Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

484 comments

fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5271941)

fp

One more reason I am considering getting a Mac (5, Insightful)

leerpm (570963) | more than 11 years ago | (#5271948)

They come out with the coolest technologies and they just work great!

Spend Valentine's Day downloading Windows drivers (5, Funny)

mattbot 5000 (645961) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272252)

If you hurry, you might be able to get one in time to save Valentine's Day.

ARGH! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5271958)

Does anyone else hate that feeling of trying to pee only 5 minutes after you jack off?

Serious blockage, dude.

Re:ARGH! (-1)

CmdrTaco on (468152) | more than 11 years ago | (#5271973)

Usually when I fuck your mom, she wants me to pee in her, before I ejaculate. You know how dry old women get.

Re:Doubleclick (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5271959)

Indeed! I was the one who posted the article, however the new bit on the end was NOT by me.. and I did NOT put a doubleclick link in my article.

Is someone at /. trying to make a few bucks?

Re:Doubleclick (1)

pgrote (68235) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272000)

What did you mean by the normal columnist is out? Were you implying that the coverage was more indepth?

Worst quote ever in the Apple Section (5, Funny)

teamhasnoi (554944) | more than 11 years ago | (#5271967)

Still, at the time many Apple observers reacted cautiously. "Cool app, but show me something real and meaty," seemed to be the general feeling.

That's what she said.

I can't believe I actually posted this. Wait...Yeah, I can.

Re:Worst quote ever in the Apple Section (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272183)

Still, at the time many Apple observers reacted cautiously. "Cool app, but show me something real and meaty," seemed to be the general feeling.

That's what she said.


Not to this crowd, she didn't.

Rendezvous your dick with my ass! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5271969)

Go to hell and die. I hope you rendezvous your dick with my ass first, though!

Love,
The Homosexual Rainbow Representative of Butt Sex

Slashdot on the Bandwagon (-1, Troll)

Pave Low (566880) | more than 11 years ago | (#5271977)

It's interesting to see recently how the editors and a lot of the readers are falling over themselves to get on the Apple bandwagon.

These same people who cry "Free as in Freedom" when cheering for Linux and hating Microsoft salivate at all the closed Mac hardware and beg for Apple' iron fist that is just as tight at MS's.

No matter who wins in the MS and Apple battle, Linux will lose if it loses the mindshare and support that it once had from the front running zealot.

On leave? Good (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5271979)

> it's interesting to note that BusinesWeek's 'Byte of the Apple' columnist Charles Haddad is on temporary leave and this article was written by a substitute columnist.

WHY is this interesting to note?? Charles Haddad is nothing but an apple apologist, a real zealot. Have you read his previous articles? They are all sugar-coated for Apple. He runs the Apple column at that site, so this is to be expected of course, but I prefer more objectivity.

Re:On leave? Good (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272107)

I don't normally read the site, but I was really left with a feeling of 'so what' on this one. OK, the technology would be nice if it worked in the mainstream, but I'd be impressed if it worked with anything other than overpriced and underpowered systems (relative to every situation where this capability would be remotely helpful).

I don't want to try running an office full of Macs just because they can network easily with my MP3 player. If they're going into a photojournalist's office or a print shop, fine, but as advanced and smooth as the interface is it's the unfortunate truth that it is still hard to do anything meaningful with a Mac.

Idiot. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272225)

As the article pointed out, Apple has released the source code, it's platform-agnostic.

You want to see this widely adopted in Windows and Linux? Develop some cool peripherals that showcase the technology.

Re:On leave? Good (5, Insightful)

SoftwareJanitor (15983) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272246)

the unfortunate truth that it is still hard to do anything meaningful with a Mac.

I'm not a big Mac apologist, but may I ask what meaningful things are harder to do on a Mac than on Windows? It can't be using Microsoft Office documents, because there is an official Microsoft Office for MacOS, even OSX. That is the thing most people seem to complain about with other non-Windows OSes. So what are you talking about "anything meaningful" is awfully open ended.

'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5271991)

*sigh*

At the risk of sounding like flamebait, I'm writing right now from a Linux box. Is it my imagination, or does Rendevous sound like the most insecure application ever designed?

If it isn't, what ABOUT Linux?

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272092)

Rendevous is based off of an Open Source project called ZeroConf. Which compiles quite nice on Linux

simple != insecure (1)

kakos (610660) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272093)

Simple does not necessarily mean insecure. Badly written means insecure. I personally haven't had a chance to test out Rendezvous much, so I can't vouch for its security.

There are a lot of ways to make something secure, automatic, and simple. So, don't be so quick to assume just because it is easy, it is a security risk.

Re:simple != insecure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272146)

I think what my concern is and what raises my 'security problem' hackles is the scenario given in the article: 'If you are on a WiFi network, you'll be able to see anybody's iTunes music' (or, I might assume, any shared file in a more broad critiria, in the full product.

The concern THERE is that if this is deployed in a company, somebody forgets they're sharing something, or a more general 'share' shares things that weren't meant to be. It's not 'hackable' security I'm worried about as much as, 'social engineering' security. As in, small scale P2P networking that isn't checked against what's actually shared or configured.

Re:simple != insecure (4, Informative)

kakos (610660) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272209)

I do know that it isn't on by default. So, it isn't something that is automatically on my iBook and my music files are being broadcast to everyone in the world without me knowing it. It is something I physically have to turn on, and I'm pretty sure you have to set which files are shared and such.

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (4, Insightful)

superdan2k (135614) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272104)

Have you ever bothered to even examine Rendezvous/ZeroConf? I mean, my God, dude...please, read a spec or talk to a developer that's intimately familiar with the technolgoy before making off-the-cuff remarks. Sheesh.

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272207)

That was largely the point of my comment. :P

So. Could anyone better explain what the service actually does and how it might be widely deployed? I don't have either its design philosophy, specs, or a Rendezvous Apple developer handy.

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (1)

lost_it (44553) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272261)

Have you ever bothered to even examine Rendezvous/ZeroConf? I mean, my God, dude...please, read a spec or talk to a developer that's intimately familiar with the technolgoy before making off-the-cuff remarks. Sheesh.

Could you please provide a link? I'd love to read all about it but I don't even know where to start looking.

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (5, Informative)

clasher (2351) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272110)

No more insecure than dhcp, http, or smtp. Rendevous, as far as I can tell, are just some lower level protocols. Sure it relies on procedures like dynamic dns updates which can be insecure but they are probably no worse than dhcp. From the few documents I have read about Rendevous it looks like a very elegant solution, it uses existing technology from approved RFCs.

What that means is that Rendevous need not worry so much about security, instead security will be left up to the other pieces, maybe something like secure dns [is.co.za] . Much like http was later secured by wrapping it with SSL, telnet evolved into SSH, Rendevous can be secured with other mechanisms.

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (5, Insightful)

jone1941 (516270) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272116)

Yes and no. Rondevous could potentially allow people to more easily discover unprotected boxes. However, rondevous isn't exactly an application, it is a facilitator. You write applications with the knowledge of rondevous' capabilities in mind. It isn't microsoft's ability to auto locate computers that make a computer insecure, it is the user turning on filesharing. This could be a very exciting technology, and as others have posted, it just requires that someone create the right app/device to take advatage of it.

Rondevous (3, Funny)

cygnus (17101) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272237)

the best thing about it is that you don't even have to spell it correctly for it to work.

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (1)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272245)

It sounds like other OSes could create an equivalent to Rendezvous in about two weeks by writing a wrapper around nmap.

In fact that's a pretty neat idea - your web browser doesn't look for the intranet web server or http proxy, it just nmaps the whole network looking for things listening on ports 80, 3128 or 8080. When you want to print, lpr(1)'s main job is to run nmap and scan for machines listening on the lpr port. Sending mail - likewise.

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272141)

At the risk of sounding like flamebait, I'm writing right now from a Linux box. Is it my imagination, or does Rendevous sound like the most insecure application ever designed?


Rendezvous is not an application. It's a networking standard that allows software/devices to broadcast services they provide, as well as look for services they need. It's no more or less secure than any app designed to use it. I can use nmap to scan you network for open ports, doesn't mean tcp/ip is insecure.


If it isn't, what ABOUT Linux?


Rendezvous is open source. Plus it's an implementation of the ZeroConf standard. If you want it for Linux, feel free to port it.

mod_rendezvous for apache... (1)

5n3ak3rp1mp (305814) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272151)

http://homepage.mac.com/macdomeeu/dev/current/mod_ rendezvous/

A Linux version is not out of the question. See that page's tips. Why not do it linux-style and help finish the move yourself?

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (-1)

CmdrTaco on (468152) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272182)

Who cares.

Steve the Dell dude gets BUSTED.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,78110,00.htm l

Who's getting a Dell now, fucker? Who's getting a Dell now?

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (4, Informative)

dhovis (303725) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272189)

Um...

Rendevous is a protocol, not an application. It just provides autodiscovery of available services on a single subnet. For example, someone created a Rendezvous module for Apache which allows Macs running Safari to automatically see that the server is there. Does that make Apache less secure? Security is up to the individual services to provide.

Rendezvous is Apple's name for the IETF standard "zeroconf". Nobody has implemented it on Linux yet, but I'm sure people are working on it.

Re:'Bill's Boxes' and 'Steve's Elegant Machines'. (3, Informative)

sakeneko (447402) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272195)

Is it my imagination, or does Rendevous sound like the most insecure application ever designed?

If it's your imagination, it is mine too. I work for a company that makes application level firewalls for web servers ( Teros [teros.com] ), and we make our living off of insecurities in networks and networked software. This sounds like something our marketing guys are gonna love. <wry grin>

Apple has posted a technical brief on Rendezvous [apple.com] on their web site. I grabbed a copy, and will read it later when I have the time.

Personally, I'm going to want a whole lot more details about Rendevous, and testing of it, before I'd consider enabling it on any computer I owned, though. And I'm seriously considering a switch to the Mac platform when I buy my next personal laptop.

Bill O'Reilly calls mexicans "wetbacks" (-1)

IAgreeWithThisPost (550896) | more than 11 years ago | (#5271993)

Get this bigot off the air.

Conservatives that support him show their true racist colors. Stop hiding the KKK cards, boys.

Re:Bill O'Reilly calls mexicans "wetbacks" (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272024)

Filthy Mexicans are called "Filthy Mexicans" for a reason - they're fucking disgusting! I take a shit on anyone whose descent is from Spain. Fuck you, you fucking wetback. Go back across the border and stop eating on my dime - you fucking asshole. You eat shit!

By the way, Bill O'Reilly makes more money than the GDP of Mexico. What a bunch of corrupt fucktards running that country! Ha Ha! It serves them right. Now, go eat a quesedilla, you asshat.

Re:Bill O'Reilly calls mexicans "wetbacks" (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272067)

hey, at least those "corrupt fucktards" have a president who was democratically erected.

Re:Bill O'Reilly calls mexicans "wetbacks" (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272084)

Oh, who cares - I'm just happy to live in a country where negroes can't bribe their way out of prison. They can hire fancy lawyers to trick fucking retards like you who are on a jury to let them go BUT the cops don't take the money.

You sound like a liberal pillow-biter. Always remember that there's a reason AIDS is funny and you're the punchline!

Freudian? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272161)

You said "erected". I guess you were referring to Clinton?

Re:Bill O'Reilly calls mexicans "wetbacks" (-1)

Guns n' Roses Troll (207208) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272269)

Jay Severin on 96.9 WTKK Boston (3PM - 7PM) is better than O'Reily. Severin is a far-right Libertarian. He regularly calls illegal alien Mexicans "wetbacks". He regularly says he wants to kill every single Muslim in the world. He's my type of guy. Pissing off faggot Haavahhd Boston liberals since 1998.

This article is not readable. (5, Funny)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 11 years ago | (#5271997)

This single-sentence article does not parse for me. It seems to be claiming that an article in Business Week is a threat to Microsoft.

Re:This article is not readable. (5, Funny)

Green Light (32766) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272020)

From the linked article:
Apple is delivering on the immense potential of its no-fuss networking system. With luck, it could be a direct challenge to Microsoft
Now, apparently, Apple needs "luck" in addition to all of its products and services...

Re:This article is not readable. (1, Offtopic)

Randolpho (628485) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272118)

Dear god, when will I get mod points so I can mod parent funny?

Well, which is it? (4, Insightful)

JLyle (267134) | more than 11 years ago | (#5271998)

MacCentral reports that a BusinessWeek article entitled: 'A Rendezvous with Redmond?' has -- with Rendezvous -- created an actual threat to Microsoft.
Did the BusinessWeek article create the threat, or did Apple?

VOIP (5, Interesting)

spnbs (264432) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272001)

The author suggests that Apple should release a Rendezvous enabled VOIP app. It seems to me that he's almost hit the nail on the head. Imagine if all new Macs came with not only that app, but also a phone jack that you could plug your telephone into. Maybe partner with a long distance company to provide a .Mac internet-to-phone calling plan! The possibilities are wide open for a company who owns the hardware, the software, and has little bit of capital.

Re:VOIP (1)

Knobby (71829) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272082)

This would be great!..

Re:VOIP (1)

VValdo (10446) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272144)

This would be great!..

For spammers... ugh.

W

Re:VOIP (1)

justMichael (606509) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272123)

I'll stick with my Vonage [vonage.com] setup, it doesn't require my box[s] to be on to use it.

Now if you could set that up so that all I had to do was get online with my powerbook, plug in a phone and have my Vonage number access, that would rock.

Re:VOIP (5, Funny)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272128)

Yeah, that could replace e-mail as way of communicating. Just think about it. instead of typing you use your voice.

Re:VOIP (5, Funny)

brarrr (99867) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272176)

>> but also a phone jack that you could plug your telephone into

you mean like a modem?

Nothing really new... (3, Interesting)

Aviancer (645528) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272007)

the real question is if this will dissapear into obscurity as JINI [sun.com] has (a similar technology using Java).

You can't compare the two! (1)

Geek Dash Boy (69299) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272263)

Not when peripheral vendors are building it into their hardware!

Jini was being hyped while it was still vaporware. Apple popped the cap on Rendevous just at the right time.

For more on this, read Joel's recent article [joelonsoftware.com] .

swab the deck, bitch! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272009)

You're a naughy sailor eh?

BFHD.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272014)

Big Fat Hairy Deal. What we really want to know as Apple users is if it comes in Blueberry, Raspberry, or Tangerine colors. Don't confuse us with all of the technical mimbo-jumbo.

Home usage only (2, Interesting)

petree (16551) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272022)

A lot of the technology behind this seems very cool in nature, but just like AppleTalk (which had many similar zeroconf features) i can't imagine it will scale very well. Although this article would love you to think otherwise, I would imagine this whole thing would have more of an effect on the home market then on the buisiness market. I can see not wanting configure applications on small network, but with all of these broadcast packets i would imagine it would saturate a low speed (read:wireless) network.

Oh yeah, and
"Here's another idea that crossed my mind. How about using Rendezvous to power local-phone traffic inside a midsize office? Get rid of the wires. Use cheap voice-over-IP phones plugged into Macs equipped with Wi-Fi cards. No more need for inside plant specialists to check wiring or string cables to the desks." ...

Oh yeah, I -REALLY- want my phone to drop out whenever someone tries to microwave their lunch.

All of this is fun for small networks, but there is a reason no one has done a lot of this before, because it doesn't scale well.

Re:Home usage only (1)

tetra103 (611412) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272213)

I've got a beter idea for you...how about ripping all the net cable out all together and building a Mac with Power Line networking built in? Ok, I know Power Line is very slow compaired to 100baseT or even 10baseT, but I don't think a machine could be any easier to self configure.

Re:Home usage only (5, Informative)

d3xt3r (527989) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272231)

... but with all of these broadcast packets i would imagine it would saturate a low speed (read:wireless) network.

Although wireless networks offer slower bandwidth than their wired counterparts, they do offer one advantage over hard-connected ethernet: they don't suffer from the same saturation problems. While 100 demanding users could quickly saturate a shared 100 MB/S wire, the same users on wireless will not interfere with eachother. Wireless scales much better than you seem to think.

Secondly, a couple hunderd extra broadcast packets aren't going to saturate a 100 base-t network. A packet is tiny. If I do a tcpdump right now, you wouldn't believe the number of broadcast packets flying around here at this moment. My network connnection isn't being adversely affected.

Also, I'd really differ with you that Rendezvous isn't useful in a business setting. Obviously it's not going to replace DNS for the majority of services, but it could seriously simplfy things like, printing, scanning, and maybe even some file sharing. I don't doubt that this technology will find a great place in the home, but it certainly doesn't mean it's useless to businesses. It's worth noting though that Rendezvous is limited to the current machine's local subnet.

It scales much better than previous protocols. (5, Informative)

Paradox (13555) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272249)

You'd be surprised how well this actually scales. That is one of the whole points. Rendezvous is a replacement to AppleTalk, and as such one of the major goals is not to saturate the network like other more chatty protocols.

For instance, each host implements an aggressive caching scheme so if one host asks for data, other hosts can learn from its request. There is also an exponentially rising delay between each request, the assumption being a host that has been around a long time will continue to be around a long time. Further, Rendezvous requests are not just like broadcast pings. They have a very well defined (and specific) domain standard in multicast DNS. You could ask only for http servers running over TCP, or only iPhoto sharing servers. This cuts down on the traffic.

Of course, the other problem is the dynamic IP address assignment. It chooses an IP out of a /16 subnet. In short, in order for there to be a high probability of collision there need to be more than 32768 hosts, and even then it'll converge quickly. The Zeroconf spec gives upper bounds on how many hosts should be in a zeroconf network.

The whole idea of this system is to allow small isolated subnets (like a wireless zone) to auto-configure. After the first 20,000 devices, sure you might see some degredation in performance. Of course, imagine an admintaking care of a 20,000 device subnet. They end up like a cross between Jerry Lewis and Christopher Lloyd. If you need more subnets then you link them via a configured host. A proxy-gateway with rendezvous, forwarding only things that matter for this subnet, would be a pretty cool app too.

Zeroconf, especially in the home or small office setting, is really, really useful.

Umm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272027)

Having trouble parsing the Slashdot story... is Rendezvous actually a threat, or is it just the BusinessWeek article that's a threat?

This is sad (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272037)

I work for a high-tech company, that must remain nameless, and in my work I talk to IT people on a regular basses across the U.S. I am astounded that most of these people even have jobs. I must however convey that every now and then I come across a person of the highest integrity and the ability to get the job done right. The sad part is, that this only happens in about one in twenty contacts, way too low of a number to have these people running our country. When they've been bad, I have no idea how the company is even running, but when they've been good, it's been crystal clear why they hold that position and are an asset to the computing world.

Food for thought, when ever I converse with the people who do a great job and run they're IT department efficiently, and Apple/Macintosh is part of the conversation, they have no problem with it. I quote in a conversation just last Friday, "in our company we do what ever it takes to get the job done in the most efficient and effective way, at this time Mac's are not part of our makeup, but if that's the direction we need to go in the future, then we will. I am loyal to my company, not Microsoft and certainly not Dell.

Let them fight among themselves (-1, Offtopic)

amigaluvr (644269) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272038)

Let apple and microsoft with their more proprietary technology fight among themselves. that's the real 'mantra' of Apple.

And also of Microsoft, and many others.

Unlike some systems, they will spend money arguing and dissociating among themselves. more effort and $$$$ of their customers money spent in a little holy war.

Time for OSS to grab the reigns. Without that level of so called 'competition' and just the buck stops here kind of 'get down and do it' we can only see benefits here.

it will be interesting

Re:Let them fight among themselves (3, Informative)

banky (9941) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272098)

Not open source? [apple.com]

I wonder what that source download is.

Or mod_rendezvous for Apache.

Or the CVS access.

Re:Let them fight among themselves (4, Informative)

MouseR (3264) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272108)

What the hell are you talking about?

Rendez-Vous is based on Zero-Config, an open-sourced standard.

Apple merely enhenced it a bit and wrote some high-level APIs for even speedier development. But it's just Zero-Config. Rendez-Vous sources are available as all Darwin source code at Darwin.org [apple.com] .

Re:Let them fight among themselves (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272140)

Well you are right on one thing they don't waste money arguing on OSS projects, they just waste time. Time is not worth anyone to geeks.

It's under the APSL (1)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272175)

Rendezvous is released under the Apple Public Source License.

And it works for games, too (4, Interesting)

c13v3rm0nk3y (189767) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272039)

I was pleasantly surprised when I noticed that "Pop-pop" is rendezvous-enabled. No need to "host" a game -- you just see each other, double-click to request a game.

What is interesting is that even though "normal host a game over IP" stuff still works, and is dead-easy to config, rendezvous seems to be relatively easy to drop into an app.

I was skeptical at first, but now I'm curious to see what neato things people will start to implement using rendezvous.

Re:And it works for games, too (4, Funny)

donutello (88309) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272258)

Great! Now I can play Breakout, Super Breakout and Photoshop easily!

Security? (2, Insightful)

g8oz (144003) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272041)

How does that fit into Rendezvous?

Re:Security? (2, Insightful)

IPFreely (47576) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272238)

Security? How does that fit into Rendezvous?

Actually, a more important question than it sounds on first read.

Rendezvous is a nice trick, and should be lots of fun for the Apple cadre. All of the Apple users in their own little world of friendliness and cooperation against the agression of MS. But if it takes off, eventually you get a critical mass of users, and the script kiddies and crackers invade.

This technology sounds like it could become a loophole for lots of security breaks, or at least an easy path to Denial of Service. I hope it isn't quite as easy to get to other peoples computers as this article makes it sound.

Sweet!!! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272042)

"You walked into a room bearing a laptop running Jaguar (the latest version of the OS X operating system) with a wireless networking (Wi-Fi) card, and you could instantly see the iTunes music files of everyone else in the room with a similar setup."

AWESOME!!!

-H. Rosen

Re:Sweet!!! (0, Flamebait)

diablobynight (646304) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272168)

were they looking at their computer or could they see it in their mind with the amazing super Apple technology. Oh wait, ummm...I can walk into our whole facility with a laptop and connect to any computer with an open share, holy crap what kind of software did I do this with, oh no, oh no, it was XP aaaagggghhhhhh....this must be a bad dream, only Mac can do this amazing feat of science and technology. Slashdot must have really needed some filler today.

ZeroConf on Linux? (4, Interesting)

Phroggy (441) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272046)

What's the state of ZeroConf on Linux? How long before the major distributions have out-of-the-box support for Rendezvous? What would be required to make that happen?

Also, what exactly are the security implications? Obviously there are certain things you don't want to broadcast to just anybody! Rendezvous could make wardriving even easier...

Imagine a beowulf cluster of ... (2, Funny)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272048)

Wait, you wouldn't NEED a beowulf cluster, with the Rendezvous-enabled programs CPU-shifting the work in your office.

scarey (2, Interesting)

gmack (197796) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272062)

It seems to me that zero configuration automatic sharing of resources is exactly what I don't want.

I'm seeing a lot of features but where is the security? This looks a lot like how older versions of windows used to share the contents of your drive over ethernet but not dialup without asking and theres a good reason they stopped doing that.

Or have I missed something?

Re:scarey (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272203)

You've missed something. Rendezvous is more like DHCP plus a services directory. It doesn't automatically give you -access- to all of these services. It just lets you know that they're there, and it takes care of all the setting-up-and-connecting details. Once you try to access the service that Rendezvous has found, you may be required to authenticate etc. depending on how you've set it all up.

For example, Rendezvous will show me that there is another computer on my local network and that it has been set up as a file-server. You need zero configuration to do this: plug two completely unconfigured computers into a crossover cable, and all of a sudden you'll have that fileserver available. Buuut to actually surf through the fileserver's stuff, you'll have to put in a username and password if you want to see anything other than the public folders.

Re:scarey (4, Informative)

bnenning (58349) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272227)

It seems to me that zero configuration automatic sharing of resources is exactly what I don't want


It's not automatic sharing, it's automatic discovery. Rendezvous will tell you that there's a machine providing a particular service on your LAN, but that doesn't necessarily mean you'll be able to gain access to it.

Where is Open Source Rendezvous? (1)

urbieta (212354) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272063)

OSS should talk to this cute new thechnology 8)

where is the sourceforge project? Id be among the first to use it ;D

Re:Where is Open Source Rendezvous? (4, Informative)

davebo (11873) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272193)

Looks like there are sourceforge projects here [sourceforge.net] and here [sourceforge.net] (although the first project actually has code, and the 2nd looks just like a description.)

Not to mention you can get the "real" rendezvous source here [apple.com] from Apple.

Re:Where is Open Source Rendezvous? (1)

adjusting (32309) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272265)

Here [apple.com]

Printer Sharing works great (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272066)

I know that USB printer sharing is not technically Rendevous yet, but new printers will support this. I was astonished when I was able to print off a printer shared on my brother's computer by simply clicking "printer sharing" on his computer. If this is how good it will get with any printer, the world will indeed be a better place.

If Redmond is smart, they will jump on the bandwagon. It would be great if I could communicate with my stupid XP box with my brilliant G4 iMac just as easy as it does the printer.

Tittillating tech titans touch together! (4, Funny)

HarveyBirdman (627248) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272074)

Could the Belle of Cupertino and the Stud of Redmond be the hottest new couple on the Siliconwood stage? That's what this gossip reporter tried to find out this week, but alas there was little 411 to be found as intimate confidantes of both parties were tight lipped and mum!

Apple and Microsoft we heard to be discussing a "rendezvous" of some sort. Could it be merely a business deal, or a romantic entanglement? Une telle excitation!

Only time will tell, sassy tech fans! Maybe Microsoft can only tell us how Apple signs a contract. But if the stars favor romance as Valentine's Day (every geek's FAVORITE holiday!) approaches, perhaps Microsoft will learn if Apple cries out or sighs softly or squeals like a pig as she, well, consummates the deal, if you know what I mean.

And I know you know, you naughty voyeurs! ;-) Une fessée sur le fond pour vous!

A networking program with no setup (0, Flamebait)

diablobynight (646304) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272086)

Yep I can see it now, people will hear about this and run out and by a 3000$ grapefruit flavored pc because they can't click the button on their computer the runs the network setup wizard in XP. hmmm...I don't think so. So apparently to get an article posted it has to be anti- microsoft, because lord knows their is no pro microsoft news that might be important to hear.

Rendevous A Redmond Killer Does Not Make (5, Insightful)

visionsofmcskill (556169) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272091)

Rendevous is certainly a humungoesly great piece of software... however... i do NOT see it as a redmond killer even mixed with it's many abilities and supporters.

why?

because its open source...

Ironicly this is in redmond favor.... since if they ever see it as a threat to themselves due to their lack of such a feature, they'll simply incorporate it... And with that the advantage apple had over MS is gone.

With the major printers on board amongst others begining to support it.... I highly doubt it will take Bill long to make sure MS also supports it AND adds their own special "windows enhanced" features to it.

This whole situation is anologous to when apple made the USB only imac.... in a time when USB was common, but USB products weren't.... Apple suddenly created a greatly under-supported market.... which suddenly rushed to fill the whole with plethras of USB devices.... that didn't even take a year to become predominatly PC.

--Enter The Sig --

Re:Rendevous A Redmond Killer Does Not Make (2, Insightful)

Derg (557233) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272256)

Somebody puhleaze mod parent up! This is soo True. Simply put, What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Apple grabs the open source project, puts out their own rendition, and scares MS. MS Grabs themselves a copy, adds their own features, and pushes back. Winner? the users.

The writer is on crack (4, Interesting)

Ducon Lajoie (30475) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272097)

This article is perfectible...

The first thing Apple shipped using rendez-vous was iChat. The iTunes demo refered to has yet to ship. (you can get the same fuctionnality using iCommune though).

Then, it's not that magical. It only works on one subnet, no way to manually add hosts to the resolver (at least not without serious hacking).

What's the deal with Safari helping you change your printer config? IF your printer advertises itself as a web serveur via Rendez-vous, AND you ask safari to display Rendez-vous-discovered bookmarks, then yes, you can directly access the printer's config pages. But the article does not make this clear at all. And this is different from auto-discovering printers, which I have yet to test since the old HPs we use are still go for a couple hundred thousand pages.

The wild guesses about distributed computing are still a pipe dream, Rendez-vous or not.

And at work, somehow, aliases of Rendez-vous-mountedd servers won't resolve after unmounting the server. Aliases made of servers mounted via AFP or Appletalk will resolve and mount the server.

Rendez-vous is cool, but it still has a long way to go before it is as polished (from a user POV) as the old Appletalk system.

*whines* (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272102)

All I asked for was a rainbow to fulfill my homosexuality! RAINBOW! I WANNA RAAAAINBOOOW!

Where's my rainbow? I know you straight people took it. You're always taking our rainbows. I don't get why; we gay people identify with the rainbow, because, uhh... you know... uhhh...

We identify with the RAAAAINBOOOOW! Because we're fags! YEAH!

Networking for dummies...but (4, Insightful)

aarondsouza (96916) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272115)

Sure this "instant networking" is all very cool, but for most geeks in the know, we *want* to be able to configure till we die.

Security restrictions? Can I restrict the range of IP addresses that access my music folders? Password access? Encryption? I wanna tweak dammit! The problem with that is that as soon as you make the system more powerful and have all these geek-satisfying options, you need to be able to get down to the nuts and bolts of configuring it. Otherwise you end up in the same mess as MS, with users blindly enabling potentially insecure servers.

Microsoft's response (5, Interesting)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272124)

Considering the extreme cost-savings inherent in zero-config networking like this, what is the most likely Microsoft response? The ones I can think of are:

a) Ignore
b) FUD
c) Embrace/extend/destroy

One important question: Does the Apple Public Source License (under which Rendezvous has been released) give Apple the ability to stop Microsoft from embracing/extending/destroying?

Re:Microsoft's response (-1, Flamebait)

TheAwfulTruth (325623) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272180)

Considering that MS is on a security campaign and this is as anti-security as you can get, I doub't they'll adopt it. They may rightly point out that it is a stupid concept in the face of ever growing security concerns, but that would be considered by you as B) I'm sure.

What a great thing to be able to have any stranger pop-over and hook up to your printer without you knowing it and print out whatever kind of crap. Or just waste your supplies. Make it wireless and even more fun can be had!

In this day and age, this is the stupidest thing imaginable. Apple and the WiFi people have completely ignored all the warnings and are working as hard as they can to make this an even less secure world than it is.

Course it "Easier" so 99% of the people will flock to it. Sad.

Apple: Something to do with Apple! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272147)

From the I'm-so-clever-I-make-my-balls-ache department

Something to do with Apple! Basically pointless, but "Apple" is mentioned and let's not fool ourselves! Apple, apple, apple. Sir Isaac Newton, gravity? I rest my case.

it's not such a big deal (1)

g4dget (579145) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272150)

For applications like 3D renderers or P2P systems that need to find multiple instances of themselves on a local network, you don't need Rendezvous--they have been able to do this via broadcast and multicast for a long time. Nor, for that matter, are server-less IP configuration or service discovery really new--Windows, for example, already has them, and for pretty much the same reason that Macintosh does: Microsoft wanted the same kind of plug-and-go convenience they had with their non-TCP/IP systems for TCP/IP (well, even if it was plug-and-crash in the case of Microsoft).

Don't get me wrong: Rendezvous looks like a decent and simple standard, and if it gets widely supported, that would be great. It's also great that all the fanfare surrounding Rendezvous gets people thinking about how to make their applications configure themselves with less user intervention. But the existence of Rendezvous isn't a problem for Microsoft, and it isn't something groundbreakingly new either.

help (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272160)

I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (dual 1GHZ G4 tower) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 1GHz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

I'd like to hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

Re:help (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272247)

Funny, earlier you said it was a 300MHz Mac. Maybe the problem is the interface between the chair and the keyboard.

Classic Slashdot: (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272167)

Mecrosofte is teh shit becos Windowes crasheas all teh time!! ehehehehehEHe3hEHe!!!!!111

Two things... (2)

weave (48069) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272170)

1) Nice in theory but in practice, in my best ellen feiss tone, "huh?" I have a mac in my office, and sure enough there is a list of rendevous printers available, all with names like "hplj542502260123" -- as if I'm supposed to know which one is where...

2) Rendevous must be limited to a broadcast subnet. In my work site, subnets kind of snake all through the site due to historical reasons and growth over the years, so the subnet I am on spans two buildings, where across the hall those folks are on a different subnet. I know of a few cube office rooms where people in the same room are on two different subnets. Is there support in cisco routers to forward this traffic between nets? (or maybe that's not a good idea...)

3) ok, i lied. three things. Since when did itunes get ability to pick up other rendevous user playlists? (mentioned in that article). I sure don't see it... Am I missing something?

Alex Salkever is not "a substitute columnist" (4, Informative)

rpiquepa (644694) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272184)

Charles Haddad is on leave for a while now. Alex Salkever, Technology editor for BusinessWeek Online, is replacing him since his last column, which appeared on November 13, 2002. So, he's not really "a substitute columnist." Since then, Salkever wrote several articles about Apple including "A Rendezvous with Redmond?". You can read What's with the Hassles from Apple? (January 29, 2003) [businessweek.com] , THE Key to User-Friendly Computers? (January 22, 2003) [businessweek.com] or this other column [weblogs.com] ), or Is Apple Getting Too Cool Again? (January 15, 2003) [businessweek.com] .

How in the hell is this GOOD? (0, Flamebait)

jerkychew (80913) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272211)

Seriously... the weakest point of any network is its users. Give your users enough rope, and they will hang themselves. However, when they hang themselves, it's up to the Sys admins to come to the rescue.

This is why lockdowns exist. They keep Joe User from randomly changing settings he doesn't understand, and accessing files he's not supposed to access.

As a sys admin, I DO NOT WANT random people being able to print to my printers just because they have a wireless card. The article mentions that they "don't even need to be on the network". So, lemme get this straight - any shmoe with a Rendezvous-enabled Mac can print to my printer, without getting permission? Even, say, somebody sitting outside the building?

This may be nice in a home environment, but I don't see how this is anything but a threat to business security. I have never read about rendezvous anywhere besides this article, so perhaps there's some administrative stuff I don't know about. For now, though, I think I'll stick with having a secure network. You want to print to the office printer? Call me first. How hard is that?

How... (-1, Redundant)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272228)

How is an article in BusinessWeek a threat to Microsoft?

PDF file on Apple (4, Informative)

nyc_paladin (534862) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272242)

Here is a PDF file [akamai.net] that explains the technology behind this a little better...but does not go into too much detail regarding security. It sounds like you can choose what you want to share.

a new Mac ad... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5272244)

i use to spend so much money on printing and distributing my ads to local busnisess, but since i got my powerbook, with OSX its been so much easier.

i wrote a custom script to find printers and printout ads, now i just drive arround town and print out ads at businesses that have new printers and WiFI, and since then by phone has been going nuts, business couldn't be better.

and A. Hole, and i'm a door to door spam man.

Lack of a security model (0)

mrkitty (584915) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272271)

This article talks nothing about security. From what I can tell I can make my laptop hop on anybodies network and start printing stuff. Seems like the insecurity possibilities outweight the good.

RIAA, MPAA and Harlan Ellision will sue soon! (1)

farrellj (563) | more than 11 years ago | (#5272272)

To them, Rendezvous will be the ultimate P2P software that will allow people to share, and they don't like people sharing. Another good tech (like DAT) killed by money grubbing.

ttyl
Farrell
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...