Can you see Apple doing a UK only version of Imessage? Not a chance. Not only because its a pain in the rear re: legal, code, which phones are to be be targeted etc but more importantly, once they cave to one Western government, it will be all of them asking for the same thing.

All Apple would have to do is say "Sorry, no Imessage because UK government wants to snoop on your stuff and we don't want to let them" and the government would about turn so fast that they would break the sound barrier.

Also it's a certain amount of BS on the governments part because most Police action is intelligence led and secondly, failure to surrender a password makes you liable for up to two years inside. They have the tools to fix this, they just want more power.

Oh and no one has told them... Major criminal orgs will just create their own encryption using COTS encryption libraries. You cant "undo encryption" and put it back in its bottle.

Sorry couldn't resist!

I wouldn't trust BT to secure a WIFI point let alone a military system.

So I know a lot of people do Facebook, Twitter etc but for those of us that work doing any form of content creation of value desktops beat out most of the competition. For example... I am writing a white paper at the minute and doing so on a desktop. With a decent amount of grunt, good keyboard and dual monitors I can do stuff so much quicker than any other device, esp for media intensive ops.

There will always be a place for desktops.

I sent Disney a mail to the office of the CEO and complained about the terrible treatment of those American workers (I am not American BTW) but I did get a reply and I like to think that everyone who did the same helped with the cause.

People laughed when I said I had done it, but it proves I did a tiny bit to help some jobs and I feel good, damnit :)

I just suggest everyone does the same and tells them what theyI am writing to you as a potential visitor to your resorts and occasional consumer of your media to complain in the most intense terms possible about your companies attitude towards its IT staff in general, and specifically those employed within these resorts.

If recent reports are to be believed (http://www.computerworld.com/article/2915904/it-outsourcing/fury-rises-at-disney-over-use-of-foreign-workers.html) , you have just replaced one hundred and fifty hardworking staff with offshore labour that is cheaper.

The reasons given, unfortunartly don't jel with any reasonable person who believes in a healthy economy. Workers should be paid their proper worth and be allowed to bring up their families without the threat of an offshore person taking that job.

It is not even as though Disney is doing badly in terms of income and needs to cut costs. The only people that benefit from this action is mostly corporate share holders and the one percent of the population, including board members such as yourself. If you truly believe in a strong proud America, you should be looking to keep those good workers and give them something to be proud of.

I fully expect that such a plea falls on deaf ears, but I will be doing what I can to ensure that Disney recieves no income from me. My wife and I were planning to go to Disneyland this year. However in light of your shortsighted attitude to US workers I will take my dollars elsewhere. I will also try my hardest to make sure people know how Disney treats their employees.

Yours sincerely think of Disney.

I can't remember exactly which book, but the book pointed out how easy it could be.

Ignore messing around with firmware etc. The book foretold the story that someone would be using a online take out service/delivery service and they had setup all their allergies so that any restaurant saw a red flag and to be careful what goes in the meal. Someone hacks into just-eat or whomever the provider is. The customers Peanut allergy suddenly goes away on the notes and the dish is prepared as normal a week later. Instant severe incident if not death.

I'm so glad I don't have food allergies.

2.6 Billion. Really ?

Holy shit, maybe I should create some fairly non descript website that some hipsters use and then sell it for a whole frigging lot more than it will probabily ever bring in in revenue.

I have no idea how these people make these values, but they are totally not based on reality.

We are so totally heading towards a tech bubble burst. Unfortunately, it is my pension that will suffer when it goes pop and a few millionaires walk away smiling with a load of cash.

I have to agree that Beta is not so awesome. Doesn't work on my droid phone so I lose 30 mins a day looking at other sites.

A lot of the issues go deeper than Beta though. Firstly, as IT folks we are (mostly!):

Educated
Have disposable income
Revel in nerdy stuff
Have decision making/influencing power.

All the above is an IT advertisers wet dream

I am starting to find the content rather dull and repetitive.

Can you imagine the sort of stories that could be brought to Slashdot as an exclusive if Slashdot actually paid for original unique content and also got editors that can do the job to a higher standard. Imagine the uber geek stuff that could be created if people were motivated enough. Original stuff that brings new blood, new thinking, decent ad revenue. Think of the interesting stories that could be told by you guys, right here, if you had the incentive.

I can't disclose exactly what I am writing about at present, but all the good stuff is going to people who pay me for my time. Slashdot needs some of this!

In short rather than messing with beta, start getting some original content. Differentiate Slashdot, make it relevant, make it fresh.

Err, you are totally wrong..

You go into security settings and tick a box in there. I know as i did it last night with Wireshark.

Those involved in Virtualisation probably (or should have) known this anyhow.

The Hypervisor war is done. Pretty much everyone (VMware, MS, Citrix) have their new cloud based offerings that are agnostic towards the hypervisor that runs on the tin. If you have played with vClould Automation Center for example, there are multiple options for the hypervisor types including Citrix. The bottom line is there is not much more to add to to hyervisor and there is also less money in the hypervisor. It is an old (mature?) technology.

The new hot button is the tools to manage the infrastructure and that is where the real war is going to be won or lost.

From my point of view (and it is only that!) I don't see what is so wrong with banning it from public wifi spots. Two things occur to me:

Firstly, it means less issues with people who don't know better browsing for it in Starbucks for example.

Secondly, if you want it, go home and download or if you are really stuck, just buy a personal hotspot thingy from your provider.

Lastly (ok that makes 3) it probably reduces your susceptibility to lawsuits (Oh my little johnny say a nipple and is now traumatised, show me the money) as the providers have made a reasonable effort to keep it clean.

Yep, I know its a few thou per socket depending on edition and such. I was on about a few hundred per VMs, but yep, I know what you mean :)

Hi

Speaking as someone who spends 100% of their working week in VMware it's no biggie. A (very) small group of us look after a stack just as big as that.

With MS entreprise agreements that mean you now have to a seperate for each socket in the cluster (ie when DRS moves the guest to another cluster node or you get a host failure and HA kicks in) it costs an awful lot and also makes Hyper V looks more enticing to the bean counters as the Enterprise comes with all the Hyper V management tools..

VMware realise they cannot compete on cost and they have said as much. No matter what you say about Hyper V I have seen some nasty failures that just wouldn't happen in VMware (and lets not forget host failures can mean loosing 30 guests at one time (Lets not go into allowable failure scenarios..)

I have seen a Hyper V guest mentally shit itself and cause the host to fail in such a manner that the failed machines didn't restart. So rather than have a restart on another cluster member a guest was able to take out a host. Just wouldn't happen with VMware and it's highly advanced Virtual Machine Manager. VMware also has awesome other features including shared memory paging etc etc.

Big business craves stability over saving a few hundred bucks per machine. However VMware are coming up with interesting new stuff and more interestingly the more advanced features are flowing down into more basic editions.

Just my 2 cents.

Ok, so we know that Google have issues with trusting apps at the moment.

It would be easier if Google just bought em. Ready made solution requiring little "start from scratch and try and compete"

That way, they get a ready made market. Few people are going to abandon it because it forms part of their "Digital life"