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

Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why

bsky.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 379 posts

Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why

#291

Post by raverbashing »

notorandit wrote: post #284

The point is not running Windows or Outlook on a PC in space. The point is that the Software was not sealed, downloading upgrades while in space, sending telemetry back to Microsoft (or to whoever else). Those PC are like any other instrument onboard the spacecraft: it's status needs to be known and predictable by NASA. Not to talk about the amount of unknown and unpredictable extra traffic caused by those PCs onto t…

> it's status needs to be known and predictable by NASA

Ah yes but do you think MS gives a flap about this?

Same thing with the recent Fedramp certification. "Hey they're using it so we might as well certify"

Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why

#292

Post by cm2187 »

starkparker wrote: post #276

https://www.businessinsider.com/artemis-astronauts-microsoft... > After Wiseman flagged the issue, Mission Control said it could remotely access his system with permission. > Soon after, a member of Mission Control said, "We wanted to let Reid know we are done remoting into his PCD 1." They added that the issue had been resolved and that the system would appear offline, as "expected." > The personal computing device,…

I love the idea that even on a mission to the moon the crew still needs to allocate a portion of their time to click through cookie consent banners, non skippable ads and fighting with windows update! Probably part of the effort to make the environment similar to life on earth to make the long trip more bearable.

Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why

#297

Post by nottorp »

esseph wrote: post #245
papichulo2023 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude you are on HN no Reddit, most people around here use Linux

I wished I believed this, but it feels closer to 50% Apple, 35% Windows, 15% Linux.

You also need to define "use".

No one or almost no one specifies whether they use $OS at work or for their own stuff, or whether the work $OS is mandatory for the organization.

And at home... the IT HNer probably has everything. I'd bet everyone who says they use Mac OS on the desktop also has Linux boxes.

Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why

#298

Post by p_l »

somat wrote: post #91
stackskipton wrote: post #41

Everyone 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…

Email(smtp) is not a bad choice for messaging in space(or anywhere really) it is a well understood robust protocol designed in a time when all networks were slow and intermittent. Exactly what you need in space. IMAP probably not so much, It depends too much on having a good network. unless the imap server is on the spaceship(heh, spaceSHIP, that is an optimistic term, but it is all we have, so going with it), I woul…

Outlook when connected with exchange (which is probably the case, with corporate network email accounts connected) does not use SMTP nor IMAP, but Exchange RPC protocol, with underlying data model based on X.400 not SMTP. Can actually work pretty well but the implementation had been successfully eroded over last decade or more.

P.S. SMTP isn't well designed for slow and intermittent network protocols, it's designed so that you can bang it out on teletype by paying a grad student a twinkie and coffee and that should hopefully translate into simple implementation across different systems (only to relearn all the lessons of more complex ones, badly)

Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why

#299

Post by theshackleford »

nottorp wrote: post #297
esseph wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wished I believed this, but it feels closer to 50% Apple, 35% Windows, 15% Linux.

You also need to define "use". No one or almost no one specifies whether they use $OS at work or for their own stuff, or whether the work $OS is mandatory for the organization. And at home... the IT HNer probably has everything. I'd bet everyone who says they use Mac OS on the desktop also has Linux boxes.

> I'd bet everyone who says they use Mac OS on the desktop also has Linux boxes.

Guilty.

Re: Artemis computer running two instances of MS outlook; they can't figure out why

#300

Post by ku1ik »

thephyber wrote: post #243
dotancohen wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment is downvoted, but it is correct. Emailing a file takes roughly 30% more bandwidth than a file transfer protocol (any such protocol, not necessarily FTP) due to mime encoding.

Discussion of the MIME part’s encoding as being an inefficient size is missing the forest for the trees. The entire message is (or can be) compressed before transmission (eg. When IMAP has DEFLATE enabled). Just because an intermediate encoding step expands binary to make it text safe doesn’t mean it has to stay uncompressed during the entire existence of that MIMe message.

But without the intermediate encoding step the compression would give a better result.
Post reply on HN