Search Results

Search found 2442 results on 98 pages for 'standards policies'.

Page 34/98 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • Opera 11 disponible en version finale, plus rapide, sa nouvelle galerie compte déjà plus de 200 extensions

    Opera 11 disponible en version finale Plus rapide, sa nouvelle galerie compte déjà plus de 200 extensions Mise à jour du 16/12/2010 par Idelways Opera 11 vient de sortir en version finale. Prometteuse, cette nouvelle mouture intègre de nombreuses nouveautés. La principale étant évidemment l'intégration d'une plateforme et d'une API légère de développement d'extensions avec les standards Web (HTML5, CSS3 et Javascript - lire ci-avant) Son catalogue d'extensions est déjà des plus en plus fournis (200 extensions à l'heure de l'écriture de cet article) Au top des extensions les plus téléchargés ...

    Read the article

  • UE : l'adoption des solutions libres devrait entraîner une réduction des coûts de plus d'un milliard d'euros pour le secteur public européen

    Le secteur public pourrait économiser plus d'un milliard d'euros en adoptant les solutions libres selon l'Union européenne, qui publie un guide pour aider les institutions L'Europe estime que l'ouverture des entreprises européennes aux solutions libres peut entraîner d'énormes réductions des coûts.La commission européenne met en garde les institutions publiques sur les dangers de trop compter sur un fournisseur unique des solutions d'informations, en particulier ceux proposant des produits « fermés ».L'organisation a publié un guide dont le but est d'aider les pouvoirs publics à adopter davantage les standards ouverts. Selon le guide, ce virage pourrait réduire les coûts de 1,1 milliard d'euros ...

    Read the article

  • Effectively Increase Chances of Repeat Visits to Your Website

    The ultimate goal of SEO/Online Marketing is not just to continually increase website traffic but to establish a loyal following of visitors. With the ever growing competition, and highly exactly standards of online consumers nowadays, how does one manage that? Getting people to visit your site is one thing, but getting them to look up your site from time to time, may seen too ambitious.

    Read the article

  • Effectively Increase Chances of Repeat Visits to Your Website

    The ultimate goal of SEO/Online Marketing is not just to continually increase website traffic but to establish a loyal following of visitors. With the ever growing competition, and highly exactly standards of online consumers nowadays, how does one manage that? Getting people to visit your site is one thing, but getting them to look up your site from time to time, may seen too ambitious.

    Read the article

  • Outsource SEO - Benefits Or How to Increase Profits

    To be able to make it inside the time involving economic downturn, the global issue associated with the firms is usually to maximize the sales involving products or services along with reducing the cost of different companies processes. To work on these kinds of tactics firms tend to be adjusting their policies so that they can keep to the present-day tactics which usually are based on today's marketplace requirements and thereby sustain in the world trade.

    Read the article

  • How to Get on Google's Top 10 List

    A question I often asked by new clients is why some websites rank higher on Google than others? This question can be difficult to answer because of the number of variables involved and the fact that Google's search algorithms are closely guarded secret. However, there are a number of standards which affect every website regardless of its topic, purpose, or age.

    Read the article

  • Free Version of Oracle Application Development Framework

    - by Cinzia Mascanzoni
    Now available, Oracle Application Development Framework (ADF) Essentials enables the global developer community to leverage the core capabilities of Oracle ADF free of cost. Oracle ADF Essentials is standards-based and deploys on GlassFish Server Open Source Edition, giving developers the ability to adopt and extend Oracle ADF functionality to new environments. Read the Press Release here.

    Read the article

  • Native PHP vs exec()

    - by resting
    Just wondering, assuming no security issues, that is, you're in total control of the command passed to exec(), is there a difference (in terms of speed or standards) between using exec() vs native PHP? Example just to name a few use cases: Using the DirectoryIterator vs exec(ls -1, $output), to list all files. List 100 files from the 99th file onwards (that is, file 100 to 199) Count total number of files in directory.

    Read the article

  • How to Interview an SEO Company

    Even a non-technical interviewer can take steps to ensure that an SEO company will meet certain quality standards. Failing to ask some key questions could leave your site ranking worse and your pocket book feeling empty.

    Read the article

  • Google? Facebook? Who Do You Trust?

    <b>Datamation:</b> "May 31 is "Quit Facebook Day." Some users are outraged over new privacy policies that made sharing all personal content the default. The company "rolled out a simplified version of its privacy controls today, a single page where users can set who sees what."

    Read the article

  • QNTC and Windows Server 2008 R2

    - by Ben
    I am having a really hard time getting an iSeries (AS/400) machine talking to my new Windows Server 2008 R2 box using the QNTC file system on the iSeries. I had similar problems getting it to initially talk to a Windows Server 2003 machine, but enabling the local Guest account on the 2003 box solved that one. No such luck with the new 2008 box. When I do a WRKLNK /QNTC/SVR01 on the iSeries (which should show share listings, and does on any 2003 boxes) all I get is (Cannot find object to match specified name.). I know the iSeries likes the same username and password on the remote server, but unfortunately for us this is not the case. Anyhow, it does currently work with different username/password combinations on a 2003 box. To try and get the wretched things talking, I have made the 2008 server pretty open but the iSeries will not see shares on it. I have enabled the local Guest account, turned Windows firewall off, set the share permissions so Everyone has full control but to no avail. I read something on the internet about the iSeries only being able to handle NTLM authentication (and I understand by default that Server 2008 R2 only uses NTLMv2 and has NTLM disabled), so I made a special group policy for the server and tweaked all Group Policy settings under Computer Configuration\Policies\Windows Settings\Security Settings\Local Policies\Security Options but the iSeries STILL won't see it. We have a team of programmers who do all the system administration of the iSeries, but they are stumped for ideas on their side, and I'm stumped for ideas on my side. This is driving me crazy now, and if anybody has managed to get an iSeries to talk to Windows Server 2008 R2 using QNTC I would be very appreciative of any suggestions, be it on the Windows side, iSeries settings or even IBM PTF's that might patch anything. The iSeries is running V5R4 and I have *SECOFR privileges on it, if it helps. One final (most important!) note - The programmers think it's my system being tricky, and I think it's theirs - please prove me right :)

    Read the article

  • MS NPS denying access, can't validate server certificate

    - by Fred Weston
    At my office we use a Cisco WLC2504 wireless controller and starting about a week ago we started having problems with users connecting to one of our secure wireless network. We are running AD on Windows Server 2008 R2 and use network policy server to control access to our wireless network. When I look at the logs in event viewer after a failed connection attempt I see an access reject message: Reason Code: 262 Reason: The supplied message is incomplete. The signature was not verified. Looking this up on Google I found this article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/838502 I tried disabling server certificate validation on my computer and as soon as I did that I was able to connect to the network, so it seems that there is some sort of certificate validation issue. I'm not sure which certificate is unable to be validated or how to fix it. This used to work and stopped suddenly by itself so I am thinking a certificate may have expired. When I go to NPS Policies Network Policies My policy Constraints Auth methods Microsoft PEAP and view the properties, the certificae specified here expires in 2016, so doesn't seem as though this could be the problem. Any suggestions on how to troubleshoot this issue?

    Read the article

  • Cannot Change "Log on through Terminal Services" in Local Security Policy XP from Server 2008 GP

    - by Campo
    This is a mixed AD environment, Server 2003 R2 and 2008 R2 I have a 2003 AD R2 and a 2008 R2 AD. GPO is usually managed from the 2008 R2 machine. I have a RD Gateway on another server as well. I setup the CAP and RAP to allow a normal user to log on to the departments workstation. I also adjusted the GPO for that OU to allow Log on trhough Remote Desktop Gateway for the user group. This worked on my windows 7 workstation. But unfortunately the policy is a different name in XP "allow log on through Terminal Services" I can get through right into the machine but when the log on actually happens to the local machine i get the "Cannot log on interactively" error. This is set in (for the local machine) Secpol.msc Local Security Policy "user rights assignment" but is controlled by the GPO in Computer Configuration Policies Security Settings Local Policies "User Rights Assignment" Do I simply need to adjust the same setting on the same GPO but with a server 2003 GP editor? Feel like that could cause issues... Looking for some direction. Or if anyone has run into this issue yet. UPDATE Should this work? support.microsoft.com/kb/186529 Still seems like I will have the issue as the actual GP settings for Log on through Terminal Services is still different between Server 2008 R2 and 2003 R2.... Another Thought: Should I delete the GPO made for the department and remake it with the 2003 R2 server? I have no 2008 specific settings as the whole department runs XP other than myself. If that's a solution I will move my computer out of the department as a solution... Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How can I erase the traces of Folder Redirection from the Default Domain Policy

    - by bruor
    I've taken over from an IT outsourcer and have found a struggle now that we're starting a migration to windows 7. Someone decided that they would setup Folder redirection in the Default Domain Policy. I've since configured redirection in another policy at an OU level. No matter what I do, the windows 7 systems pick up the Default Domain Policy folder redirection settings only. I keep getting entries in the event log showing that the previously redirected folders "need to be redirected" with a status of 0x80000004. From what I can tell this just means that it's redirecting them locally. Is there a way I can wipe that section of the GPO clean so it's no longer there? I'm hesitant to try to reset the default domain policy to complete defaults. ***UPDATE 6-26 I found that the following condition occurred and was causing the grief here. I've already implemented the new policies for clients, and for some reason, XP was working great, 7 was refusing to process. The DDP was enforced. Because of this, and the fact that the folder redirection policies were set to redirect back to the local profile upon removal, it was forcing clients to pick up it's "redirect to local" settings. Requirements for to recreate the issue. -Create a new test OU and policy. -Create some folder redirection settings, set them to redirect to local upon removal -Remove settings on that GPO -Refresh your view of the GPO and check the settings. -You'll notice that the settings show "not configured" entries for folder redirection. -Enforce this GPO -Create another sub-OU -Create a GPO linked to this sub-ou and configure some folder redirection settings. -Watch as the enforced GPOs "not configured" setting overrides the policy you just defined. I've had to relink the DDP to all OU's that have "block inheritance" enabled, and disable the "enforced" option on the DDP as a workaround. I'd love to re-enable enforcement of the DDP, but until I can erase the traces of folder redirection settings from the DDP, I think I'm stuck.

    Read the article

  • DisableCrossAccountCopy not working on some Outlook installs, working on others, both going against Exchange

    - by MikeBaz
    As part of a mail migration project from one Exchange organization to another, we need to be able to prevent users from moving/copying messages between their accounts in each organization. (Yes, users will think this is evil; no, it's not my decision; yes, users will hate us.) Luckily, we thought, Outlook 2010 provides the DisableCrossAccountCopy registry value/policy (cf. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff800883.aspx). (Because you can't do multiple Exchange organizations in a single profile before Outlook 2010, this only matters on Outlook 2010. Yes, I'm ignoring for the sake of this question copy/move to/from the filesystem.) In our test lab, in a test forest with a test Exchange organization, with a second Exchange account added to the profile in either of the "real" Exchange organizations, with the value set to "*", everything works as expected. On a workstation in one of the production domains, however, the setting does not seem to work. We have tried it under HKCU, HKLM, HKCU\Software\Policies, and HKLM\Software\Policies. It simply seems to be ignored. The value was set in the OCT on a test machine, but the OCT (and the ADM/ADMX file) have the wrong type for the value. We have located the value in the registry and removed it everywhere it is found, we think, and put it back in HKCU, but it still isn't taking. At the moment, a clean Outlook install is not an option - even if it was, we at this point would need to know what to do to fix the pushed copy (I didn't push the copy out to thousands of machines, I've just been asked to help clean up the current mess). Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 32 bit & windows 7 professional SP1

    - by Harry
    I'm testing my new Windows Server 2008 32 bit edition (2 servers) as a server and Windows 7 professional 32 bit as a client. Let say one is a primary domain controller (PDC) and the other is a backup domain controller (BDC) like the old time to ease. Every setup were done in the PDC and just replicate to BDC. Didn't setup anything, just install the server with AD, DNS, DHCP, that's all. Then I use my windows 7 pro 32 bit to join the domain. It worked. After that I tried to change the password of a the user (not administrator) but it always failed said it didn't meet the password complexity setup while in fact there's no setup at all either in account policy, default domain policy or even local policy. Tried to disable the password complexity in the default domain policy instead of didn't set all then test again but still failed. Browse and found suggestion to setup the minimum and maximum password age to 0 but it also failed. Tried to restart the server and the client then change password, still failed with the same error, didn't meet password complexity setup. Tried to see in the rsop.msc but didn't found anything. In fact, if I see the setup in another system with windows server 2003 and windows xp, using rsop.msc I can see there's setup for computer configuration windows settings security settings account policies password policy. I also have a windows 7 pro 32 bit in a windows server 2003 32 bit environment but unable to find the same setting using rsop but this windows 7 works fine. anyone can give suggestion what's the problem and what to do so I can change my windows 7 pro laptop password in a windows server 2008 environment? another thing, is it the right assumption that we can see all the policies setting in windows 7 whether it's in a windows server 2003 or 2008 environment? thanks.

    Read the article

  • Fixing Poor Email

    - by Tiffany Walker
    I'm having an issue with SenderBase. My IPs are not blocked in any BLs but people who use SenderBase/Ciscos stuff do not get my emails. Is this because my email system is setup poorly? They list the following: Your email server or a computer in your network may be infected with malware and may be used to send spam. You may have an insecure network which is allowing other parties to use your network to send spam. Your email server may be misconfigured and might relay spam. You may be utilizing a dynamic IP that is not allowed to relay email directly to the Internet. I have just my site running CPanel. As far as I know there is no spam or abuse. What should I check to ensure that the mail systems (Exim) are up to standards? I have the server pretty well configured so I just can't see the system being abused without me knowing it. What standards should I be ensuring my e-mail server aligns up to?

    Read the article

  • What speed are Wi-Fi management and control frames sent at?

    - by Bryce Thomas
    There are a bunch of different 802.11 Wi-Fi standards, e.g. 802.11a, 802.11b, 802.11g, 802.11n etc. that all support different speeds. Wi-Fi frames are generally categorised as one of the following: Data frames - carry the actual application data Control frames - coordinate when its safe to send/reduce collisions Management frames - handle connection discovery/setup/tear down (e.g. AP discovery, association, disassociation) My question is about whether all these frames, and specifically management frames, are transmitted at the fastest supported speed available, or whether certain classes of frames are transmitted at some lowest common denominator speed. I have noticed that when I put an 802.11b/g only device into monitor mode and capture traffic over the air, I still see management frames (e.g. association/disassociation) being transmitted between my phone and AP which are both 802.11n, even though 802.11n has a higher transfer rate. So I am imagining one of two possibilities: My 802.11n phone/AP had to negotiate a slower speed for some reason and that's why I can see their frames on my 802.11b/g monitoring device. Management frames (and perhaps control frames also?) are sent at a lower speed, and it's only data frames that are transmitted faster with newer 802.11 standards. The reason I would like to know which one of these two possibilities (or perhaps a third possibility) is the case is that I want to capture management frames, and need to know whether using an 802.11b/g card is going to lead to me missing some frames sent at higher speeds than the monitoring card can observe. If management frames are indeed sent at a slower rate, then it's all good. If I just happen to be seeing the management frames because my phone/AP have negotiated a slower rate though, then I need to reconsider what card I use for packet capture.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >