Home

Advertisement

Customize
About this Journal
I'm a long-time IT Consultant and former (of no glory to speak of) engineer, support engineer and/or pseudo-IT guy masquerading as an engineer (or some might say an engineer masquerading as a technologist). This is my blog. I do not speak for my employer(s), client(s), past employer(s), future employer(s) or other employer(s) that I may or may not be aware of. This is my blog. Read it. Enjoy it. Print it out, take it to the bathroom to read and, as a bonus, you can use it as "spare toilet paper" in case the roll is out (com'mon guys, you KNOW what I'm talking about -- we don't get ours replaced as much as the gals do) -- especially since my posts are usually long, winded and you probably use them as such about half-way through them. ;)

Also see my LinkedIn Profile (bjsmith) and "Personal" Blog (thebs413) (largely photos).

Current Month
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
Oct. 23rd, 2009 @ 12:15 am Support 101: Logs and Pastebin
Current Location: United States, Texas, Alvin
Current Mood: awake


I am a member of various communities and I try to do my best to help people solve issues. I'm just a wannabe technologist and solutions provider and do my best to see people through solutions, regardless of distractions such as meta-discussions.

One issue I reguarly run into is that many people are hesitant to send me logs and information so I can pinpoint issues. I don't know if it's really hesitation but more of a matter that they have difficulty following my requests. So, while this might be taken as an insult by some, I'm only providing this as a step-by-step for others. Those who know me know I never talk down to anyone, but only shift down gears to provide complete details for those that honestly haven't done things before.

Hence the reasons for this hastily written "Support 101" entry.


An introduction to GNOME System Log Viewer

I use the GNOME desktop. Your desktop may vary. But for those that use GNOME, or have GNOME installed, there is a helpful, graphical user interface (GUI) log viewer known as, simply, the GNOME System Log Viewer. The location of the Log Viewer will vary based on your site's desktop menu, but by default, it should be under:
  • System -> Administration -> System Log
If you are not a privileged user (and you should not be, this isn't Windows where programs break if they aren't running as a privileged user), then you will most likely be prompted for the password of the "root" user. Figure 1 illustrates a typical prompt by the GNOME desktop.

gnome_query

Figure 1
: Administrative Privilege Query

If your distribution does not allow you to enter root credentials directly, then it may require use of the "sudo" command. In that case, open a command line interface (CLI) prompt and use the "sudo" command to execute the "gnome-system-log" command. E.g.,
  $ sudo gnome-system-log
  Password:  
You may have seen some uses of sudo to launch a full, privileged shell, such as illustrated in Figure 2.

gnome_cli

Figure 2: Full Administrative Privilege Shell in a typical Linux Command Line Interface (CLI) via Sudo

In any case, once the System Log Viewer launches. It shows a three (3) pane display of ...
  • List -- list of common files with relevant system information
  • Calendar -- when not grayed out, bolds the dates of entries in the current log view
  • View -- the contents of the log file
The main log of any POSIX system is its primary Syslog output file, which is /var/log/messages on Linux systems. Like most entries in the System Log Viewer, entries will be parsed by date and can be "folded" and "expanded" to hepl with organization. If you're like me, with a notebook computer, you're often booting every day. So the first entries for any day will often be the initial boot message when the system was first booted that day, as illustrated in Figure 3.

gnome_log_main

Figure 3: Main Syslog entries for Thursday, October 22nd, starting when the system was first booted at 1:46am.

Of special note is that fact that some logs are "rotated." E.g., in the case of /var/log/messages, older version of the log are named /var/log/messages.1, /var/log/messages.2, etc... This is the result of the typical logrotate configurations on most Linux systems. The System Log Viewer notes this and will list older versions in a pull down in the lower right corner, as illustrated in Figure 4. When accessed, the calendar will even bold the appropriate dates with entries in these older versions too, adding additional, visual information for quick notification.

gnome_log_version

Figure 4: The lower right pull-down menu with older log versions in the System Log Viewer.

Another important log is the X-window version 11 (X11) logs, typically the implementation from The X.org Foundation, and its /var/log/Xorg.0.log output. In this case, as illustrated in Figure 5, View -> Filter (also Ctrl-F key combination) was used to filter out all but lines with "DDC" (VESA Display Data Channel).

gnome_log_ddc

Figure 5: Filtering out lines by keywords in the System Log Viewer.


Directing output into a new/custom "log" file

Sometimes information will not be located in a log file or otherwise needs to be captured into a file or other form for use later. POSIX systems can utilize (as well as Windows, being that MS DOS 2.0 and later directly used SCO Xenix code to add) redirection of output to a file. Figure 6 illustrates redirection of the output of "lspci" into a file, and then the GNOME Editor is launched to view the file.
  $ lspci > /tmp/lspci ; gedit /tmp/lscpi &

gnome_cli_gedit

Figure 6: Redirecting command output to a file and viewing the file in the GNOME Editor.

Of course, this new file (/tmp/lspci) can be viewed in the System Log Viewer as well. It's as simple as using the menu:
  • File -> Open
  • Browse to file location (Filesystem -> /tmp)
  • Pick the file
Figure 7 illustrates the lspci output now viewed in the System Log Viewer, with all lines highlighted by clicking on the first line, then holding down the Shift key and clicking on the last line.

gnome_log_lspci

Figure 6: Viewing other/custom files in the System Log Viewer (with all lines highlighted in the view pane)


Uploading file contents to the Internet via Pastebin

Most forums have limited file attachment and/or viewing capabilities. When monospace and other attributes should to be retained in the original format, solutions like Pastebin should be utilized. Pastebin is a simple PHP program which allows file contents to be posted on the Internet and viewed, including options for formatting (such as programming language-specific syntax formatting). There is a public Pastebin.COM site where anyone can upload file contents, although organizations with more confidential information should consider setting up an internal server (only accessible via login, VPN, etc...).

After highlighting the contents of the custom lspci output file in Figure 6, the Edit -> Copy (also Ctrl-C) menu can be used to copy the contents of the file to the clipboard. Once copied to the clipboard, the contents can be pasted into a browser with Edit -> Paste (also Ctrl-V), such as one opened to Pastebin.COM as illustrated in Figure 7.

gnome_pastebin_paste

Figure 7: Pasting file contents into Pastebin

Pastebin (plus various Pastebin/PHP/Apache formatting extensions) supports many different syntax formatting options. If none are appropriate for the contents, the double at symbol (@@) can still be used as the preface for any line, which will highlight the entire line. As entered in Figure 7, and illustrated in the resulting output of Figure 8, the third (3rd) line is highlighted, which shows the display adapter in the lspci listing.

Note the resulting URL in the address line of the Browser of Figure 8. This is the URL to share the link to others in an e-mail or forum posting, so they can view the contents of the file. Also keep track of the link and your declared "Name" so it can be edited or deleted (browser settings or other session state permitting).

gnome_pastebin_sent

Figure 8: Pastebin output with custom URL and syntax formatting


I will be linking to this blog entry in the future.  I sincerely no one takes it as an insult and only as someone who honestly wants to help, especially getting those all-important logs and various command out that will tell me exactly where your issues lie.

About this Entry
Aug. 27th, 2009 @ 10:11 pm Legacy and Incompatible PC Power Supply Connectors
Current Location: United States, Maryland, Glen Burnie
Current Mood: tired
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

If there is nothing that drives me up the wall more than anything else, it's commodity PC vendors reusing existing connectors for new, incompatible, allegedly (often hacked, then adopted) standards.  And there is nothing more of an issue in this space than power, where you can fly or fry very easily.  In fact, keyed connectors are often useless, as they do not prevent improper voltage.

Most of the details I'm going to cover are not well known and probably don't need to be known in 2009.  However, in case you run into legacy systems with incompatible PC power connectors, be aware of these possibilities.  I originally blogged a warning about the 2x3 (6-pin) conflicts back in 2005, but I figured it's time to put this all in one article.

Know thy basic colors

When it comes to power in PC systems, although you cannot trust or guarantee these to be true, they are typically true in the 21st century at least, with Black being utilized for most GND (although not necessarily negative voltage).

Color
Voltage
Yellow+12V
Red+5V
Orange+3.3V

Today's Auxillary PC Power Connectors

For the most part, virtually all of today's auxillary PC power connectors are +12V-GND pairs.  These aux connectors include ...

"P4" Connector
(typical ATX12V and ATX v2.0+)
GND+12V
GND+12V
2x2 (4-pin) configuration

SSI EEB "Server"
(EPS12V w/"Server")
GND+12V
GND+12V
GND+12V
GND+12V
4x2 (8-pin) configuration

PCI Express (PCIe) Power
(ATX12V and EPS12V)
+12VGND
+12VGND
+12VGND
3x2 (6-pin) configuration

Now to confuse things even more, some PCIe connectors have a 4x2 (8-pin) configuration, which merely adds two (2) more GND conductors.  Luckily the industry "non-standard" vendors (who do their "own thing") were smart enough not to make the connector shape exactly the same as the SSI EEB Server connector.  So unless you force it, you can't accidentally plug one into another.

However, as noted in the next section, the PCIe power connector actually did make a major mistake with another SSI EEB standard.

SSI EEB "Workstation" (2002-2005)

To support new, standard workstation mainboards with additional +3.3V requirements, the Server System Infrastructure (SSI) forum created another power connector for "workstations," that supplemented the 4x2 +12V "Server" connector.  This was known as the "Workstation" or "WS" connector.

SSI EEB "Workstation" (WS)
(EPS12V w/"Workstation")
+12V+12V
+3.3VGND
+3.3VGND
3x2 (6-pin) configuration

This connector was utilized by most Athlon MP implementations, as AMD pushed for a single, open power supply standard instead of various vendors with their own, proprietary ones.  The SSI EEB "Workstation" (WS) replaced the stop-gap ATX GES (discussed later).

Now here's to the brilliance of the "non-standard" industry vendors.  They not only created the PCIe power connector using the same 3x2 (6-pin) configuration.  The PCIe vendors irresponsibly used the exact same keying as SSI EEB "Workstation"!  Brilliant!  (NOT!)  The SSI EEB "Workstation" connector very much pre-dates the introduction of PCIe video cards and their need for additional power.

When this happened, AMD and major, Tier-2 Whitebox OEMs (like SuperMicro and Tyan) had to issue technical documents warning people not to use PCIe power connectors.  Here's an example for the Tyan S2895 warning against plugging a very common PCIe power connector into this board (and note that exact same keying as the SSI EEB "Workstation" spec).  Likewise, those who purchased EPS12V power supplies in the 2002-2004 timeframe may have a 6-pin connector with two (2) Red (+5V) wires.  This is the "Workstation" connector, not the PCIe.  Don't plug it into your PCI card either.

AMD GES Power Supply (2000-2002)

When AMD brought the Athlon MP to the market, there was no open standard power specification that could handle its multi-socket power requirements.  This was before the SSI forum, SSI EEB, and virtually all vendors had their own, different, proprietary specifications for multi-socket intel solutions.  So AMD introduced it's own, GES.

Although AMD GES is often referred to as ATX GES, it is not remotely ATX compatible.  It was purposely not so, with different keying as well.  At the time, ATX was still a 2x10 (20-pin) P1 connector.  AMD GES introduced a new 2x12 (24-pin) P1 connector, but also with different keying.  The SSI EEB would later create a new 2x12 (24-pin) EPS12V connector which largely has a P1 compatible with ATX12V (anything ATX v2.0+ typically works without issue, although not all ATX12V based on ATX v1.0).

AMD GES "P2" Power
(short-lived AMD GES)
+12VGND
+12VGND
+12VPWR-OK
+3.3VGND
4x2 (8-pin) configuration

AMD GES also has a 2x4 (8-pin) 'P2" connector, but it is not compatible with the latter 2x4 (8-pin) SSI EEB "Server" connector.  So instead of inspecting the P1 connector, the easiest way to identify an AMD GES power supply is via the 2x4 (8-pin).  It'll have more than just yellow (+12V) and black (GND), but one Red (+5V) wire.  It should also have a Grey (PWR-OK) wire as well, instead of a GND.

Rackmount.COM has a great dissection of all the differences between AMD GES and EPS12V (as well as older ATX v1.0, prior to the ATX v2.0 alignment of ATX12V and EPS12V).  They also sell converter cables so one can use a newer EPS12V supply for AMD GES mainboards.  I have personally utilized these cables and they are much cheaper than trying to find the few AMD GES power supplies out there (typically 460W).  The creation of the SSI forum and EPS12V standard removed the need for AMD GES, and one can even see the influence on the "Workstation" connector from it.

Just some connectors to recognize in case you run into older systems.

About this Entry
Aug. 20th, 2009 @ 09:46 pm Two (2) Per-user Methods to Disable PackageKit Notifications in GNOME ...
Current Location: United States, Maryland, Glen Burnie
Current Mood: exhausted

I'm going to make a quick blog of this.  I'm not going to debate the merits and purpose of PackageKit, how it operates, different distro defaults or other meta-discussions on the matter.  There are decisions and reasons that have been discussed enough, let alone related discussions (e.g., the common "why did Yum take a different approach than proven/assumed Apt operation?").

PackageKit, like many solutions out of Raleigh-Westford-et al. (i.e., largely Red Hat), are designed with GNOME in-mind, but there are icons, launchers and interfaces and other support in KDE on Fedora-based distros, among others.  KDE references can be found elsewhere.  The following are the per-user settings that you can change in the GNOME desktop GUI in seconds.

Option 1:  Disable All PackageKit Operations in Future GNOME Sessions for the Current User
  • Either:  From GNOME menu System
    • Select Preferences > Software Updates, or
  • Or:  In the notification area (defaults to right side of the bar near the clock)
    • Right-click notification icon for PackageKit applet (typical mouse-over is "There are # updates available")
      • Select Preferences
  • Now in window Software Update Preferences
    • In pull-down options next to Check for updates:
      • Select Never
    • In pull-down options next to Automatically install:
      • Select Nothing (should be the default)
    • In pull-down options next to Check for major upgrades:
      • Select Never
    • Click button Close
Option 2:  Disable Startup of PackageKit Applet in Future GNOME Sessions for the Current User
  • From GNOME menu System
    • Select Preferences > Startup Applications
  • Now in window Startup Application Preferences
    • In tab Startup Programs
      • Highlight PackageKit Applet (scroll down using the scrollbar on the right if needbe)
      • Either:  Uncheck the checkbox
      • Or:  Click button Remove
    • Click button Close
In both cases, the setting is per-user only.  If the system-wide service daemon /usr/sbin/packagekitd executes on the system, it will continue to execute after these changes.  However, they will modify how the currently logged in user executes the user's PackageKit Applet.  And in both cases, the change in settings will not take effect for the current user until the GNOME session is ended and another one started (e.g., the user logs out and back in).

With Option 1, the PackageKit Applet still executes, but the notification icon should not appear with one caveat.  PackageKit will no longer check for any updates for the current user.  However, in the case the system has not been updated since the last time PackageKit did check for updates (before the changes were actually made), the notification of updates may still appear.  Updating the system will remove this notification, and it will never return for that user.

With Option 2, the PackageKit Applet is never launched when GNOME starts for the user.  So the notification never appears in the next GNOME session, regardless of the prior state of updates.

I will leave all other debate, discussion and consideration to other articles, including system-wide changes -- including just uninstalling PackageKit.  However, this per-user method and setting is the only way to guarantee that the setting for users does not change, regardless of what a system administrator or other privileged user or related operation does to affect PackageKit at the system-level.  E.g., PackageKit may be re-installed, but the user settings will not change.

NOTE:  To make these GNOME settings the default, mandatory or on a per-user basis outside of the GUI when the user is logged in, see the GNOME Desktop System Administration Guide.  Yes, GNOME has full policy capability -- mandatory, default, per-user, etc..., as does anything Mozilla (e.g., Firefox, Thunderbird, etc...).  I regularly have to educate even experienced Linux professionals that, yes, you can lock-down Linux desktops quite well, with both a centralized hierarchy and utilizing a tier, contextual approach (as simple or as complex as you want to make it).  There is even a costly, per-user solution to add this management capability to Active Directory's MMCs and GPO facilities, instead of using file-based or open source LDAP-based (e.g., Port389.org, Red Hat Directory Server, etc...) stores.

About this Entry
Jul. 21st, 2009 @ 10:00 pm Subnetting and CIDR-to-Mask "Check" Sheet
Current Location: Bowie, MD
Current Mood: awake

I'm not big into "cheet sheets."  As my Introduction to Environmental Engineering instructor utilized as a most excellent approach (beyond his first day, "if you haven't had Calc II and Mechanics/Statics, get out"), "I'm going to give a sheet with all the formulas you need for the exam, plus all sorts of other formulas from aerospace, civil, computer, electrical and mechanical engineering, maybe a few ones from physics too."

In other words, you don't need to memorize, but you do need to understand what you're looking at.  Especially in engineering, which is the study of systems, building a system of equations to explain systems, etc... and there's a lot of overlap (e.g., mechanical "normal" v. electrical "right-hand-rule").  We don't memorize in engineering, we derive and then reference work that has already be learned.  And most importantly, we check our work, we are methodical, not necessarily smart.  In fact, it's the fact that we recognize we aren't smart and often wrong that makes us engineers (sans the one gal/guy that was a 4.0 student that blew the curve every time -- don't count her/him).

So, with that said, I will offer this "Check Sheet" for Subnetting and CIDR-to-Mask conversion.

Why do I call it a "Check Sheet"?  Well, two reasons ...
  1. You should be able to create it from memory, and
  2. I make mistakes, so I should look to it as a check/reference when pressed for time
I've done enough IPv4 (and even some IPv6 if you can believe that) that I know CIDR prefixes and Subnet masks in and out.  But sometimes I still make mistakes.  Like my Electrical Networks (i.e., Analog Circuits) instructor, not merely a PhD but co-chair of the laser research center and one of the smarted individuals I've ever met, used to make simple arithmetic mistakes after deriving a complex series of equations only half of us followed, I make some stupid ones at times.  I could care less about all the theory, like I did with astrophysics -- I just want to the applied engineering, like I did with engineering mechanics.

Technical application is more of the same from the "theory" of engineering technology.

So, without further delay, here's my "check sheet."


When you take a networking exam (CCNA, JNCIA, etc...), learn to write these down on your scratch paper.  You should be able to create these from your mind without much effort.  These "reference tables" will save you a lot of time and effort when answering questions that, well, are just dead simple.

Table 1 (Optional):  Know your Base 2 (binary) powers to 10 ...
2^01
2^12
2^24
2^38
2^416
2^532
2^664
2^7128
2^8256
2^9512
2^101,024 (Ki)

Now why do you only need to memorize 0-10?  Simple.  Because 2^10 is 1,024, or one Kilo-binary (KiBi, Ki for short).  Take 100,000 for example.  What powers of 2 are greater than 100,000?  17+.  You know this because 2^7 = 128, add 10 for the 1,000.  In all honesty, you should memorize these over time and not make a mistake at all.

Table 2 (Recommended):  Know the CIDR Prefix to Subnet Mask Octet (one of the four numbers in a IPv4 address)
CIDR Prefix
Mask Octet
/0, /8, /16, /24
0 (256)
/1, /9, /17, /25
128
/2, /10, /18, /26
192
/3, /11, /19, /27
224
/4, /12, /20, /28
240
/5, /13, /21, /29
248
/6, /14, /22, /30
252
/7, /15, /23, /31
254
/8, /16, /24, /32
255

Yes, there are 32 possible CIDR Prefixes / Subnet Masks in IPv4.  But in reality, you only need to know a quarter of them, the individual octet. This table you should write down and reference as a "sanity check," because -- unlike powers of 2 -- sometimes you forget.

Start with /0 and then add the perfect classes A (/8), B (/16), C (/24) in the left column and write "0 (256)" in the right column.  Now write the next iteration of each (/1, /9, /17, /25) and the half-way point of 0 and 256 = 128.  Now write the next iteration and the half-way point between 128 and 256.  So forth.  You should learn all of the mask octets over time, but even then, sometimes it's best to have the table for quick reference.  On more than one occasion I've transposed the octect (e.g., 254 for /17, instead of 128).

Why did I write /0 out?  If you didn't notice, there are 4 values in the left column.  If you have /22, then you know it's the third position and the octets to its left are 255 and the octet to its right is 0, the 252 goes in the third position, just where /22 is located -- 255.255.252.0.

So what do these two tables give you?

CIDR is the most useful because it's powers of two.  Mathematically CIDR /18 means 256 Ki (~ 256 thousand) networks of 16 Ki (~ 16 thousand) host.  I'm not bothering with the math any more than I would want an universal equation for astrophysics, give me a real application like orbital mechanics!

You have the first table, plus you know IPv4 is 32-bit (32 powers of 2).  18 = 10 + 8 => 1 Ki * 256 = 256 Ki > 256,000 (actually 262,144, yes, memorized that long ago).  How many hosts?  Remember that 32?  Yeah, without any subnetting, you have 2^32 hosts, so you need to subtract the CIDR (networks) from that 32 to get the power to use for hosts.  32 - 18 (networks) = 14 (hosts) = 10 + 4 => 1 Ki * 16 = 16 Ki > 16,000 (actually 16,384, which you may have memorized too).

Now you have the fomulas for taking X networks v. Y hosts and subnetting/supernetting in CIDR, given X networks and/or Y hosts.  Subnetting increases CIDR (more networks, fewer hosts), supernetting decreases CIDR (fewer networks, more hosts).  It's typically best to start at a Class A (/8), B (/16) or C (/24) and increase the CIDR (more networks, fewer hosts).

But sometimes questions like to "trip you up" and have you supernet set of a Class Cs.  Just remember that a supernet of Class C (/24) networks is a subnet of a Class B (/16), so the CIDR should head towards B (/16), less than C (/23).  No difference, just remember that the whole idea of "Classes" is so '80s ("And I Ran ... Ran So Far Away" ... yeah, we all did from the '80s) and don't let the "Class" confuse you.  Just remember the "perfect 0" in the octet exists on A (/8), B (/16) and C (/24) and is a good "starting point."

Adding in the second table, you now have a way to convert to/from CIDR prefixes into subnets rather easily.  Line up the CIDR in the left column as 2nd, 3rd or 4th octet, put 255 in the ones to the left, 0 in the one to the right (if applicable), and then the value of the right column as in the same octect position in the left column for the CIDR prefix.

Practice using the binary (through the 10th power) and the CIDR to netmask octet (only 8 to create) tables.  You can probably drop the first table after awhile (3 -> 8, 4 -> 16, 5-> 32, etc... should be memorized after awhile), but use the second table as your "sanity check" for CIDR to/from Netmask.  Work in CIDR as its the easiest, everything is between 0 and 32.
About this Entry
Jul. 2nd, 2009 @ 11:41 pm Microsoft Certified IT Professional (MCITP) on Windows Server 2008
Current Location: Glen Burnie, MD
Current Mood: awake

2009 June:  An "Exciting" Month (meaning little sleep)

June was an "exciting" month.  By "exciting" I mean I was so busy with professional details (much less personal) that I slept a median of three (3) hours an evening.  It started on Monday, June 1st around lunch when one of my bosses informed me my initial "risk assessment" (not my place to say more) so I could start at federal client next Monday.  That meant I had 48 hours to pack up my "mobile office" (as I call it) for temporary relocation so I drive up Thursday and arrive by Friday to be badged and sworn in.  I spent the weekend looking for housing and was slammed with the job and related, relocation administriva over the first three (3) weeks of the month.

June was also the month I scheduled four (4) new Microsoft certification exams for myself, and was required to take them by June 30th.

It started in late April with an offer from Prometric.  For those of us Microsoft Certified Professionals (MCP) who had not sat an exam since prior to 2007, a coupon was offered for $100 off of the exam fee.  Microsoft exams are typically only $125, so this meant the cost was only $25 and nearly free.  Even better was the lack of limits on how many times the coupon could be applied.  The only catch was that the exams had to be sat by June 30th.

So timing was everything here.  I signed up for a full Microsoft track, plus one additional exam down another.  Being slammed with temporary relocation and a new job, I was rushed to take the four (4) exams in the final week of June (23rd - 30th), while working handling other details.

The Microsoft Certified IT Professional (MCITP) Program

The one track I signed up for was part of the not entirely new Microsoft Certified IT Professional (MCITP) program.  The MCITP replaces several "system administration" and "technology" certifications, unifying them under a single acronym.  The MCITP designation actually began after SQL Server 2005 was released, and now encompasses Windows Server 2008 and other products.  Specifically, the following programs are replaced: 
  • Microsoft Certified Systems Administrator (MCSA)
  • Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE)
  • Microsoft Certified Data Base Administrator (MCDBA)
  • Microsoft Certified Desktop Support Technician (MCDST)
In fact, the Microsoft certification programs have been separated into five (5) separate foci:
  • IT Professional (MCITP) replacing the separate MCSA, MCSE, MCDBA and MCDST
  • Professional Developer (MCPD) replacing the separate MCAD and MCSD
  • "Advanced," the new Master (MCM) and Architect (MCA) programs (the latter being a 2-week, on-campus engagement)
  • Application Specialist (MCAS) for Home and Office replacing Office Specialist (MOS)
  • Trainer (MCT) and the Learning Consultant (MCLC)
The administrator/technologist MCITP program also introduces the indivudal Microsoft Certified Technical Specialist (MCTS) title for supporting exams that feed into MCITP titles.  The titles of the exams themselves are prefixed as such with "TS", with the final, qualifying, "PRO" exam for each program.  E.g., several TS exams may be required and shared between different MCITP tracks, but then there is at least one, dedicated "PRO" exam finale for the MCITP track.

For those that are traditional engineers and engineering technologists, this means an end to the use of the term "engineer" (which may be reserved in various locales) for Microsoft.  Of course, traditional architects may still have a complaint (in some locales).  As a traditionally educated engineer with some software engineering experience, I thought this was of note, and I have to commend Microsoft for removing the long-standing issue of "engineer" v. "technology" in titles.

MCITP: Server Administrator and Enterprise Administrator

Microsoft has replaced the MCSA and MCSE with a pair of tracks for Windows Server 2008, although Microsoft's FAQ states that the pair are not replacing the prior MCSA and MCSE programs 1:1.  Probably one thing to point out, which probably clarifies this, is that you can only upgrade from the MCSE on Windows Server 2003.  There is no upgrade path for the MCSA on Windows Servrer 2003.

MCITP "Administrator Common" (2 exams)The 070-640, now retired and replaced by the 083-640 in the US, and the 070-642 represent the "core" Technical Specialties (TS) of the new MCITP program for System and Enterprise administration.  The 083-640 exam, introduced 6 months earlier, has "performance-based components" -- the first ever by Microsoft.  These are not unlike the "practicum" approaches in the Novell NCLP and CLE programs where you connect to a remote, live, real server.  This is not the same as the "simulation" portions of select, other Microsoft exams.  Microsoft has stated that it plans to add more 083 exams to replace 070 equivalents.  Sadly, only the latter digits show up on your transcript (no proof you actually sat the exams with "performance-based" components).

I talk more about my "experience" with the 083-640 later in this entry.

MCITP Server Administrator (+1 exam)MCITP Enterprise Administrator (+3 exams)And here are the two levels of the new MCITP for system and enterprise administrators.  As you'll note from the above, the "Enterprise Administrator" adds detailed Client (Vista/Office) and Application (IIS/Services) over the "Server Administrator," along with a different "PRO" exam covering the wrap-up of those added details.  While the "Server Administrator" does dive into some client and application details, including design in the "PRO" that touches on both.

Regarding upgrades, Microsoft offers no Windows 2000 upgrade track, and no MCSA on Windows Server 2003 upgrade track.  Only those MCSEs on Windows Server 2003.  And unlike prior upgrades from NT 4.0 to 2000 and 2000 to 2003, the upgrade exam does not reward the new certification.  The "upgrade" exam only replaces 070-640, 070-642 and 070-643, the TS "Server" exams, but neither the TS "Client" nor the PRO exams.  The resulting track then becomes ...

MCSE on 2003 (only) "Upgrade" to MCITP Enterprise Administator (3 exams total): 
The 070-649 exam replaces the 070-640, 642 and 643 exams.  In other words, you're only "upgrading" to select, individual "Technology Specilist" titles on 2008, not the full MCITP title.  Although there is no MCSA path, I guess it's possible to "upgrade" to the MCITP: Server Adminstrator by taking 070-646 "PRO" with the 070-649, but then you're talking two (2) of three (3) exams, and the upgrade only saves you one (1) exam for the "Enterprise Administrator."  In any case, it's clear that Microsoft is trying to differentiate the MCITP from the MCSA/MCSE prior.  I just don't know what they expect people to think.

My Experiences With the New MCITP Program

As I mentioned before, I originally scheduled the exams with Prometric for Florida in May.  I was going to sit the exams on Saturdays in June.  Unfortunately, the relocation changed that, and I actually had to call them to reschedule for a different state.  Prometric's web-based interface does not let you reschedule along state lines, which has been a major issue for myself in the past (and even caused me to forfeit some exams and have some issues with Cisco on the timing of my CCDP).  The administriva kept causing me to push back my exams until the very last week in June, where I finally just ignored sleep for study and sat them.

Originally I scheduled 070-640, 642 and 646 in the "Server Administrator" track, and then the 070-620 Vista Client to start the "Enterprise Administrator" track.  I figured I'd work on the "Enterprise Administrator" later in the year.  In any case the $400 savings on four (4) exams made it worth it.  When I reschedule my exams from Florida to Maryland at the start of June, I found out that the 070-640 could not be rescheduled.  After the Prometric representative dealt with the extensive administriva on the matter, she informed me I would have to sit the new 083-640 version with performance-based components.  I was actually excited to finally see Microsoft adding such.

Timing with work finally led me to schedule the following exams on these days, literally the last week of the month, as the Prometric coupon required sitting (or forfeit of the registration) by June 30th (although it said the registration was good for a year under the confirmation number, it would not let me schedule at any site beyond June 30th).
  • 070-646 on Tuesday, June 23rd -- my 12th ever Microsoft exam
  • 070-620 on Friday, June 26th -- my 13th
  • 083-640 on Monday, June 29th -- my 14th
  • 070-642 on Tuesday, June 30th -- my 15th
I assumed the "PRO" exams would be easiest, so I scheduled the 070-646 first.  Some might disagree, but from my prior experience on my MCSA/MCSE, the "design" exams are always easiest in my view.  Why?  They test layout, integration and other things of various Microsoft services and support.  If you really understand Microsoft's architecture, which you should if you've been working on NT since the original 3.1 beta -- much less the decisions and differences from OS/2 and VMS prior, and the Michigan LDAP / Netscape iPlanet, MIT Kerberos and other "code grab" that became Active Directory -- it's not difficult.  I only had to learn the new services and where
they fit in the "Microsoft Solutions Architecture."

Sitting the 070-646 and 070-620 exams

Although I had been studying Windows Server in general whenever I could on my 17" notebook (I love having a true desktop replacement with dual-500GB drives and 4GiB of DDR3 memory so I can run a lot of virtual machines), I had stupidly studied the 070-642 materials instead of the 070-646 exam the week prior.  I realized this just before lunchtime on the 23rd itself, the day of the exam, so I added a few PTO hours to cram from the 646 manual.  Thank God I downloaded the CDs from the Microsoft Study Kit, including the PDF version of the book.

I passed 070-646 with over a 900 out of 1000 (933).  I have yet to not pass a Microsoft "design" type exam without coming with 7-8% of perfect.  Despite not giving the 646 my full attention, it didn't make much difference.

In all honesty, and this is on me, I "blew off" studying for the Vista Client in 070-620.  My attitude started when the Virtual PC 2005 image of Vista Enterprise would not work under Virtual PC 2007.  So between work and preparing for the 083-640 on Active Directory with the new "performance-based" components, I only gave Vista marginal study without hands-on.  In all honesty, I don't use Vista much.  It's only on my personal notebook, it's the "Home Edition" anyway, hence why I wished the Vista Enterprise VHD would have worked.  That's Microsoft for you.  I use Linux desktops far more at work and home and at a client, if I have to use Windows, it's always XP Professional (let alone I'm largely running from Cygwin under it, and using open source software).

When I sat the 070-620, anything that was Server interaction related, I slammed dunked.  I did know my remote access and wireless components as well.  But the multimedia and other "consumer" components, I bombed ... badly!  The score sheet's "graphical breakdown" showed where, well under 50% in those portions.  Yes, I don't use Vista at home at all for multimedia and "consumer" stuff, only Linux (and that's been the case for the past 12 years).  And that cost me, as I scored only 644/1000, where 700 was passing.  It was my 13th Microsoft exam, the only the second time I didn't score at least an 82% overall.  While I squeaked by on the 070-214 MCSA Security exam without study with a 783 or so, just over the minimal passing, back in 2003, this time I clearly failed by 5.6%.

It was the first Micrsooft I had ever failed, my 13th ever Microsoft exam.  Thirteen is supposed to be my lucky number, as I was born on Friday the 13th.  Guess it really is the opposite when you pass all the others.  ;)

Welcome to 083-640 and the "Lost Connection"

Putting that aside, I focused on studying for the 083-640 throughout the weekend.  From the 646 exam I already knew about the "Domain Level" differences between 2003 and 2008 (I already knew 2000 v. 2003 from experience), and laughed at the fact that the "Forrest Level" differences between 2003 and 2008 are nothing (I honestly sure wish I knew when talking to one client who said they couldn't install Red Hat Directory Server and the AD sync because they use 2008, a domain can be 2003 in a 2008 forrest and lose *0* functionality).  I played with the GPO changes and laughed at various details about Security Objects that require "shadow groups" (defeating the purpose of the option given limitations in AD's OUs and other things -- hack after hack after hack, that's what the test is about!).  I felt ready.

When I sat the 083-640 exam, it was given in three (3) parts:
  • 65 minute lab 1
  • 65 minute lab 2
  • 60 minute, traditional 30 Q&A
Each lab cannot be returned to after you hit "Done."  You are given tasks in each lab, you are on a physical system and can do them in any order (just like the Red Hat exams) and when you hit "Done," you're done with it (Red Hat exams reboot the system, so the system has to be "as is from a clean boot" when scored).

What I saw before and when I entered the first lab shocked me.  First I got a pop-up from the local program telling me that I needed to click a checkbox and accept when a security window popped up.  Sure enough, I got a NTLM -- yes, 15 year-old NT Lan Manager (NTLM) security pop-up -- saying that I trusted the connection, overriding the default because it was, in fact, not trusted.  With all the study I had put into, all while digesting all of the Microsoft marketing on, Read Only Domain Controllers (RODC), Lightweight Directory Services (LDS) and, most notably, Federated Services (FS) -- things that were designed to allow AD to "feed" things and "be more secure," all without opening up AD itself with all its RPC and other services, using secure links, modern hashes, etc... -- I got a NTLM prompt!

And then it got comical.

The screen came up.  It had serious latency.  Not only that, the "pick" looked familiar, darn familiar.  No, that's not Terminal Services pick in RDP.  No, that's not Citrix's XenApp ICA protocol and presentation either.  And then the repainting of the screen told me the truth.  Yes, that's framebuffer, dumb framebuffer, and the all-too-familiar VNC pick!  Oh yeah, this isn't a Microsoft solution.  It's a 3rd party, pass-thru NTLM authentication, VNC framebuffer based solution.

And that's where the frustration kicked in.

Normally, the tasks they give you here would only take 10 minutes, possibly only 5, if you knew what you were doing.  If you have to look through a few minute items or launch a couple of programs or -- even more so -- expand those detailed policies to find the few policy objects you want to modify, but don't remember the exact hiearchy to get there, maybe 10-15 minutes on a local system.  But no, were remote, major latency, and the screen paints like garbage.  That's why they give you 60 minutes.

It gets better ... "lost connection."

I made it through the first lab, probably a little frustrated between the lack of sleep, general dislike of the format and disappointment.  This was especially the case after taking so many Red Hat exams on physical, local hardware, or at least having a "command line" that works well over a VPN (and such is the case in the EX436, clustering, where you have a half-dozen systems, and some operations cannot be done on the 1-2 physical, local systems).  I would later hit myself in the head when I realized where I should have gone in the menu.  The darn latency kept me from exploring options, and I know I configured 2 things wrong that I should not have, and would have easily discovered had I been able to "play" on a local system.  But then I hit the second lab.

After the first 20 minutes into the second lab, it "lost connection."  It sat there with a green silon type back-forth, back-forth trying to re-establish connection.  All-the-meanwhile the locally executing, right-hand side of the screen kept counting down both the lab time remaining, as well as entire exam time remaining.  After 5 minutes I notified the local proctor.  He was very nice (I had visited the same location before), but it took me a good 3-4 minutes to get him to realize that this new, first of its kind (exact words from Microsoft's blogs) 083 exams were using a remote system.  So he contacted his Prometric/Microsoft people.

After answering various questions of when I started the exam -- the remote servrer is tied to its windows from various locations -- they had him reboot the local computer.  Because of the same reality, that multiple testing locations are hitting the same, remote server and the access slots are "windowed," I lost those 15 minutes!  What was around 40 minutes remaining became 25 minutes, and there was nothing the Proctor could do about it.  You'd figure they'd "buffer" in some extra time per session for these types of situations, but they do not.  And so I re-entered the exam with about 23 minutes remaining.  I tried to focus on just continuing on, but after 2 minutes, I just hit "Done" in disgust.

The traditional section then came up and I went through it very fast.  It was typical Microsoft, a really "great answer" with "one little thing wrong" and then a "poor answer" but "the only one that worked."  Typical.  I didn't check my answers.  At this point I was just frustrated.  I kept my wits about me.  In fact, when the Proctor said, "well, what can I say, it's Windows," it did make me laugh.  It certainly wasn't his fault and I just wanted to try to "give it my best" to finish.  But I wasn't going to spend much time checking my work, and I was even debating if I wanted to sit this exam again.  I'd much rather have only 15 minutes per lab on a local system than 65 connecting over the Internet, but alas, this is the reality of the format that Microsoft is pushing.

I hit my final "Exit Review" and got my result.  No way, I passed with a 783/1000 (700 was required).  In all honesty, I "knew what I was doing" in the virtual labs.  Although one cannot talk about the exam, I knew how to do 100% of the lab content, and it was just a matter of remembering where that one box in that one tab under that one MMC pane was (if in a MMC) -- something that is not easily done in such a remote environment over an Internet connection without frustration.

When the "evaluation/comment" questions came up, they hit the point home.  It explicitly asked about the lab v. traditional portions, including any technical difficulties (including "crashes"), interactive feel, etc...  I know Microsoft beta'd this test for 6 months (as 070-117 IIRC) before starting to offer it 6 months earlier before making it mandatory in the US starting in June.  But this is a really poor setup, and I assume it's leveraging the same Prometric/Novell engine.  In fact, on Tuesday, I meet a former Novell-SuSE employee with a NCLP+CLE at my clients HQ office and we talked about this.

Although he had never sat 083-640, he said the NCLP+CLE use the same.  More surprising to me, he commented how he loves the RHCE format much better, with a physical system, and the fact that Red Hat can cram in a lot more "real testing" in 3 hours than the Prometric remote connection could allow in 12.  Nice to hear that "independent, unbiased" viewpoint, let alone from a former employee of a Red Hat competitor who has sat the competiting Linux certification program.

Once again, I want to stree that the 083-640 and its "performance-based components" are not the same as the "simulations" on some Microsoft exams.  In the "simulations," they are running local, only take 5 seconds to launch, and you can't click outside of select windows and bars.  With the 083 series "performance-based components" of remote labs, you have a full, real system running at the other end (Microsoft stated the system is running as a virtual guest), and you can do anything on them.  That's the easiest way to compare.

Finishing off with the 070-642:  MCITP Achieved

Tuesday was my wife's birthday.  Between the 070-646 and 083-640 studies, and my error in going through much of the 070-642 book prior, I took the time to sleep well Monday night and didn't rush the morning of my wife's birthday.  I glanced through the topics of the 070-642 materials at lunch before heading out in the afternoon.  Because it was my wife's birthday, I didn't get overly anal with reviewing my answers, and left things to my original judgment.  I think I only looked at four (4) inter-related questions in my review, and got out very early.

It took way too long after I hit Exit Review for the score to come up.  As a joke, I told myself, "well I got a 832" and then said, "either that, or I didn't pass with a 632."  Right after those brief few seconds, the score came up, "833/1000" (700 passing).  I guess I knew what I knew and it was good to go with my first instincts.  The score sheet's graphical breakdown also explained what I knew, and what frustrated me.  DNS and DHCP always frustrate me on Microsoft exams because they use non-standard terms (let alone change them every 2 version) and the questions are always poorly worded in general in ways you'd never proceede in a production network.

E.g., everyone knows that you need to 1) define at least one DHCP scope and 2) active a DHCP server in Active Directory before starting DHCP on a server.  What Microsoft loves to do is throw you questions that test if you've ever been stupid before with that (I can't talk about the exam or questions, but read into what type of questions could be used to test if you've been stupid before).  Methodical people like myself always follow practices, and never do this.  It's one thing to test troubleshooting.  It's another to test people on how Microsoft products break when you don't follow practices.  Again, it's not troubleshooting in my opinion, but alas.

Refocusing on my RHCA, then possibly CEH/CISSP, then MCITP: Enterprise Administrator

I'm still waiting on my official Microsoft transcript to show the MCITP: Server Administrator.  It's clear it takes at least 3 days (if not a full week) for anything to come through:
  • +1 day for the Prometric transmit from Microsoft (and you know when they do it because the MCP site goes down with "Server Error" as they remove access from the public network -- yeah, still like that after 5+ years ;)
  • +1 day for the Microsoft system to take the 3 digit exam suffix and apply the proper MCTS
  • +X day for the Microsoft system to put 640, 642 and 646 together as the MCITP title

When I passed EX436, Red Hat immediately issued the Certified Datacenter Architect (RHCDS) at the same time as the "Clustering and Storage" certificate of expertise, let alone that was just a few hours after the exam.  It went into the on-line validation.  I guess that's you get for controlling the system, end-to-end, although it was already late on a Friday on Arizona time and the grading was done by someone even later on EDT.  Red Hat states it can take up to 3 weeks for results, but 3 hours is not uncommon at all (and 3 days in the worst case).

I'm sure a lot has to do with the fact that both Prometric and Microsoft are using back-ends that are so outta date, and not always under the control of themselves (or even using their products in the case of Microsoft).  One of the advantages of Red Hat "eating its own dogfood" -- both internally as well as avoiding partners who do not "eat open source as their dogfood," is that things get done and done right.  I'm not saying everything that every Red Hat partner does is always open source, and even Red Hat has acquired firms that produce software for Windows in addition to Linux and/or MacOS X that requires use of proprietary components at times in development and test.  I'm just saying that the whole 083 "performance-based experience" has left me with a greater appreciation for how Red Hat tests, which was also noted by a former Novell-SuSE employee as well.

For now, I'm refocusing on studying for my EX442 retake.  Out of the six (6) Red Hat exams I've taken -- RH301 (cold turkey, exam-only, back in 2003), RH301 (again for re-cert in 2007), EX401, EX432, EX436 and EX442, I failed the EX442 on the first shot with a 66.7%, with 70% passing.  I'm not looking to retaking it, but the next time it's coming to the DC area (which may be only one of two for the rest of the year) is July 24th.  So I have three (3) weeks of study.  The only remaining RHCA exam after that (assuming I pass the EX442 on the second try, let alone 2 years after I took the course), is EX333 which does not return to DC until October.

After the RHCA, I plan on taking the Ceritifed Ethical Hacker (CEH) and finally getting around to putting in the paperwork and sitting the CISSP.  I've put the CISSP off way too long.  I know the CEH is newer, but I heard it is not difficult to pass with study.  I know there is the crash course for it, but I've found plenty of materials, including several material free via my IEEE CS membership access to Element K.  Same for the CISSP, although I've had several colleagues who were studying for the CISSP, took it, and then told me I'd have no difficulty passing it.

Post-American football season and into the winter, I suspect I'll get around to retaking the 070-620, and then taking the 070-643 and 647 for the full MCITP "Enterprise Administrator."  After my "experience" with 083-640, I'm desiring to sit the 070-643 before they turn it into an 083-643 "experience" as well.  I'm all for performance-based testing, but I want a local system (or at least a command line into a remote, not a pig of a GUI over framebuffer and that latency).  I'm also wondering if I should just wait for Windows 7 and the "Client" version of that exam, instead of bothering with Vista.

We'll see.  Until then, there's another acronym to put on my resume, and the continued explaination that the MCITP replaces the MCSA/MCSE.  As always, my resume reads various statements such as ...

"Certifications do not represent and should never replace any requirement for experience.
In fact, certifications may be found attached to applications who have no experience whatsoever.
Experience must always be evaluated independently of certifications, and in the context of the available position.
Vendor agnostic experience, based on understanding of technologies, are always preferable to product-tied certifications (or even vendor-agnostic certifications for that matter).
Do not filter candidates based on certification alone or your hiring managers and technical leads may miss the most qualified candidates"

About this Entry
May. 23rd, 2009 @ 01:48 am The $200 netbook, 2 days of power, Internet, Office and no Windows ...
Current Location: Oviedo, FL
Current Mood: anxious

I have not yet bought a "netbook" for myself.  I bought one for my wife, a Pink Acer One fully loaded (Atom N270, 1GiB RAM, 160GB disk, 6 cell battery, 0.3Mpix webcam and Windows XP) when it hit $260 at Amazon earlier this year.  But I have not purchased one for myself.  I've looked at a few 9-12" Intel Atom based Netbooks, but came up disappointed.  I have even considered  a 12" AMD Neo (under-clocked Athlon 64) with 4GiB RAM and AMD-ATI 700 series chipset from HP that smacks the Intel Atom netbooks silly, but really made me wonder what I was buying for $600 at that sizeable 12".  I almost pulled the trigger on a small 7" ViA C7 unit for $200, but the only half-gig of memory just killed it for me.

Memory is really the big thing for myself, which is why I even looked at the Neo with 4GiB (but at 12"?! Com'mon!).  Memory is always the limitation in performance.  Out-of-order (Neo and traditional CPUs) versus in-line (Atom, C7, etc...) isn't a huge deal, and I can deal with waiting on some launches or calculations.  No need for a hard drive (that's a Windows requirement).  I just want a 8-9" netbook of 1024x600 resolution, something that just leverages commodity DDR2 RAM where I can put in a 2GiB SO-DIMM for $20.  And give me two (2) full days of six (6) hours of computing each -- basically plug my Netbook in every other day like I do my cell phone.

As far as cell phones, I stopped that "rat race" years ago.  I just started carrying unlocked Blackberry units of 1-2 generations back.  Whatever cost under $100/unit, unlocked (even if refurbished, I could get a replacement plan for $10-20 for 2 years).  First that was the 7230, then the 7290 by 2007 and now it will get me a 8700.  It's all I need.  EDGE speed over GSM is more than efficient for getting e-mail pushed to my unit, occasionally looking up something quickly in its browser and doing what it's supposed to let me do -- talk to people.

But for most people, myself included, there is just too much of a jump down to a cell phone and too much of a jump up to a notebook.

The Intel Atom Netbook World, and Why It's Still Windows

Linux Netbooks are not selling.  Let's get real here.  First off, they are still x86 (PC) based.  That's Windows' world, at least Windows XP (Vista and the forthcoming Windows 7 are slouches on Atom).  Secondly, the EEPROM versions are no cheaper -- despite 8GiB of MLC NAND EEPROM being much cheaper than a 1.8" 4200rpm 120-160GB disk -- which removes another staple advantage of Linux.  Third, Microsoft is subsidizing the Netbook vendors like they do any Tier-1 PC OEM, so that removes yet another area of Linux intrusion.

Heck, I'd be happy to just have a POSIX shell command prompt and OpenOffice.org on anything, it doesn't have to be Linux.

The battery life of the Netbook really just sells what it is, it's a notebook, only ultra-light and with longer battery life.  My wife gets up to 6 hours with her oversized battery that sticks out the back of her Acer.  The Atom N270 and its video/peripheral chipset with physical disk eat up 20-25W, as little as 15W when idle.  That's too much to qualify it as anything else but a PC notebook.  To bring a non-Windows world to people, we have to go cheaper and lower, with many advantages.

Heck, PC sales are booming again in volume numbers -- although not fiscal numbers -- thanx to the new age of the inexpensive Netbook of $400-600.

Atom and ARM, the Gap Between Notebook and Handheld, and the Partial Netbook Bridge

Intel abandoned its ARM legacy, a legacy that it acquired from Digital which was sold off piecemeal by Palmer in the late '90s (who was probably the smartest man for doing such in the age of blind .COM belief), back in 2006  Intel put its faith and future into Atom, an in-order, 2-issue x86 redesign that it now leverages for an unified embedded/portable solution.  Right now Intel has that hold on both the Netbooks as well as the home tweakers'n geekers that believe Atom is a "Greener Solution" (in the case of Mini-ITX solutions, that's not the case as I mentioned in my most recent entry).

Unfortunately for Intel, Atom will never be an option for handheld devices.  In a world where ARM and a few other cores dominate, Atom can't even offer itself when cell phone battery life would drop to under one hour talk time.  That's the world Intel has written off.  So far, it hasn't hurt them.  It doesn't want to deal with ARM anymore, probably for the same reason why IBM finally ended offering a generic Power processor for Apple and others.  Then again, IBM didn't drop Power, they just moved over to a higher volume, consoles (e.g., Playstation 3, XBox 360, etc...).

ARM is the player in the handheld mobile market.  It has been for some time.  It will be for some time.  More and more mobile phones are pushing the fine into portable computing.  Unfortunately they have small screens, limited memory and limited keyboards.  Many vendors have tried to bridge the gap between notebook and handheld over the years, but most have failed.  Much less the costs has been prohibitive, the computing limited and the asumed Windows compatibility requirements.

The costs have no come down with the Atom-based netbook.  As 3.5" disk has moved to 2.5" and made it commodity in servers and, increasingly, desktops, the ultra-light is doing the same from the 2.5" disk to 1.8" disk now in netbooks, let alone solid state disk (SSD) options.  The 8-10" LCD of 800x600 to 1280x768, typically 1024x600 today as 16:10 aspect has taken over, has also dropped.  Add in the other, miniture features and details, and the bridge in costs to lightweight, but the cost were partially bridged thanx to 2007-2008 netbook developments.

Consumer Desires and Windows Biggest Problems, including Mobile and 7

Consumers are ready for the next step in portable computing.  They have been for a long time.  These days people sign 2 year contracts so they can save $200 on that new, $500 cell phone that has everything.  I guess I'm abnormal in that I'm not, and I'm happy to have "upgraded" to an unlocked GSM Blackberry 8700 for $100 in the last year.  But for most consumers, it's not always about cost, it's about portability.  It's about not having to be plugged in for power.  It's about being truly mobile.

Consumers want, no expect, the following in a portable computing device: 
  • At least two (2) days of battery life with regular use -- so figure two (2) days of a good six (6) hours of "computing time"
  • The ability to get a full browser, with full features, and popular applications, including graphics editing and web
  • The ability to fully edit common office documents, with full features, and view PDFs with good DPI (dots per inch)
  • Enough memory to run both the browser and an office program or two  without shutting any of them down
There it is, pretty simple, no?  Get "computing time" with their portable computing device like they do their cell phone.  Heck, be like the cell phone vendors and make a killer profit on the sale of a 2nd (or even 3rd) battery.  As long as it lasts for at least two (2) days with heavy usage, they're all for it!

The next two are where Windows runs into trouble.  Microsoft has its CE-based kernel, powering PocketPC / Windows Mobile -- even on processors like the ARM -- but you're not going to find MS Office running on it, just some "applets."  Same with the Internet Explorer and browser.  This only gets worse with the fact that none of these phones are PC (x86) processors, so most Win32/x86 components of the full versions will never be ported for that very reason, and documents and sites will always "just break" anyway.  Microsoft still has that portability, PC-only compatibility nightmare and they've never fixed it -- even with MacOS X (and why they gave up with Internet Explorer on Mac).

Even features in MS Office 2008 for Mac have actually regressed from the MS Office 2004 for Mac -- and caused more compatibility issues with MS Office 2007 users on Windows than MS Office 2003 Windows users had with their Mac friends.  Given Microsoft's fully admission that they aren't adopting their own ISO standard Office Open XML (OOXML) until version 14 (MS Office 2007/2008 is version 12) at the very earliest, it means document compatibility will continue to be an on-going nightmare between versions and non-Windows systems.  MS Office 2007/2008 (version 12) also eats up double the memory if you launch both new version 12 documents and older, version 10-11 (XP/X-2003/2004) documents which launch the "compatibility mode."  Compared to OpenOffice.org, it's a pig -- especially when you consider OpenOffice.org 3.1 actually reduces requirements, has a full, native Mac mode (and a Solver and basic VBA too -- things Microsoft removed in 2008), etc...

And let's talk Solid State Devices (SSD).  I personally cannot wait until Windows-based netbooks with SSDs start crapping out within 1-2 years of sale, outside their basic, 1-year warranties.  Understand the NT 5.1 kernel of Windows XP doesn't know jack about how to buffer or at least overlay (like Embedded XP) writes to the commodity NAND EEPROM aka "flash" in these systems, and NT 5.1 does not offer a "read-only" filesystem (let alone boot) mode.  Wear-leveling does not work at the device level for Windows, it wears out rather quickly when the OS is atop of it.  The NT 6.0 kernel in Vista doesn't solve the problem at all.  Vista only offers a "boost" mode whereby if you have an EEPROM device, it will relocate read-only binaries and files to it, to improve performance over a hard drive -- but it too offers no read-only or overlay mode.  But aren't SSDs "faster"?  No, not at writes, not in the least bit, at least not in commodity versions (long story, read my prior entry and the LinkedIn post).

Oh, but Microsoft Windows 7 will solve these problems, right?  Yeah, right!  Windows Vista won't even run on Atom and any of these processors because of the sheer requirements, and not even a future ARM would be a likely candidate.  Windows Vista, the NT 6 kernel and all of its core libraries, are a pig and not changing in Windows 7 which is -- tada -- a variant of the NT 6.1 kernel in their Windows Server 2008 product (the "improved over Vista" version).  I.e., if you haven't noticed, all netbooks come with Windows XP even though Microsoft isn't supporting it very shortly (at least not without a serious, 7 or 8+ figure licensing agreement from an PC OEM,  Enterprise or on a per-agency Government customer basis).  So Windows 7 is not going to solve the problem, but just re-enforce it.

Maybe 8-core Atoms and 8GiB of memory will hit for $5/each soon, and make Windows 7 an option with a browser and couple of office programs running.  But in reality, don't hold your breath, especially since battery life will be laughable in such a Windows 7 solution.  Consumers need enough RAM to run a basic OS, a featured browser and a couple of office programs, and the OS and office suite can't be pigs (and try to balance things with "compatibility modes" that double or even triple memory and processor usage).

It's Never Been About the Year of the Linux Desktop, but the Killer App on Linux

In 1994, Linux took off because the web hit and it was quickly the open source platform for the open source web server.  People could care less what was running their web site, they only needed the content to be served from it.  In the early 2000s, the same happened with the Digital Video Recorder (DVR).  People didn't even know their TiVO and, later, countless off-shoots were running Linux.  It had a menu and it worked as designed.  Google and their endless apps have made the Internet viable for so many things, as people leverage Google Earth and its APIs, utilize Picasso and other tools that "do the basic things they need," and read their e-mail.

Linux will never, ever be about the "marketed desktop" or "breakage of the distribution lock" that Microsoft has.  As such, I find the phrase "the Year of the Linux Desktop" to not only be only a distraction, but a total misunderstanding of the realities of the computing world.  People use applications, not operating systems.  People know marketing, not technologies.  Linux is not an application and Linux has no marketing -- at least those few successful and profitable Linux and open source companies do not spend money on marketing or trying to break those distribution locks that Microsoft has (my employer being an ideal example).

But Linux can very much be about the next killer app consumer must have, even if they never see Linux.  Sure, they know they aren't running Windows, but that's not always a bad thing.  DVRs "just work" because they don't run Windows, whereas Windows media PCs break down and crash regularly.  ATMs and various information systems (e.g., those at the airport) regularly do that run Windows, and anyone technical notes it.  Heck, the 2008 Olympics couldn't get off the ground without a huge notification to everyone that a Windows system had crashed and the London Stock Exchange (LSE) is beating itself over its head (or at least its Microsoft and its core software development partners for the integration/portability issues and resulting downtime now over 2 years into the effort) for not just following everyone else in going Linux and leveraging existing, POSIX/UNIX code atop of it with minimal effort.

The Era of the Linux Netbook, Multi-day Portable Computing for Most Everyone

That leaves Linux, or at least open source and/or UNIX-based computing that is already running on ARM.  This not only includes nVidia who is building their commodity graphics around ARM in a single package (something Intel has still not done, but nVidia's lower power cores smack Intel's aged or even newer PowerVRs silly -- 6x over), but even Apple.  Remember, Apple has their own UNIX-based OS (FreeBSD compatible) at the heart of Mac as well as their Safari browser built on KHTML (open source from the popular Linux KDE desktop).  But will consumers accept it?  Here's the reasons why they might ...
  • The 2007-2008 era of the notebook evolution as brought the support components -- LCDs and other components -- and will hit at $200, below Intel Atom netbooks (and even ViA C7 it seems)
  • The single package ARM cores + graphics and peripherals will make multi-day computing (2 x 6 hours) on a single charge possible, "charge it when you also charge your phone" and "carry a spare battery or two for a full business week"
  • Performance will match that of Intel Atom, at 1/4th (or lower) power, even after factoring in graphics (especially since Intel continues to ignore it) and peripherals
  • Linux runs extremely well out of commodity EEPROM SSD, because it can read-only boot and use filesystems such, and buffer/overlay writes (especially if the vendor leverages JFFS2 and its write leveling)
  • The Linux distros to support ARM (and even SSD w/JFFS2) already exist -- from Debian to Fedora, which offer native ports and cross-compiling from full PCs in their software repositories -- let alone Google's gOS and other developments, before even considering Apple's possible product
  • The SDHC, in addition to USB devices, is quickly becoming the defacto standard for portable storage, capable of over 30MBps reads and over 10MBps writes in new Class 10 devices (actually over 20MBps, but fliesystem operations managing the files over the 4-bit interfaces cut that to about half), which is now in all devices (even many cell phones) for next-to-nothing, but that performance is really no slower than 1.8" 4200rpm hard drives anyway
  • Mozilla developments like Firefox (or Apple's Safari browser based on KTML) and the leaner footprint of OpenOffice.org over Office 2007 (while often being more compatible, especially with Office 2000/XP/2003) will really reduce Windows compatibility considerations given the benefits of the platform's mobility/longevity/capability -- again, not just an ultra-light notebook, but a true netbook
The only concern I have is the memory that I expect to see in these ARM-based netbooks.  A lot of vendors will try to get the memory size down to save money, shipping only 512MiB (0.5GiB) I'll assume, just like most of the Atom-based Netbooks running Linux.  While this may be the "default option," I plead with these vendors to use a DDR2 SO-DIMM, even if a very simple pin-out and bracket that won't survive more than a change or two.  The worst thing they could do is not provide a 2GiB option for customer.

Because memory size is performance, period.  A processor can be slower, disk writes can be slow or slow writes to flash, but when memory is low, there is paging or, gasp, out-of-memory (OOM) conditions.  Memory means performance in all cases, because no memory available means 100-1,000x performance loss.  DDR2 memory is so commodity, and available in direct pin-out in ARM deisgns these days, that it's a no-brainer to offer it, and leverage the availability of up to 4GiB per channel sizing.  That's the biggest problem with the current Atoms, and their continued use of DDR (and that 1GiB sizing limitation).

Again, that is my only fear in these new ARM-based netbooks.  Memory will be neglected for cost, and the lack of a socket for the same.  Heck, if you really want to save on costs, manufacture and ship the system with no memory to integrators/resllers, but with an easily accessible SO-DIMM socket -- force integrators/resellers to add it, or the consumer, and they cover it.  Lack of memory in the GiB sizes will definitely kill the ARM-based netbook running Linux as a viable option, because 2GiB can make Firefox and OpenOffice.org an usable solution for many that would have never considered Linux.  Because of what the ARM solution itself will be capable of in features, as a full desktop, that Atom cannot, let alone anything running Windows.

Related Articles ...
About this Entry
May. 21st, 2009 @ 02:00 am Hardware Blurbs: Ion+Atom kicks Intel ITX, Desktop 2.5" Backplanes and Stop with the SSD Non-sense!
Current Location: Oviedo, FL
Current Mood: restless
Tags: , , , ,

It's been a bit since my last blog post, but here's a few things I've wanted to note:
  • Ion+Atom kicks Intel ITX
  • Desktop 2.5" Backplanes, and
  • Stop with the SSD Non-sense!
nVidia's Ion Finally Boosts Atom at Only 60% the Power

As a degreed EE, the only thing that gets to me more than the "Going Green" non-sense is "Save the Planet." First off, it's "Sustain the Planet" (if I have to explain why, then I've already lost you). But, secondly, it's not "Going Green" if you're just following mass assumptions of the (self-censored) or marketing that prys on such (sorry, had to say it, then censor it). Probably the biggest issue is the joke of the Intel Atom in the popular ITX small form-factors (SFF) when Intel continues to pair the 4-8W Atom processor with a 22W+3W power sucking i945GC+ICH chipset, resulting in consumption of 40-45W total. Why does the chipset eat that much? It's because Intel is still recycling the 5+ year-old, 130nm fabbed chipsets on them, that's why.

I was looking forward to some AMD Neo solutions, which are essentially a clock reduced 64-bit core with their 8-11W 700 series chipsets (more for the higher end 790FX) that are fabbed at 55nm by TSMC. Unfortunately the Neos are still 65nm processors, and AMD isn't making the most efficient cores these days. Sure, the single core Neo will whip even the dual-core Atoms, but at a power cost that makes you start to consider just a full, but more energy efficient (power/watt) AMD processor with the same 700 series chipsets. On the portable side, the only Neos seem to be 12" as well, and even though they support 4GiB (see more on that below regarding Atom), one can get a powerful 12" for not much more cost or power consumption.

Thankfully, nVidia's new Ion has become available, making Atom viable on the desktop again (possibly more viable on the portables too). What is Ion? Basically the GeForce 9300 chipset for the Atom. Of course I cannot comment on Linux compatibility of the nVidia chipsets, but outside of the GPU, GPL support should be solid (or so in short order), or at least the PCI IDs supported in short order. The GPU is more of a debate (closed v. GPL drivers). But in any case, as AnandTech found out with the new Zotac board, the power consumption is literally cut to 60% the i945GC+Atom. In other words, expect 25-30W consumption instead of 40-45W with that i945GC heat piper.

Of course, it's still more than the sub-20W you'll get out of a proper Acer One or other portable, that actually has a real, die-shrunk version of the i945GC for portables. But it'll also typically have a slower Atom as well (depending on the model). And the Ion isn't cheap, expect to pay 2x (or more) for the Ion boards with an Atom 330 versus a recycle 130nm i945GC chipset with the same. Now you're back to the age-old, "how many hours do I have to run this to save money?" like the classic, "how many miles do I have to drive to save money?"

Although one thing that has prevented me from buying an Acer One (like my wife has), is the limit of 1GiB pre-installed (1.5GiB if I want to rip it apart), The Ion also offers DDR2 and other support, which means it can support 2GiB easily, if not 4GiB. Intel has its newer Atom chipsets coming out with DDR2 support as well, so there will be another option. But in any case, if you really want to "go green" and mean it, buy an Ion+Atom combination today, not a recycle i945GC power hog with Atom.

As a bonus, you'll actually be able to play lower end 3D titles like World of Warcraft (if that's your thing) on the Atom 330 at just under 20fps -- instead of only 3fps with Intel's uber combo-power/performance sloucher.

Desktop 2.5" Backplanes Reviewed

As many have probably heard me note many times, I stopped buying 3.5" drives in 2006 entirely. I have largely used portables since 2004, and entirely as my "100% desktop" with 17" "desktop replacement" portables -- namely a HP dv9000z (2006) and Gateway P-7811FX (2008). Since that time, I've always updated my portable drives in pairs (since 17" portables can fit 2 internally), recycling the old units to my server. My server now has 160GB, 250GB and 320GB drives, utilizing twelve (12) hot-swap bays.

As I've stated elsewhere, my preference for 2.5" is as follows ...
  • It is the standard for enterprise drives -- i.e., all 10-15,000rpm drives are 2.5" platters, and have been for years
  • Commodity 5400-7200rpm 2.5" drives have MTBF/failure rates based on 10x+ the shock and other operational tolerances than commodity 7200rpm 3.5" drives (a major factor for removable/external drives, even internal in many aspects)
  • I've now had three (3) 3.5" drives fail within two (2) years whereas I've yet to have a single 2.5" drive fail in three (3) years
  • Four (4) 2.5" drives (at least at 5V @ 500mA, 2.5W, or less at full seek) consume less power and deliver more aggregate throughput and independent seek than one (1) 3.5" drive (typically consuming well over 12W to even 15W+ at full seek, sometimes as high as 7W even idle) -- something to consider for, again, even the "Going Green" crowd (sigh)
There are several options for hot-swapping 2.5" drives, assuming you have a controller that supports such, or at least have a procedure to always power-down before doing so. There are the (2) 2.5" in 3.5"x1" bay "trayless" options from several vendors now. Then there are the (4) 2.5" in 5.25"xHH bay "tray" options that I've adopted in my server -- three (3) to be specific, for the twelve (12) bays. The "trayless" option is great for more desktop backup (as I advocate 2.5" removal for most, short-term consumer/desktop backup, at least until NAND SSD drops more in price).

Tom's Hardware has looked at some of the four (4) 2.5" in 5.25"xHH bay "tray" options, which are almost all of the same design -- sans SATA v. SAS multi-port options (with the x4 SAS concentrator cable). I have both and I'm not using any SAS drives, so it makes no difference. The locking is plastic on all of them, so they are clearly not "enterprise quality," but NewEgg carries one brand for $50/unit, so one cannot complain.

The other, nice detail about adopting 2.5" SAS/SATA bays is that the next generation of SSDs over the next couple of years will likely become viable backup (not operational) options for most desktops/servers, and they will utilize 2.5" SAS/SATA form-factors/connectors as well.

Stop with the SSD Non-sense!

Repeat after me ...

"there are different types of solid state devices (SSD), and the commodity SSD available today writes slower than disk, especially over time"

I'm honestly tired of people who assume SSD is Synchronous, Dynamic Random Access Memory (SDRAM) based.  It is not.  Virtually all SSD is Electronically Erasable, Programmable Read Only Memory (EERPOM) aka "Flash" of the NAND gate variety, typically multi level cell (MLC) and not single (SLC).  What does that mean?  The individual cells are very slow at writes and typically wear out with only a few hundred writes per cell.

No, you will not get 100,000 writes out of a cell.  No, you will not see wear-leveling see your SSD last 5 years with any Windows operationg system.  You will not get 100MBps write performance.  Yes, you can get quite fast read performance, and it's great for some operating system aspects (especially Linux).  But no, you're better off with either hard disk or a combination of hard disk and flash on-board for read caching only.  That's what the NT 6 kernel in Vista can do, read cache commonly used binaries, libraries and static (non-changing) files.

And even for Linux, as several of my posts in the Linux Expert section of LinkedIn tried to explain (along with SRAM v. DRAM v. NOR v. NAND, etc...), you have to take care to target select filesystems.  So stop with the SSD non-sense!  Please!  SATA SSD may become viable for backups very soon, as the price continues to drop, but not as the main, secondary storage mechanism in most general purpose OSes for non-expert integrators.

About this Entry
Mar. 29th, 2009 @ 02:58 pm DigitalRiver.COM has removed my Sun GlobalSpecials account entirely ...
Current Location: Oviedo, FL
Current Mood: confused

For those that haven't read it, here was my prior blog entry on my futility in trying to download my Sun StarOffice 9 binary for Linux after my purchase from Sun GlobalSpecial store c/o DigitalRiver.COM: 
Digital River screws-the-pooch for Sun's StarOffice 9 Linux release

Apparently I wasn't the only one, as many others experienced the same on the Sun forums ...
Corruption with file "release so-9-bin-linux-en-US.sh"

I would like to find one (1) person who downloaded the Linux version of StarOffice 9 between November 2008 and January 2009 that didn't get a corruption.  I'm having the feeling that the Linux binary on DigitalRiver.COM, at least between those dates (I cannot verify other dates), is corrupted, probably due to their upload method.  It also wouldn't surprise me if their Windows version is not corrupted, hence why only us Linux users have an issue (and are far less numerous, especially considering OpenOffice.org 3's inclusion in most Linux distros).

But even after all that, it only gets better.  You see, I've bought every, major version of StarOffice since version 3 back in the mid-'90s.  That includes StarOffice 8 from Sun's GlobalSpecials store site serviced by DigitalRiver.COM.  So my account with my personal e-mail address has been in their system for years.

Today, for the heck of it, I tried to enter my old order number and see if I could retrieve it.  My password didn't work.  Oh well, I figured being that it's been over four (4) months, the access to download the software was removed for my order.  But just for giggles, I tried to reset my password.  My e-mail address is no longer in their system, specifically, "invalid."  Okay, weird.  I used to be able to view my purchases from years ago, for prior StarOffie versions.  I guess no longer?

This is really sad as I've been a StarDivision, now Sun, fanboy for almost a decade and a half.  My documents from old StarOffice 3 still come into OpenOffice.org 3 (StarOffice 9) with few issues.  I cannot say the same for MS Office 4 or 7.0 (95), or even MS Office 8.0 (97) when it comes to MS Office 12 (2007) or even older 11 (2003).  I was even interested in paying for the box set, but it appears that the box set is only offered by Avanquest in the UK, not the US (if anyone finds a link on their USA site, please pass it on).

The only thing that has changed since is that I also ordered some Seagate hard drives. Seagate also uses DigitalRiver.COM, and somehow DigitalRiver.COM can't handle more than one reseller?  That's my only guess.  If so, then they've got even more problems.  In fact, with the Seagate purchase, they increased the cost of each unit of the item by $2, which I got nowhere on.

In any case, at this point, I'm avoiding DigitalRiver.COM and anyone who associates with them.  They obviously have issues with both technical and customer service.  I'm not calling for a boycott or anything, as I'm not into such.  I'm just warning people that I have had repeat issues with them.

Just to review, here are my issues ...
  • Repeatable corruptions in the DigitalRiver.COM download link as (quite invalid) MD5SUMs of match across downloads of even different platforms, networks, browsers, etc... (verified by other people as well)
  • DigitalRiver.COM only offers a download link for the Linux binary (or whatever platform was selected at purchase-time), when the StarOffice license allows installation of any binary on up to five (5) systems (I use only 3, one for Red Hat CSB notebook, one for my personal notebook in Fedora, one for my personal notebook in Windows which I rarely use).  DigitalRiver.COM never answered my requests for a Windows download link
  • My entire, longstanding Sun GlobalSpecials store account has been deleted, or at least no longer known by my personal e-mail address, so I've lost my entire purchase history at the Sun GlobalSpecials store -- this was just the "final straw" (likely serious, technical/customer history issues) as they now have no record of my account at all (including prior purchases)
And my suggestions to Sun ...
  • Make the binaries downloadable under a "trial" link as was done through StarOffice 8, which work for 90 days until a valid license key is entered (enforce the key with an Internet lookup, I'd accept that)
  • Ensure customer service is adequate with DigitalRiver.COM, or consider another reseller, as your individual sales do matter as well (even if not as fruitful as volume sales), especially when it comes to your own, customer records (mine seem to have been removed)
  • Raise the price back to $70-80 or even $100 if it will cover these small, customer service details, as I do understand it takes money to do such (even remove the customer support incidents included, I don't need them, I just want the software)
At this point, I'll have to stick with OpenOffice.org 3.  I wish that wasn't the case.  I am willing to pay $100 for StarOffice 9.  I understand that is hardly a money maker, but it does go a little bit towards servicing purchases and related customer support.  Especially since you do get three (3) support incidents with the current, small purchase price.

BTW, I will still continue to appreciate Sun's purchase of StarDivision, LGPL'ing of the codebase and employment of much of the OpenOffice.org development staff.  I'm hesitant to call American Express to dispute the charge because of this, but I must remember it is DigitalRiver.COM that I have the dispute (and charge) with.

If any Sun employee or OpenOffice.org developer has the Linux and Windows binaries for StarOffice 9, I will personally send them a check for $100, with a Memo that $34.95 is to be given to Sun for a StarOffice license.  I will provide my license number provided by DigitalRiver.COM, which I will use for registration.  I believe in paying for music, software, etc..., never pirate and even paid for MS Word 2007 (largely as a DOCX verifier for clients that are very anal on formatting), and not just the "Student and Teacher" or any Academic edition (the full, commercial version).
About this Entry
Nov. 26th, 2008 @ 11:23 am LPI Updates Certification Objectives, Go Live 2009 April
Current Location: Hot Springs, SD
Current Mood: Vacation Rules
PREFACE/DISCLAIMER:

I work for Red Hat.  Obviously (no, seriously, not just because I work for Red Hat), we have an award-winning, vendor certification program that is repeatedly praised for its value in training and highly regarded for its 100% hands-on certification testing.  Some of the training on its own is quite excellent, which you can take at any level without holding any Red Hat certification.  E.g., for experienced system administrators, I highly recommend our
RH442 Enterprise System Monitoring and Performance Tuning class, which I would professionally qualify as a lab that could be attached to an undergraduate level computer engineering (ECE) class on OS design, or a dedicated class in a computer engineering technology (CET) curriculum.

But I have also followed certification developments of the Linux Professional Institute (LPI).  I think one of the greatest, overlooked aspects of LPI is not merely that they are vendor-agnostic, as well as a great neutral objective set to either associate or even base a computer-administered, vendor-specific program on.  But the most grossly inconsidered aspect of the LPI program, especially compared to the majority of other vendor-agnostic programs, is how they do not make money on training.  Training programs, especially non-vendor programs where most money is made on training (instead of product), can fall into the pit of examination based on the classes or, at the very least, official courseware.  LPI does not offer training or official courseware, and limits their involvement to select review.  Even if you are a RHCE or possibly a higher Red Hat certified professional, it can only help to add LPIC-1, 2 or even 3 credentials as we often run into other Linux platforms as well (e.g., it always helps to have APT/DPKG exposure).

LPI is also heavily based on a volunteer-effort, so if you don't like what you see, volunteer!  But come with an open mind, especially the fact that not every little distribution is going to be equally represented, let alone a corporate usage focus (based on experience, and not just web servers) is expected.
  With that all said ...

LPI Set to Launch New and Revised LPIC-1 and LPIC-2 Linux Certification Programs

On 2009 April 1st (no, no April Fool's joke here), revised objectives for the Linux Professional Institute Certified Level 1 (LPIC-1) and Level 2 (LPIC-2) will go live in new 101/102 and 201/202 exams, respectively.  These new, leveled objectives and their corresponding pool of examination questions are the result of hard work by associates and volunteers like Matt Rice and others both inside and, even more so, outside of LPI -- professionals like yourself.  These last few years have seen a number of changes at LPI, and all I've seen have been completely positive.  Some previously complained that the LPI program was too Fedora/Red Hat-centric, and while I have not seen that to be the case over the last half-decade, the new updates should really hit most of the 3 sigma of distribution commonality out there.

Even if a LPIC title is not your ultimate goal, or the goal of any of your staff, the LPIC objectives make for an outstanding list of study, as well as the wealth of independent LPI aligned training materials.  LPIC-1 is aimed at an equivalent eighteen (18) months of enterprise (not home consumer) experience on the desktop and server, while LPIC-2 is aimed at least double that.  The LPIC-1/2 programs continue to be aimed to certify individuals who should have been exposed to most, if not all, the technologies administered as a Linux system administrator and professional in a corporate environment (again, not just web servers either).

The forthcoming, 2009 April LPIC-1/2 objectives can currently be found on the Wiki: 
https://group.lpi.org/publicwiki/bin/view/Examdev/WebHome

Note that these will be different than the August/November 2006 LPIC-1/2 objectives on the main LPI site until spring next year: 
http://www.lpi.org/eng/certification/the_lpic_program/lpic_1 
http://www.lpi.org/eng/certification/the_lpic_program/lpic_2 

All other information is available on the LPI web site, including FAQs and links to related certification programs -- like Canonical's Ubuntu Certified Professional program, based on LPIC-1 (with LPIC-1 as a prerequisite).
About this Entry
Nov. 18th, 2008 @ 05:04 pm Digital River screws-the-pooch for Sun's StarOffice 9 Linux release ...
Current Mood: aggravated
I've been paying for StarOffice since version 3 -- yes, the mid-90s -- and made heavy use of version 4 on-ward. I started on Windows (long story), and picked up regular usage on Linux with version 4 and 5. After Sun launched the OpenOffice.org project, I decided to continue my patronage given their charity of the initial codebase as well as continued employment of at least half of the full-time developers.

For StarOffice 7 and 8, all you had to do was download the Evaluation installer (e.g., so-X[-ppX]-eval-bin-linux-en-US.sh) and then add your key you paid for via Digital River (Sun's on-line commerce/sales partner). It worked perfectly. I still would occasionally run into little nags with components on Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), but nothing a SunSolve patch wouldn't cure. It happens.

But for StarOffice 9, I just put my head in the blender. Not only does Sun not offer the Trial download right now (future?), but I cannot get a version from Digital River that will install. Yes, instead of downloading from Sun, I have to download from Digital River. And I only received ten (10) attempts -- the first five being the only officially allowed.**

** "Sorry, Too many download attempts: 10. You were allowed to download only 5 times.
If you have any questions, please contact Digital River Customer Service at CustomerServices@digitalriver.com."


The problem is actually very simple. Digital River doesn't return the MIME type. So the new so-9-bin-linux-en-US.sh gets streamed as "shell script" and, therefore, considered ASCII / UTF-8 by not only Firefox, but even "very well behaved" HTTP clients like curl. I ran out of attempts before I could try wget.

So what's the problem with that?

Well, at line 88, the shell script becomes a tar stream -- a binary POSIX tar stream. I.e., the shell script itself extracts these contents, then pipes them through tar (for Linux, it merely executes: tail -n +88 $0 | tar xf -). This is nothing new, as the Loki Installer/Setup suite has long offered this as well (only far more refined/controlled). But it's highly recommended that binaries be attached, BASE64 encoded, because the prefixing shell script will clearly be seen as ASCII / UTF-8, not binary.

In this case, the second it hits a character that HTTP stream doesn't transfer well as an assumed "Shell Script" ... bam! "Corruption." In fact, the script itself catches this when self-extracting. It uses /usr/bin/sum to check. Corruption. I used my first four (4) or five (5) downloads just on that, clearing my Firefox cache (which is only 64MiB anyway, not enough), using different versions, exiting (and ensuring the process exited), etc...

So I renamed that utility to discover the more detailed symptoms.

  JavaSetup.jar
  tar: Skipping to next header
  tar: Archive contains obsolescent base-64 headers
  tar: Error exit delayed from previous errors


I re-created this by running the tail|tar pipe combo outside the script. I also got something similar with star:

  x JavaSetup.jar 316922 bytes, 619 tape blocks
  star: Checksum error at: 620: 0357 should be 010433.
  star: 821 blocks + 0 bytes (total of 8407040 bytes = 8210.00k).


Yep, pretty early into it, a byte got corrupted. I'm sure had I been able to download it from Sun's own download servers (and using their download manager), I wouldn't have an issue. But because Digital River's server (wgt.digitalriver.com) is pathetic and doesn't know how to present the content proper, it's own server is causing the problem with the stream.

I.e., wget would have failed as well, because it's very likely Digital River's own server that is corrupting the stream before it even hits my Firefox browser, curl CLI (command line interface) program, etc... Great job!

Note to Sun: Just offer the downloads of StarOffice 9 directly from your site with the 90 day trial expiration. I wanted to get the Windows version as well anyway (I have Windows that I rarely boot on my personal notebook, but sometimes need for a quick utility that won't under WINE), but Digital River was only offering me to download the Linux version. We have our key and will input it proper.

At $35, no one is going to be pirating. If anything, they will get the earful from me if I ever catch them. I was going to continue my recommendations that "real [L]GPL proponents should patronize Sun StarOffice," but this really makes me wonder if I should stop after some half-dozen years of Sun ownership. Let alone after nearly a dozen years of purchasing and using StarOffice myself.

About this Entry
Nov. 12th, 2008 @ 03:20 am A full Red Hat kernel source tree with makefiles, symbols, built objects, etc ...
Current Location: Atlanta, GA
Current Mood: busy

I thought this was past us with kernel 2.6, but some developers cannot seem to create a kernel module build tree that works against the standard /lib/modules/version/build tree (provided by the kernel-devel package in modern Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux releases).

Years ago, after various questions and comments by CentOS users, I informally documented the Red Hat kernel building history from Source RPM (.src.rpm aka SRPMS) starting back with old Red Hat Linux (RHL) 6.1 and basically the only approach with new kernel 2.6 releases (Fedora Core 2+, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4+).  Unfortunately, I found my prior command has not worked for some time: 

# rpmbuild -bb --target=noarch /usr/src/redhat/SPECS/kernel-2.6.specc
# rpm -ihv /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/noarch/kernel-sourcecode-*.noarch.rpm

However, it's not to difficult to get similarly, as I'm sure many others have already documented before.  I just couldn't find it, and I'm posting it here because I can search my blog faster than any mail reader can search my folders (yeah, yeah, I'll learn vFolders someday -- it's only been 7 years of Evolution for me ;)):   

# rpmbuild -bc [--with baseonly] --target=arch /usr/src/redhat/SPECS/kernel-2.6.spec

This outputs this tree:  
  /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/kernel-2.6.xx.arch[-type]/linux-2.6.xx.i686

The tree would be the same as any /usr/src/linux[-2.6] assumed by the project, with the exact config, makefiles, symbols as well as actual, built objects.  Temporarily symlink at your own risk, as always (see my aged blog for reasons behind such warnings).  The --with baseonly option will not generate any of the additional -type builds for the architecture (e.g., pae, hugemem, etc..., depending on your release, architecture, etc...).

About this Entry
Nov. 12th, 2008 @ 01:22 am Atom is for embedded, basic set-tops, UMPC, but not HTPC ...
Current Location: Atlanta, GA
Current Mood: Another client all-nighter
Currently the Intel Atom is all the buzz.  People are rushing out and buying all sorts of Intel Centrino Atom Ultra Mobile PC (UMPC) systems, Intel Atom prototype boards and even Intel's new, consumer "Desktop board."  The problem is, people do not realize what the Intel Atom is all about.  It is not designed for extensive Multimedia applications, Home Theater PC (HTPC) and, God help them, gaming, 3D for anything doing serious floating-point other than 32-bit math matrix.  That's the problem.

X-Scale Replacement:  Trading ARM Efficiency For x86 ISA Compatibility


First and foremost, the Intel Atom is the X-Scale replacement, which Intel sold off.  For those of us who have been involved with Intel in the embedded world, we knew this was coming.  Intel decided that x86 Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) compatibility was more important than ARM efficiency.  Whether it's for ultra-portables, network devices or storage arrays, x86 makes for quicker prototyping, elimination of cross-compiling and/or emulation and countless other details.  Many of Intel's partners agree, although not everyone (e.g., Apple acquired a Power5/PowerPC 970 designer awhile back).

But, secondly, Intel has hypermarketed the Atom as a low-power consumer device.  Whether this is appropriate is not really a question of Intel, but of consumers who do not understand much about microprocessor design.  For UMPC, it fits well, as consumers only need basic e-mail, browsing and application usage, but with full x86 compatibility.  For basic set-tops, the UMPC has enough to hold a basic HD size framebuffer for general display (which fits perfect for the typical 1024x600 resolution 7-10" widescreen) or render more complex NTSC/PAL quality output (or similar, 720x480 overlay on the larger framebuffer).  That's what it's designed to do at Intel's entry GMA level.

Atom:  A Superscalar, x86 Microcontroller


Let's face it, Atom is not a superscalar microprocessor, but more of a superscalar, microcontroller -- x86 style.  It is a sixteen (16) stage, in-line, up to 2-issue threading processor.  Although it has lineage to the Pentium-M, it is not a Pentium-M.  When this is explained to consumers, contrasting to other Intel processors, they might thing that it "sucks even more" than NetBurst.  Well, depends on your viewpoint.  Without going into that whole sidebar, understand sometimes considerations are made for other than performance.

"Dumb" is actually good when it comes to microcontrollers.  Remember, Atom is the X-Scale replacement -- essentially -- a superscalar microcontroller.  You do not want to waste transistors (and, correspondingly, IC die) on out-of-order execution, extra pipes, branch prediction, etc...  That space could be used for adding application specific integrated circuits (ASIC) and, the Atom specialty, more cores!  That's where the multi-threading (HyperThreading re-invented) comes back in, along with select SSE3 operations leveraging the native SIMD.

Centrino Atom and UMPC Today


Putting the original, embedded world focus aside, the Centrino Atom is making a splash at an UMPC option.  It could go into hand-helds as well, but several vendors (even Apple) believe that any x86 is just not going to be power-efficient enough.  Does it matter?  Maybe not.  Intel clearly sees a huge market in the UMPC, and that's why Centrino Atom was a major focus from the get-go.

And Intel may be right.  The margins and control, along with ease of x86 development and support, of a PC in an ultra-portable could take a huge share away from both the light-weight notebook and all hand-helds outside of phones and media players (with the two merging closer every day).  Sales certainly seem to be showing that consumers want a 100% compatible PC in no more than a "kilo" (2.2lbs.) weight.

Intel engineering definitely had that in mind when they took the aging 900 series from the Pentium-4 era memory controller and GMA integrated graphics and shrunk it down into a sister-chip fabbed at 65nm (possibly 45nm?), to pair with the 45nm Atom.  This is the Centrino Atom platform, very power efficient.

Atom Desktop ... er, Aged, Engineering Prototype Board?

Unfortunately, the Intel Atom Desktop is currently ... well ... more of an aged, engineering prototype board where the Atom is glued to parts many years old now.  Basically everyone, even Intel's own D945GCLF (Atom 230) and D945GCLF2 (Atom 330) boards, ship with aged, 120nm (or 90nm?) 945GC chipsets.  These suckers eat 25W (22W for the 945GC northbridge, plus 3W+ for the ICH7 series southbridge) on their own.  In fact, Intel continues to fab many commodity system logic components at 120nm or 90nm fabs, and only a few are now available at 65nm while priority is given to processors and portable logic support at 45nm.

So even Intel itself is pairing a superscalar microcontroller designed for power, not performance, with an older, under-performing, integrated GPU that sucks back all the power you saved.  The resulting solution is something that makes for an even worse option than some options from the competition.  E.g., even the recycled, 90nm, Socket-A/S1 AMD Athlon XP-M (mobile), sold at the aged Geode NX (not to be confused with the Geode GX or LX, different lineage) that runs a 6-14W TDP (under 20W max) can absolutely destroy the performance of the Atom, and can be put on a variety of chipsets, for a sub-50W, sub-$100 solution as well.

AMD's 55nm Chipsets:  Magnitude Greater 3D and Overlay Performance

In 2008, AMD started using another foundry for its chipset fabrication, one at 55nm.  It's newer, high-integration 780G (and more "desktop" 790G), series chipsets integrate an ATI Radeon HD3200 GPU (R600+ generation) while sucking up not much more than 10W.  At that includes full high definition (HD) video overlay and acceleration support, including newer support even in their Linux drivers (for those considering MythTV), including improving open source drivers (for those that find Intel's lack of any open source utilities to control outputs, support overlay features, etc... a PITA).  nVidia also has options for both AMD and Intel processors, a further considertion for Linux users with the best drivers available -- at the expense that most features aren't configurable/tunable outside their drivers (although their product support, especially all features on them, is the ultimate).

Ironically, as Tom's Hardware found, pairing an 65nm Athlon 64 2000+ (basically an aged, 1GHz single-core Hammer) with the solution absolutely trounces the 4W, single core D945GCLF in both power and performance, and it's a safe bet the dual core, HyperThreaded 8W D945GCLF2 would not fair much better.  Although Tom was ignorant of the fact that the 780G has come in the Mini-ITX form-factor for some time (since the first half of this year), and AMD doesn't produce its own line of mainboards (unlike Intel), I will admit that a less-than-commodity Mini-ITX 790G + Athon 64 2000+ would be $200, compared to the sub-$100 of even the D945GCLF2.

Of course, if we're going to play the price-performance-power-size game, one would have to look at pairing a commodity MicroATX 780G with the Sempron LE-1100, another sub-$100 solution, to any Intel solution.  By increasing power consumption 60%, the processor performance more than doubles (and sometimes far more than that).  The HD3200 is just so capable of so much that it really prefers at least one AMD core of 2GHz.  In fact, many people "insist" on Mini-ITX, but easily find themselves putting it in nearly a small MicroATX enclosure because they want to fit a full optical bay and/or 3.5" drives.

These commodity ($50), Mini-ITX "cubes" are sometimes just as big, volume-wise, than the common 12" x 12" x 5.5" MicroATX desktop with four (4), full-height expansion slots (and bigger than the 3.5" high ones with 4 low-profile slots).  Makes me scratch my head.  If you're going to do Mini-ITX, do slimline and 2.5" drives, and make it "worth your while."

Will AMD's DTX/Mini-DTX Make An Appearance?

Although Mini-ITX 780G solutions exist, they are clearly not as commodity as Intel or ViA options, hence the cost of the few 780G Mini-ITX options out there.  A contributing factor may be the fact that AMD promoted its own, small form-factor known as DTX, with the Mini-DTX option.  Why yet another form factor?

AMD claims cost will be reduced with DTX as it is the most efficient form factor for PCB manufacturers.  At 8" x 9.6" for DTX, four (4) boards can be cut from the industry's most common PCB board usable area, 16" x 20".  At 8" x 6.7" for Mini-DTX, six (6) boards can be cut -- the same as the 6.7" x 6.7" for Mini-ITX, while adding a 2nd slot and another 1.3" of "room" in front of it.  Note that at 9.6" x 9.6", only two (2) MicroATX can boards can be cut or larger, less commodity board can be used (hence why many MicroATX boards are often 9.6" x 8" nowdays, so four can be cut from the most commodity PCB).

AMD may have a point, because most commodity, Mini-ITX enclosures are rarely 7" x 7".  I've used one, and they are not big enough for much other than a 2.5" HD and/or ultra-slimline optical and, more importantly, a 40-60W DC-to-DC PS (external adapter to AC).  Most are easily 8" x 10", and if they have a cut-out for the expansion slot, over 5" high, while still not fitting a full 5.25" optical drive -- only 2.5" and slimline options and a miniaturized, but capable 90-120W PS.  The exact same enclosure could also house a DTX board.  In fact, if you think two-slot DTX/Mini-DTX is anything original, just check out one of those proprietary, Small Form Factor (SFF) "Shuttle" and other systems -- they are 8" wide as well (two expansion slots), and 8-10" deep (more for a full 5.25" drive, as well as "taller").
 

About this Entry
Nov. 12th, 2008 @ 01:00 am LTSP Hackfest Maine (USA) 2008 ...
Current Location: Atlanta, GA
Current Mood: Another client all-nighter
I'm quite engaged with my client work currently, but I wanted to drop a quick note regarding the Linux Terminal Server Project (LTSP) and its Maine (USA) 2008 Hackfest past weekend.  I only made one day, Saturday, due to client billables and travel arrangements made last second.  But I attempted to make it "worth my while" with a good, fourteen (14) hour day.

Warren Togami and I focused on the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) release 5 backport of select components (see Warren's blog entry here).  In addition to Warren's previous work to make the LTSP package for Fedora build the ltsp-server package for RHEL 5, and slight modifications I've made, I also have a working ltsp-client package running on RHEL 5.  There are still a few upstream details to address though (as noted in tasks under my name in Warren's blog).

Understand most of my efforts are more immediate, so I am using some components developed and/or modified from existing options, rather than waiting on Warren's upstream developments (e.g., mkinitrd, livecd-tools, etc...).  But I am designing them so I can get maximum reuse should upstream developments make it into a future RHEL 5 update and, likely, any RHEL 6 release.

About this Entry
Nov. 11th, 2008 @ 12:00 am Collecting my thoughts ...
Current Mood: creative
Current Music: FRNK Radio
I have not blogged much at all as of late. But in an effort to "collect my thoughts" when I want to "take a break" every now and then, I finally opened a LiveJournal account.

I previously had a Blogger account, but immediately stopped posting once I read Google's Terms. I made a few posts to Yahoo 360's beta, but I really hate their permalink approach (e.g., the "readable" URLs are hard to find). I'll be migrating/updating select posts from those prior blogs here as I go along.
About this Entry

Advertisement

Customize