My employer completed migration of apps to Linux - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on My employer completed migration of apps to Linux - Ubuntu ; In article , Maxwell Lol wrote: > Wanting to learn more about powershell, I went to the FAQ > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv....aspx?pf=true# > > I clicked on "How much will Windows PowerShell cost?" > > and it refused to answer. (It just ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 250

Thread: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

  1. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    In article <87iqr6cmit.fsf@com.invalid>,
    Maxwell Lol wrote:
    > Wanting to learn more about powershell, I went to the FAQ
    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv....aspx?pf=true#
    >
    > I clicked on "How much will Windows PowerShell cost?"
    >
    > and it refused to answer. (It just pointed me to
    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...faq.aspx?pf=tr
    > ue#
    > again. Clicking on "View all answers" doesn't help. )
    >
    > I'm using Firefox on Linux.


    Works fine in Firefox on Mac.

    It doesn't work in Safari on Mac, though, with the URL you gave. Take
    off the ?pf=true#, and then it works fine in Safari on Mac.

    On my Ubunutu 6.06LTS system, with whatever Firefox comes with that
    (with all updates installed), the behavior is the same as Safari on Mac:
    fails with the URL you gave, works if the ?pf=true# is removed.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  2. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "Erik Hahn" wrote in message
    news:87k1u5-vdu.ln1@a-b.bplaced.net...

    > Just look in C:\Windows\sources ... wait ... how should someone find a
    > hidden backdoor without the source code?


    The same way as you do if you think you have the source.
    It has already been shown that it is possible to hide stuff in OSS by
    modifying the compiler so I hope you disassemble your compiler and check it
    isn't hiding backdoors in everything you compile.


  3. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    "Peter Köhlmann" stated in post
    490dea03$0$31862$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net on 11/2/08 10:57 AM:

    > Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, dennis@home belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>> news:8SiPk.56808$bx1.52267@bignews1.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>
    >>>> Yeah, but why bother running OSS on Windows?
    >>>
    >>> Why not?
    >>> There is a lot of OSS out there and most of it runs fine on vista.

    >>
    >> Because it works better on Linux.
    >>
    >> Trust me.
    >>

    >
    > Apart from the fact that not "most OSS" runs fine on windows (I seriously
    > doubt that *anything* runs fine on Vista). OSS running fine on windows is
    > for the most part *not* of the GUI type. Only the very best GUI apps are
    > ported to windows, since until relativly few years ago it was quite some
    > work to have a GUI app running on windows and X.


    Why do you think only the very best GUI apps are ported? Why not port the
    apps that are lacking, in your view? And which apps are these - the not
    "very best GUI apps"?

    > So, most "fine on windows working OSS" is not GUI. And far from being "most
    > OSS". I guess it is not even half of it




    --
    Picture of a tuna soda: http://snipurl.com/f351
    Feel free to ask for the recipe.




  4. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "Jim Moss" wrote in message
    > news:rPKdnWg72tGJkpPUnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@supernews.co m...
    >> On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:59:21 +0000, dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>> news:8SiPk.56808$bx1.52267@bignews1.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Yeah, but why bother running OSS on Windows?
    >>>
    >>> Why not?
    >>> There is a lot of OSS out there and most of it runs fine on vista.

    >>
    >> So do viruses, trojans,

    >
    > They also run on linux despite what you may think.


    Feel free to name any virus in the wild

    > DRM,
    >
    > Ah yes the lack of the stuff stops linux from playing things like hi def
    > downloads on the bbc.


    If absolutely needed, linux will have DRM
    I think that instead DRM will vanish

    >> WGA,

    >
    > A waste of time.


    Yes. A typical MS "innovation"

    >> and probably more than a few Microsoft
    >> and US government back doors.

    >
    > Care to name any?
    > I bet there are lots of people looking for them but no one has found them
    > yet.


    Thats the point, isn't it?
    --
    I just found out that the brain is like a computer.
    If that's true, then there really aren't any stupid people.
    Just people running Windows.


  5. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    > news:JgnPk.60339$De7.52072@bignews7.bellsouth.net. ..
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, dennis@home belched out
    >>>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Yeah, but why bother running OSS on Windows?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Why not?
    >>>>> There is a lot of OSS out there and most of it runs fine on vista.
    >>>>
    >>>> Because it works better on Linux.
    >>>>
    >>>> Trust me.
    >>>
    >>> Apart from the fact that not "most OSS" runs fine on windows (I
    >>> seriously doubt that *anything* runs fine on Vista). OSS running fine on
    >>> windows is for the most part *not* of the GUI type. Only the very best
    >>> GUI apps are ported to windows, since until relativly few years ago it
    >>> was quite some work to have a GUI app running on windows and X.

    >>
    >> Well, cygwin helps a lot with that.
    >>
    >>> So, most "fine on windows working OSS" is not GUI. And far from being
    >>> "most
    >>> OSS". I guess it is not even half of it

    >>
    >> It would be interested to see some numbers.

    >
    > You won't get them from kolman.


    What part of "I guess it is..." needs more explanation, MD5-dennis?

    > He has already altered the quotes to suit his trolling in case you failed
    > to notice.


    Feel free to prove that lie, imbecile

    > It started as most of the *good* OOS runs on windows but that doesn't suit
    > his trolling.


    With you defining the "good OSS", naturally.

    --
    Another name for a Windows tutorial is crash course


  6. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "Erik Hahn" wrote in message
    > news:87k1u5-vdu.ln1@a-b.bplaced.net...
    >
    >> Just look in C:\Windows\sources ... wait ... how should someone find a
    >> hidden backdoor without the source code?

    >
    > The same way as you do if you think you have the source.
    > It has already been shown that it is possible to hide stuff in OSS by
    > modifying the compiler so I hope you disassemble your compiler and check
    > it isn't hiding backdoors in everything you compile.


    No, it hasn't been "shown".
    It was a theoretical thinking, which has never been attempted in reality

    And even *if* it were possible, it is several magnitudes more difficult than
    hiding backdoors in windows
    --
    What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth? Judging from realistic
    simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog,
    we can assume it will be pretty bad. --- Dave Barry


  7. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "PeterKöhlmann" wrote in message
    news:490e3324$0$32682$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net...
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "Erik Hahn" wrote in message
    >> news:87k1u5-vdu.ln1@a-b.bplaced.net...
    >>
    >>> Just look in C:\Windows\sources ... wait ... how should someone find a
    >>> hidden backdoor without the source code?

    >>
    >> The same way as you do if you think you have the source.
    >> It has already been shown that it is possible to hide stuff in OSS by
    >> modifying the compiler so I hope you disassemble your compiler and check
    >> it isn't hiding backdoors in everything you compile.

    >
    > No, it hasn't been "shown".
    > It was a theoretical thinking, which has never been attempted in reality
    >
    > And even *if* it were possible, it is several magnitudes more difficult
    > than
    > hiding backdoors in windows


    Why do you always appear here and try to be more stupid than the last time
    you posted?
    It is quite possible using the method described and *you* have no idea if it
    has been done.

    Also it doesn't make any difference at all how difficult it is to do on
    windows, you still have to find it the same way, having the sources doesn't
    help at all.




  8. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 00:09:24 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "Erik Hahn" wrote in message
    >> news:87k1u5-vdu.ln1@a-b.bplaced.net...
    >>
    >>> Just look in C:\Windows\sources ... wait ... how should someone find a
    >>> hidden backdoor without the source code?

    >>
    >> The same way as you do if you think you have the source.
    >> It has already been shown that it is possible to hide stuff in OSS by
    >> modifying the compiler so I hope you disassemble your compiler and check
    >> it isn't hiding backdoors in everything you compile.

    >
    > No, it hasn't been "shown".
    > It was a theoretical thinking, which has never been attempted in reality


    Not true.

    http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.f...1-thompson.pdf

    "The actual bug I planted in the compiler would match code in the UNIX
    "login" command. The replacement code would miscompile the login commnd so
    that it would accept either the intended encrypted password or a particular
    known password."

    > And even *if* it were possible, it is several magnitudes more difficult than
    > hiding backdoors in windows


    Depends. If it's made into a script, even a kiddie can do it.

  9. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    > The truth is that Linux is a great server, but struggles as a dektop due
    > to lack of apps.


    Wrong! There are just as many apps for Linux as there are for Windows.

    > Windows is the other way round, mediocre desktop, but preferred cos all
    > the apps do run on it. Lousy as a server. Which it was never designed to
    > be. really, despite all the NT bollocks.


    Lousy, unstable, insecure, expensive... All the bad "features" of Windows.
    IIS - "which security flaw would like to exploit today?"

    There is no longer any reason to "run" Windoze on /anything/ at all. MS
    haven't released anything truly new since Windoze 2000, despite wasting the
    GDP of a large country on "development".

    C.

  10. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Erik Hahn wrote:

    > Just look in C:\Windows\sources ... wait ... how should someone find a
    > hidden backdoor without the source code?


    8-) MD5 Dennis will claim that the "black helicopters" are on their way for
    you!

    You *can* be certain that all MS "operating systems" include "facilities" for
    the NSA (or whatever they're called this week).

    C.


  11. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "Erik Hahn" wrote in message
    >> news:87k1u5-vdu.ln1@a-b.bplaced.net...
    >>
    >>> Just look in C:\Windows\sources ... wait ... how should someone find a
    >>> hidden backdoor without the source code?

    >>
    >> The same way as you do if you think you have the source.
    >> It has already been shown that it is possible to hide stuff in OSS by
    >> modifying the compiler so I hope you disassemble your compiler and check
    >> it isn't hiding backdoors in everything you compile.

    >
    > No, it hasn't been "shown".
    > It was a theoretical thinking, which has never been attempted in reality
    >
    > And even *if* it were possible, it is several magnitudes more difficult than
    > hiding backdoors in windows


    Also, it'd be caught by the changed MD5 sum... 8-;

    C.

  12. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Peter Köhlmann writes:

    >> The same way as you do if you think you have the source.
    >> It has already been shown that it is possible to hide stuff in OSS by
    >> modifying the compiler so I hope you disassemble your compiler and check
    >> it isn't hiding backdoors in everything you compile.

    >
    > No, it hasn't been "shown".


    So you are saying Ken Thompson is a liar?

  13. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 23:46:04 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >
    >>
    >> "Jim Moss" wrote in message
    >> news:rPKdnWg72tGJkpPUnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@supernews.co m...
    >>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:59:21 +0000, dennis@home wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>> news:8SiPk.56808$bx1.52267@bignews1.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> Yeah, but why bother running OSS on Windows?
    >>>>
    >>>> Why not?
    >>>> There is a lot of OSS out there and most of it runs fine on vista.
    >>>
    >>> So do viruses, trojans,

    >>
    >> They also run on linux despite what you may think.

    >
    > Feel free to name any virus in the wild


    Well, I did once have a Linux system that was infected by
    Windows. Fortunately, it was unable to escape the VM.

    >
    >> DRM,
    >>
    >> Ah yes the lack of the stuff stops linux from playing things like hi
    >> def downloads on the bbc.


    It also stops Windows users from enjoying fair use of their media, their
    games and applications, and even their OS. That's a lot to give up just
    to tie up your broadband connection watching something on a puny little
    computer screen that's standard fare on basic cable TV.

    > If absolutely needed, linux will have DRM I think that instead DRM will
    > vanish


    DRM isn't going to vanish, because it does have valid uses for securing
    personal and business data. However, OSS developers are adamant that DRM
    as implemented on Linux must serve users rather than enslaving them to
    media and software vendors. The planned system will therefore include
    overrides that will allow the system administrator full access to DRMed
    files.

  14. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On 2008-11-02, John Kloosterman wrote:
    > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:30:49 -0500, Ignoramus27079 wrote:
    >>
    >> Interesting. You seem to live up to your name. See below:
    >>

    > [snipped a lot of crap]
    >
    > Dot't you get it in your thick scull?
    >
    > He Likes Linux and don't want to use Windows. Thats it!
    > Nothing more, nothing less.


    Yes, there is something more, which is that Linux works much better.

    > Why does he have to defend his choice as Linux is obviously
    > working for him? Is it a crime not to use windows?
    >
    > It looks to me like you are trying to say that...
    >
    > Seems to me like you are a arrogant (and maybe paid?)
    > windows user trying to bash a Linux user for his (also in my
    > opinion) good choice. Now - go home to your beloved Richmond
    > an go play with the other brainless guys over there...


    I think that, as things stand, we do not have a viable option to go
    back to Windows.
    --
    Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
    to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
    from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
    more readers you will need to find a different means of
    posting on Usenet.
    http://improve-usenet.org/

  15. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Microsoft itself admits that Linux people make 15-20% more. (see their
    total cost f ownership study). Thus, retraining from Windows to Linux
    makes plain common sense, especially during the current economic
    collapse. After all, any company would rather use free software than
    pay big bucks for non-free software and go bankrupt due to that.

    i

  16. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On 2008-11-02, Maxwell Lol wrote:
    > Erik Funkenbusch writes:
    >
    >> Also utter BS. The single most advanced scripting environment available
    >> for general purpose computers is PowerShell. It blows the doors of any
    >> other scripting environment out there.

    >
    > Wanting to learn more about powershell, I went to the FAQ
    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv....aspx?pf=true#
    >
    > I clicked on "How much will Windows PowerShell cost?"
    >
    > and it refused to answer. (It just pointed me to
    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv....aspx?pf=true#
    > again. Clicking on "View all answers" doesn't help. )
    >
    > I'm using Firefox on Linux.


    Does not seem to work, indeed.

    >> Sounds more like you're either ignorant (thus your name) or lying or maybe
    >> both.

    >
    > Perhaps it's a conspiracy by Microsoft to keep us Linux people
    > ignorant . :-)


    Maybe they conspired to look like incompetent web designers.

    --
    Due to extreme spam originating from Google Groups, and their inattention
    to spammers, I and many others block all articles originating
    from Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by
    more readers you will need to find a different means of
    posting on Usenet.
    http://improve-usenet.org/

  17. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux


    Another thing about this PowerShell is that it is some sort of a
    newfangled, experimental thing from Microsoft. It is not even a part
    of Windows yet. So they can discontinue it at any time like they did
    with other products. They can also choose to charge a license fee for
    it.

    There is no source code for it and, therefore, it is risky to
    use. Conversely, bash and perl are free and are maintained in a
    reliable fashion (meaning that they will not be "discontinued").

    i

  18. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message
    news:6n6uirFk05ktU1@mid.individual.net...
    > Erik Hahn wrote:
    >
    >> Just look in C:\Windows\sources ... wait ... how should someone find a
    >> hidden backdoor without the source code?

    >
    > 8-) MD5 Dennis will claim that the "black helicopters" are on their way
    > for
    > you!
    >
    > You *can* be certain that all MS "operating systems" include "facilities"
    > for
    > the NSA (or whatever they're called this week).


    So show one then!
    You just keep chuntering away and making stuff up, no sensible person
    believes a word you say.




  19. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "Jim Moss" wrote in message
    news:_pidnRHFHuHPzJPUnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@supernews.co m...
    > On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 23:46:04 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "Jim Moss" wrote in message
    >>> news:rPKdnWg72tGJkpPUnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@supernews.co m...
    >>>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:59:21 +0000, dennis@home wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>> news:8SiPk.56808$bx1.52267@bignews1.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Yeah, but why bother running OSS on Windows?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Why not?
    >>>>> There is a lot of OSS out there and most of it runs fine on vista.
    >>>>
    >>>> So do viruses, trojans,
    >>>
    >>> They also run on linux despite what you may think.

    >>
    >> Feel free to name any virus in the wild

    >
    > Well, I did once have a Linux system that was infected by
    > Windows. Fortunately, it was unable to escape the VM.
    >
    >>
    >>> DRM,
    >>>
    >>> Ah yes the lack of the stuff stops linux from playing things like hi
    >>> def downloads on the bbc.

    >
    > It also stops Windows users from enjoying fair use of their media, their
    > games and applications, and even their OS. That's a lot to give up just
    > to tie up your broadband connection watching something on a puny little
    > computer screen that's standard fare on basic cable TV.


    Generally speaking it doesn't.
    If you can get DRM free stuff it is DRM free on windows too.
    It doesn't stop you copying CD/DVD, recording TV, etc.

    It does allow you to access the stuff that needs DRM like iTunes and other
    download services (bbc iplayer and sky tv being two I use a lot).

    >
    >> If absolutely needed, linux will have DRM I think that instead DRM will
    >> vanish

    >
    > DRM isn't going to vanish, because it does have valid uses for securing
    > personal and business data. However, OSS developers are adamant that DRM
    > as implemented on Linux must serve users rather than enslaving them to
    > media and software vendors. The planned system will therefore include
    > overrides that will allow the system administrator full access to DRMed
    > files.


    Which will stop them being of any use to linux users who want access to
    DRMed material on download services. Unless the administrator is the *owner
    of the material* and not the machine. Then it will be the same as
    windows/Mac DRM.


  20. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Christopher Hunter wrote:
    > The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    >
    >> The truth is that Linux is a great server, but struggles as a dektop due
    >> to lack of apps.

    >
    > Wrong! There are just as many apps for Linux as there are for Windows.
    >
    >> Windows is the other way round, mediocre desktop, but preferred cos all
    >> the apps do run on it. Lousy as a server. Which it was never designed to
    >> be. really, despite all the NT bollocks.

    >
    > Lousy, unstable, insecure, expensive... All the bad "features" of Windows.
    > IIS - "which security flaw would like to exploit today?"
    >
    > There is no longer any reason to "run" Windoze on /anything/ at all. MS
    > haven't released anything truly new since Windoze 2000, despite wasting the
    > GDP of a large country on "development".
    >
    > C.

    There is a very good reason to run windows. Because the program, you
    need to USE (remember USING a computer rather than pratting about with
    it) doesn't run on anything ELSE.


    Its the only real reason I have, but sadly, its a good one.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast