Sure - I could. But that's extra devices and usually extra power points at those locations (esp if you want any POE - I doubt there will ever be a switch that can be powered by, AND deliver POE at the same time). So it's extra devices to buy and support and manage which is why I decided against it. Having the extra ports doesn't stop me doing it in the future either.

The flip side of course is that a failure in one of the big switches takes a LOT of things offline and it's more expensive to replace. Not the VM cluster or servers - but about half the other devices (e.g. one of the WAPs, half the desktop points etc).

OK Telstra has to record the source and destination numbers of all the calls - right? Here's a sample record (not that drawing a table is easy so work with CSV here):

FromID, ToID, TimeStart, TimeEnd
0299999999, 0288888888, 20090617135834, 20090617140711

How would you like to determine whether the number 0299999999, which is not owned or operated by Telstra today, and which was not owned or operated by Telstra in 2009 either, was or was not an unlisted number at the time of the call? Because its state right now is completely irrelevant - the state at the time of the call is the important and relevant piece of data, and it doesn't exist. And the reason it doesn't exist is that this is a record designed for billing and cross-checking, not for customer view (if you're arguing against unlisted numbers in toto, you've never been stalked).

I did this when I finally bought a place 15m ago. I went what I considered was pretty "nuts" on the cabling. Cat6A everywhere - 2 in every room except bathrooms, kitchen, laundry and foyer, 6 per room for the entertainment areas. 2 APs at opposite ends of the house, and everything terminates in a 6U cabinet in the garage (26 points total). The sparkie who did the cabling said he's just finished another place with over 50 points, similar approach to mine. So what would I do differently? Most rooms are fine. I find I could use more in one of the entertainment areas, but some of those devices are both wired and wireless (and if push came to shove, I would simply move a device to WiFi). I wish I had thought to put a couple of points near where the solar inverter will be, so I could run a Galileo or similar for monitoring - it'll have to be WiFi. But this gives me at least 1Gb with POE almost everywhere, and I can go to 10Gb if it's ever a requirement.

Look I know it's a tiny thing, and I'm in the "don't like U2 so might have been annoyed" camp. But at least some of the reasoning behind the annoyance is that this has hit a stack of data caps / data plans on mobile devices. "It's only 100MB" you say. But if that's 1/5th your monthly data and you only had 30MB left on the last 2 days of your month - now you have a bill thanks to Apple. And where does it stop? "Here's your free 100MB download" is a possible annoyance or a great thing once. It's a royal PITA for lots of people if it starts being every month or week. Or what if it was a 1GB movie instead? Is that OK because the free 100MB album push was OK, and $producer paid Apple eleventy squillion bucks, and it's free so don't complain? Sorry, there's nuances here you're deliberately ignoring, and it makes your argument look like a baseless whinge.

Oh, like you don't find on the Samsung Note 3 and Galaxy S5, you mean? Yeah no chance of seeing it on a phone.

Actually, combine the Yubikey with AuthLite, and you have 2FA for Windows AD environments. I just implemented for a customer; they use the OTP for the username and the normal password for the password. This has two benefits: first, you don't hit the arbitrary 48 character password length limit for things like VPNs (yeah - you can have a 128 character UTF16 password, just don't try to connect remotely) and secondly, there's no customisation of apps required. It Just Works.

I've seen comments like this a couple of times now and I have an easy way to demonstrate that bullying was (and is) illegal. I believe Aus and US law are not too far apart on this - either the bully hits the bullied, or does not. If he does, he can be found guilty of battery. If not, he can be found guilty of assault, (if the bullied person feels his safety is at risk that's technically enough).

Sure they do - all the major web servers and hosting platforms can use and define vhosts (it's just that the mechanism for creating them differs on each platform). IIS for example, if you create a new site, using "All IP Addresses" port 80, will require that you designate a host header so that the HTTP engine can route the request to the right Web Site (and corresponding content). All IP Addresses port 80 with an empty Host Header acts as a "catch-all" and is assigned to the Default Web Site. Which you generally disable, and create your own config for, if you know what you're doing. Apache, on the other hand, configures those vhosts in text files (nowadays under sites-enabled, as I recall). But the functionality is all there on pretty much all major platforms.

Now if you're arguing that the administrators of IIS servers are exponentially less likely to have a clue about host headers, when compared to their Apache/nginx counterparts - well then from my experience you're absolutely right (my history is MS consulting, and the number of IIS admins who want 20 IP addresses for 20 sites because they don't get how to do host headers, DNS resolution etc, cannot be counted - the reverse can be counted on both hands over 20 years of doing this stuff).

No, it means anecdotal evidence is to be taken as better than no evidence whatsoever. Not everything is black and white, one side of the fence or t'other.

Consider this as a scale - Peer reviewed, multiple-source reproducible trumps anecdotal evidence, but anecdotal evidence is still better than the absence of any evidence on either side.

Cop 1: "He looked like he was hiding something, yer onner". When we stopped him he kept looking around and acting strangely."

Cop 2: "Yeah, yeah, wot he said."

You: "I did no such thing, your honour."

Judge: Both cops say you did, 2 trusted public officials with no reason to lie against 1 obvious reprobate, probable cause, case dismissed with prejudice.

Do you really think the telcos would be able to charge full monthly fees for each car despite it sending a few dozen kB a month? Most likely something like the kindle model - where I'm guessing Amazon pay the telcos 20c a month or something, because while the total data amount is huge, the amount of data per device is so small and only the aggregate so large. Same with FROD. 50M extra data streams, once a day spread country-wide? Noise to the telco's existing data streams. Frod and all the others will negotiate the rates down to SFA, they get the data, the telcos get more revenue/profit and the only loser is you, the consumer.

Citation needed, since I recall no such major outcry. Your machine is probably one of the ones with 25 browser toolbars, or ten download accelerators, or fifty outdated browser plugins, or a couple of undetected rookits etc., which is usually the reason behind a security patch "crashing your machine".

And if Windows closed the app with unsaved work, you'd be here whinging that Microsoft destroyed your work. And if you really gave a crap, you'd go in and change the Windows Update setting from "Automatically install" to "Ask me first".

Microsoft has done some seriously stupid stuff. And some bad stuff. But if you want to abuse them, at least abuse them for the stupid stuff not the sane stuff.

So what you're saying is that it's Microsoft's fault your business held out for post-Win7, despite the knowledge that the end date was 2014 (and heck, that's been moved out by 2 years from the original date!). And it's also Microsoft's fault for not planning your app upgrades (what, you thought Win8 would be more compatible than Win7 for your XP apps)? Sounds to me like you think your lack of planning should constitute an emergency on my part. Bzzzzzt. Wrong. You made your bed, now you get to lie in it.

That comment in no way changes what was said in the GP post (though for clarity, while you could still buy WinXP about 4-5 years ago you are still not a current customer). The other point to consider though is the customer (company) who has 20x WinXP machines, 100x Win7 machines and 50x Win8.1 machines. They still are a customer, obviously, but IT moves so much faster than most older industries - it's like complaining your 1955 Studebaker isn't getting new parts made any more because it's 2013, and the original moulds/specs have been lost. The only difference is that you can't even retro-fit a cloned part.

Actually - that their software is open is irrelevant to the problem. Are they running their own servers with openssl/openvpn/??? or using third party appliances? Did THEY create and build the hardware from the ground up or purchase it from a third party? The balance of probabilities may say their inter-DC encryption is done on a secure, up-to-date and built-and-operated-to-best-practices RH server, but it's not a guarantee.

And just like this scenario with Microsoft, how is anyone going to audit the deployment? RH will most certainly not allow twenty million users to tour their datacentres and audit each and every device. So just like Microsoft's environment, and despite RH's code potentially being open, there is absolutely no way to vet the environment. You have to trust the organisation (and each and every person involved in the decision tree). I really don't see a significant and meaningful difference - the open code has no bearing whatsoever on what's actually running (both code-wise and configuration-wise).