This comes to exemplify what whas obvious for anyone with a modicum of computing knowledge.
If/when the Mac goes to ARM, it would be trivialy easy, from the technical point of view, to develop a version of Windows for ARM for said Mac computers.
The complicated part will be to make the Three companies agree, Namely Apple (to develop ARM bootcamp and ARM Windows Drivers), Microsoft (to adapt the OS if needed), and Qualcomm (they may have some intelectual property on parts of this windows for ARM thing, especially the X86-32 emulation bits).
brunes69 mentioned IBM, while an AnonCW mentioned Amazon Outpost, and JustAnotherOldGuy mentioned Amazon's VPC for HIPPA use*. And some other comments, so let's Clarify.
IBM's cloud is based on VMware and Openstack, both of which I mentioned in my comment. Problem is, IBM's public cloud offering is so small, like a drop in (huuuuge) bucket.
Some cloud providers offer you a "Cloud on colocation" where the servers are used only for your workloads, but is still servers on colo with cloud software installed, not a private cloud. A VPC is even worse, as your private cloud is running on servers were other workloads from other tenants are running, just that the network addressing and other things make it seem like a private cloud to you. That qualifies even less as private or true hybrid cloud.
Amazon lets you have a very specific box in a very specifc configuration for a very specific subset of workloads on premises. That's Amazon Outpost, and that can hardly be called a true hybrid cloud, let alone a private cloud.
The thing is, the Openstack public cloud market is highly fragmented, and OpenStack is a beast to set up and administer in your Datacenter (I shall know, I am technical trainer for OpenStack in the telco space), and the different parts of that Voltron are not cohesive enough.
Meanwhile Microsoft's Azure is the second largestpublic cloud in the market. And believe it or not, if you do not want public Azure cloud directly from microsoft (say, because you do not want to or can not deal directly with an american corporation), you can get it from telcos and partners. And if you get it in your private datacenter, you will find that the pieces are more cohesive and easier to administer than Openstack (but all of them still way behind of VMware, dare I say, the gold standard).
In the public cloud, the three biggest players are Amazon, Microsoft and Google (in that order). All the others are dwarfs in comparison (IBM included). The technologies that underpin those clouds are whatever propiertary stuff Amazon did to Xen (and moving away from xen), whatever stuff google is using, and Azure. Then you have a lot of small fish using Openstack (with KVM), Oracle (another small fish) using Xen, VMware doing deals with players big and small all over the place but reamining a small fish in the public cloud stakes nonetheless.
As I said, Amazon lets you have a very specific box in a very specifc configuration for a very specific subset of workloads on premises. Also gives you a VPC, or even a "Colocloud". So does IBM. But that does not qualify as private cloud or true hybrid cloud. Google gives you nothing on premises. But of course they offer you a VPC. Oracle hangs on in cloud because of predatory pricing if you run their software on other clouds, public or private. Only Microsoft and openstack can claim a large public cloud presence (big in the case of microsoft, in the case of openstack, a really large shoaling of small fish) coupled with the posibilities of running your cloud on premises or true hybrid).
* for OldGuy: I am not a lawyer, and probably you are not one either. But your company's tech dept. should double check with your company's legal dept. if getting your HIPPA stuff in AWS (be it in public, colo cloud or VPC) is legal or not. The tech team probably checked before the project got started, but is good to re-check regularly. I know amazon is lobbying extensively for it to be legal, and I am a big proponent of cloud in general and public cloud in particular. But laws are somethinmes weird for us engineers, and maybe, just maybe, some of that HIPPA stuff shall not be in a VPC or Colo cloud. Also, laws change from time to time, and people (even lawyers) make mistakes. With things like HIPPA, sarbanes-oaxley and financial info, is best to err on the side of caution from the legal point of view. I hope is all legal and no changes are needed. JM2C, YMMV.
That would just be your servers on your premises in your intranet.
The whole (retarded) point of "cloud" services is, that you don't know where you data physically is and who has access or control over it. ("Amazon"? Yeah, but/who/ "at" Amazon?)
There is more to a cloud than just having servers in someonelse's datacenter.
You can have your servers in your premises and even use virtualization, and yet not have a private cloud in your premises, for instance:
Are your workloads in your servers in your premises elastic? Automaticaly? No? Then you do not have a private cloud...
Can you move an internal workload from server to server in your premises? No? Then you do not have a private cloud...
Can the project leaders inside your organization self-serve a virtual server automaticaly? No? Then you do not have a private cloud?
Is your internal datacenter scalable? No? Then you do not have a private clud.
Are you treating your internal workloads as pets instead of catle? No? Then you do not have a private cloud...
I think you should be able to get the drift from here.
Microsoft's Azure Cloud offerings can be used Public, Private and true hybrid cloud types. Unlike amazon, which is 99.9% public cloud at the moment. And google, which is 100% public cloud.
Which means that, as your strategy shifts, you can go from Public cloud to hybrid clud to private clud with the same software stack.
Many companies are afraid of cloud technologies in general, and even more so about public clouds, and use this technology out of necesity, rather than desire. Other companies like the cloud, but would be deligthed to get everything inhouse if, for examle, what started up as a small project, grows so large that is cost-effective to do so (think DropBox).
While is true that there are SW layers that let you deploy in a "Cloud stack agnostic" fashion, those add a layer of complexity, appeal to the lowest common denominator, and show a technological lag.
Realisticaly, only Azure and OpenStack* can claim an uniform software stack between public cloud, private cloud and true hybrid cloud...
* There are others, like VMware, but their public cloud offering is marginal at best.
If you take a "Modern" song, and try to put it in Vinyl, the moder equalization would make the needle jump out of the record. This is termed "Loudness Wars", and was made possible by the introduction of Digital Music (CD, DCC, MiniDisk, etc).
If the song you want was released in Vinyl AND the same mix was used for Vinyl, CD and digital download, you can feel free to get it in the media most convenient to you.
If, on the other hand, there are different mixes dependeng on the media, go for Vinyl, you will not get the most acurate reproduction, and there may be noise, but at least, you will get a hell of a lot better dynamic range in your song.
Imagine you phonecall a company and say: Send me a travelling Salesperson, please. Or a delivery service and say, please deliver a newspaper to my office.
They answer: "sure, but there are some conditions for that convenience, please, for the next 8 minutes listen carefully to them."
You do not listen, instead, put the phone on the table, set your watch to 7 minutes, and go brew a tea.
You return, and when the operator asks: "Do you agree to our terms?" You say "yes"
It turns out that the terms include the salesperson or deliveryperson staying in your office long after the transaction is concluded (you place your order or get your newspaper), taking notes of many of the things you do, correlating those notes with those of other delivery companies/salespeople/third parties and a long and creepy et cetera.
But hey, you neglected to hear the terms of their service, because those terms were boring, and instead you went for tea.
Having corrected the analogy used by dryriver, the correct question to ask slashdot is:
Are the terms of service used by most websites even legal?
Nope, It also checks the Syno partition looking for Linux viruses. As a matter of fact, the default check is to check only the system partion every day, as a full NAS check would take way too much time.
You do know that ClamAV is intended to find Windows malware on Linux hosted email servers or samba shares? And that's it?
Nope, It also checks the Syno partition looking for Linux viruses. As a matter of fact, the default check is to check only the system partion every day, as a full NAS check would take way too much time.
A free antivirus provided by Synology based on ClamAV, and a paid one by McAfee. Both are optional to install. I installed the ClamAV one.
After all, the Synology is, at its core, a Linux Box connected to the net, and therefore suceptible to viruses and worms. Granted, less susceptible than, let's say, a windows box, but susceptible nonetheless. So, an antivirus is a nice addition to the defense in depth*, multiple layers of defense, whathaveyou.
The Samsung TV is, at its core, a box running a Linux/BSD core (Bada, which is what samsung uses, can use either) connected to the net, so it should use an Antivirus. Defense in depth, multiple layers of defense and all that...
Having it Pre-Installed is a way to simplify things for less sophisticated users, and (sadly) monetize them post sale as well.
Let alone the publicity for McAfee: my SmartTV uses McAfee antivirus, when time comes to chose an antivirus for my new PC/company/small business, may use McAfee as well (or so goes the thinking of the marketeers).
JM2C
* Some of the defenses for my Syno are, in no particular order: 1.) Use 9.9.9.9 as the DNS of the Syno. 2.) Activate the FW on the Ingress Router of NW. 3.) Activate SW Firewall on the Syno itself. 4.) Keep Syno Updated on Patches. Also patch syno packages. 5.) Run AV on Syno. 6.) Periodicaly run Security Advisor on Syno. 7.) Disable SMB 1 on Syno. 8.) Secure the WiFi network as much as possible.
Yes, I know Windows used to come out for multiple architectures, but that hadn't happened since when, Windows NT 4?
The WindowsNT family has always supported multiple architectures in their current builds. Some people (me included) may say that X86 and AMD64 are different enough to be considered different architectures...
But, let's go with the conventional wisdom and count x86+AMD64 as a single architecture.
Pre-windows2000, there was support for x86, Alpha, MIPS and PPC.
In windows2000 they stopped supporting PPC and MIPS (early betas had PPC and MIPS support). There was a Win2000 port for Alpha that got Axed by DEC shortly after release. Also in Windows 2000 there was the port of NT server for Itanum (last windows to support Itanium was server 2008R2, released on 2009, with no end of support in sight).
As you clearly note, PowerPC was a supported architecture From NT 3.1 all the way to the Xbox360 (mantained until 2016).
2012 brought Windows Phone 8 and windows RT supporting ARM, support which continues to this day.
So, NT never has stopped supporting multiple architectures. But right now, the current builds support X86/AMD64 and ARM only.
Switchchar was the eviroment variable for DR-DOS. In MS-DOS the procedure was different, but the idea was the same. Do not feel bad though. I can't remember how it was done in DOS either, It has been a looong time.
Once you read the whole quote in TFS it makes sense.
The West is North America (USoA, CAN) and Europe. the east is Asia (please bear in mind that Russia strands europe and Asia), and perhaps a tad of the Arabic countries.
the north is again NA and EU, while the south is South America and Africa. Oceania (Oz, NZ) are another matter.
disclaimer: Used to work for Huawei in my home country, the chinese smetimes have a poetic way to speak... Specially when threatening/threatened.
Many linux users do care. Those that use Linux at home (or used it at a previous job, or learned it in the university), and would like to use linux at work, but their company policy forbids it. Also, may, many, windows users care about it too...
There are a bunch of reasons to use this WSL thing. But before we get to those reasons, let's clarify something. If someone is already happyly using Linux, WSL will not make them go back to Windows. WSL is targeted to people who must use windows, or want to use Windows, for most of their tasks. After all, if most of your SW was in linux, and your company allowed you to run linux, you would be running Linux on the bare metal, and would be dualbooting windows (for gaming), and running windows in a VM from the raw partition (for other SW) like I do on my MAC (with macOS instead of linux, but you get the idea).
Many of the reasons for WSL were articulated elsewere in the thread, but I'll recap and add some of my own:
1.) Reiterating, for whatever reason you must run Windows (company policy, most of your SW is in Windows, you are more familiar with windows, etc), yet you need some specific linux things for whatever reason*.
2.) Your machine can not run a VMM because: 2.a) Your machine is low on resources to run a VM. Not unheard of in corporate, even for technical people. 2.b) Your processor does not support VM acceleration, which leads you to low performance, which leads you to 1.a). 2.c) The manufacturer of said machine disabled HW VM Acceleration in the BIOS/UEFI, which again leads to 1.a) 2.d) Your company's policy does not allow you to run the VM SW, or the company policy disables the VM acceleration in the firmware (or both).
3.) You do not know or care to learn how to set up a VMM (Virtual Machine Monitor, ex. WMware Player, VirtualBox, etc). *
4.) You do not know how or do not want the hassle to create the VM and install a distro from scratch. Nor the pain of configuring USB passthroughs, shared folders, shared clipboards and whathaveyou. *
5.) You do not want to learn the ins and outs of alternatives like Cygwin* (or you are forbiden to run it as per company policy)
Now, what are the advantages of using WSL:
i.) Is right there on windows, so all previous 5 points are solved in one fell swoop.
ii.) If you want to do some shell script or use some SW (say, ssh) that for whatever reason is easier for you on *nix than on powershell, is right there.
iii.) If there is a piece of SW that you need to use that is linux only (say, as some poster indicated, toolchains for enbeded SW development), is right there.
iv.) All pheripherals are integrated. So no USB/PCI passthough, or weird interactions because of the VM drivers, or GuestAdditions to install.
v.) Performance is better than in a VM, for both the Windows side and the Linux side.
vi.) If you are a windows user who wants to learn or experiment with the comand line side of linux, is a good place to start.
vii.) If there is some linux thing you need to test, perhaps you can test it here.
viii.) If there is something you need to develop, and your IDE runs here, you can develop it here.
JM2C YMMV
* Believe it or not, some very smart and technically inclined people do not like to endlessly fiddle with computers as an end to itself, for them the computer is a tool to do a job, and the idea is to do the job through the path of less ressistance.
I used to fiddle a lot in my young age, CP/M, Apple DOS, C64, MS-DOS, Windows, OS/2, FreeBSD, Linux, and in my Sysadmin days, Solaris, HP-UX, Linux, Windows, Sinix, VMS to name a few. But, nowadays I value other things in my life. My confort included. The liberty to fiddle when I want to , instead of being forced to fiddle because something goes wrong. So macOS it is, with VMs for windows, Khali, Tails and #!++ and Bootcamp for games... Nice GUI on the outside, commercial SW aplenty (word, excel, and powerpoint are very usefull when interacting with corporate clients), BSD-ish guts, well integrated HW/OS/Kexts. The only thing to complain about is the price of the combo, but that is why I worked hard, to be able to afford some luxuries. (Before you ask, android cellphone, no tablet).
My bigger question is: "wait, linux files were visible to windows programs, but accessing them could cause corruption? WHY WAS THIS EVER A THING???". This seems like a terrible implementation.[...]
In reality, by default, you were supposed to see the files read only. Just like in a mac with bootcamp, were from the macOS side you can see the NTFS files read only, and from the Windows side, you could se the HFS+ files read only. If you bypased the protections (say, by installing FUSE on macOS, or, in this case, fumbling with the WSL configuration) and got RW access, corruption could ensure.
For Ctrl+c for copy, you should blame Xerox P.A.R.C., not Microsoft. Actually, microsoft follows convention. In the GUI ctrl+c is for copy, while Ctrl+c in comand line is interrupt, just like in *nix. So, no "deliberate incompatibility"
About c:\folder\subfolder, you should ask the CP/M guys. You see, they used the / for parameter passing, so when MSoft decided to support folders in MS-DOS 2.0 onwards, the character was already in use. Actually, if memory serves well, there was an obscure command in early MS-DOS to change the path separator to / . Since no one used it, it was retired without much fanfare. So no "deliberate incompatibility here". As a matter of fact, at that time MSoft was selling a unix (called Xenix) and, if anything, they wanted MS-DOS and Xenix to converge, that's why they included the aforementioned obscure command.
About the line endings, as some other comentator indicated, using CR+LF together meant that you could copy a plain text file to the printer directly without further conversion. And also, dos (and windows latter), mac and *nix all had differnt ways of skinning that particular cat. And do not even ask about the complications of line separation in VMS, you will not believe it!!!. So, no "deliberte incompatibility" here.
If you want examples of deliberate incompatibility, better check your history books for things like running Windows 3.x on DR-DOS, or running lotus 123 on early versions of Windows, that sort of thing, but, the three examples you choose, don't quite cut it.
Due to a problem in the left shoulder (a small bone growth in the surface of the articulation which produces bursitis).
If I get the shoulder surgery, will this imprve my heart?
Sheeeesh, correlation is not causation.
As a matter of fact, quite likely, my bariatric surgery did more for my heart's health than 50 pushups a day would have ever done...
changes in your food mix and quantitities + periodic moderate excersice * (which are the two things you are FORCED to do after a bariatric surgery) will do more for you than 40+ pushups a day...
PS: I guess that pushups will also increase the volume of your thoaxic cavity, leading to better breathing, but my scuba diving has that area covered for me;-)
* Moderate excercise is, for example, walking at a brisk pace for 45 min every day
I mean: + Disney owns Marvel Studios. + Disney will become a competitor of Netflix launching their own streaming service (Disney+). + Disney is retiring a significant chunck of their catalogue from Netflix in preparation for said streaming service. + Diseny (due to their Fox Studios Acquisition) owns the majority (60%) of Hulu, another Netflix competitor.
I guess this may have something to do with said cancelations...
Slashdot Mirror
As sir edmund hilary said: "Because it was there".
Hackers like to hack.
Remember the demoscene, or doom runing on the touchbar, or linux on a toaster?
The guys doing this earn an inherent satisfaction of being able to "Just do it".
This comes to exemplify what whas obvious for anyone with a modicum of computing knowledge.
If/when the Mac goes to ARM, it would be trivialy easy, from the technical point of view, to develop a version of Windows for ARM for said Mac computers.
The complicated part will be to make the Three companies agree, Namely Apple (to develop ARM bootcamp and ARM Windows Drivers), Microsoft (to adapt the OS if needed), and Qualcomm (they may have some intelectual property on parts of this windows for ARM thing, especially the X86-32 emulation bits).
Other than that, easy peasy!
brunes69 mentioned IBM, while an AnonCW mentioned Amazon Outpost, and JustAnotherOldGuy mentioned Amazon's VPC for HIPPA use*. And some other comments, so let's Clarify.
IBM's cloud is based on VMware and Openstack, both of which I mentioned in my comment. Problem is, IBM's public cloud offering is so small, like a drop in (huuuuge) bucket.
Some cloud providers offer you a "Cloud on colocation" where the servers are used only for your workloads, but is still servers on colo with cloud software installed, not a private cloud. A VPC is even worse, as your private cloud is running on servers were other workloads from other tenants are running, just that the network addressing and other things make it seem like a private cloud to you. That qualifies even less as private or true hybrid cloud.
Amazon lets you have a very specific box in a very specifc configuration for a very specific subset of workloads on premises. That's Amazon Outpost, and that can hardly be called a true hybrid cloud, let alone a private cloud.
The thing is, the Openstack public cloud market is highly fragmented, and OpenStack is a beast to set up and administer in your Datacenter (I shall know, I am technical trainer for OpenStack in the telco space), and the different parts of that Voltron are not cohesive enough.
Meanwhile Microsoft's Azure is the second largestpublic cloud in the market. And believe it or not, if you do not want public Azure cloud directly from microsoft (say, because you do not want to or can not deal directly with an american corporation), you can get it from telcos and partners. And if you get it in your private datacenter, you will find that the pieces are more cohesive and easier to administer than Openstack (but all of them still way behind of VMware, dare I say, the gold standard).
In the public cloud, the three biggest players are Amazon, Microsoft and Google (in that order). All the others are dwarfs in comparison (IBM included). The technologies that underpin those clouds are whatever propiertary stuff Amazon did to Xen (and moving away from xen), whatever stuff google is using, and Azure. Then you have a lot of small fish using Openstack (with KVM), Oracle (another small fish) using Xen, VMware doing deals with players big and small all over the place but reamining a small fish in the public cloud stakes nonetheless.
As I said, Amazon lets you have a very specific box in a very specifc configuration for a very specific subset of workloads on premises. Also gives you a VPC, or even a "Colocloud". So does IBM. But that does not qualify as private cloud or true hybrid cloud.
Google gives you nothing on premises. But of course they offer you a VPC.
Oracle hangs on in cloud because of predatory pricing if you run their software on other clouds, public or private.
Only Microsoft and openstack can claim a large public cloud presence (big in the case of microsoft, in the case of openstack, a really large shoaling of small fish) coupled with the posibilities of running your cloud on premises or true hybrid).
* for OldGuy: I am not a lawyer, and probably you are not one either. But your company's tech dept. should double check with your company's legal dept. if getting your HIPPA stuff in AWS (be it in public, colo cloud or VPC) is legal or not. The tech team probably checked before the project got started, but is good to re-check regularly. I know amazon is lobbying extensively for it to be legal, and I am a big proponent of cloud in general and public cloud in particular. But laws are somethinmes weird for us engineers, and maybe, just maybe, some of that HIPPA stuff shall not be in a VPC or Colo cloud. Also, laws change from time to time, and people (even lawyers) make mistakes. With things like HIPPA, sarbanes-oaxley and financial info, is best to err on the side of caution from the legal point of view. I hope is all legal and no changes are needed. JM2C, YMMV.
That would just be your servers on your premises in your intranet.
The whole (retarded) point of "cloud" services is, that you don't know where you data physically is and who has access or control over it. ("Amazon"? Yeah, but /who/ "at" Amazon?)
There is more to a cloud than just having servers in someonelse's datacenter.
You can have your servers in your premises and even use virtualization, and yet not have a private cloud in your premises, for instance:
Are your workloads in your servers in your premises elastic? Automaticaly? No? Then you do not have a private cloud...
Can you move an internal workload from server to server in your premises? No? Then you do not have a private cloud...
Can the project leaders inside your organization self-serve a virtual server automaticaly? No? Then you do not have a private cloud?
Is your internal datacenter scalable? No? Then you do not have a private clud.
Are you treating your internal workloads as pets instead of catle? No? Then you do not have a private cloud...
I think you should be able to get the drift from here.
You should check AWS outpost out
I KNOW about AWS outpost. That's the 0.05% I was talking about.
Microsoft's Azure Cloud offerings can be used Public, Private and true hybrid cloud types. Unlike amazon, which is 99.9% public cloud at the moment. And google, which is 100% public cloud.
Which means that, as your strategy shifts, you can go from Public cloud to hybrid clud to private clud with the same software stack.
Many companies are afraid of cloud technologies in general, and even more so about public clouds, and use this technology out of necesity, rather than desire. Other companies like the cloud, but would be deligthed to get everything inhouse if, for examle, what started up as a small project, grows so large that is cost-effective to do so (think DropBox).
While is true that there are SW layers that let you deploy in a "Cloud stack agnostic" fashion, those add a layer of complexity, appeal to the lowest common denominator, and show a technological lag.
Realisticaly, only Azure and OpenStack* can claim an uniform software stack between public cloud, private cloud and true hybrid cloud...
* There are others, like VMware, but their public cloud offering is marginal at best.
If you take a "Modern" song, and try to put it in Vinyl, the moder equalization would make the needle jump out of the record. This is termed "Loudness Wars", and was made possible by the introduction of Digital Music (CD, DCC, MiniDisk, etc).
If the song you want was released in Vinyl AND the same mix was used for Vinyl, CD and digital download, you can feel free to get it in the media most convenient to you.
If, on the other hand, there are different mixes dependeng on the media, go for Vinyl, you will not get the most acurate reproduction, and there may be noise, but at least, you will get a hell of a lot better dynamic range in your song.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/0...
Imagine you phonecall a company and say:
Send me a travelling Salesperson, please. Or a delivery service and say, please deliver a newspaper to my office.
They answer: "sure, but there are some conditions for that convenience, please, for the next 8 minutes listen carefully to them."
You do not listen, instead, put the phone on the table, set your watch to 7 minutes, and go brew a tea.
You return, and when the operator asks: "Do you agree to our terms?" You say "yes"
It turns out that the terms include the salesperson or deliveryperson staying in your office long after the transaction is concluded (you place your order or get your newspaper), taking notes of many of the things you do, correlating those notes with those of other delivery companies/salespeople/third parties and a long and creepy et cetera.
But hey, you neglected to hear the terms of their service, because those terms were boring, and instead you went for tea.
Having corrected the analogy used by dryriver, the correct question to ask slashdot is:
Are the terms of service used by most websites even legal?
Opera is Owned and run by a Chinese company. If you trust them, fine, but chinese ownership was a concern raised in the article.
I live in Venezuela, and for what is worth my choice is ProtonVPN
JM2C, YMMV
Nope, It also checks the Syno partition looking for Linux viruses. As a matter of fact, the default check is to check only the system partion every day, as a full NAS check would take way too much time.
Amyjojo already explained it.
You do know that ClamAV is intended to find Windows malware on Linux hosted email servers or samba shares? And that's it?
Nope, It also checks the Syno partition looking for Linux viruses. As a matter of fact, the default check is to check only the system partion every day, as a full NAS check would take way too much time.
Amyjojo already explained it.
Yup. They Offer two tiers.
A free antivirus provided by Synology based on ClamAV, and a paid one by McAfee. Both are optional to install. I installed the ClamAV one.
After all, the Synology is, at its core, a Linux Box connected to the net, and therefore suceptible to viruses and worms. Granted, less susceptible than, let's say, a windows box, but susceptible nonetheless. So, an antivirus is a nice addition to the defense in depth*, multiple layers of defense, whathaveyou.
The Samsung TV is, at its core, a box running a Linux/BSD core (Bada, which is what samsung uses, can use either) connected to the net, so it should use an Antivirus. Defense in depth, multiple layers of defense and all that...
Having it Pre-Installed is a way to simplify things for less sophisticated users, and (sadly) monetize them post sale as well.
Let alone the publicity for McAfee: my SmartTV uses McAfee antivirus, when time comes to chose an antivirus for my new PC/company/small business, may use McAfee as well (or so goes the thinking of the marketeers).
JM2C
* Some of the defenses for my Syno are, in no particular order:
1.) Use 9.9.9.9 as the DNS of the Syno.
2.) Activate the FW on the Ingress Router of NW.
3.) Activate SW Firewall on the Syno itself.
4.) Keep Syno Updated on Patches. Also patch syno packages.
5.) Run AV on Syno.
6.) Periodicaly run Security Advisor on Syno.
7.) Disable SMB 1 on Syno.
8.) Secure the WiFi network as much as possible.
Yes, I know Windows used to come out for multiple architectures, but that hadn't happened since when, Windows NT 4?
The WindowsNT family has always supported multiple architectures in their current builds. Some people (me included) may say that X86 and AMD64 are different enough to be considered different architectures...
But, let's go with the conventional wisdom and count x86+AMD64 as a single architecture.
Pre-windows2000, there was support for x86, Alpha, MIPS and PPC.
In windows2000 they stopped supporting PPC and MIPS (early betas had PPC and MIPS support). There was a Win2000 port for Alpha that got Axed by DEC shortly after release. Also in Windows 2000 there was the port of NT server for Itanum (last windows to support Itanium was server 2008R2, released on 2009, with no end of support in sight).
As you clearly note, PowerPC was a supported architecture From NT 3.1 all the way to the Xbox360 (mantained until 2016).
2012 brought Windows Phone 8 and windows RT supporting ARM, support which continues to this day.
So, NT never has stopped supporting multiple architectures. But right now, the current builds support X86/AMD64 and ARM only.
Until they begin making (micro)SD cards out of 3DxPoint, ReRam, Phase Changing RAM or Mermistors...
You see, the (micro)SD format is not tied to Flash, therefore, the need to future-proof the bus...
Nah, happy being a sysadmin, and scubadiving every now and then.
I took no offense.
At least not because of my health (or lack of it).
If anything, took offesnse at the silly "research". Hope those guys get an igNoble prize next year.
And risk looking like a chronical masturbator?! No way! ;-)
Switchchar was the eviroment variable for DR-DOS. In MS-DOS the procedure was different, but the idea was the same. Do not feel bad though. I can't remember how it was done in DOS either, It has been a looong time.
Once you read the whole quote in TFS it makes sense.
The West is North America (USoA, CAN) and Europe. the east is Asia (please bear in mind that Russia strands europe and Asia), and perhaps a tad of the Arabic countries.
the north is again NA and EU, while the south is South America and Africa. Oceania (Oz, NZ) are another matter.
disclaimer: Used to work for Huawei in my home country, the chinese smetimes have a poetic way to speak... Specially when threatening/threatened.
Many linux users do care. Those that use Linux at home (or used it at a previous job, or learned it in the university), and would like to use linux at work, but their company policy forbids it. Also, may, many, windows users care about it too...
There are a bunch of reasons to use this WSL thing. But before we get to those reasons, let's clarify something. If someone is already happyly using Linux, WSL will not make them go back to Windows. WSL is targeted to people who must use windows, or want to use Windows, for most of their tasks. After all, if most of your SW was in linux, and your company allowed you to run linux, you would be running Linux on the bare metal, and would be dualbooting windows (for gaming), and running windows in a VM from the raw partition (for other SW) like I do on my MAC (with macOS instead of linux, but you get the idea).
Many of the reasons for WSL were articulated elsewere in the thread, but I'll recap and add some of my own:
1.) Reiterating, for whatever reason you must run Windows (company policy, most of your SW is in Windows, you are more familiar with windows, etc), yet you need some specific linux things for whatever reason*.
2.) Your machine can not run a VMM because:
2.a) Your machine is low on resources to run a VM. Not unheard of in corporate, even for technical people.
2.b) Your processor does not support VM acceleration, which leads you to low performance, which leads you to 1.a).
2.c) The manufacturer of said machine disabled HW VM Acceleration in the BIOS/UEFI, which again leads to 1.a)
2.d) Your company's policy does not allow you to run the VM SW, or the company policy disables the VM acceleration in the firmware (or both).
3.) You do not know or care to learn how to set up a VMM (Virtual Machine Monitor, ex. WMware Player, VirtualBox, etc). *
4.) You do not know how or do not want the hassle to create the VM and install a distro from scratch. Nor the pain of configuring USB passthroughs, shared folders, shared clipboards and whathaveyou. *
5.) You do not want to learn the ins and outs of alternatives like Cygwin* (or you are forbiden to run it as per company policy)
Now, what are the advantages of using WSL:
i.) Is right there on windows, so all previous 5 points are solved in one fell swoop.
ii.) If you want to do some shell script or use some SW (say, ssh) that for whatever reason is easier for you on *nix than on powershell, is right there.
iii.) If there is a piece of SW that you need to use that is linux only (say, as some poster indicated, toolchains for enbeded SW development), is right there.
iv.) All pheripherals are integrated. So no USB/PCI passthough, or weird interactions because of the VM drivers, or GuestAdditions to install.
v.) Performance is better than in a VM, for both the Windows side and the Linux side.
vi.) If you are a windows user who wants to learn or experiment with the comand line side of linux, is a good place to start.
vii.) If there is some linux thing you need to test, perhaps you can test it here.
viii.) If there is something you need to develop, and your IDE runs here, you can develop it here.
JM2C YMMV
* Believe it or not, some very smart and technically inclined people do not like to endlessly fiddle with computers as an end to itself, for them the computer is a tool to do a job, and the idea is to do the job through the path of less ressistance.
I used to fiddle a lot in my young age, CP/M, Apple DOS, C64, MS-DOS, Windows, OS/2, FreeBSD, Linux, and in my Sysadmin days, Solaris, HP-UX, Linux, Windows, Sinix, VMS to name a few. But, nowadays I value other things in my life. My confort included. The liberty to fiddle when I want to , instead of being forced to fiddle because something goes wrong. So macOS it is, with VMs for windows, Khali, Tails and #!++ and Bootcamp for games... Nice GUI on the outside, commercial SW aplenty (word, excel, and powerpoint are very usefull when interacting with corporate clients), BSD-ish guts, well integrated HW/OS/Kexts. The only thing to complain about is the price of the combo, but that is why I worked hard, to be able to afford some luxuries. (Before you ask, android cellphone, no tablet).
[...]
My bigger question is: "wait, linux files were visible to windows programs, but accessing them could cause corruption? WHY WAS THIS EVER A THING???". This seems like a terrible implementation.[...]
In reality, by default, you were supposed to see the files read only. Just like in a mac with bootcamp, were from the macOS side you can see the NTFS files read only, and from the Windows side, you could se the HFS+ files read only. If you bypased the protections (say, by installing FUSE on macOS, or, in this case, fumbling with the WSL configuration) and got RW access, corruption could ensure.
This release seems to finally fix that.
For Ctrl+c for copy, you should blame Xerox P.A.R.C., not Microsoft. Actually, microsoft follows convention. In the GUI ctrl+c is for copy, while Ctrl+c in comand line is interrupt, just like in *nix. So, no "deliberate incompatibility"
About c:\folder\subfolder, you should ask the CP/M guys. You see, they used the / for parameter passing, so when MSoft decided to support folders in MS-DOS 2.0 onwards, the character was already in use. Actually, if memory serves well, there was an obscure command in early MS-DOS to change the path separator to / . Since no one used it, it was retired without much fanfare. So no "deliberate incompatibility here". As a matter of fact, at that time MSoft was selling a unix (called Xenix) and, if anything, they wanted MS-DOS and Xenix to converge, that's why they included the aforementioned obscure command.
About the line endings, as some other comentator indicated, using CR+LF together meant that you could copy a plain text file to the printer directly without further conversion. And also, dos (and windows latter), mac and *nix all had differnt ways of skinning that particular cat. And do not even ask about the complications of line separation in VMS, you will not believe it!!!. So, no "deliberte incompatibility" here.
If you want examples of deliberate incompatibility, better check your history books for things like running Windows 3.x on DR-DOS, or running lotus 123 on early versions of Windows, that sort of thing, but, the three examples you choose, don't quite cut it.
Due to a problem in the left shoulder (a small bone growth in the surface of the articulation which produces bursitis).
If I get the shoulder surgery, will this imprve my heart?
Sheeeesh, correlation is not causation.
As a matter of fact, quite likely, my bariatric surgery did more for my heart's health than 50 pushups a day would have ever done...
changes in your food mix and quantitities + periodic moderate excersice * (which are the two things you are FORCED to do after a bariatric surgery) will do more for you than 40+ pushups a day...
PS: I guess that pushups will also increase the volume of your thoaxic cavity, leading to better breathing, but my scuba diving has that area covered for me ;-)
* Moderate excercise is, for example, walking at a brisk pace for 45 min every day
or perhaps prolog...
I mean:
+ Disney owns Marvel Studios.
+ Disney will become a competitor of Netflix launching their own streaming service (Disney+).
+ Disney is retiring a significant chunck of their catalogue from Netflix in preparation for said streaming service.
+ Diseny (due to their Fox Studios Acquisition) owns the majority (60%) of Hulu, another Netflix competitor.
I guess this may have something to do with said cancelations...