Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:So Let Me Get This Straight (Score 1) 196

I use MS products every bloody day. We upgraded to a Server 2012 network last year, we run Exchange 2010, all our workstations run Windows, with Office on them.

I have to deal with its often inelegant solutions to automation and remote administration (seriously, at one point we had GUI "scripting"). Yes, they've built better tools than they had, but all those tools ever seem to do is demonstrate the old maxim; those that don't understand Unix are doomed to re-implement it badly. Even Powershell is just gawdawful hard to use, and while it's better than the collection vbscript files, batch files, registry files and the like that came before it, I still find the process of Windows scripting just dreadful.

Windows needs Bash and the standard Unix toolkit, badly. Yes, there might be some kludges here and there, but WTF is the registry but just a bunch of setting/value pairs in a hierarchy. We were using text-based tools ten years ago to manipulate it, building registry files or using CLI registry utilities. Binary data was a pain, to be sure, but most of the registry is all just plain text.

Comment Re:So Let Me Get This Straight (Score 1) 196

And it's not as if Exchange is easy. Yes, there's the brain dead configuration that comes out of the box, but if you want to do anything like advanced filtering it suddenly becomes very complex. We run Exchange 2010 where I work, and a few months ago I wanted to do some scripting on incoming emails to a specific mailbox. Certainly possible, but man oh man, between being forced to work in Powershell and the awkwardness of Exchange itself, I ended up implementing it on the Postfix server that sits between the Exchange server and the network. Postfix passes off the message via STDIO to my Bash script, I pulled out the attachments I need to save elsewhere for further processing, and it's been humming like a charm ever since.

Maybe some of it has to do with the fact that I'm a *nix guy, and it's more familiar terrain, but I really can't get over just difficult Powershell and Exchange can be, where the *nix philosophy just makes things so much easier.

Comment Re:So Let Me Get This Straight (Score 1) 196

Gosh, what did we ever do before Windows 2000? Authentication by clay tablet?

It's the egocentric nature of MS's claims, that somehow computing couldn't be done without its products, that pisses me off the most. It denies an absolute vast amount of work done in these areas for decades before derivative technologies like AD even existed

Just like how Redmondites are doubtless cheering the innovation of giving Windows admins what everyone else has had for decades. This isn't a moment for pride at Redmond, but the moment when if fully recognizds just how shabbily it treated people stuck trying to do automation on its amazingly incoherent platform.

Comment Re: Turd (Score 5, Interesting) 196

What do you mean no rhyme or reason? The basic toolset; cat, sh, mv, rm, and so forth are mnemonics. The point being to make the commands as short as possible while retaining some semblance of meaning. For me Powershell's absurdly verbose naming scheme is as good a sign as any that Microsoft has never really understood CLI work.

Comment Re:So Let Me Get This Straight (Score 1) 196

So essentially it took until 2009 for Microsoft to even begin to admit that RPC, a few rather crappy scripting host options and RDP were inadequate, but it took them over six more years to finally implement what is pretty much the gold standard of encrypted TTY interfaces.

Maybe this is part of the turning over a new leaf, but I can't help but imagine that the next version of Microsoft's coursework will announce how innovative all of this, much as it went around declaring how innovative Powershell was, when all it really is is an overly complicated descendant of Bash, inelegant, overly verbose and unnecessarily convoluted. But yes, it is the best solution MS has ever come up with to remotely administer servers in a programmatic way.

What a bloody pity they just didn't admit their long battle against *nix was idiotic, and just implement Bash and the standard toolset. But then, I guess the obfuscation which has been so much a part of NT and its descendants' success would disappear as well.

I just hope all the Redmondites see the irony of MS sitting around for two decades declaring NT's superiority because, you know, Windows and all, and now essentially reinventing, badly in many cases, what the Unix ecosystem has had for decades.

Comment Re:So Let Me Get This Straight (Score 2) 196

Windows had a Telnet server, to be sure. But you had to be pretty damned careful as to which commands you used. We did play around with Cygwin's bash script running in a TTY on Windows 2000, but it was clunky and slow (like everything in Cygwin was, and maybe still is, I dropped it years ago). In the end it just wasn't a very good CLI-based management platform because 1. there was no good native pure CLI-based toolset to administer a system, 2. no good TTY based text editor, and 3. it was bloody Telnet, and unless you were going to throw everything in an encrypted tunnel, it simply wasn't secure enough for production servers.

Comment Re:How is this newsworthy? (Score 1) 287

You don't have any natural rights to be free from tigers or from gravity. But you DO have the natural expectation that another rational being will understand that if they attack you, they are waiving their own claim on living peacefully. That you don't grasp this is pretty amazing, really.

You'll find that your idea of "rights" disappears quite quickly as soon as any functioning society breaks down.

My "idea" of rights exists at any scale and under any circumstances. That's the entire point. Irrational people do indeed look to take advantage circumstances in which they feel willing to take the chance that their use of violence will go unchallenged because of unpleasant or unexpected circumstances. Which doesn't change the fact that they lose their claim to life when they deny you yours. That's the right you naturally have: to use (or have used on your behalf) the violence necessary to defend your life. Why? Because rational people don't kill other people except in self defense. Those who initiate the violence waive their rights to live in peace.

You're confusing having a right with happening to have the power to defend it at some particular time. These are not the same thing.

Slashdot Top Deals

The universe is an island, surrounded by whatever it is that surrounds universes.

Working...