a requirement that it be declared what it is relative to, instead realying on simply the preceeding line, ie: position relative(object). This glues it firmly to another object and therefor cements the relationship and each object knows what it should be relative to and can behave accordingly.
Ok and then there is the whole EM -v- PX debate, and the CSS people can't even make up their own minds about the best usage of it. Now this is not quite the same as a discussion about using i++ -v- i = i + 1. This is about fundamental behavior of the user agent in its interaction with the content! Should padding around an object be some relative to the size of the font as in this example which shows a padding: 1.5em?? I was under the impression that pixels are used to deal with the placement of an object within the browser window, relative to its upper left hand corner being 0,0 and its lower right hand extreme ( even if it is beyond the viewport and must be scrolled to ) being the x,y limit of the virtual screen space.
CSS extends standard HTML tags, yet one can create completely new things with CS. Then as I aluded to previously there are the grammer conventions. .content which is shorthand for document.content ( once again everthing being relative ) and the statements that beging with pound symbols (#) or not as the case may be, again non intuitive useage.
Then there are the various browser work arounds. Now clearly this is not the problem of CSS or its designers, this is the problem of user agent implimentations and their programemrs, or really is it... Lets ponder this for a moment with the PX - EM debate, or the position absolute debate. it would seem that CSS designers and the actual spec authors want to use everyhting with everthing else except where they don;t want it and then only if condition X exists. Now from a programers point of view, this is what we call, out worst nightmare. We like to write code that is straight forward and follows a given set of rules. We handle exceptions when the input violates those rules and handle them accordingly, usualy by showing some sort of message that is minimly explanitory and at least somehwat polite. I for one would really like to see a CSS rule matrix, developed by the CSS people that is coprehensive to the layout process. It would an interesting exercise and programemrs who try to write code to interpret this hodge-podge would probably be eternaly greatfull, well as greatfull as a programmer can get when people screw up their well ordered world.
All in all I think the goals of both HTML and CSS are laudable, but they are fundementaly broken. No
This is where about $5.00 worth of parts and a soldering iron will help you out.
Most all chassis have at least ONE empty slot. Buy a simple miniature SPST toggle switch and some thin wire. Take a jumper and split it electricaly, then solder a wire to each jumper socket. Solder each end of the two wires to the pins on the toggle switch. Drill an approprate hole in the slot dust cover and mount the switch, or just feed the wires out and mount the switch on something close to the box. You now have on the fly flipping from r/w to r/o, provided the SCSI or SATA or SAS or whatever drive interface you are using doesn't freak out when its flipped.
Not only is this simple but its also hacker proof unless they have physical access to your server, and even then they have to know what that little toggle switch does!
Because its NOT Windoze you fool!
I like consistancy as much as the next guy, but telling Apple to use a model that is Windows, which has their own UI issues, is a bit like telling Ford to make their cars like GM does, aye?
I use it all, Macs, Windoze, KDE, GNome all of them. Each have the pluses and minuses. Rather than bitch like a baby, what did I do? Uhmmm I spent the sum total of about 30 minutes reading through a quick start guide for each. Guess what happened? I learned their pradigm! Hot damn, imagine that, reading! Who knew it would be a usefull skill!
So get a clue, dust off those littte gray cells, and actualy fucking learn something you fucking ludite!
As I quietly chuckle, yes I can see some poor sod screeming into the abys as he follows the 500 lb boulder that just came loose that he can't let go of.
The code will follow.
What does a computer do, after all. It manipulates data. That is ALLcode does.
It doesn't matter what language you use: Machine Code, Assembler, C, C++, Pascal, Java, C#, VB, Fourth, ADA, COBAL, Fortran, Ruby, Perl, Python any of them, its all just verbs and nouns. Some are more or less elegant, some are more or less useful. But none of them are anything without data structures.
There is NO substitute for properly designed and abstracted data structures, for without those your subsequent code as efficient and elegant as it might be, the resulting program will be useless.
Look at any program out there. Look at the source if you can get it. The vast majority of the modules are defining the various data structures required to organize and keep track of what the hell you are doing, not how to do it.
I totally agree, it will advance climbing quite a bit and scrambling will reach new levels of speed. But if you think about how climbing works, the mechanics of it, you will begin to see why it wont be that extraordinary. Climbers use leverage, grip and lots of compression force to keep their bodies firmly on the rocks. What are the resting positions of a climber? A Hand Jam, wedging toes into cracks and fissures into a rock face, or in a vertical crack that you can wedge your whole body into, not hanging upside down.
Every tried hanging upside down AND crawling? You need Gecko knee pads, not Gecko shoes. Our muscle mass is designed to hold us upright, not, upside down.
1st of all this is not going to work for your average adult human.
Why you might ask? Well I knew you would, well at least in your head.
Besides sticking to things, you have to take into consideration basic human body mechanics. Yeah I know, reality is so pesky! Consider things that climb, and climb well. Lizards, Monkeys, insects, all the fauna in natures lovely wild kingdom. What do they all in common? Well, since you asked, and I knew you would, even if it was in your own head. Here is your answer:
ALL of these creatures have equal length limbs!
Yes even or favorite relative, the chimpanzee. Also, in proportion to their size, they are all also endowed with vastly more muscle strength then humans. Ever seen your favorite monkey / gorilla play with a steel belted radial? They fling the thing around like we would a hula-hoop!
No not wanting to be a TOTAL kill-joy, I can see where humans could have lots of fun with this, but don't expect to see your average nerd/geek scaling a glass tower anytime soon. Our legs are way to long. Our arms are way to short and week in comparison to our legs and or climbing posture would be all wrong, with our asses hanging out into the breeze.
Being a pretty damn good rock climber myself, I can see some wonderful advantages I could have, but its not as great as everyone things its going to be. Gloves and shoes? Well that great and all, but you have to consider what is taking our full body weight. Good climbers, and I know some really good ones, can do one finger pull-ups, they are that strong, but a glove is going to exert the wrong kind of pressure/grip. Perhaps you might not slip, but you will have to keep your fingers curled over whatever you are using for a hand hold, and that still will lead to finger / hand fatigue that every climber experiences.
Perhaps a glove and shoe will be engineered that will evenly distribute the strain along the length of the forearm and the length and contours of the ankle and calf, but until then its going to still be a clumsy system that will put even more strain on our joints and limbs that already badly designed for climbing vertical surfaces.
"Its the market dummy"! 99.9% of all SPAM points to the person or business trying to get you to but something.
You want to bering SPAM to a pretty much screaching halt? Dont prosocute the spammers, prosocute the companies that use their services.
It is easy enough to do. Simply set up a few accounts on various AOL, MSN, Hotmail, GMail accounts and let the SPAM roll on in. For every SPAM there is a good or service item trying to be sold. There is a company trying to sell it. Fine them $10,000.00 for every SPAM caught by these accounts. Put teeth into the law, "Oh Mr. Business person, you say you don't have that kind of money?, Well lets see your house, your buildings, fixtures, computers, etc. will be taken and sold to pay your fines, or maybe we will just put you in prison."
I think even Ron Popeal, would think twice.
Yeah it was called Kylix. Fast full on IDE for either Delphi ( Object Pascal ) or C++. It worked realy well and I still use it. Sadly, they priced it out of almost everyones price range unless you downloaded the free version which was missing all the good stuff.
I picked up a copy of Kylix Enterprise ( in the shrink wrap ) on E-bay for a little over $100.00 and regsitered it. Now its no longer supported by Borland. Now with Borland spinning off the developer tools to CodeGear it *might* get revived but I wouldn't count on it.
Borland created the IDE benchmark for everyone to meet and it started with Object Pascal 1.0 and then they took it from there.
As far as IDE's for Linux one of the problems is that everyone tries to create them in Java, ie: Eclipse. The IDE is HUGE and unweildly. Borland was on the right track, lets just hope they pick it up again.
If you want to do C++ or Object Pascal Development on Linux I would suggest you get a copy and try it. You have to do some tweeking to get it to run on the latest builds of Linux, but its not that hard, mostly it has to do that database connectivity and goobering around with Oracle drivers.
Nope not trolling in the least!
From the WC3...
"Extensible Markup Language (XML) is a simple, very flexible text format derived from SGML (ISO 8879). Originally designed to meet the challenges of large-scale electronic publishing, XML is also playing an increasingly important role in the exchange of a wide variety of data on the Web and elsewhere."
Hmmm moving data...., I guess I am not far off the mark.
Lets see and there is this which goes on at length about whay its a cool way to, wait for it..... Move Data!
But wait, there's more! You guessed it ladies and gentlement, the WC3 goes to great pains to tell you that only XML is X-Platform and is an excellent way to store, manipulate and transmit data! I would site this as a major push for XML to do exactly what I said it was trying to do.
As to you, fucktard, I was moving data between systems, more then likely, while the best part of you was running down your momma's leg. So shut your fucking cakehole and READ up.
Hell I think this might even be covered by n-node b-trees. Fucking examiners.
No matter what sort of input devide you use, does the following not seem to hold true:
Lets say you are running a simple capture of FName,LName,Address,City,St,Zip, let each be an input to a PHP Script beased on a web form.
Your SQl statement will consist of the following in the PHP Script: .= "values($FName,$LName,$Address,$City,$State,$Zip)" ;
$Query = "insert into NewContact (Firstname,Lastname,Address,City,State,zip)";
$Query
Now scrubbed or unscrubbed how can this insert result in anything other then bad data in the table? Even supposing you tried to write an entire script in say the address field, how can it possibly be executed? Does not "values" make a one to one correlation to the input mechanism? I have always believed, that anything in the "values" parens is only validated for data type correctness, ie: string -v- number etc and not if it a properly formatted query.