Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

blogs.msdn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 404 posts

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#381

Post by WorldWideWayne »

matthewmacleod wrote: post #380
WorldWideWayne wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... that's a minority view at best. Not at all - go ask any devops/IT group running in small, medium and large businesses to replace their Microsoft tools with a competitor's (if you can find one) or FOSS tools and they'll laugh in your face because of how easy Microsoft makes things for them. > But the tradeoff there is that it's often been slow to keep up with developments in the rest of the industry... Consideri…

Not at all - go ask any devops/IT group running in small, medium and large businesses to replace their Microsoft tools with a competitor's (if you can find one) or FOSS tools and they'll laugh in your face because of how easy Microsoft makes things for them. IT is a bit of an outlier. But I must admit, I've never encountered any self-described 'DevOps' who uses anything but Unix. Different spheres, perhaps. Consideri…

I don't think of IT as an outlier here because every IT department I've dealt with for a long while either contains programmers (usually in small/medium sized companies) or works closely with groups of programmers to keep their apps running. That's what I call devops, maybe I have the wrong definition though.

The argument about Ajax coming from Microsoft is a bit shallow. (Sorry that's all the effort I felt like putting into it at the moment.) Here are a couple other thoughts along the same vein:

1. Microsoft has done extensive research into many areas of tech that are just now blooming, such as mobile and tablet computing. They had a general purpose mobile OS with multiple third party app-stores before any of the modern industry players. They had tablets. I think the industry caught up to Microsoft while they were busy making money elsewhere.

2. Look how quickly Microsoft can pivot into doing the kinds of things that Amazon AWS, Google and Apple are doing. I think it's a testament to how "there" their platform is already.

> ...closed has a very large downside...

It can be a huge upside too. Developers have been making lots of money off of tightly controlled, closed software platforms like iOS and Windows for a long time.

The web is the only completely free open source "platform" that I can think of that is a huge hit with programmers and that people generally use. However, in my opinion - programming it sucks compared to the closed, native systems.

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#382

Post by [deleted] »

wumbernang wrote: post #375
the_af wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It merely exploits some fundamental differences on how humans operate between two markets and turns that into real-time information for me on which I can make trade decisions Let me guess: arbitrage applied to sports gambling. Wink my way if I'm on the right track.

No wink. Doesn't involve betting. Although that's a good idea :)

[deleted]

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#383

Post by rodgerd »

wumbernang wrote: post #349
rodgerd wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It must be great to know no-one within your environment will ever do anything wrong. Or download anything that will do anything wrong. Or visit any websites than can hijack your browser into doing anything wrong.

a) Human error is a possibility but that's not something that can be eliminated. b) They won't download anything wrong. There's no route to the internet for this machine. c) They won't visit any web sites. There's no browser on the machine. This is a core profile windows server installation. Don't assume that we don't know what we're doing. We have 500ish Windows Server machines floating around.

> a) Human error is a possibility but that's not something that can be eliminated.

It's good that you've managed to perfect the hiring process to the point you have zero risk of internal fraud or malice.

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#384

Post by 72deluxe »

krylon wrote: post #378
72deluxe wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very true. The Windows software market is colossal, and the ability to run software from decades ago is a feature not found on any other OS group (Linux + OSX included). I know we all like to think and strangely wish that we could replace Windows server with Linux boxes and Windows desktops with Linux desktops but the sad truth is that there is no good replacement for Exchange or Active Directory (and the myr…

Well, as far as Active Directory goes, I think it is possible to run a "Windows" domain using Samba. But apart from that, I tend to agree. I still want to believe it is possible to get Windows users comfortable on a Unix desktop, it works with OS X, after all. But practically speaking, you are right.

You can run the domain but I don't think Samba implements Users and Computers plugins etc. does it? I wrote one (the version 2 SDK was unfathomable, the SDK version 3 in C# was much better). It let us add extra fields into AD (just like any LDAP implementation) and then present extra tab sheets within AD users and computers for configuring additional external services that we had written (we wrote some middleware to communicate with Cisco Call Manager etc. so they could configure their phone system from Active Directory, very useful!)

The clever thing with OSX is that it is Unix but 95% of the OSX users don't know it is, nor do they care, nor do they know what UNIX is. OSX is Stealth Unix. Clever.

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#385

Post by krylon »

72deluxe wrote: post #384
krylon wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, as far as Active Directory goes, I think it is possible to run a "Windows" domain using Samba. But apart from that, I tend to agree. I still want to believe it is possible to get Windows users comfortable on a Unix desktop, it works with OS X, after all. But practically speaking, you are right.

You can run the domain but I don't think Samba implements Users and Computers plugins etc. does it? I wrote one (the version 2 SDK was unfathomable, the SDK version 3 in C# was much better). It let us add extra fields into AD (just like any LDAP implementation) and then present extra tab sheets within AD users and computers for configuring additional external services that we had written (we wrote some middleware to…

> You can run the domain but I don't think Samba implements Users and Computers plugins etc. does it?

Do you mean mmc.exe snapins? I have to admit, I never tried.

> OSX is Stealth Unix. Clever.

The integration of X11 into the desktop is pretty poor, and I miss a decent package manager like apt-get or yum. Apart from that, I completely agree. Apple has managed something quite impressive by building an operating system that is a Unix to techies and a comfy, user-friendly desktop to the rest (and to the Unix people).

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#386

Post by wumbernang »

rodgerd wrote: post #383
wumbernang wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a) Human error is a possibility but that's not something that can be eliminated. b) They won't download anything wrong. There's no route to the internet for this machine. c) They won't visit any web sites. There's no browser on the machine. This is a core profile windows server installation. Don't assume that we don't know what we're doing. We have 500ish Windows Server machines floating around.

> a) Human error is a possibility but that's not something that can be eliminated. It's good that you've managed to perfect the hiring process to the point you have zero risk of internal fraud or malice.

Where did I imply or state that?

Nowhere!

What does that have to do with security updates and reboots?

Nothing!

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#387

Post by digi_owl »

sudioStudio64 wrote: post #359
silon3 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You are right. The guy that wrote PowerShell says that UNIX is document oriented configuration while windows is API oriented configuration. That's an interesting way of putting it. I strongly prefer the Unix way then,(just avoid turing complete config languages).

After coding for several years, the two aren't all that different. I'm not saying that I think that the UNIX WAY is ever going to go away...but I do think that extreme scale makes the programmatic approach to configuration make more sense. Instead of treating every system as a "system" you treat it as a simple programmable node among thousands of others. You are already starting to see Linux go this way with systemD.…

I think you have it backwards. Sysadmins are not the ones arguing in favor of "the one true way". That is squarely in the newer breed of developer/admin devops hybrid that the systemd camp is pandering.

For sysadmins the nix way of text in and text out allow systems to be as simple or complex as they need to be, because parts can be swapped, added or removed as needed.

The kernel don't care what your initial process is (you can for instance point the Linux kernel straight at the sh binary and be presented with a root shell the moment the kernel is done getting the hardware up and running), and the programs you want to run don't care either.

Thus you can run nix on anything from a dinky single core SoC to a warehouse sized compute cluster.

But systemd is pandering the latter while giving the former the middle finger. This by ignoring the text in text out loose bindings that has been the core of *nix.

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#388

Post by SXX »

ygra wrote: post #347
SXX wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They could do more, sure, but I never felt like they were getting in the way. If you would try to ship OpenGL game you'll find out that Windows 8+ shipped with crippled AMD Legacy driver (HD2XXX-4XXX) that don't have OpenGL support in it and can't be really replaced using AMD Catalyst installer until user manually install new driver via Device Manager using extremely tricky way. There was also crippled Intel driver…

You'd have to take that up with the hardware manufacturers, I guess. It's not like Microsoft writes said drivers and if AMD chooses to submit a DirectX-only driver for inclusion in the OS then where's MS's fault?

I don't believe that it's AMD and Intel decision to provide crippled drivers to them. After all they never really updated these drivers after hardware become "legacy" and you won't find any package without OpenGL except what Windows 8+ installing via Windows Update. Anyway I had no intention to blame Microsoft there as likely they removed GL support from those drivers not to "harm GL", but just because they won't able to test it as it's not exist for them.

Other issue is that Windows 8+ had default behavior to replace manually installed drivers with GL by newer "Microsoft version" without GL, like that: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows8_1-...

In the end it's only Intel and AMD fault that they don't care enough to put pressure on Microsoft or at least release proper installers. BTW Intel's "The driver being installed is not validated for this computer" bullshit only prove how little they care about GL on Windows.

So comment above stated "opengl is basically fine on windows". No, it's not. Any person that tried to ship or support OpenGL-powered software know that.

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#389

Post by hassiktir »

unhammer wrote: post #346
hassiktir wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is really cool (and unfortunately I know nothing about powershell, I'm young and dumb) but I'm pretty sure this is replicable line for line with bash (and curl, maybe awk too idk). Am I wrong?

Don't use awk for parsing XML/JSON, there are excellent tools like html-xml-utils or jq that already do that well: $ sudo apt-get install html-xml-utils jq $ curl 'https://duckduckgo.com/html/?q=cake' | hxclean \ | hxselect .web-result:first-child .snippet $ curl apy.projectjj.com/listPairs | jq .responseData[0] Though I'd typically use Python's BeautifulSoup for anything major with html, there's just too much bad ht…

wow, didn't even know of jq but look's super cool. was trying to avoid using packages you would have to 'install' since it seemed that all the functionality the post I responded to used built-in's for powershell commands.

Re: Looking Forward: Support for Secure Shell

#390

Post by jevgeni »

jyrkesh wrote: post #379
jevgeni wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from unconstrained resizing, everything else is part of Powershell.

No, actually. Ctrl+V and Ctrl+C are implemented in PSReadline, but those features have also been added to the Windows 10 console host (i.e. they work with cmd.exe). The other big one for me that's been added to the console host is "line wrapping selection". You can actually highlight text now correctly as opposed to copying a rectangular block of text (though the latter is sometimes useful, just hold Alt when you're…

True on line wrapping. You can copy-paste using right click, though.
Post reply on HN