Search Results

Search found 1274 results on 51 pages for 'pros'.

Page 48/51 | < Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >

  • Suggestions on error handling of Win32 C++ code: AtlThrow vs. STL exceptions

    - by EmbeddedProg
    In writing Win32 C++ code, I'd appreciate some hints on how to handle errors of Win32 APIs. In particular, in case of a failure of a Win32 function call (e.g. MapViewOfFile), is it better to: use AtlThrowLastWin32 define a Win32Exception class derived from std::exception, with an added HRESULT data member to store the HRESULT corresponding to value returned by GetLastError? In this latter case, I could use the what() method to return a detailed error string (e.g. "MapViewOfFile call failed in MyClass::DoSomething() method."). What are the pros and cons of 1 vs. 2? Is there any other better option that I am missing? As a side note, if I'd like to localize the component I'm developing, how could I localize the exception what() string? I was thinking of building a table mapping the original English string returned by what() into a Unicode localized error string. Could anyone suggest a better approach? Thanks much for your insights and suggestions.

    Read the article

  • INotifyPropertyChanged Setter Style

    - by Ivovic
    In order to reflect changes in your data to the UI you have to implement INotifyPropertyChanged, okay. If I look at examples, articles, tutorials etc most of the time the setters look like something in that manner: public string MyProperty { //get [...] set { if (_correspondingField == value) { return; } _correspondingField = value; OnPropertyChanged("MyProperty"); } } No problem so far, only raise the event if you have to, cool. But you could rewrite this code to this: public string MyProperty { //get [...] set { if (_correspondingField != value) { _correspondingField = value; OnPropertyChanged("MyProperty"); } } } It should do the same (?), you only have one place of return, it is less code, it is less boring code and it is more to the point ("only act if necessary" vs "if not necessary do nothing, the other way round act"). So if the second version has its pros compared to the first one, why I see this style rarely? I don't consider myself being smarter than those people that write frameworks, published articles etc, therefore the second version has to have drawbacks. Or is it wrong? Or do I think too much? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Evaluating creation of GUI via file vs coding

    - by nevets1219
    I'm working on a utility that will be used to test the project I'm currently working on. What the utility will do is allow user to provide various inputs and it will sends out requests and provide the response as output. However, at this point the exact format (which input is required and what is optional) has yet to be fleshed out. In addition, coding in Swing is somewhat repetitive since the overall work is simple though this should be the safest route to go as I have more or less full control and every component can be tweaked as I want. I'm considering using a configuration file that's in XML to describe the GUI (at least one part of it) and then coding the event handling part (in addition to validation, etc). The GUI itself shouldn't be too complicated. For each type of request to make there's a tab for the request and within each tab are various inputs. There seems to be quite a few questions about this already but I'm not asking for a 3rd party library to do this. I'm looking to do this myself, since I don't think it'll be too overly complicated (hopefully). My main consideration for using this is re-usability (later on, for other projects) and for simplifying the GUI work. My question is: are there other pros/cons that I'm overlooking? Is it worth the (unknown) time to do this? I've built GUI in VB.NET and with Flex3 before.

    Read the article

  • Python/Sqlite app for web or desktop?

    - by ChrisC
    I am in the planning stages of rewriting an Access db I wrote several years ago in a full fledged program. I have very slight experience coding, but not enough to call myself a programmer by far. I'll definitely be learning as I go, so I'd like to keep everything as simple as possible. I've decided on Python and SQLite for my program, but I need help on my next decision. Here is my situation 1) It'll be a desktop program, run locally on each machine, all Windows 2) I want a nice looking GUI with colors, different shaped buttons, nice menus, lists, etc, etc 3) I'm thinking about using a browser interface because (a) from what I've read, browser apps can look really great, and (b) I understand there are lots of free tools to assist in setting up the GUI/GUI code with drag and drop tools, so that helps my "keep it simple" goal. 4) I want the program to be totally portable so it runs completely from one single folder on a user's PC. If I do go the browser app router, a major concern I have is the possibility that a user's browser settings could affect or break the app. How likely is this? What other pros and cons are there for my situation?

    Read the article

  • Choosing approach for an IM client-server app

    - by John
    Update: totally re-wrote this to be more succint. I'm looking at a new application, one part of which will be very similar to standard IM clients, i.e text chat, ability to send attachments, maybe some real-time interaction like a multi-user whiteboard. It will be client-server, i.e all traffic goes through my central server. That means if I want to support cross-communication with other IM systems, I am still free to pick any protocol for my own client<--server communication - my server can use XMPP or whatever to talk to other systems. Clients are expected to include desktop apps, but probably also browser-based as well either through Flex/Silverlight or HTML/AJAX. I see 3 options for my own client-server communication layer: XMPP. The benefits are clients already exist as do open-source servers. However it requires the most up-front research/learning and also appears like it might raise legal issues due to GPL. Custom sockets. A server app makes connections with the clients, allowing any text/binary data to be sent very fast. However this approach requires building said server from scratch, and also makes a JS client tricky Servlets (or similar web server). Using tried and tested Java web-stack, clients send HTTP requests similar to AJAX-based websites. The benefit is the server is easy to write using well-established technologies, and easy to talk to. But what restrictions would this bring? Is it appropriate technology for real-time communication? Advice and suggests are welcome, especially what pros and cons surround using a web-server approach as compared to a socket-based approach.

    Read the article

  • Cannot access objects in associative arrays using jQuery

    - by Sixfoot Studio
    I am trying to create and array of objects so that I can access them in a for loop in jQuery and I know that this works in Actionscript so what I am trying to do is convert my current knowledge to jQuery that will work. Please have a look at this and tell me why I cannot access divToShow Thanks guys var homeImages = new Array(); homeImages[0] = { hoverImage: ".leftColImage1", divToShow: ".image1", rollOverImg: "img-family-over.jpg" }; homeImages[1] = { hoverImage: ".leftColImage2", divToShow: ".image2", rollOverImg: "img-students-over.jpg" }; homeImages[2] = { hoverImage: ".leftColImage3", divToShow: ".image3", rollOverImg: "img-pros-over.jpg" }; homeImages[3] = { hoverImage: ".leftColImage4", divToShow: ".image4", rollOverImg: "img-retired-over.jpg" }; var hoverImage; var activeDiv; var mainContent = ".mainContent"; for (k = 0; k < homeImages.length; k++) { homeImages[k].id = k; $(homeImages[k].hoverImage).mouseover(function() { //alert("divToShow : " + homeImages[this.id].divToShow); alert("this : " + this.id); activeDiv = homeImages[k].divToShow; $(".leftColImage1 img").attr("src", "/App_Themes/MyChoice2010/Images/" + homeImages[k].rollOverImg); $(mainContent).hide(); $(homeImages[k].divToShow).slideDown("slow"); }).mouseout(function() { $(".leftColImage1 img").attr("src", "/App_Themes/MyChoice2010/Images/img-family.jpg"); $(".image1").hide(); $(mainContent).slideDown("slow"); }); }

    Read the article

  • What is better for a student programming in C++ to learn for writing GUI: C# vs QT?

    - by flashnik
    I'm a teacher(instructor) of CS in the university. The course is based on Cormen and Knuth and students program algorithms in C++. But sometimes it is good to show how an algorithm works or just a result of task through GUI. Also in my opinion it's very imporant to be able to write full programs. They will have courses concerning GUI but a three years, later, in fact, before graduatuion. I think that they should be able to write simple GUI applications earlier. So I want to teach them it. How do you think, what is more useful for them to learn: programming GUI with QT or writing GUI in C# and calling unmanaged C++ library? Update. For developing C++ applications students use MS Visual studio, so C# is already installed. But QT AFAIK also can be integrated into VS. I have following pros of C# (some were suggested there in answers): The need to make an additional layer. It's more work, but it forces you explicitly specify contract between GUI and processing data. The border between GUI and algorithms becomes very clear. It's more popular among employers. At least, in Russia where we live. It's rather common to write performance-critical algorithms in C++ and PInvoke them from well-looking C# application/ASP.Net website. Maybe it is not so widespread in the rest of the world but in Russia Windows is very popular, especially in companies and corporations due to some reasons, so most of b2b applications are Windows applications. Rapid development. It's much quicker to code in .Net then in C++ due to many reasons. And the con is that it's a new language with own specific for students. And the mess with invoking calls to library.

    Read the article

  • Make an abstract class or use a processor?

    - by Tim Murphy
    I'm developing a class to compare two directories and run an action when a directory/file in the source directory does not exist in destination directory. Here is a prototype of the class: public abstract class IdenticalDirectories { private DirectoryInfo _sourceDirectory; private DirectoryInfo _destinationDirectory; protected abstract void DirectoryExists(DirectoryInfo sourceDirectory, DirectoryInfo destinationDirectory); protected abstract void DirectoryDoesNotExist(DirectoryInfo sourceDirectory, DirectoryInfo destinationDirectory); protected abstract void FileExists(DirectoryInfo sourceDirectory, DirectoryInfo destinationDirectory); protected abstract void FileDoesNotExist(DirectoryInfo sourceDirectory, DirectoryInfo destinationDirectory); public IdenticalDirectories(DirectoryInfo sourceDirectory, DirectoryInfo destinationDirectory) { ... } public void Run() { foreach (DirectoryInfo sourceSubDirectory in _sourceDirectory.GetDirectories()) { DirectoryInfo destinationSubDirectory = this.GetDestinationDirectoryInfo(subDirectory); if (destinationSubDirectory.Exists()) { this.DirectoryExists(sourceSubDirectory, destinationSubDirectory); } else { this.DirectoryDoesNotExist(sourceSubDirectory, destinationSubDirectory); } foreach (FileInfo sourceFile in sourceSubDirectory.GetFiles()) { FileInfo destinationFile = this.GetDestinationFileInfo(sourceFile); if (destinationFile.Exists()) { this.FileExists(sourceFile, destinationFile); } else { this.FileDoesNotExist(sourceFile, destinationFile); } } } } } The above prototype is an abstract class. I'm wondering if it would be better to make the class non-abstract and have the Run method receiver a processor? eg. public void Run(IIdenticalDirectoriesProcessor processor) { foreach (DirectoryInfo sourceSubDirectory in _sourceDirectory.GetDirectories()) { DirectoryInfo destinationSubDirectory = this.GetDestinationDirectoryInfo(subDirectory); if (destinationSubDirectory.Exists()) { processor.DirectoryExists(sourceSubDirectory, destinationSubDirectory); } else { processor.DirectoryDoesNotExist(sourceSubDirectory, destinationSubDirectory); } foreach (FileInfo sourceFile in sourceSubDirectory.GetFiles()) { FileInfo destinationFile = this.GetDestinationFileInfo(sourceFile); if (destinationFile.Exists()) { processor.FileExists(sourceFile, destinationFile); } else { processor.FileDoesNotExist(sourceFile, destinationFile); } } } } What do you see as the pros and cons of each implementation?

    Read the article

  • Enums and inheritance

    - by devoured elysium
    I will use (again) the following class hierarchy: Event and all the following classes inherit from Event: SportEventType1 SportEventType2 SportEventType3 SportEventType4 I have originally designed the Event class like this: public abstract class Event { public abstract EventType EventType { get; } public DateTime Time { get; protected set; } protected Event(DateTime time) { Time = time; } } with EventType being defined as: public enum EventType { Sport1, Sport2, Sport3, Sport4 } The original idea would be that each SportEventTypeX class would set its correct EventType. Now that I think of it, I think this approach is totally incorrect for two reasons: If I want to later add a new SportEventType class I will have to modify the enum If I later decide to remove one SportEventType that I feel I won't use I'm also in big trouble with the enum. I have a class variable in the Event class that makes, afterall, assumptions about the kind of classes that will inherit from it, which kinda defeats the purpose of inheritance. How would you solve this kind of situation? Define in the Event class an abstract "Description" property, having each child class implement it? Having an Attribute(Annotation in Java!) set its Description variable instead? What would be the pros/cons of having a class variable instead of attribute/annotation in this case? Is there any other more elegant solution out there? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Codeigniter xss_clean dilemma

    - by Henson
    I know this question has been asked over and over again, but I still haven't found the perfect answer for my liking, so here it goes again... I've been reading lots and lots polarizing comments about CI's xss_filter. Basically majority says that it's bad. Can someone elaborate how it's bad, or at least give 1 most probable scenario where it can be exploited? I've looked at the security class in CI 2.1 and I think it's pretty good as it doesn't allow malicious strings like document.cookie, document.write, etc. If the site has basically non-html presentation, is it safe to use global xss_filter (or if it's REALLY affecting performance that much, use it on per form post basis) before inserting to database ? I've been reading about pros and cons about whether to escape on input/output with majority says that we should escape on output only. But then again, why allow strings like <a href="javascript:stealCookie()">Click Me</a> to be saved in the database at all? The one thing I don't like is javascript: and such will be converted to [removed]. Can I extend the CI's security core $_never_allowed_str arrays so that the never allowed strings return empty rather than [removed]. The best reasonable wrongdoing example of this I've read is if a user has password of javascript:123 it will be cleaned into [removed]123 which means string like this document.write123 will also pass as the user's password. Then again, what is the odds of that to happen and even if it happens, I can't think of any real harm that can do to the site. Thanks

    Read the article

  • for loop vs std::for_each with lambda

    - by Andrey
    Let's consider a template function written in C++11 which iterates over a container. Please exclude from consideration the range loop syntax because it is not yet supported by the compiler I'm working with. template <typename Container> void DoSomething(const Container& i_container) { // Option #1 for (auto it = std::begin(i_container); it != std::end(i_container); ++it) { // do something with *it } // Option #2 std::for_each(std::begin(i_container), std::end(i_container), [] (typename Container::const_reference element) { // do something with element }); } What are pros/cons of for loop vs std::for_each in terms of: a) performance? (I don't expect any difference) b) readability and maintainability? Here I see many disadvantages of for_each. It wouldn't accept a c-style array while the loop would. The declaration of the lambda formal parameter is so verbose, not possible to use auto there. It is not possible to break out of for_each. In pre- C++11 days arguments against for were a need of specifying the type for the iterator (doesn't hold any more) and an easy possibility of mistyping the loop condition (I've never done such mistake in 10 years). As a conclusion, my thoughts about for_each contradict the common opinion. What am I missing here?

    Read the article

  • What is the "x = x || {}" technique in JavaScript - and how does it affect this IIFE?

    - by Micky Hulse
    First, a pseudo code example: ;(function(foo){ foo.init = function(baz) { ... } foo.other = function() { ... } return foo; }(window.FOO = window.FOO || {})); Called like so: FOO.init(); My question: What is the technical name/description of: window.FOO = window.FOO || {}? I understand what the code does... See below for my reason(s) for asking. Reason for asking: I'm calling the passed in global like so: ;(function(foo){ ... foo vs. FOO, anyone else potentially confused? ... }(window.FOO = window.FOO || {})); ... but I just don't like calling that lowercase "foo", considering that the global is called capitalized FOO... It just seems confusing. If I knew the technical name of this technique, I could say: ;(function(technicalname){ ... do something with technicalname, not to be confused with FOO ... }(window.FOO = window.FOO || {})); I've seen a recent (awesome) example where they called it "exports": ;(function(exports){ ... }(window.Lib = window.Lib || {})); I guess I'm just trying to standardize my coding conventions... I'd like to learn what the pros do and how they think (that's why I'm asking here)!

    Read the article

  • Is dual-booting an OS more or less secure than running a virtual machine?

    - by Mark
    I run two operating systems on two separate disk partitions on the same physical machine (a modern MacBook Pro). In order to isolate them from each other, I've taken the following steps: Configured /etc/fstab with ro,noauto (read-only, no auto-mount) Fully encrypted each partition with a separate encryption key (committed to memory) Let's assume that a virus infects my first partition unbeknownst to me. I log out of the first partition (which encrypts the volume), and then turn off the machine to clear the RAM. I then un-encrypt and boot into the second partition. Can I be reasonably confident that the virus has not / cannot infect both partitions, or am I playing with fire here? I realize that MBPs don't ship with a TPM, so a boot-loader infection going unnoticed is still a theoretical possibility. However, this risk seems about equal to the risk of the VMWare/VirtualBox Hypervisor being exploited when running a guest OS, especially since the MBP line uses UEFI instead of BIOS. This leads to my question: is the dual-partitioning approach outlined above more or less secure than using a Virtual Machine for isolation of services? Would that change if my computer had a TPM installed? Background: Note that I am of course taking all the usual additional precautions, such as checking for OS software updates daily, not logging in as an Admin user unless absolutely necessary, running real-time antivirus programs on both partitions, running a host-based firewall, monitoring outgoing network connections, etc. My question is really a public check to see if I'm overlooking anything here and try to figure out if my dual-boot scheme actually is more secure than the Virtual Machine route. Most importantly, I'm just looking to learn more about security issues. EDIT #1: As pointed out in the comments, the scenario is a bit on the paranoid side for my particular use-case. But think about people who may be in corporate or government settings and are considering using a Virtual Machine to run services or applications that are considered "high risk". Are they better off using a VM or a dual-boot scenario as I outlined? An answer that effectively weighs any pros/cons to that trade-off is what I'm really looking for in an answer to this post. EDIT #2: This question was partially fueled by debate about whether a Virtual Machine actually protects a host OS at all. Personally, I think it does, but consider this quote from Theo de Raadt on the OpenBSD mailing list: x86 virtualization is about basically placing another nearly full kernel, full of new bugs, on top of a nasty x86 architecture which barely has correct page protection. Then running your operating system on the other side of this brand new pile of shit. You are absolutely deluded, if not stupid, if you think that a worldwide collection of software engineers who can't write operating systems or applications without security holes, can then turn around and suddenly write virtualization layers without security holes. -http://kerneltrap.org/OpenBSD/Virtualization_Security By quoting Theo's argument, I'm not endorsing it. I'm simply pointing out that there are multiple perspectives here, so I'm trying to find out more about the issue.

    Read the article

  • Profiles and using the local profile for a domain user

    - by Harry
    I’m having some trouble with profiles and would like to reach out for some help. I’ve tried to do some research to help myself along, but I’m not making much progress on my own. I’ve pretty much taken over the sys admin duties for my small lab, I don’t have much experience to justify it besides I’m the only with the time and dedication to go at it (The environment was in a state of disrepair). My network and domain I look over are extremely small by most standards, about 10 users at a time. They are pretty intensive activity on the network, and we do work with fairly large files. None of the network is online, which is nice at the moment because it allows me not to have another headache. On to my profile problem, I have set up roaming profiles for the users in the network. Now after a little research, I think I will be switching this to a hybrid of folder redirection and roaming profiles as this seems to best practice. I also don’t want the users having to wait for a long time if they have a bloated profile. Now I’ve finally got a build working using MDT. We have Mac Pros, and it wasn’t fun getting everything to play nice. The way I did this was by setting up a reference computer and installing all the software and tools that each user would need and editing the settings preferences to how we would need them. I think used MDT to do a sys prep and capture to create the image of my reference computer. Using the reference image I can push out my images to the rest of the desktops in my environment. The issue I’m having is when we join the computer to domain. The user can login and operate fine on the computer, but I’d like a more. When the user is logged on with their domain user name they lose a lot of the icons I had on my reference image, as well as the desktop background and some other miscellaneous settings. I would love to have the user log on using their domain user name and see the icons and desktop environment as I had it setup on the reference computer. I’m not sure if it is possible, or something simple that I’m missing, but any help would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 file-based backup service

    - by Ben Voigt
    I'm looking for a good replacement for Lazy Mirror, since it doesn't support Windows 7 well. Pros: One of the things I really loved about Lazy Mirror is that it always maintains a "full" backup, but does so by only copying modified files. As each file was copied, the old version got archived (moved to an out-of-the-way location). So after mirroring ran, there'd be a complete copy of the file system, which could even be booted if necessary. At the same time, extra space on the backup media was used to store as many older versions of files as possible, without wasting space storing multiple copies of the same version. It seems that with Windows 7 backup, there'd be wasted space storing the same data in both the system image and file backup. It was completely file-based, but also aware of the registry (it had a feature to dump the live registry to hive files in the correct format). The backups were normal NTFS filesystems, no special tool was needed to read them. It automatically cleaned out the oldest previous versions when space ran out (unlike Windows 7 backup which apparently simply starts failing the the backup media fills.) It copied all file attributes including security. Cons: It doesn't deal well with junction points, symbolic links, and hard links. It didn't run as a service without lots of help from firesrv or srvany, and then you couldn't interact with the GUI. Running as a service was necessary to be able to mirror protected OS files. It didn't have open file handling, except for registry hives. I guess that the file-by-file archive and replacement could leave mismatched sets of files, if the mirror was interrupted. This would be the advantage of incremental backup techniques that require old full backup + all intermediate incremental backups to restore. But I don't see this as presenting much of a problem, you'd really only have a boot failure if you had a mixture of pre- and post-service pack files, and I can run a full image backup using another tool before applying a service pack. Does anyone know of a tool that does both full-system backup and storage of old versions of files like Lazy Mirror did (without storing the same data multiple times), and also can run as a service in Windows 7? Free is best of course, but a reasonably priced paid program (e.g. It would be absolutely awesome if it also triggered a backup/mirror pass when a particular external drive was plugged in and generated popup warnings if backups hadn't been run recently)

    Read the article

  • Win 8: Adding a boot volume to an MBR dynamic disk [NOT about changing to basic disks]

    - by Stilez
    (This is NOT aiming to convert to basic disk. In this question, the disk stays dynamic but becomes bootable) There doesn't seem to be a clear, well stated answer I can find, for the question "What are the criteria for Windows 8 to successfully boot from an MBR dynamic disk", or "how do I fix a dynamic MBR partition that's failing boot"? I've tried to educate myself but can't find crucial information to clear it all up. My existing HDD/SSD setup: DISK 0 ~ 60GB SSD/MBR/basic: (350MB recovery)(60GB windows 8 bootable) DISK 1 ~ 512GB SSD/MBR/dynamic: (350MB recovery)(60GB unallocated)(410GB mirrored data) DISK 2 ~ 512GB SSD/MBR/dynamic: (350MB recovery)(60GB unallocated)(410GB mirrored data) DISKS 3, 4, 5: (ignored for simplicity: 2xHDD RAID1 + caching SSD) I'm heavy duty on data crunching and virtualisation, just maxxed out 32GB RAM @ 2133 and moved to 4960X + 64GB. Disk 0 is a pure system disk of little value, and virtualisations runs off mirrored SSDs (Samsung 840 Pro 512 x 2) for double speed reading and so they snapshot in reasonable time. I'm using 4 SATA3 ports and the board only has two decent Intel ports (onboard Marvell are poorer quality). I'm wary of choosing between LSI, HighPoint and other 3rd party controllers as I'm unfamiliar with the maze of decent RAID cards (that's a whole other issue!). I want to cut down my SSD needs by moving the boot volume and caching volume to the 840 pros, giving a setup with 2 fewer SSDs: DISK 0 ~ 512GB SSD/MBR/dynamic: (350MB recovery)(60GB boot)(410GB mirrored data) DISK 1 ~ 512GB SSD/MBR/dynamic: (350MB recovery)(30GB cache for the ICH10R mirror)(30GB temp)(410GB mirrored data) DISKS 2, 3: (2xHDD RAID1) Intel's RST allows this, Win 8 allows booting off a MBR/dynamic disk, and the two 60GB SSDs are hardly the fastest SSDs anyway, they'll get repurposed. Moving the caching volume is easy. Moving the boot volume has me stumped. The difficulty is, I'm hitting a wall of knowledge here. I have a UEFI Asus motherboard with an previous traditional MBR/basic boot disk, and I want it to boot from a disk and volume that's MBR/dynamic. The disk copy is physically ok (Partition Wizard Server will copy to dynamic volumes) but then hits a light blue 0xc000000e boot error. No real surprise, I expected to have some boot fixing, but had expected Windows to boot-fix it (all drivers exist), or the usual manual fixes to work. Specifically, I don't know enough, to know what's got to be manually checked and perhaps corrected for the disk to boot (legacy/uefi/bios, odd partitions, boot tables, disk IDs, hidden boot files, oh my!), or if I need to change any of this secure boot/UEFI/legacy stuff in the bios, convert a 512 SSD to basic and then back to dynamic when working, or if the issue is pure OS config using "diskpart", "bootsect" and "bootrec" from the Win8 DVD. The old system disk still boots but I don't know enough to figure what to fix, to make the system boot as I want. The answers probably aren't hard but the real issue is my confusion and missing information. Thanks for helping!

    Read the article

  • Good maintained privacy Add-On/settings set that takes usability into account?

    - by Foo Bar
    For some weeks I've been trying to find a good set of Firefox Addons that give me a good portion of privacy/security without losing to much of usability. But I can't seem to find a nice combination of add-ons/settings that I'm happy with. Here's what I tried, together with the pros and cons that I discovered: HTTPS Everywhere: Has only pro's: just install and be happy (no interaction needed), loads known pages SLL-encrypted, is updated fairly often NoScript - Fine, but needs a lot of fine-tuning, often maintained, mainly blocks all non-HTML/CSS Content, but the author sometimes seems to do "untrustworthy" decission RequestPolicy - seems dead (last activity 6 months ago, has some annoying bugs, official support mail address is dead), but the purpose of this is really great: gives you full control over cross-site requests: blocks by default, let's you add sites to a whitelist, once this is done it works interaction-less in the background AdBlock Edge: blocks specific cross-site requests from a pre-defined whitelist (can never be fully sure, need to trust others) Disconnect: like AdBlock Edge, just looking different, has no interaction possibilities (can never be fully sure, need to trust others, can not interact even if I wanted to) Firefox own Cookie Managment (block by default, whitelist specific sites), after building own whitelist it does it's work in the background and I have full control All These addons together basically block everything unsecure. But there are a lot of redundancies: NoScript has a mixed-content blocker, but FF has it's own for a while now. Also the Cookie blocker from NoScript is reduntant to my FF-Cookie setting. NoScript also has an XSS-blocker, which is redundant to RequestPolicy. Disconnect and AdBlock are extremly redundant, but not fully. And there are some bugs (especially RequestPolicy). And RequestPolicy seems to be dead. All in all, this list is great but has these heavy drawbacks. My favourite set would be "NoScript Light" (only script blocking, without all the additonal redundant-to-other-addons hick-hack it does) + HTTPS Everywhere + RequestPolicy-clone (maintained, less buggy), because RequestPolicy makes all other "site-blockers" obsolete (because it blocks everything by default and let's me create a whitelist). But since RequestPolicy is buggy and seems to be dead I have to fallback to AdBlock Edge and Disconnect, which don't block all and and need more maintaining (whitelist updates, trust-check). Are there addons that fulfill my wishes?

    Read the article

  • SQL Clustering on Hyper V - is a cluster within a cluster a benefit.

    - by Chris W
    This is a re-hash of a question I asked a while back - after a consultant has come in firing ideas in to other teams in the department the whole issue has been raised again hence I'm looking for more detailed answers. We're intending to set-up a multi-instance SQL Cluster across a number of physical blades which will run a variety of different systems across each SQL instance. In general use there will be one virtual SQL instance running on each VM host. Again, in general operation each VM host will run on a dedicated underlying blade. The set-up should give us lots of flexibility for maintenance of any individual VM or underlying blade with all the SQL instances able to fail over as required. My original plan had been to do the following: Install 2008 R2 on each blade Add Hyper V to each blade Install a 2008 R2 VM to each blade Within the VMs - create a failover cluster and then install SQL Server clustering. The consultant has suggested that we instead do the following: Install 2008 R2 on each blade Add Hyper V to each blade Install a 2008 R2 VM to each blade Create a cluster on the HOST machines which will host all the VMs. Within the VMs - create a failover cluster and then install SQL Server clustering. The big difference is the addition of step 4 whereby we cluster all of the guest VMs as well. The argument is that it improves maintenance further since we have no ties at all between the SQL cluster and physical hardware. We can in theory live migrate the guest VMs around the hosts without affecting the SQL cluster at all so we for routine maintenance physical blades we move the SQL cluster around without interruption and without needing to failover. It sounds like a nice idea but I've not come across anything on the internet where people say they've done this and it works OK. Can I actually do the live migrations of the guests without the SQL Cluster hosted within them getting upset? Does anyone have any experience of this set up, good or bad? Are there some pros and cons that I've not considered? I appreciate that mirroring is also a valuable option to consider - in this case we're favouring clustering since it will do the whole of each instance and we have a good number of databases. Some DBs are for lumbering 3rd party systems that may not even work kindly with mirroring (and my understanding of clustering is that fail overs are completely transparent to the clients). Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Mysql Servers for Attendance System

    - by foo
    I'm building an attendance system. There are about 20 places where people will check in and check out using Mifare 1K Card. It will use MySQL as the database. The system will display something like "#ID IN: 800AM" when the first time the user checks in and "#ID OUT: 400PM" when the user checks out. For this to work, all the databases need to be synchronized with each other all the times. For an example, if user A went to location #1 to check in but by the time he wants to return home, the server at location #1 went down, he needs to go to location #2 or the nearest server to check out. The server at location #2 should display '#ID OUT: 400PM" and not "#ID IN: 400PM" since he's already checked in. So, what should I use to ensure this idea will work? My main concern is with the network (other department manages it) which is very unpredictable. It just love to go down anytime it wants to. Update LOL, didn't realize my question is not clear, just noticed it when you guys pointed it out, sorry about that. My real question is, how can I configure my MySQL to be synchronized with each other (20 servers)? MySQL cluster ? (tried reading about it, but I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do) My current setup (first phase): Local database for each server OS: Slackware A main server that keeps track which staff is at which server A web based front end for the user to see their history (which connects to the server based on their records) Main Pros No worries about network problems since it is a local database Main Cons A user can only check in and out at the same server. Databases/Servers are not connected with each others. Have to add the user to each server if the users want to check in at different locations. Which means, if he wants to go to location A, he must be checked out from location A first and then check in at location B. The server at location B didn't know that the user has checked in before at A. By the way, I've already centralized my NTP to a local server. About the network, let's just say, I don't have the authority to make changes so that the network will be better. The network won't effect all 20 servers at once, usually, just a few of them for several times a week. If there are anything else you would like me to answer, please just ask.

    Read the article

  • How should I use my new SSD drive?

    - by jasondavis
    I just built a new PC the other day. Specs... Processor: Intel i7-930 quad core CPU CPU Cooler: COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 Motherboard: AsRock X58 Extreme 3 RAM/Memory: 6gb G-Skill tripple channel DDR3 memory (3 sticks of 2gb planning to get another kit to make it 12gb total soon) Operating System Hard drive: Intel X25-M 80GB Mainstream SATA2 Solid State Drive Video Cards: 2 XFX ATI Redeon HD 4650 cards to run 3-4 monitors Case: Lian Li PC-B10 Midtower case Power Supply: Antec TruePower New TP-750 Blue 750W Operating System Windows 7 Pro 64bit Not sure if the specs are helpful at all but I posted them just in case. So I got everything put together and running great so far but I need some advice/ideas/help/tips. I got the SSD drive in hopes of using it strictly for my windows 7 install along with all my other programs I install. I am then going to get another drive or 2 just for data (video,music,photos, etc). So my plan is to just install the new data drives and then in windows 7 I will change my "My documents" "My Music" "My Video" "MY Photos" library's to be located on the data drives instead of the OS SSD drive. I would ultimately like to install all my programs with my windows install on the SSD drive and then create an IMAGE of the drive and then 6 months down the road if things are sluggish I can just wipe the drive and restore my IMAGE with all my programs and settings in tact still. So here are some questions now. 1) How can I verify that TRIM is working on my new SSD? 2) Is there anything above that I missed that I should be doing? I think I once read that there is a page file or some sort of file that windows changes a lot and that it should be moved off f an SSD an onto my data drives. DOes anyone know what I might of heard? If you do can you explain the pros and cons of doing such a thing as well as how to possibly? 3) Any tips or advice to get the best performance from all this, I built a pretty nice system and I just want to make it stay that way as long as I can.

    Read the article

  • IT merger - self-sufficient site with domain controller VS thin clients outpost with access to termi

    - by imagodei
    SITUATION: A larger company acquires a smaller one. IT infrastructure has to be merged. There are no immediate plans to change the current size or role of the smaller company - the offices and production remain. It has a Win 2003 SBS domain server, Win 2000 file server, linux server for SVN and internal Wikipedia, 2 or 3 production machines, LTO backup solution. The servers are approx. 5 years old. Cisco network equippment (switches, wireless, ASA). Mail solution is a hosted Exchange. There are approx. 35 desktops and laptops in the company. IT infrastructure unification: There are 2 IT merging proposals. 1.) Replacing old servers, installing Win Server 2008 domain controller, and setting up either subdomain or domain trust to a larger company. File server and other servers remain local and synchronization should be set up to a centralized location in larger company. Similary with the backup - it remains local and if needed it should be replicated to a centralized location. Licensing is managed by smaller company. 2.) All servers are moved to a centralized location in larger company. As many desktop machines as possible are replaced by thin clients. The actual machines are virtualized and hosted by Terminal server at the same central location. Citrix solutions will be used. Only router and site-2-site VPN connection remain at the smaller company. Backup internet line to insure near 100% availability is needed. Licensing is mainly managed by larger company. Only specialized software for PCs that will not be virtualized is managed by smaller company. I'd like to ask you to discuss both solutions a bit. In your opinion, which is better from the operational point of view? Which is more reliable, cheaper in the long run? Easier to manage from the system administrator's point of view? Easier on the budget and easier to maintain from IT department's point of view? Does anybody have any experience with the second option and how does it perform in production environment? Pros and cons of both? Your input will be of great significance to me. Thank you very much!

    Read the article

  • Hardware for multipurpose home server

    - by Michael Dmitry Azarkevich
    Hi guys, I'm looking to set up a multipurpose home server and hoped you could help me with the hardware selection. First of all, the services it will provide: Hosting a MySQL database (for training and testing purposes) FTP server Personal Mail Server Home media server So with this in mind I've done some research, and found some viable solutions: A standard PC with the appropriate software (Either second hand or new) A non-solid state mini-ITX system A solid state, fanless mini-ITX system I've also noted the pros and cons of each system: A standard second hand PC with old hardware would be the cheapest option. It could also have lacking processing power, not enough RAM and generally faulty hardware. Also, huge power consumption heat generation and noise levels. A standard new PC would have top-notch hardware and will stay that way for quite some time, so it's a good investment. But again, the main problem is power consumption, heat generation and noise levels. A non-solid state mini-ITX system would have the advantages of lower power consumption, lower cost (as far as I can see) and long lasting hardware. But it will generate noise and heat which will be even worse because of the size. A solid state, fanless mini-ITX system would have all the advantages of a non-solid state mini-ITX but with minimal noise and heat. The main disadvantage is the read\write problems of flash memory. All in all I'm leaning towards a non-solid state mini-ITX because of the read\write issues of flash memory. So, after this overview of what I do know, my questions are: Are all these services even providable from a single server? To my best understanding they are, but then again, I might be wrong. Is any of these solutions viable? If yes, which one is the best for my purposes? If not, what would you suggest? Also, on a more software oriented note: OS wise, I'm planning to run Linux. I'm currently thinking of four options I've been recommended: CentOS, Gentoo, DSL (Damn Small Linux) and LFS (Linux From Scratch). Any thoughts on this? Any other distro you would recomend? Regarding FTP services, I've herd good things about FileZila. Anyone has any experience with that? Do you recommend it? Do you recommend something else? Regarding the Mail service, I know nothing about this except that it exists. Any software you recommend for this task? Home media, same as mail service. Any recommended software? Thank you very much.

    Read the article

  • Developer Training – Various Options for Maximum Benefit – Part 4

    - by pinaldave
    Developer Training - Importance and Significance - Part 1 Developer Training – Employee Morals and Ethics – Part 2 Developer Training – Difficult Questions and Alternative Perspective - Part 3 Developer Training – Various Options for Developer Training – Part 4 Developer Training – A Conclusive Summary- Part 5 If you have been reading this series, by now you are aware of all the pros and cons that can come along with training.  We’ve asked and answered hard questions, and investigated them “whys” and “hows” of training.  Now it is time to talk about all the different kinds of training that are out there! On Job Training The most common type of training is on the job training.  Everyone receives this kind of education – even experts who come in to consult have to be taught where the printer, pens, and copy machines are.  If you are thinking about more concrete topics, though, on the job training can be some of the easiest to come across.  Picture this: someone in the company whom you really admire is hard at work on a project.  You come up to them and ask to help them out – if they are a busy developer, the odds are that they will say “yes, please!”   If you phrase your question as an offer of help, you can receive training without ever putting someone in the awkward position of acting as a mentor.  However, some people may want the task of being a mentor.  It can never hurt to ask.  Most people will be more than willing to pass their knowledge along. Extreme Programming If your company and coworkers are willing, you can even investigate Extreme Programming.  This is a type of programming that allows small teams to quickly develop code and products that are released with almost immediate user feedback.  You can find more information at http://www.extremeprogramming.org/.  If this is something your company could use, suggest it to your supervisor.  Even if they say no, it will make it clear that you are a go-getter who is interested in new and exciting projects.  If the answer is yes, then you have the opportunity to get some of the best on the job training around. In Person Training Click on Image to Enlarge When you say the word “training,” most people’s minds go back to the classroom, an image they are familiar with.  While training doesn’t always have to be in a traditional setting, because it is so familiar it can also be the most valuable type of training.  There are many ways to get training through a live instructor.  Some companies may be willing to send a representative to you, where employees will get training, sometimes food and coffee, and a live instructor who can answer questions immediately.  Sometimes these trainers are also able to do consultations at the same time, which can invaluable to a company.  If you are the one to asks your supervisor for a training session that can also be turned into a consultation, you may stick in their minds as an incredibly dedicated employee.  If you can’t find a representative, local colleges can also be a good resource for free or cheap classes – or they may have representatives coming who are willing to take on a few more students. Benefits of On Demand Developer Training Of course, you can often get the best of all these types of training with online or On Demand training.  You can get the benefit of a live instructor who is willing to answer questions (although in this case, usually through e-mail or other online venues), there are often real-world examples to follow along – like on the job training – and best of all you can learn whenever you have the time or need.  Did a problem with your server come up at midnight when all your supervisors are safe at home and probably in bed?  No problem!  On Demand training is especially useful if you need to slow down, pause, or rewind a training session.  Not even a real-life instructor can do that! When I was writing this blog post, I felt that each of the subject, which I have covered can be blog posts of itself. However, I wanted to keep the the blog post concise and so touch based on three major training aspects 1) On Job Training 2) In Person Training and 3) Online training. Here is the question for you – is there any other kind of training methods available, which are effective and one should consider it? If yes, what are those, I may write a follow up blog post on the same subject next week. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: Developer Training, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Last week I was presented with a Microsoft MVP award in Virtual Machines – time to thank all who hel

    - by Liam Westley
    MVP in Virtual Machines Last week, on 1st April, I received an e-mail from Microsoft letting me know that I had been presented with a 2010 Microsoft® MVP Award for outstanding contributions in Virtual Machine technical communities during the past year.   It was an honour to be nominated, and is a great reflection on the vibrancy of the UK user group community which made this possible. Virtualisation for developers, not just IT Pros I consider it a special honour as my expertise in virtualisation is as a software developer utilising virtual machines to aid my software development, rather than an IT Pro who manages data centre and network infrastructure.  I’ve been on a minor mission over the past few years to enthuse developers in a topic usually seen as only for network admins, but which can make their life a whole lot easier once understood properly. Continuous learning is fun In 1676, the scientist Isaac Newton, in a letter to Robert Hooke used the phrase (http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/268025.html) ‘If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants’ I’m a nuclear physicist by education, so I am more than comfortable that any knowledge I have is based on the work of others.  Although far from a science, software development and IT is equally built upon the work of others. It’s one of the reasons I despise software patents. So in that sense this MVP award is a result of all the great minds that have provided virtualisation solutions for me to talk about.  I hope that I have always acknowledged those whose work I have used when blogging or giving presentations, and that I have executed my responsibility to share any knowledge gained as widely as possible. Thanks to all those who helped – a big thanks to the UK user group community I reckon this journey started in 2003 when I started attending a user group called the London .Net Users Group (http://www.dnug.org.uk) started by a nice chap called Ian Cooper. The great thing about Ian was that he always encouraged non professional speakers to take the stage at the user group, and my first ever presentation was on 30th September 2003; SQL Server CE 2.0 and the.NET Compact Framework. In 2005 Ian Cooper was on the committee for the first DeveloperDeveloperDeveloper! day, the free community conference held at Microsoft’s UK HQ in Thames Valley park in Reading.  He encouraged me to take part and so on 14th May 2005 I presented a talk previously given to the London .Net User Group on Simplifying access to multiple DB providers in .NET.  From that point on I definitely had the bug; presenting at DDD2, DDD3, groking at DDD4 and SQLBits I and after a break, DDD7, DDD Scotland and DDD8.  What definitely made me keen was the encouragement and infectious enthusiasm of some of the other DDD organisers; Craig Murphy, Barry Dorrans, Phil Winstanley and Colin Mackay. During the first few DDD events I met the Dave McMahon and Richard Costall from NxtGenUG who made it easy to start presenting at their user groups.  Along the way I’ve met a load of great user group organisers; Guy Smith-Ferrier of the .Net Developer Network, Jimmy Skowronski of GL.Net and the double act of Ray Booysen and Gavin Osborn behind what was Vista Squad and is now Edge UG. Final thanks to those who suggested virtualisation as a topic ... Final thanks have to go the people who inspired me to create my Virtualisation for Developers talk.  Toby Henderson (@holytshirt) ensured I took notice of Sun’s VirtualBox, Peter Ibbotson for being a fine sounding board at the Kew Railway over quite a few Adnam’s Broadside and to Guy Smith-Ferrier for allowing his user group to be the guinea pigs for the talk before it was seen at DDD7.  Thanks to all of you I now know much more about virtualisation than I would have thought possible and it continues to be great fun. Conclusion If this was an academy award acceptance speech I would have been cut off after the first few paragraphs, so well done if you made it this far.  I’ll be doing my best to do justice to the MVP award and the UK community.  I’m fortunate in having a new employer who considers presenting at user groups as a good thing, so don’t expect me to stop any time soon. If you’ve never seen me in action, then you can view the original DDD7 Virtualisation for Developers presentation (filmed by the Microsoft Channel 9 team) as part of the full DDD7 video list here, http://www.craigmurphy.com/blog/?p=1591.  Also thanks to Craig Murphy’s fine video work you can also view my latest DDD8 presentation on Commercial Software Development, here, http://vimeo.com/9216563 P.S. If I’ve missed anyone out, do feel free to lambast me in comments, it’s your duty.

    Read the article

  • Review of Samsung Focus Windows Phone 7

    - by mbcrump
    I recently acquired a Samsung Focus Windows Phone 7 device from AT&T and wanted to share what I thought of it as an end-user. Before I get started, here are several of my write-ups for the Windows Phone 7. You may want to check out the second article titled: Hands-on WP7 Review of Prototype Hardware. From start to finish with the final version of Visual Studio Tools for Windows Phone 7 Hands-on : Windows Phone 7 Review on Prototype Hardware. Deploying your Windows Phone 7 Application to the actual hardware. Profile your Windows Phone 7 Application for Free Submitting a Windows Phone 7 Application to the Market. Samsung Focus i917 Phone Size: Perfect! I have been carrying around a Dell Streak (Android) and it is about half the size. It is really nice to have a phone that fits in your pocket without a lot of extra bulk. I bought a case for the Focus and it is still a perfect size.  The phone just feels right. Screen: It has a beautiful Super AMOLED 480x800 screen. I only wish it supported a higher resolution. The colors are beautiful especially in an Xbox Live Game.   3G: I use AT&T and I've had spotty reception. This really can't be blamed on the phone as much as the actual carrier. Battery: I've had excellent battery life compared to my iPhone and Android devices. I usually use my phone throughout the day on and off and still have a charge at the end of the day.  Camera/Video: I'm still looking for the option to send the video to YouTube or the Image to Twitter. The images look good, but the phone needs a forward facing camera. I like the iPhone/Android (Dell Streak) camera better. Built-in Speaker: Sounds great. It’s not a wimpy speaker that you cannot hear.  CPU: Very smooth transitioning from one screen to another. The prototype Windows Phone 7 that I had, was no where near as smooth. (It was also running a slower processor though). OS: I actually like the OS but a few things could be better. CONS: Copy and Paste (Supposed to come in the next update) We need more apps (Pandora missing was a big one for me and Slacker’s advertisement sucks!). As time passes, and more developers get on board then this will be fixed. The browser needs some major work. I have tried to make cross-platform (WP7, Android, iPhone and iPad) web apps and the browser that ships with WP7 just can’t handle it.  Apps need to be organized better. Instead of throw them all on one screen, it would help to allow the user to create categories. PROS: Hands down the best gaming experience on a phone. I have all three major phones (iphone, android and wp7). Nothing compares to the gaming experience on the WP7. The phone just works. I’ve had a LOT of glitches with my Android device. I’ve had maybe 2 with my WP7 device. Exchange and Office support are great. Nice integration with Twitter/Facebook and social media. Easy to navigate and find the information you need on one screen. Let’s look at a few pictures and we will wrap up with my final thoughts on the phone. WP7 Home Screen. Back of the phone is as stylish. It is hard to see due to the shadow but it is a very thin phone. What’s included? Manuals Ear buds Data Cable plus Power Adapter Phone Click a picture to enlarge So, what are my final thoughts on the Phone/OS? I love the Samsung Focus and would recommend it to anyone looking for a WP7 device. Like any first generation product, you need to give it a little while to mature. Right now the phone is missing several features that we are all used to using. That doesn’t mean a year from now it will be in the same situation. (I sure hope we won’t). If you are looking to get into mobile development, I believe WP7 is the easiest platform to develop from. This is especially true if you have a background in Silverlight or WPF.    Subscribe to my feed

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >