25 posts • joined Friday 3rd August 2012 01:30 GMT
Seems Adobe believes their own propaganda though...
I actually had a very firm "chat" with my local Adobe office a month ago with respect to this matter.
A senior Adobe sales representative had called me to preach their Creative Cloud offerings. She claimed that it was more "economical" than their boxed solutions of the past and et cetera. What?
(A) We've been utilizing a dozen copies of CS3 since 2007. Each license cost us USD 1,400.00 at launch and said license allows us to use the product for as long as we see fit. That's USD 233.33 a year to date. You'll find that "Creative Cloud for Teams" costs at least three times that amount.
And that's an amount which is further subject to review on a yearly basis.
(B) No Adobe, we do NOT need every single damned product under your umbrella in order to function our business. We are perfectly fine with Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and Acrobat. We do not see it as "value added" having a ton and a bit of applications we do not use. We see it as a complete waste of money.
(C) Upon hearing earlier in the year that Adobe was headed in this direction we actually upgraded all of our licenses to CS6 which enables us to shun away from Creative Cloud for as long as it is possible to do so. We have used CS3 for six years... I don't see why we can't use CS6 for just as long if not longer.
(D) It's obvious that Adobe has lost touch with reality and firmly believes that every single business in the creative industry is swimming in cash. It's a hugely competitive arena and there are many who barely survive. Both I and my finance controller will definitely sleep better at night if we don't have to worry whether or not we can afford our upcoming yearly license renewals because that'll be a pretty shitty situation of "if we upgrade, we're in the minus; if we don't, we can't work".
So to sum it up...
Adobe: F*ck you.
(P.S. We need Linus's iconic nVidia-Middle-Finger as an icon here...)
"The idea behind what became FireWall-1 was first developed in April 2003."
Re: If you can't create tech, criticize it
Enabling "Click to Run/Play/Etc" is all very well for users such as ourselves who have a better understanding of the risks which lurk around the corners of the Internet.
For your everyday Jane and Joe though all you're going to accomplish is increased left mouse button wear.
The trouble here is training your users to NOT be trigger happy and click "Yes" to every single damned prompt to run a plugin. And this is a lot easier said than done. Especially so if your target demographic are those adamant that a free Mickey Mouse Pointer is crucial to their "productivity".
It's a little bit like password policies. It almost doesn't matter at all that your IT policy prohibits staff from writing down passwords. People will still do it no matter how threatening you are. Same story with access control passes (be it key cards or 2FA tokens)... "DO NOT LEAVE IT UNATTENDED"... Yeah, right.
Re: As always, the victim would need to fail the Java user IQ test
Well. There are quite a lot of rather naive users out there who will always give the benefit of doubt and assume that there's no evil to be found on the Internet and that everything everyone's doing is for the good of humanity.
Java's assumption that a security dialogue is the resolution for their shortcomings in security is, well... meh.
Having said that though it certainly does seem that there are quite a number of individuals sitting on a huuuge cache of Java vulnerabilities and only releasing them a tiny bit at a time and preferably right after a major patch.
Speaking of 16-bit DOS applications though. You'd be right in making the assumption that they do still have a nasty habit of appearing from time to time and rather unexpectedly.
A number of years ago (2008 or so) I had the displeasure of being in a situation where our finance department acquired a "new" payroll application (of course with the feedback and approval of IT, not) which didn't quite work.
Turns out that while the software was 32-bit it relied on a bundled install of FoxPro as its database back-end...
...which was 16-bit.
Fair comment. I did consider that possibility but it really does seem that customers who require support for said 16-bit DOS applications would much rather just stick to Windows XP and "play it safe" rather than move to a more modern operating system.
This would be especially true if some sort of web interface is involved somewhere which would have inevitably been built around Internet Explorer 6 and some obscure and highly specific version of Java.
A completely useless utility then.
Seriously; is there any good reason to even use Windows 7 32-bit over 64-bit?
Microsoft even acknowledges that certain security features (such as ASLR) aren't implemented as well on 32-bit Windows versus 64-bit.
...that is all.
This isn't the first time...
...back in iOS4 there was another vuln allowing passcode bypass.
Simple solution (if you have Chrome)...
SDELETE Adobe Reader (or DBAN your drive if you're feeling particularly hateful)... then...
1) Right click on PDF file
2) Open with...
3) Find chrome.exe
4) "Always use the selected program to open this kind of file"
5) Say "Yipee!"
Now I do admit that you'll need Chrome installed in order for this to work (might be doable in other browsers with built-in PDF viewers but I haven't tested accordingly) and yes I am also aware that Chrome's PDF rendering isn't necessarily the best in the world.
Having said that however Chrome does open the vast majority of PDF files I have to deal with without issues and hence I have actually been without Adobe Reader for quite some time now.
And yes, Chrome may have their own issues from time to time but let's be honest here; they patch a HECK OF A LOT faster than Adobe.
Interesting business model
I've been following this whole OCZ hu-la-la for some time now and from what I can recall OCZ wishes to fully exit the low to mid range consumer market and instead focus on the enthusiast and enterprise market.
This is an interesting proposition considering it's the enthusiast market they have royally given the shaft in the past and I don't know about you but I do believe a decent chunk of said enthusiasts also tend to be in the IT industry and so by having shafted said enthusiasts they didn't just lose some "individual" sales but surely some enterprise sales as well.
OCZ's shortcomings are well documented and even with their "recent" release of their thus-far-spectacular OCZ Vector there is still a thick aura of sourness surrounding any mention of OCZ. Pretty much every single OCZ Vector review for instance doesn't just highlight how stunning the OCZ Vector is but also how not-so-brilliant OCZ's track record has been. Furthermore said reviews are often loaded with user comments on how a given individual/organization has sworn to never touch OCZ ever again.
It's really hard justifying the risk in purchasing an OCZ product these days given the crap track-record the company has portrayed and their current financial difficulties doesn't make matters any better. And don't forget, these so-called "enthusiasts" tend to be people who spend a decent amount of time reading up on a product rather than committing to a "blind" purchase in a shop down the street.
Despite all that though I did pull the trigger on two OCZ Vector 256GB SSD's a month plus ago as I do believe in giving a second chance. Plus OCZ did undergo a CEO/CFO change since their darker days.
And I do hope for a brighter future for OCZ. Not just in the interest of the warranty on my two not-so-cheap SSD's. But more in the interest of them being around to further push the envelope of SSD technology. Don't forget that OCZ had always been the leader of the pack. They have always been right at the forefront of SSD technology and they have paid the price (OCZ was often accused of treating its consumers as beta testers).
In that sense I do believe that OCZ doesn't receive enough credit where it's due. They pushed the boundaries while other manufacturers were sitting around with their thumbs up their butt-holes and "playing it safe" (i.e. waiting for someone else to make the first move to learn from their mistakes).
Re: I think the only solution here is DBANing the drives.
+1 for DBAN. It has served me extremely well over the years.
These days though I usually leave a copy of Parted Magic around just in case I need to secure erase an SSD.
(And for HDD's it does come with a copy of Nwipe which is a DBAN fork which can run from Parted Magic.)
Re: Oh, I love this!
I'm with you on this. I used to love Firefox. Unfortunately however over the years not only has resource usage gone up it's not entirely uncommon to see Firefox in infinite loop ("hmm why is my notebook fan suddenly going into hyper-drive when it's only my browser that's open?") and silently consume all available PRAM there is to consume.
It's sad really. It used to be an awesome browser.
I'd never use Opera because of their constant whining to the EU about Microsoft's "monopoly". Perhaps if they weren't charging for a browser back when everyone else was already giving them out for free they'd have less problems today.
Chrome? I've still got this love-hate relationship with it. I've got both Chrome and IE pinned to my task bar with IE being my browser of choice (albeit with cookies and java script disabled globally with a few exceptions for sites I generally trust). I don't know... never really trusted Google I suppose when it came to the topic of "privacy".
This little IE problem here though... that's really become the final straw for me despite my precautions. Even though I have java script disabled for all sites not within my trusted zone it's all too common for websites to be compromised these days.
Back to Chrome it is I guess. Rather Google have my data than a bunch of hackers.
(And yup, I'm paranoid.)
Next up: SMS rates.
It's ridiculous having to pay 0.05$ (or more in other countries) for every 160 bytes of data.
(Yes I'm aware it's a little more due to header information and that you get less characters per message segment for multipart messages but you get the point.)
That's bloody fifty grand per megabyte. So... WTB Clue?
(Also from what I've gathered SMS's these days pretty much follow the same data path as 2G/3G, so what in the royal heck is up with the price? Sheesh.)
Re: Why doesn't Apple simply 'Man Up'?
...quite frankly the very least Apple could do at this stage is to hurry the heck up their approval for the Google Maps iOS App...
...someone's obviously had one too many.
SSL VPN through Port 443
... and they're going to block that how exactly?
I know this has been mentioned already but it really is worth mentioning again that this article misses out on one of the biggest problems with Mac in the enterprise; hardware support (or lack thereof).
I oversee a 100% Windows and Linux environment. 100% with the exception of one director, that is.
Not long ago the Macbook Pro of said director suffered an unknown logic board failure. The quickest solution was to fail over to a spare Macbook Air we had around and without going into the details lets just say the whole transition from Pro to Air, waiting for two weeks for Apple to mend the Pro, and then going from the Air back to the Pro was nothing short of a major pain in the arse... and a complete waste of time.
With our Windows and Linux systems however we have varying levels of ON-SITE hardware support (ranging from 24/7 4-Hour response times for upper management to Five-Days-a-Week Office Hour 4-Hour response times for everyone else, at minimum). Even without said support in place most trivial problems are a breeze to fix with a small cache of spare parts lying around.
Furthermore, for emergencies where even a 4-Hour response time is deemed too slow, non-drive related failures are as easy as pulling out the drive from a dead system, putting it into a functional spare, and updating TPM. Most staff however are comfortable with doing something which doesn't involve their computer during the 4-Hour downtime and with our experience thus far spare parts are always delivered via DHL Express within 30-60 minutes of me putting the phone down (and our vendor lets our own in-house staff do the fixing, though an engineer can also come down for trickier replacement procedures more typical with notebooks).
So... until Apple can come up with similar hardware support; thanks, but no thanks.
RE: "+1 for calling it Vista 2"
I've actually been calling it Windows ME 3.
Seems everyone has forgotten about *that* calamity though.
Totally agree here. Damn “Cloud” has been the most over-used, over-hyped and over-promoted IT term of the past decade. I’ll stick to being in direct control of my content, thanks. Remember the news article from a couple days back how someone social-engineered his way through Apple support and managed to remote-wipe iWhatever devices he didn’t actually own? What a joke. It’s issues like this that time and time again highlight the perpetual problem of lack of foresight in the IT industry by major decision makers. Cut costs now to get your promotion then let your successors clean up the mess a few years down the road created by your incompetent self.
Not much of a surprise?
I've always been a supporter of OpenGL going back to the early Quake days due to better cross-platform compatibility and, from the looks of it, it is simply a better optimized API.
The popularity of DirectX is frankly mind-boggling.
I can only assume however that it's easier for developers to use DirectX than OpenGL (either because it's simply an easier API to understand or because it is easier to port games to/from the Xbox. And, you know, porting games has been the "in" thing to do for some time now).
I'm no programmer though and these are just assumptions. It is very sad though how rarely OpenGL is utilized in games these days and I applaud any developer who uses it.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire