Posted on 11/26/2012 11:13:00 AM PST by ShadowAce
Or you could just source and store on the cloud.
There. A 2 thousand word solution verses a 10 word solution.
The article addressed a "why" question.
Yes by FR criteria that’s the only permissable option.
Apple is run by a gay guy and Ballmer and Gates gave big money to the Wash State “marriage initiative”
Could you give an example?
Cloud may work for some. For others, it's a huge potential liablitity.
/johnny
Can’t “cloud” things in my business due to privacy concerns.
However, I do not agree with running my business on brand x computers, either.
After having been in the business for 30 years prior to my current job, brand x just won’t cut it.....
Could you give an example?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How about Free Republic? It may not be the best example, but Jim and John certainly use their own in-house systems and software. And last month when it was non-operative for days on end...
How’d that work out?
The bad thing about open source is that anyone can contribute to it.
Unless you are personally reviewing and merging changes, there is a potential security risk.
Maybe it is my age but I am just not comfortable with the cloud. In fact it creeps me out.
My customers rely on my keeping their information confidential so notes and such are kept on a non-internet connected computer. You want it then you are going to have to break into my house and take the computer it's self and good luck decrypting it.
Even my less confidential stuff I would not store out in cyberspace. There is too much loss of control.
I keep as much of my network Beige Box as I can: basically everything but infrastructure.
I’m trapped by software, though.
And when you try to find the blasted thing after the birds sh*t in your cloud, you have a zero word solution.
But the hw-makers are doing what they can to lock you into hw you have no use for. Like Intel.
That's not true. The UEFI is used to verify the OS or OS kernel before it loads. It prevents unauthorized changes to the OS. The real reason the author doesn't like UEFI is that is can be used to local a piece of hardware to a particular OS, no other OS can then be loaded on it.
I have 2 identical machines and use one as a backup. My backup policy is to pull one of the mirrored RAID hard drives and replace it with a freshly wiped drive twice each week (and let the system rebuild overnight). If my system goes down, I pop the snapshot drive into the backup and I’m up and running immediately while I troubleshoot and repair the main system. This happened only a month ago when the power supply in my system died and I had to get a replacement.
Pretty much matches what I do, although I don’t care whose name is on the box, as long as I can fix what’s inside it.
I’ve run into situations where file compatibility isn’t enough. And the incredible number of free apps for the Windows platform keep me on it, although I use Linux too.
I find it to be quite the opposite - Closed source software tends to have way more security holes than OSS. BY FAR. Closed source relies upon obfuscation and has significantly less programmers at their disposal. Open source and many eyes naturally results in more elegant code and far quicker discovery of exploitable code. I don't use ANY closed source programs anymore... that I can think of... Other than Windows on some boxes, and the antivirus applications it requires BECAUSE of it's closed source mentality.
And 'merging changes'? Most programs nowadays handle their updates automatically - You may have to hang out on the application's forum for a while to see if there are problems, but other than that, it is much the same as closed source, with the only difference being that you, the end user, have the option of actually SEEING the changes, and can go right to the source code to do so. You don't get to see the crappy code hiding behind closed source - If that gives you some feeling of 'professionalism', let me assure you that is not the case.
Not exactly. While anyone can submit a contribution to an open source project, that does not mean that the submitted change will automatically be incorporated into the project. Submissions are reviewed for malicious code.
The bad thing about open source is that anyone can contribute to it.
Again, not exactly. Most larger open source projects only allow submissions from an approved list of volunteer coders. If Juan Dough programmer has a better idea about how to do something is the project, he can submit the changes to the appropriate volunteer coder who reviews it and if it looks good, then submits it to the larger project community, who review it and test it again.
At least that has been my experience on open source projects, but your mileage may vary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.