Saying 'No' to an Executable Internet 306
Dylan Knight Rogers writes "Applications are constantly being ported for usage on the Internet - either for a viable escape from expensive software, or because it's often helpful to have an app that you can access from anywhere. Operating systems that run from the Web will be a different story."
Ah, yes (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ah, yes (Score:5, Funny)
rm -rf /../* (Score:4, Interesting)
what's above root dir? Does anbybody know?
Re:rm -rf /../* (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Ah, yes (Score:4, Funny)
errrr.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:errrr.... (Score:2)
What's being proposed in this article is a different scheme, or so I would gather. It's not so much about applications executing on a separate machine, rather than the operating system software being obtained on the fly. Of course, s
Re:errrr.... (Score:5, Informative)
It would have been quite a trick to design an operating system based on the principles of the network protocols later developed on it.
That said, the dumb terminal to mainframe concept was a big part of the UNIX legacy. UNIX was designed from the start as a multi-user environment for the individual user. The kernel supported multiple users but the tasks it was designed for were single user tasks, mostly programming. UNIX was a reaction against mainframe computing of its day.
The author is completely wrong when he says that Windows did not have any security until 2000. Windows NT was designed from the outset to obtain Orange book B2 certification. It would take a huge amount of work to get Linux to meet that criteria. It is generally considered to be 'B2 equivalent' but thats like saying that being ABD is the same thing as having a Phd, the only people who say that are ABD grad students.
Likewise the author is completely wrong about Microsoft being likely to take the O/S in that direction. Unix and VMS led the minicomputer revolution. Gates led the microcomputer revolution which was even more against the central processing store model of computing. If you look at all the early microcomputers you will find that they all ran Microsoft Basic. When IBM went to Microsoft while it was building the PC it was the BASIC they wanted. They only demanded a bootstrap loader when Kildal refused to deal with them for CPM.
The company that tried to make the network the operating system was Netscape. They failed for several reasons, the most important of which was you can't hire 5000 world class engineers in a year and even if you could that you would not end up with a world class team. MarcA's policy of never hiring anyone he thought might be smarter than him didn't help either.
The company that seems to be making the attempt now is Google. They might make it, at this point it is unclear.
Re:errrr.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Meh. The whole "certification" theory seems to not tally with practice. Why does NT see
Re:errrr.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems to me like there is something important that the Orange Book fails to take into account.
It's not necessarily what the Orange Book is failing to take into account, it's the observer. Microsoft Windows, thanks to Microsoft Visual Studio, and Microsoft's maximum documentation overkill mindset, is childi
Re:errrr.... (Score:3, Insightful)
It is easier to develop code for Linux than for Windows. That is why there are so many more applications for Linux than there are for Windows, and it is also why developers, on the whole, prefer to use Linux whe
Re:errrr.... (Score:3, Funny)
I didn't know it was going to turn the registry into swiss cheese, whatever that is.
"Swiss cheese [wikipedia.org]" refers to a variety of cheese, such as the Emmantel cheese from Switzerland, known for the distinctive holes that appear throughout the cheese.
Re:errrr.... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:errrr.... (Score:4, Informative)
This is true, but:
1. Windows NT was only certified B2 secure when not connected to a network.
2. Orange book isn't related to the type of security we're talking about; the certification says nothing about whether there are bugs in the system allowing remote attacks or even local privilege escalations. It only talks about how the system is nominally designed, and even there it's more about logging who does what on the system and forbidding things like copying and pasting between applications running at different security levels.
Re:errrr.... (Score:2)
Re:errrr.... (Score:3, Interesting)
You are quite right in pointing out that B2 is not very relevant to today's security needs. But the fact remains that Windows NT was designed from the outset to meet a measurable security criteria that UNIX was not designe
Technically *nix started out single-user (Score:3, Informative)
The very first iteration of what eventually became Unix was a simple task switcher to allow a game to run at the same time as actual work. Technically it wasn't multi-user, because there was only a system console.
Re:errrr.... (Score:2)
Forget it (Score:5, Insightful)
Local apps give us a lot of freedom. It might be nice to be able to also have such a centralised system available, but even with access on planes, there are always times and places you'll be cut off.
woof.
Re:Forget it (Score:2)
Connectivity is everywhere (Score:2)
Mark my words... Google VNC servers... You saw it here first.
Re:Connectivity is everywhere (Score:2)
Anyone have any experience in Graphical Terminal Protocal design that would like to shed some light on the subject?
Yuck (Score:2)
Dumb Idea? (Score:3, Insightful)
What about having the network augment the user's computer? I mean, there are a lot of idle CPUs out there, right? What if your apps were designed to run on your own system just fine, but could tap into free CPU time as needed, SETI@home-style?
Now even to a non-computer person like me, security is obviously an issue here, but it seems like this could work pretty well on a company's in-house ne
Re:Dumb Idea? (Score:5, Informative)
Botnets are an interesting example of this sort of computing, though. In fact, botnets are the closest thing we have to this sort of idea being implemented right now.
Anyway, the point is that real time applications such as gaming wouldn't really see much benefit from this. By the time someone else could execute part of your processing, and send the result back to you, you character is already a foot from where you were when you requested the work, and the old work is now completely irrelevant. Even more, I can't think of a single use for GPUs that *isn't* realtime -- distributed GPU use over the net is almost certainly 100% impractical. It's not uncommon for gamers to play at and above 100 FPS -- that leaves your system 10 milliseconds to render every frame; you can hardly ping someone a block away in that time -- severely limiting the number of computers available to your 'cluster'. Also latency is NOT garanteed on the net, much less successful, in order delivery.
It works for apps like SETI@home because seti just sends you a chunk of work every few minutes or hours, and doesn't particularly care if and when you finish it. There's no 10 ms deadline on SETI -- the project will finish when it finishes.
Internet wide cluster computing is most suitable for applications that are primarily about converting a very large input (years of SETI data, protein folding data, massive mailing lists for bot nets) into very large output (analyzed data, folded proteins, spam) over a long, unpredictable period of time.
Re:Dumb Idea? (Score:3, Interesting)
As my assembly language instructor once said, "The time difference between loading something out of the local cache and access the computer's RAM is like the difference between taking a paper off the top of your desk and looking at it, and finding a paper in a filling
You need to do better than that (Score:3, Insightful)
There are few apps which can't run locally. They might run faster on the massive centralised hardware but if you can't connect, you're fucked. Anyone who can't afford to be fucked by the loss of a connection to any centralised system (like, say, a hospital) has a localised back-up already in place.
Re:You need to do better than that (Score:2)
Exactly. Their primary source is the grid. For backup only, they have an inferior, expensive, hard-to-maintain alternative.
If I would be seriously fucked by loss of my computing, I wouldn't be using my laptop, or a home desktop, or any sort of consumer-grade solution. In terms of availability, I have
Re:You need to do better than that (Score:2)
Re:You need to do better than that (Score:2)
"but if you can't connect, you're fucked
I believe that was the parent poster's point, and all these other comparisons about electric generators and such are just plain silly. I have a fast connection, but I've seen a bad storm knock out the lines so no one in my area could connect with any internet service, and it took the companies days to fix them all. So if I can't connect to the net I can at least still use the Gimp, use swriter to read/work on stuff, play games or listen to music. But if the OS and
Re:You need to do better than that (Score:2)
The net isn't right for everything but it's not bad for everything either and we've not uncovered that much of its potential yet either.
Re:You need to do better than that (Score:2)
More to the point, with software it doesn't have to be an either/or proposition. There's no reason apps can't be designed to make use of centralized resources when they are available, and yet still handle their absence gracefully and remain useful in stand-alone mode.
Of course it would be up to Microsoft whether to make their apps work like that or not... but then it's also up to people whether or not to buy or use Microsoft's apps.
Re:You need to do better than that (Score:5, Insightful)
The rest of your point was good, this part is horribly wrong .
The majority of US farm land has been idled due to the low cost of foreign food,
and the influx of huge Corporate farms like ADM(Archer Daniels Midland).
During Depression/World War II the people were told to grow a garden in there back yards
to deal with the situation .
My Grandparents still had this habit when I was growing up as a kid thru the 70's and 80's .
We had so much food we canned it, froze it, and gave it away .
The large cities of the east and left coast this is not practical, but there are large
patches of land throughout the mid west that were crushed due to Globalization and
Willy Nelson and Friends held a series of concerts called Farm Aid for all the farmers
whose families and lives were ruined by the globalization of food .
http://www.farmaid.org/site/PageServer?pagename=a
While it is good and great that we help the poor outside our borders, it is bad
that we make our nation vulnerable to shipping embargos and eat food from countries
that do not have the same pesticide rules as we do in the US .
Soil and water pollution levels in these countires are not monitored like they are here .
The taxes on land, the equipment, and the fuel are not on equal footing either, so the
US farmer cannot compete and a large number of small farms went broke .
The cost of living is higher here, as is the cost of doing business .
Outourcing our food will be something that will come back to haunt us in the future .
I was born and raised on a farm, and I dare say you were not .
Ex-MislTech
Re:The economies of scale (Score:2)
Anyone RTFA? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Anyone RTFA? (Score:2)
Re:Anyone RTFA? (Score:2)
Is that what we call Slashdot now?
Re:Anyone RTFA? (Score:2)
Re:Anyone RTFA? (Score:2)
Wait a second, you expected interesting or meaninful *content* from a blog?
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It depends on the blog. That's really irrelevent. I do expect something beyond the level of "m1kr0$0ft sUx0Rz t|-|3 b1G 0n3!!" from slashdot. Taco should know better than to post this utter drivel.
Re:Anyone RTFA? (Score:2)
Re:Anyone RTFA? (Score:2)
Say "No" to Executable Internet, but (Score:2, Funny)
Yawn, we've been doing this for 15+ years (Score:5, Insightful)
I was horrified when I went back to set up networking booting in Un*xville, yes, horrified. "These people are dumb, not the terminals" is about the most polite I could be about the state of "the network IS the computer".
Re:Yawn, we've been doing this for 15+ years (Score:2)
Re:Yawn, we've been doing this for 15+ years (Score:3, Interesting)
This industry is a hoot.
Re:Yawn, we've been doing this for 15+ years (Score:3, Interesting)
ACs post at 0. Registered users post at 1. Users with high karma post at 2. The comment is then moderated higher or lower.
"Worse is better" refers to http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html [jwz.org]
Huh? (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, his point is that Lunix rulz and Microsoft is teh sux and such will continue to be the case with AJAX apps. That doesn't make sense even if you concede all the author's idiotic premises.
Re:Huh? (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Thank you for the article. (Score:2)
It's all about the service model (Score:2, Insightful)
Which is fine is the service doesn't disappear or go evil.
Re:It's all about the service model (Score:2)
Somewhat like a "OMFG look at how much money Google is making! Let's jump on the bandwagon!!
This article is one big troll. (Score:5, Insightful)
Taco, you should be embarrassed for posting the article. There's nothing here but a bad rant about how Windows is a terrible OS, and microsoft sucks. You may agree or disagree with that statement, but rants against Windows aren't news.
Re:This article is one big troll. (Score:2)
The article may be a troll, but I notice no one is actually talking about network operating systems in response.
J2EE is a network OS programming kit. DotNet is another. QNX was designed as a networked/RPC version of *nix.
Given the market share the first two of that last have, I think the argument about whether network-bootable OS components/updates are viable is a moot point -- they've been here for years. Someone else just finally realized the fact.
Re:This article is one big troll. (Score:2)
You can't shame the shameless.
The Point? (Score:5, Interesting)
I read through that article and it just sounds like one pretentious blogger's disdain for Microsoft. Let's run through all the things that got this fast-tracked to Slashdot:
This is pure Linux-user elitism, the sort of smug "Our Opponent Just Doesn't Get It; We Do; and We're Smarter Than You" attitude that loses political battles [commondreams.org] and makes the arguer only look like a pretentious fool in the eyes of the skeptic.
I dislike Microsoft as much as the next Slashdot user but this article is awful: it simply slams Microsoft as the Big Corporate Machine with quotes like "Microsoft does not publish all their security vulnerabilities because other executive stockholders, whom are also ignorant would become worried and eventually begin to question the platform's security." If I wanted to hear ramblings about the willfully ignorant I'd listen to a David Cross album [subpop.com].
* Intentional typo used to point out how correcting grammar on Slashdot usually leads to a spelling error, or vice versaRe:The Point? (Score:2)
Your grammar and spelling problems aside, your article was nothing more than the same "Linux is better because everyone who uses Windows is an idiot" elitism I've seen for years. It brings nothing new to the table. I'm sorry that you had to hear thi
Re:The Point? (Score:5, Funny)
You should put that in your CV.
Re:The Point? (Score:5, Insightful)
And they're not English instructors - some posters can just speak English and find mistakes glaring and detract from the message (see Marshall McLuhan). But go ahead with your arrogant responses. It just makes it easier for the rest of us to filter you out.
People will mostly accept honest mistakes. When the offender instead tries to make out that their mistakes aren't mistakes at all, for whatever reason, when clearly they are, this is what tries people's patience.
Re:The Point? (Score:2)
Re:The Point? (Score:2)
The spelling errors are due in part that I type at 89 wpm.
Judging by the content you posted, maybe you should slow down a little and think about what you're typing. I find this comment of yours about "89 wpm" very insightfull into your general attitude toward writing. It's as if getting it out of your head is the most important thing, rather than actually trying to make a point. That's what editing, and reading what you've written are about. Have you read any of the top rated responses? Most people th
Re:The Point? (Score:2)
I was going to refrain from insulting your lame ass, but I click submit at nearly 300 clicks a minute.
article summary (Score:5, Funny)
Linux rulez
and , oh..
Who forgot to change the battery? (Score:3, Funny)
uh (Score:2)
Um, Can anybody say "XBOX"?
What is Microsoft's advertising revenue? I see many M$ adverts all around, but have yet to remember seeing the competition advertising. I think I don't want more M$ advertising thank you very much. Funny how they're doing such a good job of it without paying attention whatsoever!
This blog art
Re:uh (Score:2)
Other factors that Microsoft paid little to no attention to and still don't today would be gaming consoles, advertising, portable music devices, and computer security.
I'll expand this to include both clauses separately.
Other factors that Microsoft paid little to no attention to would be gaming consoles, advertising, portable music devices, and computer security. Other factors that Microsoft still doesn't pay attention to today would be gaming consoles, advertising, portabl
Re:uh (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, I can't comment much on the content of your article itself as all I get is a 404 when I click on the link. Aside from that, much of the outrage over your "opinion piece" seems to be because this looks like nothing more than whoring for publicity for your little blog. The high UID and lack of any comments in your history prior to today doesn't help either. In addition, anytime somebody validly criticizes you, you get un
May I suggest instead ... (Score:4, Funny)
Thanks.
Great. bring back the good old days (Score:2)
A user doesnt need any more then just a terminal. Anything else is waste of resources.
The concept isn't bad, but the application stinks (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately, a huge majority of these applications are going active-x or other proprietary format, and are limiting users' access on a more fundamental level - they expand the coverage range but limit you by your access point. Our ticket system has just gone to an active-x system. Now I cannot access it from my laptop anymore. So instead of making things more flexible for me and being able to access the system from any of the 200 machines in the building that I used to be able to use, I now can access it from less than two dozen machines, only one of which I have convenient access to.
Wonderful, just wonderful.
.NET objective..... (Score:2)
Re:.NET objective..... (Score:2)
Um, no.
However, this really has no relevance, as this article is crap...
Maybe I should write an article about monkey DNA, and devote ten pages to how Windows is perfect, Linux is the devil and then put in the last paragraph, "Monkeys have DN
Worst Article EVER (Score:5, Insightful)
suspicious Cache files too? (Score:2, Interesting)
it may be nothing but on the otherhand it may be an Evil shell script, next time i find one i will examine it closer...
Bandwidth will stop this (Score:2)
Re:Bandwidth will stop this (Score:2)
Of course this is assuming that broadband in the US is cheaper then the UK, which most things normally are.
This article misses the point. (Score:3, Insightful)
"factors that Microsoft paid little to no attention to and still don't today would be gaming consoles..."
The X-Box and the X-Box 360? Microsoft put billions of dollars into those gaming consoles.
"As experience tells us, 'easily used' operating systems such as Windows are notorious for poor security..."
What about Apple's Unix-based OS X? That's often considered easier to use than Windows for new computer users.
"resulting in a poorly designed operating platform and ignorant users who don't know the difference between WEP and WPA..."
It seems like he's arguing that the users of an operating system determine the quality of that operating system.
Really, I think this article misses the point. Internet-based OSes will not be feasible now or in the near future, I agree; however, that has more to do with bandwidth limitations, and the enormous variety of hardware out there, than security flaws in Windows (Live?). Security will always be a big issue--especially when distributed to a network of hundreds of millions of computers--but the hardware and infrastructure issues will derail the process much earlier and more severely, IMO.
404 - Page not found (Score:2, Informative)
Re:404 - Page not found (Score:2)
Re:404 - Page not found (Score:4, Informative)
Re:404 - Page not found (Score:2)
It will resemble the Mainframe/Dumb Terminal world (Score:2)
Well... (Score:3, Funny)
Not Found
The requested URL was not found on this server. Please visit the Blogger homepage or the Blogger Knowledge Base for further assistance.
Sure told them!
Poetic... Blogger: 404 - Page not found... (Score:2)
Questions for the blogger... (Score:3, Interesting)
Being the author of the original piece and the guy who submitted the summary, I'd expect him to have a fairly good grasp on how to summarize it. However the summary reads as if a Web based OS would be a bad thing, yet he states in the blog post:
So do you think it's a good idea or a bad idea?
Also, why is the Slashdot summary focussed on the idea of a web based OS when you only mention the term once, and refer to a 'Web Windows' one time?
IT Phone Home! (Score:4, Insightful)
Gmail updates whether I like it or not. I'm always using the latest version, so now i'm stuck with a fking IM client for a mail host.
Hamachi doesn't run online, but phones home constantly and nags you relentlessly to "update to version X.X" every time they release a minor bug fix. When you give in and click "update" the thing is riddled with new bugs the previous version didn't have.
iTunes is similar. I never wanted all the bloat the latest versions give me. Thank christ its not an online prog. I can run the version I choose.
I spent $99 on HalfLife 2 and *cannot* play it anymore because of the very poor "Phone Home" code in steam that refuses to contact the server.
I got locked out of *my own* computer once for a day after an XP update. That wasn't cheap
I'm desparately trying to swap to linux to avoid the Vista DRM hell.
I love accessing my software from this computer remotely (using hamachi at present, but this seems to be an under developed tech) & would love to use a web interface to access info & software from my home PC from any device at any time, but I would like to retain the power over what runs on *my* pc & where that info is stored.
InternetOS (Score:4, Insightful)
Ummmm...
Can't you run thin clients (of some variety) over the Internet? Like the variety that consist of a boot disk (floppy, CD, or boot ROM) and pull the rest from elsewhere?
The problem with all of this (Score:3, Interesting)
If it is open for users to install their own programs, then everyone here will complain that it's a huge security risk and will lead to the death of the internet bla bla bla.
Re:It won't necessarily ruin security. (Score:2, Interesting)
Everyone knows this. You are just repeating facts that you probably don't entirely understand. It's not just because they audit code, there's far more to it than that. Checking for errors doesn't help is the system is poor by design! OpenBSD have made a number of design choices as they have created their OS (some of which have been made by the projects they have forked from); fo
Re:It won't necessarily ruin security. (Score:2)
Darn it.... For a second you had me thinking you actually had a point.
The problem isn't the OS, even under the best applications.
It ultimately is going to come down to a matter of giving the user the trust to run an application that they download from the internet. And the level of trust that the software accessing the internet will be able to actually identify or moderate the downloading of software for the user.
Today you have dumb people downloading bad programs all the time in forms of bots. None o
Re:It won't necessarily ruin security. (Score:2)
I'm glad you're aware. (Score:2, Funny)
Good for you! I'm happy that you might have a clue as to how to write solid, secure software. Indeed, it is true that we can all use OpenBSD as a development model to emulate. Doing so will help us write secure, quality code. And if we run it on OpenBSD, all the better!
Now if only Microsoft were to wake up to the benefits offered by a development
Re:I'm glad you're aware. (Score:2)
I'm glad you're already aware of what I pointed out. You likely read one of my other posts in which I've pointed out such facts, and thus were already in the know.
Uhh.. I think he was trying to say that your entire post was blatantly obvious to anyone that has more than 3 brain cells. You entire post can be summed up with the statement "If we do things right, we won't have problems!" Uhh. duh. The comments about going into politics or religion are spot on. You don't need to be smart, or right to suceed
Re:I'm glad you're aware. (Score:2)
Nevertheless, there is no reason why Microsoft can't draw from the OpenBSD development model. It shouldn't conflict with their desire to remain compatibl
Re:It won't necessarily ruin security. (Score:2)
Re:It won't necessarily ruin security. (Score:3, Interesting)
The original point the poster made warrants discussion - he actually attempted to address the question, unlike yourself; you seem to be obsessed with the Slashdot moderation system, frankly, who cares if his post gets rated high or not?
The design of such a system is important, and the people who brought you net send [microsoft.com] possibly are
Re:It won't necessarily ruin security. (Score:2)
frankly, who cares if his post gets rated high or not?
Four words; signal to noise ratio. Lets cut down on the superfluous karma whoring, please, so the more interesting stuff (that makes slashdot what it is) has a chance.
Re:Wow! A post to your own blog! (Score:4, Funny)
The requested URL was not found on this server. Please visit the Blogger homepage or the Blogger Knowledge Base for further assistance.
So much for saying "No" to the Eecutable Internet. "They" must have gotten him.
Re:Wow! A post to your own blog! (Score:5, Funny)
Obviously the internet executed him.
Re:Wow! A post to your own blog! (Score:5, Informative)
Reading it's a waste of time, but here's the mirror [mirrordot.org] for those interested.
Re:The real fear (Score:3, Funny)
I see we have a new candidate here for the worst acronym ever to emerge from the bowels of Linux and Open Source.