Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 36 37 38 39 [40] 41 42 43 44 ... Last
[#] Tue May 19 2009 09:30:42 EDT from Ian M. Shot @ Haven BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I never said it was new, Microsoft started Sharepoint in 2001, but it is the combing of ideas that makes it so interesting.  In 2002 when I tried to find something simular within the Open Source community I couldn't' find any one package, I found tons of things where they were all seperate, and not integrated that would do the same type of things sort of. 

 I think it is the putting together and integrating that makes it work.  The things I listed is only part of what SharePoint does.   The only thing I have found that is close, is Google Docs, and in some ways Google Docs is more advanced than Sharepoint.  Live editing of a document with mutiple people editing it at once, Sharepoint doesn't have that yet.  

Mon May 18 2009 06:27:02 PM EDT from dothebart@uncnsrd (Uncensored)

doesn't sound that new to me, just like some other things boiled together?

 



[#] Tue May 19 2009 17:59:52 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That sounds like Microsoft's usual game. Integration, lots of integration ... so much integration that you're locked into the entire Microsoft world and you can't get out.

[#] Tue May 26 2009 04:01:38 EDT from arabella @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Needs no words



menusign.jpg (image/jpeg, 28945 bytes) [ View | Download ]
[#] Wed May 27 2009 00:28:58 EDT from Animal @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

url?

[#] Wed May 27 2009 04:43:15 EDT from arabella @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

[#] Wed May 27 2009 14:19:20 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Today I'm troubleshooting a WINS/Browser problem on an Active Directory network.

On ACTIVE DIRECTORY.

Which has existed for TEN FUCKING YEARS.

Why does the slapped-together technology which AD was designed to replace, still exist?!@!!

[#] Wed May 27 2009 15:03:36 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I could swear I was reading up on that just a couple of days or so ago, when I was studying samba.

It's amazing how much you can learn about Windows networking when you read about Samba.

[#] Wed May 27 2009 15:17:48 EDT from skpacman @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Wed May 27 2009 02:19:20 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored
Today I'm troubleshooting a WINS/Browser problem on an Active Directory network.

On ACTIVE DIRECTORY.

Which has existed for TEN FUCKING YEARS.

Why does the slapped-together technology which AD was designed to replace, still exist?!@!!


They're still using old technology because they're afraid of change... if it worked before they don't want to change it for fear of M$ saying "uh...  that didn't work... your network is dead until YOU figure it out..."

--
Thanks,
Stephen D King
The Kings Photography
Network Admin/IT/Webmaster
http://www.thekingsphotography.com

"Does not the lion need the chase?, Does not the valley need the rain?, Does not the tree need the wind?, Does not your BALLS need KICKING!?" - Beavis



[#] Wed May 27 2009 16:11:15 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I thought AD still required WINS to some degree.

[#] Wed May 27 2009 17:32:00 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It's amazing how much you can learn about Windows networking when you

read about Samba.

I suspect the Samba people understand CIFS better than Microsoft, actually.
They actually had to make sense of it, whereas Microsoft merely trusts old crufty code that still happens to work.

I also discovered today that Cisco's implementation of CIFS, used for the file browser in their WebVPN portal, contains Samba code. But it's a broken implementation of Samba, which requires NetBIOS-over-TCP/IP to be enabled on the server. This is stupid. Samba hasn't needed that for ages, so why is Cisco still implementing it that way?

[#] Tue Jun 02 2009 18:41:39 EDT from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

[#] Tue Jun 02 2009 23:07:52 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Linux+ARM netbooks are coming whether Microsoft wants them to or not. They may be able to strongarm traditional PC companies like Asus into being Windows-only, but true netbooks are going to come from handset makers, who have no Microsoft shackles around their ankles.

[#] Wed Jun 03 2009 06:10:54 EDT from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

use linux to create a file like this:

top-2009-06-02_14:49:54.log.CSV

 

on a samba share. watch it with windows explorer under vista (don't know whether it happenes on xp too)

all you get is a garbled mess in filenames.

Even the mounted SMB share in linux will look right.



[#] Wed Jun 03 2009 06:59:00 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The colons in the filename mean something special to Windows.  I'm not surprised it's a mess.



[#] Wed Jun 03 2009 16:15:32 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Heh. Windows thinks it's a drive letter.

[#] Wed Jun 03 2009 17:21:53 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Maybe... or it thinks the latter portion is referring to 'sub-storage' or some such nonsense.

I seem to recall something super-arcane in the file system where you can refer to shadow-like files associated with a particular file in some bizarre way using colons. If you move the file, those shadow-like files disappear.
Otherwise, they remain... not part of the file, yet part of the file.

It's the sort of thing that could be useful for storing icons or something, but nobody really picked up on it (probably for good reason... I think it is only supported in NTFS, and a lot of people still used FAT when I found out about this).

I would love to know more about it, or even verify if what I'm saying isn't some misremembered flashback of something I had to deal with in my previous job.

[#] Thu Jun 04 2009 12:35:57 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Sounds like "resource forks" on a Mac.

[#] Thu Jun 04 2009 12:43:32 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Yeah, I think it's very similar to that. It would have been a very nice feature, and I was trying to figure out how to support it with WinINSTALL, but I figured it was too arcane to mess with.

[#] Thu Jun 04 2009 14:27:27 EDT from athos-mn @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Except that people actually used resource forks.

[#] Thu Jun 04 2009 16:26:47 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Couldn't really use that feature on NTFS, only because it wasn't available for FAT32.

Go to page: First ... 36 37 38 39 [40] 41 42 43 44 ... Last