An introduction to Tmux - <AUTHOR> http://perltricks.com/article/an-introduction-to-tmux/ <comment><USER2> Worth noting that you can enable mouse mode which is significantly easier for scrolling. It's also recommended by most people that you remap Caps-Lock to Ctrl and change the activation key from b to a. There are some great themes that make it nicer to look at as well.

I use tmux all the time for things like sshing into a vagrant box. As soon as I'm in I can switch between the tail of my logs, the readout of my build tool, the dev server readout etc. No more fumbling around starting multiple ssh sessions in multiple iTerm tabs. tmux honestly has been a game changer in terms of productivity just because of how easy it is to open things up and look at them. For those who are wondering why you wouldn't just use tabs in iTerm, its really more of an "also" not an "or"

<comment><USER3> Control-a is 'beginning of line'. Why would you possibly pick that?

<comment><USER4> It's what screen uses by default, and a lot of people come to tmux from screen so they already have the muscle-memory. Not sure of the original logic though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Here are some things that might be helpful for newcomers.

All those tmux commands, like set, bind-key etc might be put inside your tmux.conf file, as well as executed as commands directly.

For example, once you are inside a tmux session, simply execute them by prefixing with tmux:

      tmux set status off

      tmux set status on

      tmux set status-style "bg=red"

      tmux new-window

      tmux new-window -n "my window name"

      tmux rename-session mysession

Of course, you can execute them outside the tmux session too, you just need to tell it which tmux you want to control.

Open a new terminal, do not enter the tmux session, execute the following:

      tmux set -t mysession status-style "bg=yellow"
      tmux new-window -t mysession

Inside a tmux session, tmux automatically knows which session you are talking about, so no need for "-t mysession" section.

Now, I hope you get the idea, you can manipulate tmux using a client-server architecture from the outside, this is the gist of the other tools like tmuxinator.

You could easily script tmux this way, so that it sets up 4 windows, one running your server, one running your db etc.

What the keybindings do is, effectively to map these commands to keyboard shortcuts, you can also execute any command using `C-b :`, similar to how emacs can do `M-:`. I think tmux was in some ways inspired by emacs.

Hit `C-b :', then run one of the commands, `new-window`, hit Enter.

When you are satisfied with these commands, move them your .tmux.conf file.

However, note that it will not sourced (read) until after you restart tmux or you source it yourself.

Either quit tmux or do

      tmux source ~/.tmux.conf

Of course, you can similarly group your project-level settings to their own configs, and source them or start tmux with those settings with tmux -f.

      tmux source myproject.conf (inside tmux session)

or tmux -f myproject.conf (outside tmux session)

</comment><comment><USER6> I recommend Byobu. Byobu is an elegant enhancement of tmux or Gnu Screen.

For me Byobu is for far easier to use than Tmux.

<comment><USER7> I watched the video for a while - and it looks almost identical to tmux - basically tmux with different key-mappings. I'd almost guess that the someone has simply gone and skinned the base tmux, everything looks so similar - panes, sessions, windows, resizing, scrollback, etc...

If you already are familiar with tmux, I don't think Byobu will get you anything (based on what I saw of the video).

<comment><USER8> Yeah, byobu is pretty much an opinionated tmux/screen (you can choose a backend).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Serious Question: Why would I want to use Tmux instead of iTerm with multiple tabs open? I don't think I get it. Can anyone ELI5?

<comment><USER10> Speaking as someone who doesn't use it, but understands it well, the one and only thing that excites me is the persistence of sessions, if your connection drops, you can reconnect and everything is still there. Love that idea. Everything else is solved that I know it does well (for me) by using tabs. I could very well be missing other things, I know it does quite a bit, but most of the things I see other people use it for is solved by tabs (for me at least).

<comment><USER11> Doesn't mosh do that as well (or better)?

<comment><USER12> I kind of see what you mean, but tmux and mosh are completely different things and have (almost?) completely different use cases. Mosh is replacement for ssh.

Without talking about the other _huge_ benefits of tmux, mosh only helps (and was designed to) prevent disconnections and other inconveniences when your internet connection falters. If for example your terminal unexpectedly closes you can't reconnect to your ongoing mosh session (this is an intended feature for security reasons).

Tmux on the other hand wouldn't help against a poor internet connection, but at least if your terminal or your ssh session closes you can just restart another one and wouldn't lose anything.

In other words, always use tmux, and tmux+mosh if your internet connection is poor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I love tmux but it appears to be messing with my terminal colors for some reason, especially in vim and after enabling 256 color mode.(Also the line numbers in vim appears to be bold in tmux when they aren't if run directly from the terminal, weird.)

<comment><USER14> You may have hit the difference between what a terminal _is_ capable of, versus what it's _actually_ capable of. Most modern terminals can do all kinds of fancy things like mouse-support and 256-colour output, but they advertise themselves as 1990s-era 8-colour devices for compatibility reasons. Specifically, they set $TERM to "xterm" or similar.

tmux is two kinds of terminal application: it interacts with your outer, "real" terminal, and it presents an inner, "fake" terminal to the programs running inside it. By default, tmux will respect the limitations implied by $TERM, so if your outer terminal claims to be an 8-colour device, tmux will filter the colours of applications inside it to fit the standard 8-colour palette.

Vim also respects the limitations implied by $TERM, but some people override it into using 256-colour mode anyway, by doing something like "set t_Co=256" in their .vimrc. That works for Vim running in the outer terminal, but it doesn't work for any other tools running in the outer terminal, and in particular it doesn't help tmux.

These days, it's generally best to configure your terminal app to set $TERM to something like "xterm-256color", "nsterm-256color" (for Terminal.app), "putty-256color" (for PuTTY), "gnome-256color" (for libvte-based emulators) or similar. If your terminal application doesn't support manually overriding $TERM, you can do it in your shell profile. That way, every app should understand your terminal's capabilities, including 256-colour support, both inside and outside of tmux.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Discovering tmux and finding a workflow with it that works for me made me so much more productive

I have a really weird setup though.

I run screen on my laptop with a window for each machine I'm connected to. An irc box, a VM, a remote dev box, and a local screen. All of these Screen Windows I have a tmux session in.

I have a minima tmux config that makes resizing panes easy and fast to whatever size I want and whatever order I want.

It sounds stupid but I see people using multiple iterm or terminal Windows and I don't know how they do it. It just feels so slow to me. Tmux and screen are awesome you just need to find one that works for you.

<comment><USER5> You can also have nested tmux sessions instead of screen+tmux setting:

[https://mutelight.org/practical-tmux](https://mutelight.org/practical-tmux)

" Command Sequence for Nested Tmux Sessions

Often I'll run a multiplexer inside another multiplexer and need a command sequence to send things to the inner session. In Screen, this could be accomplished using C-a a <command>. This doesn't work out of the box in tmux, but can be fixed with a little configuration.

bind-key a send-prefix "

<comment><USER15> I can but I didn't like it as much. Screen out of the box with no screenrc was exactly what I wanted. now it's kind of stuck, as silly as using screen and tmux is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> One of the best tips I got when setting up tmux was to change the default prefix to ctrl+a. That combined with remapping caps-lock to ctrl makes working with tmux much more comfortable.

<comment><USER7> Or ctrl+s - (I use Ctrl-a all the time to go to beginning of line). Particularly if you remap Caps-Lock to Ctrl, it's pretty comfortable combination.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I recently stumbled across tmux while trying to provide a more customized UX in a bash script. Tmux and screen seemed a little more powerful than I needed, with lots of ways to accidentally corrupt the terminal. More and less were pretty close to what I wanted, but I could not figure out how to accept arbitrary input from the less prompt, exit, and pass it to bash.

Maybe that's not what less is for. Any tips on how I can create a less UX with custom input handling would be appreciated.

<comment><USER18> The select builtin might help in your case:

[http://tldp.org/LDP/Bash-Beginners- Guide/html/sect_09_06.htm...](http://tldp.org/LDP/Bash-Beginners- Guide/html/sect_09_06.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is there a good explanation as to why tmux forces all viewers to view the exact same content? I very frequently want to see different windows (or whatever the terminology is) on different connections. Screen for example allowed that by default.

(I do know that you can do some complicated scheme of multiple-layers of indirection, but really why can't this just work by default?)

</comment><comment><USER20> He missed one of the most useful commands - ctrl-b z - to zoom a pane to the full size of the window. Very handy for multi-line copy operations so you don't get other pane's content or border characters.

tmux is also a great way to keep your workspace available from other machines. eg. run tmux and all your text mode clients on a server somewhere and ssh into it.

<comment><USER21> nice! To think I have been using ^-b :break-pane the entire time…

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I use tmuxinator to manage all of my tmux sessions.

While, I could write tmux scripts for everything the yaml format does just about everything I need.

I treat a session as a project, for example mux dotfiles will open a tmux session, cd into the correct directory, and setup and panes I want when working with my config, just one. On a customer project I often have one window for vim, then another window for the server to run, psql, and any additional services I need.

I have also found, prefix-s to be very helpful to switch between projects very quickly.

</comment><comment><USER23> Recently I've come across the tpm (Tmux Plugin Manager), available at [0].

Happy with it, even though I'm only using two plugins: tmux-sensible (better defaults) and a theme-pack [1].

[0] - [https://github.com/tmux-plugins/tpm](https://github.com/tmux- plugins/tpm)

[1] - [https://github.com/jimeh/tmux-themepack](https://github.com/jimeh/tmux- themepack)

</comment><comment><USER24> I can only recommend tools like tmuxinator [1]. They make it really easy to start your development environment. Especially when you deal with multiple services that need to be started along with certain tasks (mostly watch tasks like build and test in my case).

[1]: [https://github.com/tmuxinator/tmuxinator](https://github.com/tmuxinator/tmuxinator)

<comment><USER25> Also [https://github.com/oxidane/tmuxomatic](https://github.com/oxidane/tmuxomatic), whose ASCII layout format I find stupid easy to create custom windows and screens.

<comment><USER24> Wow, that's pretty cool. I tend to use windows a lot though. Within a window I usually have 3-4 panes that I manage using Ctrl-B space to switch layouts.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I would recommend using mosh+tmux, rather than ssh+tmux, especially if you're using a laptop to connect to your remote development machine.

<comment><USER27> Ideally yes, but unfortunately mosh doesn't get through most firewalls, as far as I can tell. A lot of networks filter everything except port 22.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I sometimes tried that (and used screen for some time), but it never clicked. AFAIK the only advantage to a scriptable tiling WM is the persistence thing, but I never had a use-case for that.

</comment><comment><USER29> Tmux is awesome. been using it for a while but still need to learn more about it. Its great to have a progress running here and checking on it later while on another window

</comment><comment><USER30> I use it over ssh. 1 ssh session, multiple terms/windows/etc. And persistence of sessions.

</comment><comment><USER31> The images depict manuals for screen.

</comment><comment><USER32> Is this better than putty manager?

<comment><USER33> It serves a different purpose: putty manager is for managing multiple SSH sessions within a single app, but with tmux running remotely, you only need one SSH session, and you can leave it running when you disconnect, which is extraordinarily useful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Is tmux a MacOS thing? I don't understand why would I want to use it on my machine. I already have a terminal multiplexer - it's called gnome-terminal and it supports tabs and multiple windows. Why would I want to add a clunky middle man with weird key combinations that messes with scrollback and colors?

<comment><USER10> >> I don't understand why would I want to use it on my machine. I already have a terminal multiplexer

I always feel the same way. I've got terminal set to open connections to 6 servers when I open it. I've tried using it, makes perfect sense to me, it's lovely, but I guess it just solves a problem I don't have? It's one of those many things that makes me feel like some kind of failure for some reason. Like using nano as my primary editor. I can use the hell out of emacs and vi, but for the work I do (I'm a sysadmin), most of the time nano just works, no weird issues, and it's always there. I know everyone is going to and laugh and me now, but there it is. I find myself using nano most of the time, though I'll use emacs a few times a week on some projects. Something about that long reach to the esc key keeps me away from vi.

<comment><USER35> When tmux might be handy:

If you find yourself doing repetitive things in those 6 windows. Say they are production machines that are basically clones of one another. It's simple to make a key binding that will force all 6 windows to, for example, "tail -f /var/log/messages". Or start "top" on all of them.

If you kick off a long running task (say a big build) in one of those six windows, and you leave it running, but go home and watch it finish. (detach/reattach). It's easier than stdout/stderr redirection, nohup, etc. It also preserves things you did manually (setting environment variables before the build) such that restarting a build might be less complex.

You have a peer, not close by, that you want to show how to do something. It has both read only and read/write session sharing. Your peer can watch what you're doing, or you can watch them, and take over when needed.</comment></comment></comment>


The 115th Congress Republican Tax Bill for 2018 [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/TAX%20SUBSTITUTE.pdf <comment><AUTHOR> AMT Changes: The exemption and phase-out exemption amounts were increased, and AMT is proposed to adjust with inflation. Information on pp 95-97 of the 2018 tax bill.

Just in case someone wants to compare the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) changes themselves: Current federal AMT law: [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/55](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/55) v.s. New AMT amendments: pp 95-97 of the 2018 tax bill

</comment><comment><USER2> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWdfRRtAs3o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWdfRRtAs3o)</comment>


Bandaid – Dropbox service proxy - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.dropbox.com/tech/2018/03/meet-bandaid-the-dropbox-service-proxy/ <comment><USER2> Here [1] is a good article on the "random pick 2" idea in case anyone is interested. The paper is definitely worth reading too.

It's definitely one of my favorite techniques that I keep in my "toolbox". Really simple, but not (at least to me) intuitive.

[1] [https://brooker.co.za/blog/2012/01/17/two- random.html](https://brooker.co.za/blog/2012/01/17/two-random.html)

<comment><USER3> There's also a more mathematically rigorous paper on the random-pick-2 topic in the references section of the Dropbox blog post -- [https://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~michaelm/postscripts/handbook2...](https://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~michaelm/postscripts/handbook2001.pdf)

<comment><USER2> Yeah, sorry I wasn't clear but that's the paper I think that is worth reading. Thanks for linking directly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The justification for using LIFO (vs FIFO) queues for requests is interesting: at no/low load it makes no difference, while at high load the requests least likely to time out get serviced first.

Is that a common architectural decision in reverse proxies or queuing systems in general?

<comment><USER5> In queuing theory, it's well known that choosing the request with lowest service time first will result in lowest waiting time on average across the requests.

This is usually not done because it can starve the larger jobs.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortest_job_next](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shortest_job_next)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queueing_theory#Service_discip...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queueing_theory#Service_disciplines)

<comment><USER4> Interesting. I wonder if that choice would lead to a noticeable impact on perceived latency (from the perspective of a human end-user) under some high- load/pathological scenario.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nice to hear they plan to open source it. Competition in this space is heating up.

A good list is this one from the Envoy project: [https://www.envoyproxy.io/docs/envoy/latest/intro/comparison](https://www.envoyproxy.io/docs/envoy/latest/intro/comparison)

<comment><USER7> Not familiar with the space, but definitely curious how Bandaid compares with Envoy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Trademark lawyers took the day off?

<comment><USER9> IANAL but don't trademarks apply on specific markets? If that's so, I doubt bandaid has registered in the software market

<comment><USER10> Back in the day, there were VAX minicomputers and VAX vacuum cleaners in peaceful coexistence ...

(Not to mention the Apple music label and Apple Computer.)

<comment><USER11> Apple and Apple did not exactly co-exist peacefully:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> One day I hope to work on a system that needs this level of optimization.</comment>


The 15-Minute Morning Routine That's Already Changing My Life - <AUTHOR> https://www.themuse.com/advice/the-15minute-morning-routine-thats-already-changing-my-life <comment><USER2> This morning routine is definitely different than your typical routine. Your meaningful insights may give people the opportunity to look for a positive outlook on life. Your routine will help people reevaluate their perspective in their lives.</comment>


Hubot - <AUTHOR> http://hubot.github.com/

<comment><USER2> Hubot has a pretty interesting history, especially when you consider how crucial it is today to the daily operation of stuff at Github. There's a really good interview which has some stuff in it about Hubot from Hanselminutes (with Paul Betts and Justin Spahr-Summers of GitHub): [http://www.hanselminutes.com/375/on-culture-and- remoteness-a...](http://www.hanselminutes.com/375/on-culture-and-remoteness- at-github-with-paul-betts-and-justin-spahr-summers)</comment>


Hell freezes over: Forrester urges IT to support the Mac - <AUTHOR> http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/10/27/hell-freezes-over-forrester-urges-it-to-support-the-mac/

<comment><USER3> I find myself agreeing with their recommendation, even though I disagree with their rationale.

Agreeing to let "HEROES" use Macs in an enterprise (and dear god what a terrible term, as if us Mac users weren't smug enough) seems to be basically capitulating to entitlement.

At my last company, when Mac OS X first shipped, I wanted to try it out, so I bought an iBook (the cheapest entry to the world of Macs, in case I ended up not liking it). People in my office were horrified, and I was forbidden from attaching it to our network (lest its cooties infect our other systems).

Over the course of about 6 months, I was eventually allowed to connect it. I had a coworker who continuously ran a vulnerability scanner against it, telling me that if it ever found anything, I'd have to remove it from the network forever (the handful of unpatched Windows boxes on the network weren't a concern, apparently).

Within a year, there were four or five other Macs in my group. Within two years, every single person had one.

At my current job, after complaining for two years about how awful my P.O.S. Dell laptop was I got an email from my boss about a month ago. It said "We're getting you a new laptop. Do you want a Thinkpad T520 or a Macbook Pro?".

I thought he was messing with me at first, but no, it turns out Macs were now OK for us to use as testing laptops.

I will say that in 11 years of going on-site to clients to do security assessments, I have only once encountered a company that had a non-trivial amount of Macs on their network. Over the years, I'd run into a graphic arts department here or there that had a few Macs, but in general, they were a rounding error for the large enterprise clients I deal with.

<comment><USER4> _...seems to be basically capitulating to entitlement_

Entitlement to use choose your own tools? Gasp.

I think the underlying point the article's taking glancing blows at has plenty of merit, they just failed to do it bluntly enough. I think there's likely a high correlation between highly productive employees, and people who could care less about IT bureaucracy. I don't think it has anything to do with Mac users.. it's just that Windows users in this position are less affected, and through this lens.. less visible.

<comment><USER3> Entitlement that the rules put in place don't apply to you, because you are some sort of prima-donna superstar. I find that worrisome. It can bloom into pretty ugly (and moderately damaging) behavior.

I've worked for clients who have certain divisions which are the super-stars. I think the better approach is to evaluate why you have all these policies, and if they are actually doing what you think they're doing.

edit: Rereading this makes it sound like I'm calling the parent a prima-donna, which isn't what I mean (I'm referring to the people within an enterprise who decide that because they feel more productive on a Mac, they can just bring one in from home to do their work and circumvent all of the policies of IT.)

At the risk of forcing a square metaphor into a round analogy, it's really important in the Army that people follow orders. Even if a small group of them think they can be totally more productive by doing things their own way.

Enterprises aren't really set up to optimize for increased employee productivity, they're more likely to be set up to limit decreased productivity. I think this is one reason that people seem to like working at a startup, because you get to not have all that dogmatic bureaucracy.

If these HEROES in four or five years now suddenly decide that they'd be even more productive if they lugged in SGI O2 workstations from home to do their work, an enterprise has to be able to say "yeah, sorry, you can't do that."

But as to more Macs being deployed in enterprises, I'm all for it. It'd give me new things to break into.

<comment><USER4> No worries about it sounding like the prima-donna comment was aimed at me. I've certainly fallen into the category of people you've applied it to.

At this point I'm sure I'm not remotely fit for The Enterprise, though I've worked in plenty of them. It's not that I've ever thought that the rules put in place don't apply to me.. it's that I've placed a higher priority on other objectives of the company (like getting work done).

IT policy at most corporations I've worked at is completely inarguable. In my experience it's very difficult to get a reasonable accounting of cost/benefit when it comes to making almost any change in policy... in part because productivity benefits like the ones I feel I get from my choice of tools are hard to measure, and in part because I don't think I've had the experience of working anyplace where the IT department charged themselves with making other people's jobs easier/better.

I think job function matters too. Programming is a craft. Good craftspeople are ridiculously passionate about their tools. If you walk into a nice auto- mechanic shop, the racks of tools against the wall are owned and paid for by the mechanics. I imagine that's not the case at the Jiffy-Lube, but you're we're probably talking about people at a different skill level. Good craftspeople in any industry end up in a relationship that's closer to independent contractor, or even peer with the organization they work for. That's happening in our industry, and I think it makes sense to look at functions that provide friction for those people, because it will become much harder to hire them.

<comment><USER3> For what it's worth, I totally agree with you. I'm presently trying to extricate myself from a large enterprise.

I'm not necessarily a gung-ho "startup good/big company bad" kind of person, but purely from an "asymmetric effectiveness" standpoint, it's easy to see why people think large enterprises are a relic of last century. In many ways, it seems like they're designed to just continue treading water until the lake evaporates, rather than trying to swim to the other side.

<comment><USER4> Totally. I'm not on one side or the other from an idealogical standpoint.. it seems like there are some large organizations that do enough good with their size to make up for the downfalls that come along with it.. I just haven't been at one of those.

With respect to functions like IT, I'd imagine the department needs to do what other functions in a large organization do in order to remain effective and useful... decompose.

It seems like distributing things like risk management, and the security of assets among parts of the organization effectively gets the organization closer to looking like a bunch of smaller, more effective organizations who collaborate... and mitigates risk. The idea of a monolithic IT function in a giant organization providing more safety than a distributed version of the same idea seems on it's face a misplaced comfort.

Then again, I'm really not someone who knows enough about what it takes to run an IT department to be suggesting such a thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I work at a large government IT organization. We were way ahead of the curve on this trend -- we did a POC deployment in late 2008.

There are real issues with Mac vs. Windows in an enterprise for many categories of user. We found that some Executives and some knowledge workers LOVED them. All Unix admins and most web-dev types loved them. Why? They weren't using line of business applications, and either didn't have many meetings, or had an admin who handled scheduling on their behalf.

We did not end up deploying Macs more widely, but the POC boxes are still in service. I love my Mac.

Real issues:

1\. Apple is unpredictable with respect to patching. Known, material security issues may lay dormant for months with no patching. Apple prefers to rollout lots of fixes at once (ie. instead of a security patch, they roll up to 10.x.y) which often break things. This is a problem if you have to rely on ANY non-Apple software.

2\. Apple is unpredictable with respect to product lifecycle. Want to roll out 500 iMacs? You had better pray that they don't arbitrarily cancel or (worse) change your order because they are announcing a new product. When Apple releases a new product, the old product ceases to exist.

3\. Identity integration is poor. Integration with LDAP/Kerberos or AD is unreliable and undocumented. Unless you can use tools with a different model for authentication (ie. Dropbox), simple things like filesharing are unreliable. 3rd party tools help, but that creates a new problem. (See point 1)

4\. This situation improved when the new MS Office, but Exchange support sucks. Even with Outlook for Mac, calendar functions suck.

5\. I don't think that Apple takes security seriously. "Viruses" are becoming increasingly rare, even in the PC world. The types of threats that are out there are different in many ways. People in the Mac community have a really bizarre outlook on security.

6\. Apple doesn't give a flying leap about enterprise IT. They know that Microsoft jumps through hoops to keep Bank CIOs happy, and that keeping those folks happy comes with a cost (10 year product cycles, IE6, etc). Apple's ability to tell enterprises to screw off is both an advantage and a disadvantage. If you're a proponent of large-scale adoption of Macs in an IT org, you are taking a big professional risk.

Overall, I think that it's great that people are looking at alternate platforms. But don't pretend that Apple is a silver bullet -- Apple doesn't love you back, and will make you cry.

<comment><USER6> Very well said. You outlined everything that I've noticed and discussed with our IT team (who support a large number of Macs). Needless to say, they have come to despise supporting Macs.

And, yes, Microsoft Outlook for Mac is a horrid POS.

That said, I love Macs but I'm not in IT support and I completely understand their pain.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've heard in the past one theory for IT departments favoring PCs (besides all of the pro-PC marketing aimed at them) might be that the Macs are very cheap to administer and thus don't require much IT support.

I thought this was an interesting response to this news, over at the AppleInsider forums:

"I work for one of the largest corporations in the world. Surprisingly, they don't do anything to block access to network services, but they don't necessarily encourage other platforms either.

I work on a team of 23 people. The company provides Dell or HP laptops running XP or Vista (Windows 7 is still being 'evaluated'). These laptops would cost a normal human about $600, but for some reason my company leases them instead. We pay about $150/month (if memory serves) over the course of a two-year lease term. You do the math...

Four years ago I paid about $700 for a Mac Mini. I run Office 2011 (and previously ran 2008 and 2004) for Exchange Server connectivity. I occasionally use Word and Excel, but generally prefer Pages and Numbers. For presentations I exclusively use Keynote (PowerPoint is a festering pile of poop). I am a systems admin who supports applications running on both Unix and Windows 2008 Server machines. For Unix I use iTerm and X11, and for Windows 2008 remote server administration I use the RDP client that comes with Office.

My computer currently has a monthly ownership cost of (700/48) about $15. One- tenth that of my laptop. In the past four years I've had exactly zero minutes of unplanned downtime, while every single one of my 22 peers have had their machines out for days at a time for reimaging due to OS corruption, most of them more than once.

The downside is that the $150/month in lease charges covers hardware service. Still, since over four years the cost of ownership is $7200 vs $700, the company could replace my Mini six times over four years and still save money, not taking into account the money saved from productivity.

Executives who don't consider using Macs are simply bad at math."

[http://forums.appleinsider.com/showpost.php?p=1975818&po...](http://forums.appleinsider.com/showpost.php?p=1975818&postcount=44)

<comment><USER8> > These laptops would cost a normal human about $600, but for some reason my > company leases them instead.

For some reason the corporate world considers money spent in big blocks to be a different kind of money to that spent over an extended period of time. Unless they have a _really_ good interest rate on their bank accounts I have no idea why, but spending more money in smaller amounts over an extended period is the holy grail.

<comment><USER9> If you buy a computer, it becomes a company asset and, from an accounting PoV, the money was not "spent". If you lease it (and give it back at the end of the lease) you only had expenses (and, from accounting's PoV, money spent).

Various factors may make one option preferable to the other. Taxes, executive bonuses etc.

If part of the yearly bonus is tied to investing less in infrastructure, an exec may opt for leasing hardware. OTOH, if the bonus is tied to lowering expenses, the exec may consider buying it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I know I (as someone in charge of a campus) and others I know in the same position are really considering a migration to Mac

The problem with Windows 8 and Metro is Microsoft's upending things to the point where Windows doesn't resemble its own standard anymore. Windows 8 is as much a culture shift as the Mac would be.

Beyond that just about every corporate app has gone web based at this point. Only the oldest code bases are still Windows (and it's so old that it runs perfectly fine in a virtual box). So there are no apps to keep us on Windows.

So now that the question isn't "should we change" it becomes "which platform is superior" and I think most would choose the Mac in that comparison. I know (as the article says) most users feel that way.

As crazy as it seems we might finally be at the end of the Windows era.

</comment><comment><USER11>
      It's quite a turnaround for the voice of Windows in the
      enterprise. If you're not a Forrester subscriber, you can
      buy the report for $499 here.

_Four hundred and ninety nine US dollars?_

<comment><USER12> Their business model is a different one. Instead of giving it away for free, and going for a million views and thus ad revenue, they're going for a hundred purchases by Fortune 500 companies. It's the reason there are books out there that cost $4000.

<comment><USER13> No, they're going for corporate subscriptions (in which case everyone in the company gets access to everything they write), but if you _really, really_ want to read it, you're welcome to pay a punitive fine for not subscribing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> One of the two main cited reasons people prefer Macs was this:

> _Many of today's corporate PCs are saddled with management, backup, and > security agents that can bog down a PC. Employees want their PCs to boot in > 10 seconds, not 10 minutes...They're drawn to uncluttered Macs..._

I don't see how this shows superiority of Mac over PC; presumably if the Mac were running this software it would have these problems too.

<comment><USER15> The difference: when you use a Mac, you don't need that software.

\- You don't need to run third party antivirus or antispyware software on the client, only on your mail server (to protect Windows users if you forward Windows executables). OS X has built-in malware protection.

\- You don't need third party management software, you can use NetInstall/NetBoot or ARD.

\- Using NetBoot also solves the backup problem on the client, even though OS X does have built-in backup and recovery solutions built-in (Time Machine, Versions).

In other words, there are no add-on services needed that would bog down the system.

<comment><USER16> I'm also pretty sure that once MacOS starts becoming prevalent in the enterprise, they'll eventually need antivirus, back up agents, and some sort of management agent as well.

How would an IT organization manage the settings on the OS without some sort of management agent?

<comment><USER17> At what point are we going to get over the concept that Macs don't have virus issues because there's not popular enough yet? I feel like I've been hearing that chestnut for a decade now.

There are already IT management tools for Macs. I've worked at two large companies in a row (25k+ employees) where a large percentage of the company was using Macs (~30% or more) and they both had established management solutions that didn't bork the user experience on Macs. I'm typing this on a managed Macbook Air right now.

As for backups, those agents exist but they're rapidly growing less relevant as the majority of documents and work are either web-based or on servers anyway. If I somehow lost this computer, I'd be bummed to have to do some preferences setup again, but I wouldn't lose any work.

<comment><USER18> Why are Banks known for getting robbed more often than Bakeries? That's where the money is.

The reason you've been hearing about Mac popularity with regards to viruses is because it's true, despite the fact that you'd like to think otherwise.

The fact is that Mac market share is still only around ~15% in the US and much less than that worldwide. That is about triple the market share that they had ten years ago.

Also - Ever heard of Pwn2Own? The Mac has fallen first every year.

<comment><USER15> _"Why are Banks known for getting robbed more often than Bakeries?"_

Because of Hollywood movies? It isn't actually true.

Of all robberies in the US, only 2.1% targets a bank. Shops (including bakeries) are targeted far more often, 14.3% of the time. Gas stations are robbed more often than banks, and convenience stores are even 2.5 times more likely to get robbed. [1]

The number of bank robberies is on the rise, but that's not because "that's where the money is". It's because the number of bank branches has grown rapidly, banks have standardized floor plans, and banks have procedures to deal with robbers (= just give them the money). [2]

To further break down some bank robbery myths: nearly 80 percent of bank robberies are committed by one person. 70 percent of bank robbers are unarmed offenders who do not use or even threaten violence. About 60 percent of bank robbers do not bother with disguises; only 7 percent of robbers in Florida did. And finally, more than 80 percent of arrested bank robbers have no prior convictions for bank crime.

[1] [http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/violent_crime/robber...](http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/violent_crime/robbery.html)

[2] <http://www.popcenter.org/problems/robbery_banks/2>

<comment><USER18> It may not be true anymore, but that doesn't mean that Hollywood made everything up about that! Ever heard of Jesse James? The point is...thieves go where the money is.

Okay, so fine you don't like my analogy. Let's fix it for you then: If you found a large oasis in the middle of a desert, would you pass it by in order to find a smaller one?

<comment><USER15> _"thieves go where the money is."_

I'm sure robbers do risk assessment. If a bakery has half the cash a bank has but no security and a better escape route, they will much rather rob a bakery.

 _"If you found a large oasis in the middle of a desert, would you pass it by in order to find a smaller one?"_

Alright, let's use that analogy. Which is the large oasis, Mac or Windows?

Windows has a larger installed base. However, most Windows computers have virus protection and Microsoft puts a lot of effort into improving security.

Mac OS X has a smaller installed base, but practically no one bothers with virus protection and security doesn't seem to be Apple's number one priority.

That's why I think Mac OS X is a lot more interesting to cyber criminals, it's an enormous oasis. And yet, there haven't been any attacks of scale -- if there had been, it would be front page news. Perhaps OS X is safer than you want to admit?

<comment><USER18> No, it's not safer than I'd like to admit just because you don't agree with my analogy. I am relying on empirical evidence, thank you very much.

Are you one of those people who thinks that the Mac has fallen first at Pwn2Own because it's a "nicer" computer that all the hackers want? Because that's not the case at all. It's been shown a number of times that OS X can be rooted more easily than Windows.

So, no I don't think it's "safer" because of anything technical either. Even if it were though, that wouldn't matter. Windows is safe, yet it can be hacked much like any OS.

The only remaining possibility must be true: Hackers don't pay little attention to OS X because too few targets are using them to make it worth the effort.

Windows is the larger oasis (quite obviously to the non-obstinate reader). This is because even with virus protection, you can't protect users from themselves and more users means more chances to try. If a malprogrammer can get you to run a binary, you're done. If OS X were the more popular OS and it were being run by almost every business in the world that utilize computers, then I have zero doubt that it would have the same problem as Windows in that regard.

I don't think that it will ever be a problem though for Apple since I doubt OS X could ever reach the same market penetration within the highly hacker- targeted business and enterprise market. So, people can go on believing what they want I guess.

<comment><USER15> Wow, so much to respond to...

I'll limit it to what I think is the core of your message:

Why would cyber criminals be more interested in breaking into some empty business desktop, if they can break into a personal desktop filled with personal information like credit card numbers and iTunes/Paypal/Bank logins?

<comment><USER18> Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer despite empirical evidence the says otherwise?

That'd probably be quicker than me trying to explain to you why the Mac is worthless target. (Actually a no explanation is typically needed for that since the market share numbers don't lie. I just think you're being extremely obstinate at this point, so there's no way you'll see that. You might as well attempt to prove _your_ point to me since there's obviously no way you'll accept _my_ point.)

<comment><USER15> _"Why don't you just tell me why you think the Mac is safer"_

I'll let Pwn2Own winner Charlie Miller answer that for me:

 _"I'd say that Macs are less secure [...] but are more safe because there simply isn't much malware out there. For now, I'd still recommend Macs for typical users as the odds of something targeting them are so low that they might go years without seeing any malware, even though if an attacker cared to target them it would be easier for them."_

[http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac- hack,2254-6....](http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac- hack,2254-6.html)

<comment><USER18> Thanks for proving my point. It's not _technically_ safer. It's security by obscurity.

<comment><USER15> A 58 million Mac installed base, more than 250 million iOS devices sold, and you're still arguing obscurity? That's commitment.

[http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices- sol...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/04/250-million-ios-devices-sold/)

<comment><USER18> Oh please. Compared to over a billion PCs worldwide? If you are going to build a bot-net, would you really target the Mac? Gimme a break dude.

Considering the vast difference between Windows and OS X APIs; it's quite clear why mal-programmers don't waste their time with OS X. You would have to spend MORE than half your time attacking the Mac for less than 10% of your total attack surface.

The only other argument that has been made in the face of this fact is from Gruber who said: If Macs have 10% of the market, why don't they have 10% of the viruses? That's like saying because I am Nth the size of the sun, I should have Nth the power of the sun. Reality does not work that way. Everything does not have to be proportional and in this case it's crystal clear why it is not proportional.

Would you please kindly concede this point now?

<comment><USER15> So by that logic, as long as the Mac market share isn't as high as Windows market share, the Mac platform will always be safer.

<comment><USER18> Yes. Superficial, non-technical safety via obscurity which lasts forever since OS X will never break 10% worldwide usage market share.

iOS might be another story, but smartphone and tablet usage in general is still dwarfed by Windows usage. Despite that, within the realm of smartphones there have been more iOS threats than there have been threats for Windows Phone 7. Shocker? Nope. It's based on popularity.

Interestingly enough, this year's Pwn2Own left the Android and Windows Phone 7 devices undefeated while the iPhone was one of the first to fall. - [http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/03/hacking-android- windo...](http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/03/hacking-android-windows- phone/)

Take from that what you will. Ciao.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> > The voice of Windows in the enterprise discovers that Mac users are more > productive

Because the standard-issue corporate Windows laptops are locked down, running Windows XP with IE6.

</comment><comment><USER20> I'm not sure what their 6 recommendations were for preparing for the transition, and I'm unwilling to pay $499 to find out, but I hope one of them deals with the horrible pain in the ass that is Windows File Sharing.

Macs _really_ do not like Windows shares, whether in an AD context or a workgroup context. While some seem to work without any trouble, others have frequent issues with logging in, with browsing, with refreshing, with permissions. It's very frustrating for the users, and frustrating for those in IT support positions who are faced with annoyed users on one side and inscrutable black box magic on the other.

<comment><USER15> My experience has been that Windows doesn't really like Windows shares either. Ever tried to create a network with a few Windows 2000, Windows XP and Windows 7 computers? I couldn't get it to work. Instead, now those Windows machines simply access my WebDAV running on Mac Lion Server.

<comment><USER21> You're kidding right? Windows file sharing is trivial to set up.

<comment><USER15> Between different versions of Windows? No, it isn't.

<comment><USER21> Well, certainly between anything that owes its heritage to NT it is. I have win2000, 2003, XP, and 7 all playing very nicely together, and I cannot recall any issues with setup or maintenance. Compare that with getting a Mac to print to any printer that wasn't specifically designed with macs in mind... torture.

<comment><USER15> Which printer manufacturers don't make drivers for Macs? I don't know of any. Even really old printers from the pre-OS X era work fine, because of CUPS and Gutenprint. It's plug and play, the drivers are downloaded automagically.

<http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3669#Gutenprint>

<comment><USER21> The ones that I have had the most "See Note 7"* moments with have been large multifunction workgroup printers that you would find in any office - <USER2> varying manufacturers. these printers all claim to have mac drivers, and generally these claims are terrible, terrible lies.

*Note 7: This will not work.

<comment><USER22> Completely agree. One color laser MFC we recently replaced had a scanner that could only be used over the USB port for Macs but over ethernet for Windows. The workaround we found was scan to email which tended to be more reliable for Mac and Windows.

Now we have a new hotrod HP MFC that does everything and supports iOS and Android. It was also 1/3 the price.

<comment><USER15> Em, parent was talking about printing, not scanning...

I have yet to use a printer that OS X Lion can't find a driver for.

<comment><USER22> The parent was talking about the MF part of a MFC printer being nonexistant for the Mac. Hell any printer with a USB port will work on a Mac. Any $50 printer can do that. But when you spend $200+ on a network MFC most come up short on the Mac side.

<comment><USER15> I was referring to the following:

 _"Compare that with getting a Mac to print to any printer that wasn't specifically designed with macs in mind... torture."_

Like you said, printing is not a problem in OS X. As for the other functions of a MFC, I agree: it's hit-and-miss. But that wasn't what OP was complaining about.

<comment><USER21> Printing is no picnic either, as any cursory browse through discussions.apple.com, support.apple.com, or any of the many mac-centered tech forums will attest. Here's a few examples, by no means exhaustive:

[https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2776655?start=0&tst...](https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2776655?start=0&tstart=0) [http://ask.metafilter.com/79984/Need-help-printing-to- work-p...](http://ask.metafilter.com/79984/Need-help-printing-to-work-printer- from-macbook) [https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3137602?start=15&ts...](https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3137602?start=15&tstart=0) [https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3193803?start=0&tst...](https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3193803?start=0&tstart=0)

And any search for "<<printer manufacturer>> mac not working" will produce scads of results, often taking you to discussions that are dozens of pages long with people who can't print from their macs to any number of printers. This is a real problem, not a figment.

<comment><USER15> That's proof that there's a lively online Mac community, nothing more.

Guess what? Any search for "<<printer manufacturer>> windows not working" will also produce scads of results, often taking you to discussions that are dozens of pages long with people who can't print from their Windows PCs to any number of printers. The same can be said about most GNU/Linux distributions.

The only support forums where no one complains are those of products that no one uses.

<comment><USER21> I was responding to this:

> It's plug and play, the drivers are downloaded automagically.

and this:

>Like you said, printing is not a problem in OS X.

This is obviously and clearly not true, but you seemed to need evidence which I provided. In addition, in my experience the compatibility of macs and printers is far worse than windows and printers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> My recommendation: Never trust a recommendation from Forrester.

<comment><USER24> Do they do actual research? I thought they were purely a PR instrument based on their past recommendations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I work for one of the biggest corporations in the world, and I can see the acceptance of Macs creeping in. There is at least active support for using Macs as terminals for Windows virtual desktops. That said, it's still a long way to go so it would be nice to see these things speeding up.

The quote "For the same reason they wouldn't wear cheap shoes and a bolo tie to meet with Lloyd's of London to insure their cargo ships and cranes" gave me a giggle. Hell is certainly freezing over, because it's now more of a case of Lloyds of London having to rely on the tax payer in jeans to keep them afloat.

<comment><USER26> I also worked for a big corp recently where IT would not issue a Mac to anyone unless they worked in a "creative area". Some of the Intranet tools were strictly IE-only too, as in changing your user agent to IE didn't help you at all.

The silly part of the Windows-only IT policy is that it's intended to simplify IT support when in fact every week IT would broadcast alerts "EMERGENCY: Everybody must stop what you are doing and run this urgent security update!!!" That was a weekly ritual. Not to mention "New version of Office! Please install it!" ... two weeks later "Office update! Please install it" ... and so on.

So glad to be back in a Mac world.

<comment><USER21> You worked at a company with a dysfunctional IT department. In non- dysfunctional IT departments, security updates application patches are installed automatically without user intervention.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I would support OSX more if I could get better support from Apple. I have two identical MBP's in my office -- and following the same steps, one joins the AD Domain, and the other one refuses to join the domain. Apple's support? Clueless, and refers me to the community support -- which doesn't have a definitive answer or any real help.

</comment><comment><USER28> 51% allow access to web-based email? 37% allow internet access? 19% native email?

I've been in IT for 12 years, I've never seen anyone endorse blocking Macs from any of these. 49% block Macs from _webmail_? Difficult to imagine a situation where these would be a problem. Maybe super paranoid eavesdropping management?

<comment><USER29> I think the key phrase here is "employee owned Macs". They don't say what the equivalent results are for "employee owned Windows PCs", but I'd bet they're in the same ballpark. And when they say "owned" they really mean "administrated", meaning the PC isn't part of the corporate domain and subject to corporate Group Policy.

<comment><USER28> Ah so that falls under the umbrella of expectations of IT.

E.G. someone brought a machine from home one day and proceeded to work on it, then had a failure and lost "business critical" data. Then management chewed out IT with questions like "How could you allow someone put our data in that situation!!!", "What could you have done to prevent this!"... Hence IT Policy: no personal machines in the building.

To anyone else in IT; here's how you avoid that situation, and the resultant policies. Audit your connections, or have an inventory tool which will let you know when new MACs (the NIC addresses) are seen. Then follow up with a polite email to $PersonalDeviceUsers's Boss detailing what you can/can't offer service wise. So long as everyone understands the situation ahead of time (in writing), you'll avoid having to write such policies later.

<comment><USER22> And this is why employees hate their IT department. Instead of helping them do their job better they dictate and put up roadblocks so IT guy has an easier job.

1\. If business critical data is lost this is your fault because those backups should have been performed regularly, throughout the day. 2\. Unknown devices on the network should have automatically been switched to a DMZed network. If they want it on the corporate network they'll email you and ask how to do it and probably tell you why as well. People bring in all types of devices not related to work; cellular hotspots are one example. 3\. Going to the user's boss is just an asshole move. If they are causing trouble, yes by all accounts go ahead. But from an outsider it looks petulant.

<comment><USER28> I think we have a tone mismatch here. For instance if a user brought in a Mac the email would be something like "Hey, just saw $newdevice connected to corpLAN. Remember that all company data needs to be saved to a share in order to be properly backed up. Also here's what you'll need to connect to email etc..."

1\. Backups are performed regularly on devices I have control over. If someone stores their info on a personal usb flash drive and loses it what should I do?

2\. So you're advocating an automatic kill of any unknown devices and then calling me a obstacle? "If they want it to work then they will call me". Does that sound helpful?

3\. It's not a complaint, just information. The boss is responsible for that employee and would expect me to know when devices change. If the manager doesn't approve of personal devices that's between you and him. Most bosses don't have a problem.

I'm trying to be helpful towards other IT people with methods I've learned to allow the users to BYOD while still managing expectations. Your response is "this is why everyone hates you! Because you won't do things the way I think you should have!"

<comment><USER22> Sorry I might have been mistaken then. I've been both user and admin of the IT department and the amount of bullshit handwaving that comes from some of them is infuriating. I honestly believe that 25% get their jobs through nepotism because there is no way that IE6 should still be a requirement for any PC.

1\. I share the same view. Once it leaves the network you're on your own. I encourage our users to backup to our servers because storage is cheap and if they are going to be using it for work might as well.

2\. DMZ doesn't mean killing it just means your unknown device has a connection to the internet and that is all. Some users just want to bring in an iPad and aren't looking to get 802.11x certificates, 26-character WPA passswords, etc.

3\. Unless someone is being a nuissance on the network I try not to get involved and even then I fire off an email directly to shut them up.

I work for a software company so most users are really computer competent so I haven't encountered the "problem" user that most IT workers love to make fun of.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Most enterprises have a very strong culture of maintaining status quo as extensively as possible. Especially in IT departments. Even big software enterprises rely on 5-10 year old infrastructure software (such as Exchange 2003) which was released during the era of Windows domination. It doesn't help that some of the software is web based because even that is often made for Internet Explorer only.

Nevertheless Mac's are actually spreading in enterprises. Not from top but from bottom. Officially unsupported, but with a help of VM software such as VMWare Fusion there are no problems using legacy stuff.

</comment><comment><USER31> The biggest barrier to entry for the Mac in the corporate world is SAP. SAP GUI and the additional products it runs like the reporting tools (Bex) just cannot be run on Mac. The SAP GUI only works on Windows and in theory is supposed to be supported on Mac through Java and HTML equivalents, but in practice they don't work.

SAP is so ingrained into corporate IT that unless SAP themselves decide to rewrite everything (unlikely) I can't see PCs being replaced any time soon.

</comment><comment><USER32> I wonder how much of the advantage of startups vs. BDCs is using Macs as desktop/laptops, vs. windows. Probably not as much as using Linux vs. Windows for servers, but still a big advantage.

I'd have a hard time working anywhere which required a windows desktop and blackberry. I could tolerate it as a consultant if I had a consultancy- provided iphone/android and mac, with client-provided onsite windows stuff, but that's about the limit.

</comment><comment><USER33> Damning.

Upon seeing this, I thought pg had editorialized the "Hell freezes over" bit of the headline, but no ... that's the actual CNN headline.

</comment><comment><USER34> The reality isn't as bad as it sounds here. According to the same source (Forrester) 32% of personally owned PCs aren't allowed on the networks either (vs 41% for Macs).

So an only 9% difference seems pretty reasonable. It may not be what we want, but given limited company IT resources, it's almost surprising the delta is that low.

</comment><comment><USER35> I'd kill to have Mission Control, Spotlight and Quicksilver at work. I haven't found great Windows equivalents.

</comment><comment><USER36> Uh, hey Forrester, the real "HEROs" are the ones that take a couple of hours on their own time to streamline a bloated Windows install rather than wasting company resources to get a Mac working in a primarily Microsoft based infrastructure.

<comment><USER37> In The Enterprise, there's often no way of streamlining your own install. Users often a) don't have the administrative access necessary to remove the bloatware, and b) wouldn't dare uninstall "critical security applications" installed by IT. Sometimes the only way to escape the protocols is to put yourself in a situation where they can no longer be applied to you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Mac Bauer. Power hour. Could'nt help the JB joke. Microsoft has bit of a Fort Knox within enterprises.</comment>


Linux LED Class Driver for NUC8 BEH (WIP) - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/GothAck/nuc8_beh_led_linux <comment><AUTHOR> This is super work in progress, but the beginnings are there, reverse engineering ACPI was fun, looks like Intel couldn't finish writing the new interface before shipping</comment>


Show HN: A golang websocket server you can pipe to - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/minikomi/pipesock

<comment><USER2> So no installation instructions, the ones here don't work (it's not compiled), and it doesn't seem to work (tailing a log file that is receiving new content once per second `while true.... date > mylog; done` - /buffer.json always empty, /flush does nothing except echo "Flushed" and the web interface apparently does nothing...

<comment><USER2> Also, there's a problem:

> cat /usr/share/dict/words | ./pipesock 2013/06/01 22:35:59 Read Line Error: > EOF 2013/06/01 22:35:59 Read Line Error: EOF 2013/06/01 22:35:59 Read Line > Error: EOF 2013/06/01 22:35:59 Read Line Error: EOF

This happened when trying to do "y | ./pipesock", amongst other things, perhaps you should silently ignore stuff that isn't streaming in line-based.

FWIW the websocket library now installed, I get a single reading in the html frontend, the first message I broadcast.

Nice idea, needs a lot more work!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you very much for trying it out and, I agree, I have a lot more work to do. As always, the devil's in the details - and having those details pointed out is a great way to move forward!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> go get github.com/minikomi/pipesock

ln -s $GOPATH/src/github.com/minikomi/pipesock/default ~/.pipesock

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, thanks. You might also need to go get code.google.com/p/go.net/websocket if you haven't already.

<comment><USER4> You could use the following to get the path to your assets.

        import (
            "go/build"
            "path/filepath"
        )

        pkgInfo, err := build.Import("github.com/minikomi/pipesock", "", 0)
        if err != nil {
            panic(err)
        }
        webDirPath := filepath.Join(pkgInfo.Dir, "default")

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a much cleaner idea, thanks. I'll investigate it. edit: Thanks, I went with this.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Amazon Is Quietly Eliminating List Prices - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/04/business/amazon-is-quietly-eliminating-list-prices.html <comment><USER2> Could some one explain how this works?

      ...the strategy was to lose on every sale but make it up on volume

<comment><USER3> The explanation is alluded to in the second half of the paragraph you quoted: It was a land-grab strategy to build a customer base in the nascent online retail market.

Edit: There are other ways that Amazon leverages volume to be able to sell at what appears externally to be a slight loss, but I believe in the context of the quoted paragraph the person being quoted is simply referring to the above.</comment></comment>


BofA Programmer Heads to Prison After Coding ATMs to Spit Out Free Cash - <AUTHOR> http://www.securityweek.com/programmer-heads-prison-after-planting-cash-spitting-malware-atms <comment><USER2> On a related note: The Bank Of America ATMs are really, really great. Their ATMs and their online bill pay service are some great banking tech. They're the only reason I'm a BoA customer for my checking and cashflow accounts.

With their BillPay service, I can have BoA download e-bills from, say, credit card companies or utilities, and pay the amount of the bill on its due date. I never have to worry about it. I can set rules like "Pay my electric bill its full amount on its due date unless it's over $200" so I'm protected from crazy billing errors draining my account.

This guy was just a dumbass.

<comment><USER3> And yet they still use the Windows "ding" for everything, because of course there's no budget for sound design in an ATM project.

I hear those weirdly-out-of-place Windows sounds everywhere. It grates on me the same way Comic Sans grates on those who appreciate type.

Someone who does sound design could pick up this banner and impress everyone with set of free UI sounds that are classic and usable.

<comment><USER4> Ha! The New Jersey Transit ticket kiosks at 8th street station in Philly make the same Windows ding noise. It sounds like a program is stuck on an error, and it's like a dog whistle to me.

That said, about your comment "Someone who does sound design could pick up this banner and impress everyone with set of free UI sounds that are classic and usable." -- I'm betting that's exactly what MS was trying to do. They commissioned Brian Eno to do the Windows 95 startup sound, and brought on Robert Fripp for Vista's startup sound (along with Tucker Martine and Steve Ball). Mind you, I'm not sure who's responsible for the various system sounds.

It's very easy to say "make classic, usable, impressive UI sounds" but incredibly difficult to actually do that.

<comment><USER3> Good point. I suppose the ubiquity of the sounds themselves helps to make them disconcerting.

Then again, maybe using Windows isn't a terribly positive association for some to have either.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> One would wonder if there were any code reviews in place or not? Any code that has monetary effects has to go through a series of code reviews (saying from my experience working with a client in banking industry) and tests. I would be curious as to how the 'bug' went undetected until deployment!

<comment><USER6> _Any code that has monetary effects has to go through a series of code reviews_

The article reported that he installed malware on select ATMs.

I acknowledge that this leaves a great deal to the imagination, but one suspects a code review would not catch the problem. The code was clean, the implementation on certain machines went awry.

<comment><USER7> In other words, he did some kind of internal hacking to install his code - illegally bypassing the code review process.

<comment><USER6> Maybe? I can only speculate that the hack wasn't in the code at all, but something he installed on the individual ATM.

"Oh, look: you can login to the ATM after installing the code. Hey what if I ..."

If so he didn't bypass the code review so much as skip around it, whistling a jaunty 'nope nothing illegal here' tune.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> People in charge of the BofA mortgage signature fraud should go to prison too.

[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-20049744-10391709.htm...](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-20049744-10391709.html)

But I guess it's a lot easier to prosecute people who can't afford expensive lawyers.

<comment><USER9> Prosecuting financial fraud is usually a great deal slower and more complex because it's more difficult to prove intent (compared to both incompetence and pursuit of legitimate profit), because it can involve so many more people (many of whom may not have been doing anything wrong at the individual level, but whose actions taken together were wrong at an institutional level), and because the rewards are more diffuse and indirect (unit profits lead to pay rises or career advancement for those involved, rather than bags of cash or deposits into secret accounts).

That's not to say that people can't or shouldn't be prosecuted, just that it's a more difficult undertaking. A recent example: [http://www.housingwire.com/2011/04/19/ex-tbw-ceo-lee- farkas-...](http://www.housingwire.com/2011/04/19/ex-tbw-ceo-lee-farkas- convicted)

<comment><USER8> Signing someone else's name at the behest of a department head is pretty clear fraud (and more obvious when it's 1000's of documents being signed with someone else's name and backdated). Watch the 60 Minutes segments.

Prosecutors don't want to take on the financial sector because it ruins their achievement record if they lose or it takes too long because the defendant can afford good lawyers. They stick to the people who cannot afford a defense.

No-one has been prosecuted for the financial crisis, I mean the economy was DESTROYED, we are years into it now.

<comment><USER10> > No-one has been prosecuted for the financial crisis, I mean the economy was > DESTROYED, we are years into it now.

Why should they be proscecuted? We re-elected Barnie Frank.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm just dying to know how exactly he did it and how they tracked him down. I've joked about this type of thing with friends, but it would be absolutely hilarious if he did something to the effect of putting his information within the malware which led cops right to his doorsteps. I have a feeling, this may be something at the level of a burglar leaving footprints in the snow right to his home... I mean, wouldn't they have locked him up and thrown away the keys if it were more of an Oceans 11 type plan & they had to chase him down spending tons of federal money? 400k & 27 months for what essentially is equivalent to bank robbery?

<comment><USER12> My guess is that when the money in the ATMs didn't reconcile.

It may be normal for a set of ATMs to be off by a few hundred a year, but anything higher than the norm would be enough to set off alarms.

After that, it just involves reviewing code checkins and camera footage.

Just a guess, though. Hell, maybe he used ATM card first before each "heist".

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> "...some cash machine in Bumsville, Idaho spits out $700 into the middle of the street. I did that! That was me!"

"You did this from your house?"

"What are you, stoned or stupid? You hack a bank across state lines, you get nailed by the FBI!"

<comment><USER14> Man, I was JUST going to quote that. Well done.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Can anyone figure out where a year went here? He plead guilty in April _2010_. Was he really just sentenced in May _2011_?

</comment><comment><USER16> How did he get caught?

<comment><USER17> That is a line from "Hackers" one of Angelina Jolie's first movies!

<comment><USER18> Or he could actually be asking how he was caught.

<comment><USER17> I totally did not read Hansy's comment that way since it was posted in a weird place in the thread. I thought he/she was referring to line from "hackers"

Hansy, I apologize.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Like father/BoA like son?

</comment><comment><USER20> Sounds like Office Space.

<comment><USER21> More like Superman III.

<comment><USER22> It doesn't sound like either of those movies. They just shaved off dollar amounts less than 1 cent from millions of transactions. This guy just had the machines spit out extra money when he entered his ATM card.

<comment><USER17> I think you have my stapler.....

<comment><USER23> Please, just stop.

I mean, I love quoting tangentially-related old movies too, I think it's totally the highest form of wit, but the url for fark.com is "fark.com".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I wonder how they'd have felt about it making phantom lines of credit instead. (Of course, with interest.)

"Oh, it's Programmer D! How's it goin', D? You want $1,000? OK! And since you don't have enough money just now, I'll just jot this down for you to pay back later."

And magically, when I deposit $5,000, it pays back a few hundred on my, er, his loan. :-)

<comment><USER24> Fine, more apropos- yeah, the guy was an idiot. I was going to pontificate on how one might actually pull this off, but there's always a problem: you're gonna make mistakes and eventually get caught.

<comment><USER25> Or, you won't and then no one will know how you did it.

<comment><USER26> If you don't mess up, nobody will know that you did it anything at all.

They don't seem to publish statistics on these things very often, but my gut tells me more people get away with crimes than don't.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to get rid of cookie warnings? - <AUTHOR>

Over a month or so Google has implemented a cookie warning topbar that sends to https://www.google.com/policies/technologies/cookies/. I'd guess it's shown only to EU visitors as it's probably a response to the EU cookie law. There are of course many other websites that think they must follow the law and add such warning but so far the warnings have been smaller and less intrusive.
Is there any way to stop this? Every time I'm visiting any blogger.com hosted blog or open my gmail - it's there. Topbar has two choices "Learn more", "Got it". But "Got it" is not persisted.
To think that all websites would get this non-persistent topbar warning at one point is beyond logic.
Is there any extension recommendation or how are you people coping, isn't it driving you mad? ;-) <comment><USER2> CookiesOK is pretty good:

[http://www.cookiesok.com/](http://www.cookiesok.com/)

[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cookiesok/afmkbjoa...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cookiesok/afmkbjoakcacgljcdccofbffloabfbni?hl=en)

[https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/cookiesok/](https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/cookiesok/)

<comment><USER3> Brilliant - thanks</comment></comment>


The Banning of Google Glass Begins (and they aren't even available yet) - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2013/03/10/the-ban-on-google-glass-begins-and-they-arent-even-available-yet/

<comment><USER2> As someone who has been a 'Cyberpunk' enthusiast since the mid '80s - I am both in love with and terrified of where Glass is taking us.

Firstly, the Cyberpunk RPG world I was playing in as a teen was set in the year 2020. Where Ono Sendai created the decks used to jack into the net and transport someones conscious online.

While the idea of navigating the internet in a way analogous to physically walking is clumsy - what we have with glass is the reverse. Where you have the immediacy of the internet available to your physical reality.

Banning the first iteration, even before its available, is already a lost cause. By the time we hit 2020 - Google will have done more to bring us to the Neuromancing reality than most, and we will have iteration N of Glass at that time - likely available to either ocular implants of lens overlays.

Having had my first child in 2004, where I saw that she would be 16 in 2020, the same age as I was when I was roleplaying the Cyberpunk character in 2020, I go back and forth on whether I think that the tech level available to her when she is 16 is going to be a good thing or a bad thing.

There are a lot of things that I have let go as they came about and chose not to be an early adopter of, but Glass is one that I can't wait to get my hands on. While I have no idea if I would want to imbue my entire life with Glass - as that sounds like a Bad Thing (TM) - One cannot deny how potentially revolutionary this will be to the world once truly widely available.

Whats more interesting to me, than the ___banning_ __of Glass, is what the unseen reactionary responses, derivative and evolutionary apps and uses will be.

Iteration one has the small prism screen to the right. I predict this will be one of the first things to be extended by adopters who wish for full visual overlay.

Augmented full field vision is low hanging fruit. Glass will enable a true BIM overlay industry. (People like PlanGrid should be pissing their pants to get access to Glass, and if they are not - then they are far too short-sighted)

One thing I am keenly interested in trying is FPV training for things like martial arts.

Activities such as skiing, snowboarding, skydiving, etc are cool to watch from an FPV standpoint - but viewing an FPV of a long ride, great jump, etc will not necessarily be something a viewer can gain much more instructive value from, I believe.

However, as a martial arts instructor myself, I would like to see how an FPV view of some of the throws and holds I teach would be received.

TL;DR: Banning is a lost battle. in 2020 Glass will be a primary data interface to millions.</comment>


Ask HN: For those who travel a lot, what are you survival tips? - <AUTHOR> I once ran into a guy coming down the hotel elevator with a portable bike. Brings it everywhere so he can always get a bike ride in. Now that I'm traveling a lot more, what have you found useful to say healthy mentally, physically, spiritually, etc <comment><USER2> Never, ever, recline your airplane seat.

Sit up straight, with your weight on your spine like a human being. Even when sleeping.

When you lean back and try to get "comfortable", you force all of your weight sideways onto your butt, which now has to act as a scootch-guard to keep you on the seat at all. That works for a couple hours max, after which you're in agony for the rest of your 12 hour flight.

Learning to sit on chairs is a good skill in general. Getting an office chair that doesn't recline will do wonders for your health as well.

</comment><comment> et-al This is a broad question. What type of traveling? Consultant travel when you're M-F at a client's repeatedly? RTW digital nomading? Domestic/international?

\- obvious is don't check your bags if you don't need to

\- noise-canceling headphones for the airplane are worth the $2-300. be sure to pack spare battery (the Bose case has a slot for one)

\- bring a lacrosse ball in case you get a tight back, sore muscles. maybe a Theracane if you have more serious issues

\- be sure to tag your luggage and throw a business card in there just in case the checked bag happens to get lost

\- do a morning bodyweight routine instead of relying on a gym and equipment since you don't know how facilities are at every hotel. check out the 7-minute workout for ideas: [https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/the- scientific-7-m...](https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/the- scientific-7-minute-workout/)

\- if you're a traveling consultant, pay someone else to do your laundry instead of trying doing it yourself on your shrinking weekends

\- splurge for Global Entry (gives you TSA-Pre). ideally you've already applied for a travel rewards credit card that will credit you for it

\- make it a point to hang out with your friends on the weekends when you're back home. schedule things in advance, check out concerts, museums, etc.

</comment><comment><USER3> Got this one from Bill Burr's podcast: Never order scrambled eggs. They usually get made ahead of time in large quantities and sit underneath a heat lamp.

</comment><comment><USER4> If you stay at the same hotel for a month or more at a time, get a monthly rate and get two of everything so you can leave supplies and clothes in the hotel over the weekend. Not having to pack up once a week is very nice. Pay the hotel to clean and press your clothes if that applies to you.

Most hotels have gyms and pools. Use them.

Don't eat all 3 meals a day. I gained 40 lbs doing that. It feels like a luxury with per diem, but it's glutinous.

Meet locals to hang out with.

<comment><USER5>
      glutinous

_Gluttonous_ , I think you mean. Gluten not required.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Audiobooks. For me there's no better way to take my mind off the journey than that. Mostly on the topic of business or what ever specific thing I'm working on at that moment. Audiobooks and a notebook to scribble down ideas and learning is such a brain booster.

</comment><comment><USER7> For long layovers pay to use the business class lounge. They generally have good, healthy food, decent bar, quiet areas. Some have showers and even nap rooms.

</comment><comment><USER8> Bring a portable sinus rinse bottle (like a neti pot) and rinse after flying. It usually helps with the air from being in a plane for a while.

</comment><comment><USER9> Get TSA pre-check and Global entry.

Eat at local Co-ops.

Find hotels that have saunas.

<comment><USER10> +1 to pre/global. Sad that this scam exists and is needed, but it makes a big difference even though minor.

Travel light, do local wash n fold or laundromat when needed.

Try to stay in convenient locations with great walkability.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Many hotels rent bikes now, you don't need to bring one with you.</comment>


Scout - Extensible Server and Application Monitoring - <AUTHOR> http://www.infoq.com/articles/scout-extensible-monitoring;jsessionid=47AF0C77A2D3C474FBF70D827F86DA74 An interview on InfoQ with one of the Scout creators, Andre Lewis. <comment><USER2> $19 a month?

<comment><USER2> Hacker news is lame, and getting lamer by the minute.

I get knocked down for questioning the pricing model for a single server? For a three server setup, it's $612 a year.

Nagios isn't that hard to setup or maintain. At $612, at $50/hour, you can't setup nagios yourself in 12 hours?</comment></comment>


Climate Change Insurance: Buy Land Somewhere Else - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/30/realestate/climate-change-insurance-buy-land-somewhere-else.html <comment><AUTHOR> FYI, if you are looking for a community that is resilient (which seems a wiser course to me than loading up on medicine, guns, and seeds in a remote area), check out this list of transition towns: [https://transitionnetwork.org/transition-near- me/](https://transitionnetwork.org/transition-near-me/)</comment>


Is Pursuing a Masters Degree in BIS or MIS Worth It? - <AUTHOR>

Question: Is pursuing a Masters Degree in BIS (Business and Information Systems) and/or MIS worth the time and money if the end goal is to be better prepared to be CTO of a tech startup? <comment><USER2> Everything depends on what you want to do and what your previous experience/education are. I am currently pursuing a MS in MIS and have a BS in CS, I do feel like it is a good combination. I have a good exposure of what Business Intelligence are, learned machine learning, project management. Is it worth the money? It depends again on what you want to do in the future. If you want to climb up a company ladder, then maybe it will be worthed. It might even be more worthed to join into a Entrepreneur program rather than MIS if you want to be more involved in a startup

<comment><AUTHOR> I currently have a BSIT with a concentration in Web Applications (SQL, PHP, etc) and minored in Management. I am already involved with a startup and I'm narrowing down my choices on whether or not to go back to school and learn.

<comment><USER2> May I know why you want to go back to school? Are you planning to create your own startup in the future or work at a startup? Or work at big companies?

<comment><AUTHOR> There's a few reasons really so to be brief - I want to go back so I have less time thinking about my current career (50-60+ hours a week - no ownership), and more time thinking about a startup I am directly involved in while gaining hands-on experience towards an MSMIS or MSBIS. Basically, I want all my cards dealt to a startup rather than half of them since the other half is dealt to my current career. You may ask why I can't just jump straight into the startup and the answer to that is, because I'm repaying loans (private/federal) and paying bills. However, if I go back to school, I can defer the loans and gain financial aid which can be used towards other home expenses like rent, etc. I hope this explains it a bit better..

<comment><USER3> That sounds like you're digging yourself deeply into debt, especially if the startup fails (as most do).

You know more about your situation than I do, but tread carefully.

<comment><AUTHOR> you're right about the debt. that's definitely a big factor which is why I've been contemplating on whether or not to take this route and why I asked about it here.. I will, thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Getting some more color from your responses, I would have to say it is not worth it unless you intend to climb a corporate ladder. Otherwise, I think it would be more practical to learn this stuff from a person already experienced while on the job at an early stage startup and/ or established company (both would be preferable). After all, these types degrees will not help you build a successful startup directly, but they will directly aid in your resume and allow you to be a more desirable employee (which it sounds you are trying to get away from).

<comment><AUTHOR> appreciate the feedback. you've made a few key points that i overlooked - thanks. as for being desirable, i'm trying to get away from that employer because though i work 50-60 hour work weeks, i have little to no growth because the job entails a number of tasks that insult my intelligence. (mind you I've been working for this employer since inception, 3 years ago)</comment></comment>


NetDNA's real-time network monitoring system - <AUTHOR> https://developer.netdna.com/blog/how-we-built-our-real-time-network-monitoring-system?

<comment><USER2> Justin is a great guy, and NetDNA is an awesome company. Look for more great things to come from them.

<comment><USER3> =) Thanks David. Can't wait to start working together in the near future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Feel free to try my NagiosTV project on those TVs <https://github.com/chriscareycode/NagiosTV>

<comment><USER3> This is cool!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Looks to be a pretty good system. If you want something more flexible hosted on site you should look into my company's free downloadable VM [1]. You can run it out of VirtualBox or vmware player, and get essentially the same dashboards in a few mouse clicks.

1.<http://www.sevone.com/download>

</comment><comment><USER6> Some very good stuff shows up in the NetDNA blog. Useful stuff. Stuff that you might not put to use right away, but you bookmark the post so you'll remember to come back for another read.

</comment><comment><USER7> Great job Justin, you have to work on the Marketing Dashboard next ;)

</comment><comment><USER8> Keep up awesome work Justin love the insight behind the scenes

</comment><comment><USER9> Cool write up. Always good to see companies show off their projects. Haven't heard of Leftronic either, but need to check it out now.

</comment><comment><USER10> Awesome job this guys are doing!! Taking CDNs to the next level!

</comment><comment><USER11> woot woot

<comment><USER12> I kinda feel obliged to welcome you to Hacker News for some reason..</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Do the YC companies find good candidates recruiting on HN? - <AUTHOR>

Out of curiosity, I am wondering how many recruits are found on HN versus other means. Does it depend on the region? <comment><USER2> I utilise HN as a resource to stay in touch with what is happening at the core of the tech industry and more importantly, to keep me inspired and motivated to get my own start-up launched. One thing I _never_ use HN for is soliciting candidates or clients.

I currently work in the Tech Recruitment industry, so I do weigh in from time to time defending the minority in our industry that are some bit decent and I do my best to offer advice on resumes and interviews if and only when asked.

All that considered, I receive at least one or two emails a week from UK based HN'ers who ask me to help them find work and on the odd rare occasion I have had potential clients approach me asking if I could help them recruit for roles they are struggling with.

Now I do sincerely try and keep my day job & HN entirely seperate but the passive opportunities that come my way through this site are a very clear indicator to me that this is a fantastic platform for YC companies to gain access to some incredibly talented staff.

/mytwocents</comment>