If people didn't go to the movies, they wouldn't make money. They know (Hollywood, that is) that they'll get a $12 ticket from enough aging geeks for a lame turd of an eye-poking 3D pile of mawkish sentimental rehash sludge to make their money back. Plus, the movie tie-ins are worth a lot of money - how much does McDonald's pay for the rights for those Happy Meal Toys? Mattel? The video game rights?
I guarantee this will make its money back. No matter how bad it is - they'll make it in some kind of tax shelter state or country which has a huge tax rebate on movie production, count the full cost of production against the bottom line, and claim it lost money to all the people involved with the actual production. All while the money people make a healthy profit.
So, would you go see it? Of course you would. Even if it's mediocre. They just have to buy enough good reviews to get you into the theater. They don't have to actually work.
Now, on a more serious note, let's see who the creative team is that is working on it before saying it'll suck. There are some very good writers, directors, and cinematographers out there who won't give it the "G.I. Joe: Rise of My Gorge" treatment.
We converted all our customers over to Gmail before I started working at my current job. Now, this was after the old mailserver got hacked (long story) but it makes life a hell of a lot easier for communication. IMAPS and POP3S out of the box, decent web UI, and it would have to be a spectacularly retarded sysadmin that would block inbound Gmail.
I did run a mailserver at my old job - actually, three of them in a load-balancing arrangement. I'm much happier with not having to deal with the problems in running a modern mail server.
I'm in that situation - we've got a proprietary point of sale system that a lot of our customers run, that was written for SCO OpenServer. To move to Linux would cost $7,000 - $15,000 in license fees for the license transfer, so they're staying on SCO. An SCO OpenServer 6 license is a lot cheaper than the Thoroughbred software stack it's written in.
It's not a bad system - the problem with SCO was never their technical abilities. I really can't complain about its stability either - that damn things just keep running, and the most we have to do is replace tape drives and fans every once in a blue moon...
Actually, it doesn't. The interfaces can be named the same on reboot, but the initial numbering is semi-random.
The problem arises when you're trying to deploy a large number of machines, and you know which devices are where on the PCI buses (modern servers are coming with 4 Ethernet ports on the motherboard now). That way, you can assign VLANs and IPs to specific ports in a kickstart file and the installer doesn't have to play the "which interface is eth1" game. Which is not fun. We should not be relying on automagic configuration for something as basic as ethernet...
<rant>this is why I don't like the
This doesn't get into crappy BIOSes that enumerate devices badly, or NICs that have a bad habit of initializing late.
At my last job we sold CentOS-based routers and fileservers. I'd rename the interfaces ethWAN and ethLAN in the
Debian's udev rules also tried it, but it didn't work out so well for systems that had a lot of changes - we've got machines in the field that are on
I got to see a presentation given by a nuclear scientist who went there last year on a vacation - it can be done, but it takes at least one person in the tour that speaks decent Russian. Wild pictures - growing up at the end of the Cold War, seeing an abandoned, looted Soviet-era city is a little creepy.
Scratch that, a whole bunch of creepy.
The guy doing the presentation had his own geiger counter, and was showing just how hot some areas of Chernobyl still were. It was wild stuff, and sobering...
Um. I set up a IPv6 environment in my Cisco classes, and it turns out that XP doesn't do DHCPv6. That's a Vista / Windows 7 thing. I went far enough to ping addresses, but you'd have to manually set the addresses and routing information.
Worthless.
We've got a Debian 3.0 and Red Hat 7.2 box still running - we keep meaning to move the scripts and data on them, but there's so much to do at work, I can't deal with it all...
OTOH, the Debian box is dead-reliable, and after moving the RH 7.2 hard drive to more stable hardware, it's stayed up for a while as well...
What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.
