[flagged]
[deleted]
Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
61–70 of 379 posts
Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#62The poor technicians having to RDP with (what I imagine must be) a horrible latency. Although still might be better than some corporate environments lol
At the time they were ~57,000km out and I calculated it was at least 380ms RTT to the ground receiver, so bad but not unusable.
Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#63Why on God's green earth is Windows running on the Artemis spaceship?
What should they use for email?
Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#64We migrated earlier this year and had a similar problem. Outlook (classic) works differently than the OWA version. They keep the classic version so people don't spontaneously throw a chair out a window. It's being phased out slowly.
I'm betting in 15 years, people will still be using Outlook (classic). This is the culture.
We could have said that for publisher a few years back. Its death knell has been sounded and microsoft aren't even offering any way for people to properly view or print their publisher files, let alone edit them.
Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not letting Microsoft off the hook here, but if you have an expensive metered connection and you're trusting clients (especially a modern personal computer of any operating system type)to play nicely with bandwidth, that's 100% on you.
That's a really sorry state of things, then. There's zero trust in software now, in the literal sense. How did it get that we live in a world where you can't trust a client to enforce its own documented behavior? How did it get to be the user's fault for not using OS and hardware level measures and not the software vendor's fault when the "Automatic updates" toggle is a no-op?
> How did it get that we live in a world where you can't trust a client to enforce its own documented behavior?
My guess a combo of economic incentives and weak legal protections.
I realize that answer applies to so many issues as to be almost not worth saving, but I think it's still true here.
Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#66Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not letting Microsoft off the hook here, but if you have an expensive metered connection and you're trusting clients (especially a modern personal computer of any operating system type)to play nicely with bandwidth, that's 100% on you.
That's a really sorry state of things, then. There's zero trust in software now, in the literal sense. How did it get that we live in a world where you can't trust a client to enforce its own documented behavior? How did it get to be the user's fault for not using OS and hardware level measures and not the software vendor's fault when the "Automatic updates" toggle is a no-op?
MBAs/consultants hijacked the industry along with an influx of people that only consider leetcode to be sufficient for hiring. The past 10 years has been a major injunction of these people into big tech. The resulting mess is predictable, it'll get worse too which is why we need to break up these companies and allow better more efficient companies to take their place rather than letting them subsidize their failures with their monopolies.
Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#68Everyone likes to point and laugh, sure, I'm getting a chuckle as well. However, on more practical level, what are other options? Outlook, the desktop application works really well with local copies, is pretty low bandwidth and very familiar to end users. IMAP with Thunderbird is probably only other option that would satisfy the requirements. EDIT: Yes they need to get email in space. It's easy way to send documents…
> Yes they need to get email in space. It's easy way to send documents back and forth. To me that's probably much more interesting. We assume they have all this fancy NASA tech, probably some special communication protocols, but nope, email is fine. Still not sure why they'd use Outlook, but I guess it's easier than retraining astronauts on Alpine or Mutt. How long did the US military rely on mIRC... decades, maybe t…
US Military still uses IRC/mIRC for similar reasons. Easy to self host and it's low bandwidth.
Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#69Everyone likes to point and laugh, sure, I'm getting a chuckle as well. However, on more practical level, what are other options? Outlook, the desktop application works really well with local copies, is pretty low bandwidth and very familiar to end users. IMAP with Thunderbird is probably only other option that would satisfy the requirements. EDIT: Yes they need to get email in space. It's easy way to send documents…
I quit Outlook and went to Thunderbird when I upgraded my CPU and Microsoft told me I had to re-purchase Outlook when I had paid for a "lifetime license". That was the last straw for me. I installed Linux and Thunderbird and have not looked back at Windows.
Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"Is it just me that finds it terrifying that theres any Windows bits on a spaceship?" SpaceX Crew Dragon console interfaces are entirely React apps
Everything is terrifying in computing these days, and bringing it to space rockets makes it even more terrifying.
I think we need to mandate intentionally slower, sandboxed, and resource-constrained development environments/containers so developers are unable to abuse resources like they're "free" and in so using wasteful and improper algorithms to expand to fill the volume of the container (RAM, CPU, IOPS, storage capacity, and network bandwidth and latency) like an ideal gas. Lazy coding and excessive abstractions on top of VMs on top of more abstractions all the way down leads to shit.