Can I say "thank you" about his point on reusable code? Re-editable code as he puts it is far more useful.
Witness in puppet: their 'go to' module for example purposes is for ntp. Yet, last I looked, their ntp module contained a couple thousand lines of complex puppet logic to handle every configuration option under the sun. In making a meta configuration language, they have made a hydra of maintain-ability, in the name of re usability.
Far better in my view is a straightforward example that interested parties can take and tweak to their needs. Some need an iteratable list of ntp servers, some need a local clock skew.
Almost all ntp server environments can get by with a 20-30 line config file. Don't maintain a thousand+ line monster to maintain it in a reusable manner.
And now up the complexity to, say, tomcat. How complex would a fully flexible tomcat module have to be? Now do the same for Nginx. It's a pipe dream of combinatorial explosion.
Since most clients are supposed to work through a specified resolver rather than run their own, the easy block is to deny port 53 to non approved resolver hosts. Probably a good idea anyway in a secure environment, since it can potentially avoid cache poisoning if DNSSEC is setup right.
You can use the approved resolver. Just set up a DNS record delegating some subdomain to the fake DNS server, and then any unsuspecting resolver will work for you, sending the request upstream to the authoritative nameserver.
I call bs. I'm certain there will be a large scale problem with XP. However, that won't run in the reputation of MS, but rather the company still using it.
Right? I don't get the mindset of Microsoft having to support an antiquated product line over a decade past its expiration date because a few business IT customers are incompetent at writing client software and keeping their systems up to date. It's not like all of this is coming out from nowhere.
How would you feel about someone putting their equipment on your private network? What if the equipment they install is low quality? who gets the blame? Who is in charge of QOS?
I'm typing now on a u6430 running ubuntu 13.04, and it runs great.
Three challenges:
1) On a busy wifi, I have some challenges with connection drops, but I haven't determined if that's a driver issue, or a chip issue. The connection drops are mostly after several minutes of idle network connections. (Now that I think about it, its probably driver, since rmmod/modprobe the wireless modules fixes things)
2) The thumbprint reader doesn't work out of the box, but honestly, I'd rather type a password.
3) When I try to use a usb3 'docking station', it works. However I find that I need to rmmod the usb3 module, and then modprobe it again to get it back to life after ~10 undock/redock operations. After about ~20-30 undock/redocks I find I need to reboot.
Dell makes a nice bit of coin (2+bil in profit last quarter according to google), mostly from the enterprise stuff, hence the kerfuffle over 3Par 2 years ago.
What I don't get is why they're submitting to a leveraged buyout.
It's Michael Dell that's trying to bring the company private. It's hardly submitting to a leveraged buyout when it's the founder and CEO (who still owns ~ 12% of the company) leading the effort.
(that said, I do see the utility, since it gives a more obvious visual queue as to the order of size differences... but if you're doing anything with the sizes programatically, you have to remove the commas afterwards... Short version: if you're going to do this, make it a unique flag, or a new flag modifier to the -l flag... don't overload the -l flag without recourse...)
GOW seems to be more focused on a userland environment, whereas mingw is focused on enabling developers to link against unix libraries in a windows environment. Sure there's msggrep, and msgfilter as userland in mingw, but GOW gives you direct access to 'ls', 'gfind', 'grep', etc, and doesn't care a fig about giving access to libz.
Personally, I think Gow is awesome. The few times that I need power unix stuff, it's been just there, and it just works. That's the most important thing.
For me, it's worth the 'price' of admission, just to get a usable instance of 'gfind', and avoiding the cognitive dissonance of typing 'ls' and not getting useful info.
Witness in puppet: their 'go to' module for example purposes is for ntp. Yet, last I looked, their ntp module contained a couple thousand lines of complex puppet logic to handle every configuration option under the sun. In making a meta configuration language, they have made a hydra of maintain-ability, in the name of re usability.
Far better in my view is a straightforward example that interested parties can take and tweak to their needs. Some need an iteratable list of ntp servers, some need a local clock skew.
Almost all ntp server environments can get by with a 20-30 line config file. Don't maintain a thousand+ line monster to maintain it in a reusable manner.
And now up the complexity to, say, tomcat. How complex would a fully flexible tomcat module have to be? Now do the same for Nginx. It's a pipe dream of combinatorial explosion.