OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ? - VMS

This is a discussion on OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ? - VMS ; In article , JF Mezei wrote: > John Wallace wrote: > > There are many factors come into this decision, and you have said very > > little about which of them may be important to you. Despite this, there ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 44

Thread: OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

  1. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article ,
    JF Mezei wrote:

    > John Wallace wrote:
    > > There are many factors come into this decision, and you have said very
    > > little about which of them may be important to you. Despite this, there have
    > > been many helpful replies, and I'd like to add my 2p:

    >
    > I purposefully did not write what type of usage/apps I would want in
    > order to get a more comprehensive set of responses from you guys (and
    > they have been good so far).
    >
    > I've had a MAC since the fall of 1986. However, OS-X has very little in
    > common with the classic OS, other than essentially being able to run an
    > instance of OS-9 as an application. The Unix underpinnings make it
    > interesting as a learning exercise, and that puts it in an equal footing
    > with Linux.
    >
    > However, Linux appears to be a better carreer choice, even though the
    > OS-X server, on paper (or rather on Apple's web site:-) appears to be
    > much better packaged and fully loaded with what you need.
    >
    > Looking at all the advancements made by Apple, it makes VMS very very
    > pale in comparison. Lets be brutally honest here, what we have to look
    > forward to with VMS is essentially upgrades to support whatever hardware
    > HP wants to sell.
    >
    > Both OS-X and Linux are growing, so either is better than VMS since HP
    > is perfectly happy with the current pace of VMS shrinkage. OS-X appears
    > to be better quality, but Linux seems to be more popular.
    >
    > Going from VMS to OS-X would be moving from underdog to underdog, but
    > maintaining higher standards of quality. Going to Linux would be moving
    > to a winner but lowering standards somewhat.
    >
    > Thing is that OS-X may still be seen as underdog in the server market,
    > but what Apple has planned for it and the resources assigned to it gives
    > me hope that perhaps it may become a much more popular platform.
    >
    >
    > ------------------------
    >
    > A joke I heard from space (litterally !):
    >
    > What's at the bottom of the ocean and twitches ?
    >
    > A nervous wreck.


    From what you are saying in this reply, I get the sense that you
    are trying to decide which would be best for your career.

    If that is the primary desire, then I would say Linux, as far more
    companies are using Linux as a server than Mac OS X.

    Maybe if the Apple continues making gains in the home and laptop
    space, business will start to seriously look at Apple in the
    server room. But unless you already have a company wanting to use
    Mac OS X, I would suggest Linux for your career.

    In addition since you have indicate you have used Mac's since '88,
    you might consider getting one for home. If not for yourself,
    then maybe a family member that you play with from time to time so
    you can keep up with what is happening in the Mac OS X space.

    NOTE: I may have 5 Macs at home and I use a PowerMac G5 Dual
    2.5GHz/2.5GB/800GB system with dual monitors at work, I write
    software for Linux.

    Bob Harris

  2. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    On 10/25/07 22:39, Bob Harris wrote:
    > In article <1acdd$4720ab25$cef8887a$15776@TEKSAVVY.COM>,
    > JF Mezei wrote:
    >
    >> Ron Johnson wrote:
    >>
    >>> And OSX users. Unless you've figured out a way to disable the GUI.

    >> While I still haven't found a way to telnet into the mac, I can ssh into
    >> it and issue plenty of unix commands. And I can run X applications on
    >> the mac that display on an x terminal. (But the native mac applications
    >> don't do that).

    >
    > To access the GUI stuff, I just use VNC and view the desktop. So
    > I use a combination of ssh for terminal sessions and VNC if I want
    > the desktop (I actually tunnel the VNC via an ssh tunnel over the
    > same ssh terminal connection.


    But that just seems so *hackish* (and not is the good connotation).

    X Windows' network transparency seems much cleaner to me, since you
    don't need to run a full-blown GUI on the server (which is actually
    an X client).

    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  3. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article ,
    Ron Johnson wrote:

    > On 10/25/07 22:39, Bob Harris wrote:
    > > In article <1acdd$4720ab25$cef8887a$15776@TEKSAVVY.COM>,
    > > JF Mezei wrote:
    > >
    > >> Ron Johnson wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> And OSX users. Unless you've figured out a way to disable the GUI.
    > >> While I still haven't found a way to telnet into the mac, I can ssh into
    > >> it and issue plenty of unix commands. And I can run X applications on
    > >> the mac that display on an x terminal. (But the native mac applications
    > >> don't do that).

    > >
    > > To access the GUI stuff, I just use VNC and view the desktop. So
    > > I use a combination of ssh for terminal sessions and VNC if I want
    > > the desktop (I actually tunnel the VNC via an ssh tunnel over the
    > > same ssh terminal connection.

    >
    > But that just seems so *hackish* (and not is the good connotation).
    >
    > X Windows' network transparency seems much cleaner to me, since you
    > don't need to run a full-blown GUI on the server (which is actually
    > an X client).


    But since Mac OS X is NOT X11 based, using VNC is a way to access
    the Mac OS X GUI apps remotely, if you need to do it once in a
    while, or even regularly if you have enough bandwidth.

    In addition, I've used X11 2000 miles from Client to Server, and
    X11 can be VERY chatty, where VNC can be much more bandwidth
    efficient. A lot depends on the X11 app. You have never lived
    until you have waited 10 to 20 seconds for a menu click to display
    the menu, and for multiple clicks to be queued and be totally
    confused about where you are in an X11 app. "Been there done
    that", I'll use VNC in that situation, thank you.

    As far as VNC is concerned, I use to to control Linux systems,
    Windows systems, as well as Mac OS X systems. I also use X11 and
    ssh sessions as well. I use what gets the job done efficiently.
    'cleaner' means nothing if it is too slow.

    When using VNC at home, it is very fast, as I've got high speed
    connections between my home systems. The work connection across
    2000 miles is good as well. When controlling my Mom's iMac 300
    miles away, the bandwidth is less, but perfectly acceptable in
    avoiding a trip to Mom's house.

    So while you may consider it *hackish*, it is effective, and I've
    got the experience to know what I'm talking about.

    Bob Harris

  4. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    On 10/26/07 21:34, Bob Harris wrote:
    > In article ,
    > Ron Johnson wrote:
    >
    >> On 10/25/07 22:39, Bob Harris wrote:
    >>> In article <1acdd$4720ab25$cef8887a$15776@TEKSAVVY.COM>,
    >>> JF Mezei wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Ron Johnson wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> And OSX users. Unless you've figured out a way to disable the GUI.
    >>>> While I still haven't found a way to telnet into the mac, I can ssh into
    >>>> it and issue plenty of unix commands. And I can run X applications on
    >>>> the mac that display on an x terminal. (But the native mac applications
    >>>> don't do that).
    >>> To access the GUI stuff, I just use VNC and view the desktop. So
    >>> I use a combination of ssh for terminal sessions and VNC if I want
    >>> the desktop (I actually tunnel the VNC via an ssh tunnel over the
    >>> same ssh terminal connection.

    >> But that just seems so *hackish* (and not is the good connotation).
    >>
    >> X Windows' network transparency seems much cleaner to me, since you
    >> don't need to run a full-blown GUI on the server (which is actually
    >> an X client).

    >
    > But since Mac OS X is NOT X11 based, using VNC is a way to access
    > the Mac OS X GUI apps remotely, if you need to do it once in a
    > while, or even regularly if you have enough bandwidth.
    >
    > In addition, I've used X11 2000 miles from Client to Server, and
    > X11 can be VERY chatty,


    True. It was designed to be operated over a LAN, not a WAN, since
    WAN speeds were typically 56Kbps back in the mid-80s.

    > where VNC can be much more bandwidth
    > efficient. A lot depends on the X11 app. You have never lived
    > until you have waited 10 to 20 seconds for a menu click to display
    > the menu, and for multiple clicks to be queued and be totally
    > confused about where you are in an X11 app. "Been there done
    > that", I'll use VNC in that situation, thank you.
    >
    > As far as VNC is concerned, I use to to control Linux systems,
    > Windows systems, as well as Mac OS X systems. I also use X11 and
    > ssh sessions as well. I use what gets the job done efficiently.
    > 'cleaner' means nothing if it is too slow.
    >
    > When using VNC at home, it is very fast, as I've got high speed
    > connections between my home systems. The work connection across
    > 2000 miles is good as well.


    ssh offers compression. LBX (low-bandwidth X) never got off the
    ground because tunneling X over ssh offered better performance.

    > When controlling my Mom's iMac 300
    > miles away, the bandwidth is less, but perfectly acceptable in
    > avoiding a trip to Mom's house.
    >
    > So while you may consider it *hackish*, it is effective, and I've
    > got the experience to know what I'm talking about.


    "Hackish" and effective are orthogonal. Thus it's possible to be
    hackish and effective at the same time.

    That's why I didn't call VNC stupid, or some stronger derogative.

    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  5. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article , Bob Harris writes:
    >
    >
    >In article ,
    > Ron Johnson wrote:
    >
    >> On 10/25/07 22:39, Bob Harris wrote:
    >> > In article <1acdd$4720ab25$cef8887a$15776@TEKSAVVY.COM>,
    >> > JF Mezei wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> Ron Johnson wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >>> And OSX users. Unless you've figured out a way to disable the GUI.
    >> >> While I still haven't found a way to telnet into the mac, I can ssh into
    >> >> it and issue plenty of unix commands. And I can run X applications on
    >> >> the mac that display on an x terminal. (But the native mac applications
    >> >> don't do that).
    >> >
    >> > To access the GUI stuff, I just use VNC and view the desktop. So
    >> > I use a combination of ssh for terminal sessions and VNC if I want
    >> > the desktop (I actually tunnel the VNC via an ssh tunnel over the
    >> > same ssh terminal connection.

    >>
    >> But that just seems so *hackish* (and not is the good connotation).
    >>
    >> X Windows' network transparency seems much cleaner to me, since you
    >> don't need to run a full-blown GUI on the server (which is actually
    >> an X client).

    >
    >But since Mac OS X is NOT X11 based, using VNC is a way to access
    >the Mac OS X GUI apps remotely, if you need to do it once in a
    >while, or even regularly if you have enough bandwidth.
    >
    >In addition, I've used X11 2000 miles from Client to Server, and
    >X11 can be VERY chatty, where VNC can be much more bandwidth
    >efficient. A lot depends on the X11 app. You have never lived
    >until you have waited 10 to 20 seconds for a menu click to display
    >the menu, and for multiple clicks to be queued and be totally
    >confused about where you are in an X11 app. "Been there done
    >that", I'll use VNC in that situation, thank you.


    VNC is efficient? It's a screen scraper. I use it to access a remote
    Weendoze box and the router/network activity peg.



    >As far as VNC is concerned, I use to to control Linux systems,
    >Windows systems, as well as Mac OS X systems. I also use X11 and
    >ssh sessions as well. I use what gets the job done efficiently.
    >'cleaner' means nothing if it is too slow.


    When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it to
    restore your accessibility?


    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

    http://tmesis.com/drat.html

  6. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article , Bob Harris writes:
    >>
    >> In article ,
    >> Ron Johnson wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 10/25/07 22:39, Bob Harris wrote:
    >>>> In article <1acdd$4720ab25$cef8887a$15776@TEKSAVVY.COM>,
    >>>> JF Mezei wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Ron Johnson wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> And OSX users. Unless you've figured out a way to disable the GUI.
    >>>>> While I still haven't found a way to telnet into the mac, I can ssh into
    >>>>> it and issue plenty of unix commands. And I can run X applications on
    >>>>> the mac that display on an x terminal. (But the native mac applications
    >>>>> don't do that).
    >>>> To access the GUI stuff, I just use VNC and view the desktop. So
    >>>> I use a combination of ssh for terminal sessions and VNC if I want
    >>>> the desktop (I actually tunnel the VNC via an ssh tunnel over the
    >>>> same ssh terminal connection.
    >>> But that just seems so *hackish* (and not is the good connotation).
    >>>
    >>> X Windows' network transparency seems much cleaner to me, since you
    >>> don't need to run a full-blown GUI on the server (which is actually
    >>> an X client).

    >> But since Mac OS X is NOT X11 based, using VNC is a way to access
    >> the Mac OS X GUI apps remotely, if you need to do it once in a
    >> while, or even regularly if you have enough bandwidth.
    >>
    >> In addition, I've used X11 2000 miles from Client to Server, and
    >> X11 can be VERY chatty, where VNC can be much more bandwidth
    >> efficient. A lot depends on the X11 app. You have never lived
    >> until you have waited 10 to 20 seconds for a menu click to display
    >> the menu, and for multiple clicks to be queued and be totally
    >> confused about where you are in an X11 app. "Been there done
    >> that", I'll use VNC in that situation, thank you.

    >
    > VNC is efficient? It's a screen scraper. I use it to access a remote
    > Weendoze box and the router/network activity peg.
    >
    >
    >
    >> As far as VNC is concerned, I use to to control Linux systems,
    >> Windows systems, as well as Mac OS X systems. I also use X11 and
    >> ssh sessions as well. I use what gets the job done efficiently.
    >> 'cleaner' means nothing if it is too slow.

    >
    > When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it to
    > restore your accessibility?
    >
    >

    Telnet in and restart. 8-)

    I've never had a RealVNC server on a windows box die on me though.

    Jeff



    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  7. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article <1193518317_13445@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell writes:
    {...snip...}
    >> When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it to
    >> restore your accessibility?
    >>
    >>

    >Telnet in and restart. 8-)


    There is a cli command to do this? Please, do tell. This periodic VNC
    server death is maddening.



    >I've never had a RealVNC server on a windows box die on me though.


    I've never had one stay alive for more than a day.


    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

    http://tmesis.com/drat.html

  8. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article ,
    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

    > In article , Bob
    > Harris writes:
    > >
    > >
    > >In article ,
    > > Ron Johnson wrote:
    > >
    > >> On 10/25/07 22:39, Bob Harris wrote:
    > >> > In article <1acdd$4720ab25$cef8887a$15776@TEKSAVVY.COM>,
    > >> > JF Mezei wrote:
    > >> >
    > >> >> Ron Johnson wrote:
    > >> >>
    > >> >>> And OSX users. Unless you've figured out a way to disable the GUI.
    > >> >> While I still haven't found a way to telnet into the mac, I can ssh
    > >> >> into
    > >> >> it and issue plenty of unix commands. And I can run X applications on
    > >> >> the mac that display on an x terminal. (But the native mac applications
    > >> >> don't do that).
    > >> >
    > >> > To access the GUI stuff, I just use VNC and view the desktop. So
    > >> > I use a combination of ssh for terminal sessions and VNC if I want
    > >> > the desktop (I actually tunnel the VNC via an ssh tunnel over the
    > >> > same ssh terminal connection.
    > >>
    > >> But that just seems so *hackish* (and not is the good connotation).
    > >>
    > >> X Windows' network transparency seems much cleaner to me, since you
    > >> don't need to run a full-blown GUI on the server (which is actually
    > >> an X client).

    > >
    > >But since Mac OS X is NOT X11 based, using VNC is a way to access
    > >the Mac OS X GUI apps remotely, if you need to do it once in a
    > >while, or even regularly if you have enough bandwidth.
    > >
    > >In addition, I've used X11 2000 miles from Client to Server, and
    > >X11 can be VERY chatty, where VNC can be much more bandwidth
    > >efficient. A lot depends on the X11 app. You have never lived
    > >until you have waited 10 to 20 seconds for a menu click to display
    > >the menu, and for multiple clicks to be queued and be totally
    > >confused about where you are in an X11 app. "Been there done
    > >that", I'll use VNC in that situation, thank you.

    >
    > VNC is efficient? It's a screen scraper. I use it to access a remote
    > Weendoze box and the router/network activity peg.


    VNC is more bandwidth efficient than X11 2000 miles away. And I
    do that every day since my company put the development systems
    2000 miles away.

    There are some X11 apps that are acceptable 2000 miles away, but
    there are others that totally stink.

    I also do 2 things for VNC. One I use TightVNC protocols which is
    even more bandwidth efficient. And if the bandwidth available is
    even lower (like Mom's DSL connection), then I also reduce the
    number of colors transmitted to improve the bandwidth demands.

    > >As far as VNC is concerned, I use to to control Linux systems,
    > >Windows systems, as well as Mac OS X systems. I also use X11 and
    > >ssh sessions as well. I use what gets the job done efficiently.
    > >'cleaner' means nothing if it is too slow.

    >
    > When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it to
    > restore your accessibility?


    Well first of all, I actually run Linux on the system 2000 miles
    away, and then I run VMware Server, and inside of VMware Server I
    run Windows XP. I actually VNC connect to the Linux server and
    view its desktop along with the VMware Server Windows display.

    And I've never had the Linux vncserver crash.

    Then again, I also have the option of using Microsoft's Remote
    Desktop Connection client for Mac OS X if I want to. But VNC
    allows me to control the VMware Server.

    But the bottom line here is that Mac OS X gives me multiple ways
    to connect to remote systems. I get to choose the one that is
    best for the task at hand and the resources available to me.

    Bob Harris

  9. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article <1193518317_13445@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell writes:
    > {...snip...}
    >>> When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it to
    >>> restore your accessibility?
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Telnet in and restart. 8-)

    >
    > There is a cli command to do this? Please, do tell. This periodic VNC
    > server death is maddening.


    Log in as administrator and issue:

    net start winvnc4

    which starts the service.

    net start

    will show you the currently running services.

    >
    >
    >
    >> I've never had a RealVNC server on a windows box die on me though.

    >
    > I've never had one stay alive for more than a day.
    >
    >



    Jeff

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  10. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    On 10/27/07 22:19, Jeff Campbell wrote:
    > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >> In article <1193518317_13445@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell
    >> writes:
    >> {...snip...}
    >>>> When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it
    >>>> to restore your accessibility?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Telnet in and restart. 8-)

    >>
    >> There is a cli command to do this? Please, do tell. This periodic
    >> VNC server death is maddening.

    >
    > Log in as administrator and issue:
    >
    > net start winvnc4
    >
    > which starts the service.


    Only if there's someone there to log in at the console...

    > net start
    >
    > will show you the currently running services.



    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  11. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article <1193541160_13971@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell writes:
    >
    >
    >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >> In article <1193518317_13445@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell writes:
    >> {...snip...}
    >>>> When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it to
    >>>> restore your accessibility?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Telnet in and restart. 8-)

    >>
    >> There is a cli command to do this? Please, do tell. This periodic VNC
    >> server death is maddening.

    >
    >Log in as administrator and issue:
    >
    > net start winvnc4


    OK. Tenlet was not enabled but I figured that out and I can now telnet to
    this weendoze box.

    net start winvnc4

    did not work. I found I had to use:

    net start "VNC Server"


    I don't like using telnet over the internet. Is there a way to get ssh to
    startup on weendoze? I didn't see anything in the {Services} window about
    ssh.


    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

    http://tmesis.com/drat.html

  12. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article <1acdd$4720ab25$cef8887a$15776@TEKSAVVY.COM>,
    JF Mezei wrote:

    > While I still haven't found a way to telnet into the mac, I can ssh into
    > it and issue plenty of unix commands. And I can run X applications on
    > the mac that display on an x terminal. (But the native mac applications
    > don't do that).


    That's because telnet comes disabled "out of the box", which is as it
    should be. I'll agree it's a bit of a swine to enable when you do want
    it for something.

    --
    Paul Sture

    Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks:
    http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~stu...bookmarks.html

  13. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article ,
    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

    > I believe it is part of the bigger Universal Access features. The Mac and
    > OS X are big amongst the blind/nearly-blind and those with other handicaps.
    > Having the application ICON grow in size makes it easier for people with a
    > vision problem to better see.
    >


    On that note I was recently trying to read a website with very low
    contrast (light lettering on light background), and discovered that
    ctrl-alt-cmd-8 toggles reverse video. Hey presto, what I had been
    struggling to read became very readable.

    --
    Paul Sture

    Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks:
    http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~stu...bookmarks.html

  14. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:

    > I don't like using telnet over the internet. Is there a way to get ssh to
    > startup on weendoze? I didn't see anything in the {Services} window about
    > ssh.


    AFAIK, ssh server and ssh client are available as an add-on prior to
    Microsoft Windows Vista.

    CopSSH and OpenSSH are some of the server choices around, and PuTTY and
    other similar tools can provide client ssh.

    VPNs are a typical approach for protecting telnet, SMB and other
    Microsoft Windows protocols. Folks are generally not using IPv6 and
    IPSec, but that's another approach.

    Linux, Mac OS X and Unix platforms -- and recent OpenVMS with TCP/IP
    stacks -- typically have ssh client and server capabilities baked in.
    As JF has discovered, Mac OS X has a telnet server, but requires an
    explicit management command to enable it.

    http://help.lockergnome.com/windows/...ict583194.html

    --
    www.HoffmanLabs.com
    Services for OpenVMS

  15. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article , Stephen Hoffman writes:
    >
    >
    >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >
    >> I don't like using telnet over the internet. Is there a way to get ssh to
    >> startup on weendoze? I didn't see anything in the {Services} window about
    >> ssh.

    >
    >AFAIK, ssh server and ssh client are available as an add-on prior to
    >Microsoft Windows Vista.
    >
    >CopSSH and OpenSSH are some of the server choices around, and PuTTY and
    >other similar tools can provide client ssh.
    >
    >VPNs are a typical approach for protecting telnet, SMB and other
    >Microsoft Windows protocols. Folks are generally not using IPv6 and
    >IPSec, but that's another approach.
    >
    >Linux, Mac OS X and Unix platforms -- and recent OpenVMS with TCP/IP
    >stacks -- typically have ssh client and server capabilities baked in.
    >As JF has discovered, Mac OS X has a telnet server, but requires an
    >explicit management command to enable it.
    >
    >http://help.lockergnome.com/windows/...ict583194.html


    Thanks Hoff. I'll look into it. Since Weendoze has no security I
    expected that ssh would be an after thought add-on package.

    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

    http://tmesis.com/drat.html

  16. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    In article ,
    Stephen Hoffman wrote:

    > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >
    > > I don't like using telnet over the internet. Is there a way to get ssh to
    > > startup on weendoze? I didn't see anything in the {Services} window about
    > > ssh.

    >
    > AFAIK, ssh server and ssh client are available as an add-on prior to
    > Microsoft Windows Vista.
    >
    > CopSSH and OpenSSH are some of the server choices around, and PuTTY and
    > other similar tools can provide client ssh.
    >
    > VPNs are a typical approach for protecting telnet, SMB and other
    > Microsoft Windows protocols. Folks are generally not using IPv6 and
    > IPSec, but that's another approach.
    >
    > Linux, Mac OS X and Unix platforms -- and recent OpenVMS with TCP/IP
    > stacks -- typically have ssh client and server capabilities baked in.
    > As JF has discovered, Mac OS X has a telnet server, but requires an
    > explicit management command to enable it.
    >
    > http://help.lockergnome.com/windows/...ows-XP-ftopict
    > 583194.html


    Also look into Hamachi

    You can use it to create a VPN between any number of systems, and
    those systems can be Windows, Macs, or Linux.

    Hamachi does not require any advanced registration. It works
    easily across Home NAT style routers without the need for Fixed
    IPs, or Dynamic DNS or knowing the current DHCP IP address.

    For Macs I suggest HamachiX which is a Mac OS X GUI on top of the
    Hamachi Unix compiled command line interface
    >http://hamachix.spaceants.net/>


    Bob Harris

  17. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    Ron Johnson wrote:
    > On 10/27/07 22:19, Jeff Campbell wrote:
    >> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >>> In article <1193518317_13445@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell
    >>> writes:
    >>> {...snip...}
    >>>>> When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it
    >>>>> to restore your accessibility?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> Telnet in and restart. 8-)
    >>> There is a cli command to do this? Please, do tell. This periodic
    >>> VNC server death is maddening.

    >> Log in as administrator and issue:
    >>
    >> net start winvnc4
    >>
    >> which starts the service.

    >
    > Only if there's someone there to log in at the console...
    >
    >> net start
    >>
    >> will show you the currently running services.

    >
    >



    Which part of 'Telnet in' don't you understand? 8-) 8-)

    Jeff



    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  18. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article <1193541160_13971@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell writes:
    >>
    >> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >>> In article <1193518317_13445@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell writes:
    >>> {...snip...}
    >>>>> When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it to
    >>>>> restore your accessibility?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> Telnet in and restart. 8-)
    >>> There is a cli command to do this? Please, do tell. This periodic VNC
    >>> server death is maddening.

    >> Log in as administrator and issue:
    >>
    >> net start winvnc4

    >
    > OK. Tenlet was not enabled but I figured that out and I can now telnet to
    > this weendoze box.
    >
    > net start winvnc4
    >
    > did not work. I found I had to use:
    >
    > net start "VNC Server"
    >
    >


    Ok, maybe versionitis. 8-)

    I am using RealVNC 4.2.7, just upgraded to 4.3.2 today. The system I tested, which
    is running windows 2K professional, lists the service display name as "VNC Server Version 4".
    The service's service name is "WinVNC4".


    > I don't like using telnet over the internet. Is there a way to get ssh to
    > startup on weendoze? I didn't see anything in the {Services} window about
    > ssh.
    >
    >


    Don't know offhand as the machine I'm talking to is on our internal network so
    I haven't needed to use ssh.

    Jeff


    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

  19. ANN: POSIX is coming back! . . . Quack! Quack!

    Hi Steve,

    > Folks are generally not using IPv6 and
    > IPSec, but that's another approach.


    Just in case anyone misunderstood Hoff to be inferring that IPv6 is a
    requirement for IPsec, let me just point out that it most definitely *IS
    NOT*!

    My understanding is that some RFC states that, in order to claim IPv6
    compatibility you *must* support IPsec, but IPv4 stacks are more than
    capable of supporting/implementing the optional IPsec protocol. (Windows
    2003 being just one example)

    I think you'll find that most forward-looking and industry standard
    Operating Systems and Network Software providers have been implementing
    IPsec with IPv4 for some years. As to what atrificial hoops and obstacles
    UCX engineering makes VMS customers jump through is beyond comprehension
    :-( I imagine that pre-shared keys on homogenous UCX implementations layered
    on exact same versions of VMS(only) while waving a dead chicken over your
    head is still a requirement.

    I further imagine that the very same VMS middle-management wanker(s) that
    foisted POSIX upon us and then stealthfully shifted their mate-laden
    development teams to Apache/Tomcat/Garbage-Collection, decided that IPsec is
    a piece o' **** that VMS customers don't need.

    They certainly won't tell you otherwise, so what the hell? Fleece those
    stinking peasants!

    Cheers Richard Maher

    "Stephen Hoffman" wrote in message
    news:fg2coc$2vb1$1@pyrite.mv.net...
    > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >
    > > I don't like using telnet over the internet. Is there a way to get ssh

    to
    > > startup on weendoze? I didn't see anything in the {Services} window

    about
    > > ssh.

    >
    > AFAIK, ssh server and ssh client are available as an add-on prior to
    > Microsoft Windows Vista.
    >
    > CopSSH and OpenSSH are some of the server choices around, and PuTTY and
    > other similar tools can provide client ssh.
    >
    > VPNs are a typical approach for protecting telnet, SMB and other
    > Microsoft Windows protocols. Folks are generally not using IPv6 and
    > IPSec, but that's another approach.
    >
    > Linux, Mac OS X and Unix platforms -- and recent OpenVMS with TCP/IP
    > stacks -- typically have ssh client and server capabilities baked in.
    > As JF has discovered, Mac OS X has a telnet server, but requires an
    > explicit management command to enable it.
    >
    >

    http://help.lockergnome.com/windows/...ict583194.html
    >
    > --
    > www.HoffmanLabs.com
    > Services for OpenVMS




  20. Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ?

    On 10/28/07 21:38, Jeff Campbell wrote:
    > Ron Johnson wrote:
    >> On 10/27/07 22:19, Jeff Campbell wrote:
    >>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >>>> In article <1193518317_13445@sp12lax.superfeed.net>, Jeff Campbell
    >>>> writes:
    >>>> {...snip...}
    >>>>>> When the VNC server dies on the Weendoze box, how to you access it
    >>>>>> to restore your accessibility?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Telnet in and restart. 8-)
    >>>> There is a cli command to do this? Please, do tell. This periodic
    >>>> VNC server death is maddening.
    >>> Log in as administrator and issue:
    >>>
    >>> net start winvnc4
    >>>
    >>> which starts the service.

    >>
    >> Only if there's someone there to log in at the console...
    >>
    >>> net start
    >>>
    >>> will show you the currently running services.

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    > Which part of 'Telnet in' don't you understand? 8-) 8-)


    But don't you usually lose VNC when the network dies? And you can't
    telnet when the network's down.

    Hmmm. Or are you referring to unstable Windows causing VNC to hang?
    But in that case, telnetd might be hung too.

    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast