Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3

[Matthew Finkel]

On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Finkel
> <matthew.finkel@×××××.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Matthew Finkel
> >> <matthew.finkel@×××××.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon
> >> >>> and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the
> >> >>> smartphone market.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years
> >> >> now.
> >> >>
> >> >> Are we dead yet?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I'm not holding my breath. There will always be a divide for the power
> >> > users. A single, under-powered interface isn't going to cut it for a
> lot
> >> > of
> >> > us. X provides us with the flexibility that isn't available with the
> >> > mobile
> >> > interface.
> >>
> >> Even in the Microsoft world, I can't easily imagine them ditching the
> >> old UI paradigm for their Windows Server products. They've come a long
> >> way in making Windows CLI-friendly (see PowerShell), but they haven't
> >> yet (AFAIK) provided a good mechanism for remote CLI access.
> >
> >
> > True, and they've been working "hard" to get it to the state it is in
> now.
> > In many cases, sys admins have had to unlearn relying on their mouse
> > for complete power. The CLI provides options that are, obviously, very
> > difficult
> > to express in a simple GUI (I know I'm preaching to the choir).
> Powershell
> > has
> > made huge progress in this respect, but it still has a long way to go in
> > order to
> > compete with what we have. And I doubt the server environment would ever
> > become stripped down to the state we're talking about.
>
> Actually, they're there as of Windows Server 2008. It's called
> "Windows Server 2008 Core". According to "Windows Server 2008: The
> Definitive Guide", you log into one of these systems and all you get
> (by default) is a terminal window with an instance of cmd.exe. It goes
> on to list seven server roles this configuration supports:
>
> * Active Directory and Active Directory Lightweight Domain Services (LDS)
> * DHCP Server
> * DNS Server
> * File Services (including DFSR and NFS)
> * Print Services
> * Streaming Media Services
> * Windows Server Virtualization
>
> (Curiously, one of the things you _can't_ do is run Managed Code.)
>

Huh, I didn't know about this. It's still too limited, though. At least
they've
duplicated a lot of the core gui elements on cli.


>
> >
> >>
> >> Not that they won't be able to bolt one in easily enough; CSRSS means
> >> they should be able to provide, e.g. an SSH daemon, give the
> >> connecting user a PowerShell login session[1], and give it equal
> >> privileges and security controls as they have for any other login
> >> session.
> >
> > How many years have they had? I'd given up on this years ago.
>
> SFU is available in the "Server Core" configuration. I imagine you
> could run OpenSSH under there. Or some commercial entity could come
> along and provide an SSH+screen(ish) component to snap into the CSRSS
> framework.
>

I'd actually forgotten about that, I would never trust their implement
though.
Apparently there's a binary available of OpenSSH that runs on SFU (so says
wiki [1]).
I've been out of the Windows Server environment for a few years now, so I
guess
I've missed out on some of the progress MS has made in this area. It's good
they
are pushing the CLI now. Perhaps in a few releases they'll implement their
own
of encrypting telnet sessions with a screen/tmux lookalike. Microsoft never
ceases to amaze me - with the good and the bad.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX