Glad you said "next to nobody".
I have an Acer Iconia A500, has a full sized USB and HDMI output.
I've only used the USB a few times (keyboard and a thumb drive). When I did use the USB port I was very happy it was there!!
no, I am not suggesting you use un-encrypted wireless and most certainly not suggesting we get rid of firewalls either.
I am suggesting that there are way too many techs that forget how to take care of the end user and make their experience an easier one.
You should also add in the time it takes to install that cert on every device.
There are 2 basic attitudes I see here:
1. Who cares if the user gets errors, they should have installed the cert
2. Just set it up according to Microsoft's recommendations and not have users complain.
#1 will result in numerous calls to whatever helpdesk is available. In the extreme, you get the owner/ceo/exec/etc... barking at you because they don't understand the error message. Or, you use an internal CA and have to manually manage all devices. What do you tell the owner when they get a new phone on Sunday morning and ask you why they can't just set it up.
#2 results in no errors for the end user...it just plain works. The only ones who seem to have a problem are engineers/techs that don't seem to care what the end-user experience is.
You can go about this either way. It's your choice.
I prefer to setup systems so that users don't need to call me every time they get a new device, computer,etc. That is what the autodiscover service is for!
To avoid "this is an un-trusted root CA", you should use a public cert.
Is it better to setup the cert properly to not give errors, or teach your users to ignore them?
How is this new? People have been using internal server names (fully qualified and not) for a long time.
In fact, Microsoft Exchange "best practices" state you should be using the unqualified server name as one of the SAN entries in the SSL cert.
Better than home depot, Etymotic full frequency plugs are great:
I agree with the Etymotic earplug recommendation. I have had a pair since the late 90's and they are great.
Granted, I haven't used them in years and they are probably a bit gross now. meh....
100% big enough for you?
The App Store is not 100% of apps sold.
They are the sole marketplace for i-apps.
No they aren't. There are something north of three to four million jailbroken phones at this point, all of which can use the Cydia store. And the jailbreaking tools are so easy anyone who cares to can use them.
The ONLY reason apple's app bannings are news is because they assert 100% control
Since they don't I guess there is another reason. It appears it's the Apple Hating Fever.
Hold on a second.....
You are stating that because a jailbroken iPhone can use a 3rd party store this is all Apple Hating?
How about the fact that you MUST jailbreak your iPhone to use it with a 3rd party store?
Ok, how about the fact that iPhone Jailbreaking Could Crash Cellphone Towers, Apple Claims.
Sorry, just trying to point out a problem with logic.
Wait, but you can use a 3rd party store...but you have to jailbreak your phone, which is bad......
I tell people that Android is a failed experiment that proves that Carriers' and Manufacturers' greed will kill any open source advantages that Android could have brought.
Then sir, you are a fool. How exactly is is a failed experiment? My phone seems to work just fine, I can find any application I want...and...I can replace my battery!
Nothing succeeds like excess. -- Oscar Wilde
