No More James Bannan
 

Does anybody else read APC Magazine? Among their columnists they used to
number one James Bannan, who was basically their resident Windows Fanboi.
Only his column seems to have stopped as of the last few months.

One of the last items I remember him doing was on the wonders of PowerShell,
and how Microsoft has finally seen fit to provide something resembling a
command line for Windows, which lets you execute remote commands almost as
easily as local ones. Well, when I say “almost as easily�, I mean you can do
it. Sort of. You just have to figure out a completely different set of WMI
commands to do it, which bear no resemblance to their local equivalents. And
WMI is a lot more complicated and fiddly. But you can figure it out.
Eventually.

On the bright side, they’ve been doing a lot of Linux coverage, which seems
to have been gradually increasing over the last several years. Judging from
the amount of it, 5-10% of their readership must be made up of Linux users.

Re: No More James Bannan
 

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On the bright side, they’ve been doing a lot of Linux coverage, which seems
> to have been gradually increasing over the last several years. Judging from
> the amount of it, 5-10% of their readership must be made up of Linux users.

Going on that reasoning, a chunk of their readership are Apple iCrack
fanbois.

I wouldn't have minded in the least if they're hacking and/or
jailbreaking the thing, but it's only about reviewing the latest
official app that farts, or perhaps the latest iDildo peripheral.

Their other changes don't make up for it (and some of the changes don't
help either). So much so, I've transferred my remaining year and half
subscription to a guy at work, who sold his iPhone to buy an iPad.

I was going to email the mag to tell them, but apparently, if you don't
create an account and post on their boards, you don't get a say. I
think you can twitter them, but "Social networking" and computer geek
don't mix, so screw them. I'm hoping one less person reading their
magazine will be enough to get the message across.
--
Diplomacy: The patriotic art of lying for one's country.

Re: No More James Bannan
 

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote

> Does anybody else read APC Magazine?

Nope, thats why its going down the tubes.

> Among their columnists they used to number one James Bannan,
> who was basically their resident Windows Fanboi. Only his
> column seems to have stopped as of the last few months.

Because hardly anyone bothers to read that **** rag anymore.

> One of the last items I remember him doing was on the wonders
> of PowerShell, and how Microsoft has finally seen fit to provide
> something resembling a command line for Windows, which lets
> you execute remote commands almost as easily as local ones.
> Well, when I say "almost as easily", I mean you can do it. Sort
> of. You just have to figure out a completely different set of WMI
> commands to do it, which bear no resemblance to their local equivalents.
> And WMI is a lot more complicated and fiddly. But you can figure it out.
> Eventually.

Why bother when a decent UI works fine.

> On the bright side, they've been doing a lot of Linux coverage, which
> seems to have been gradually increasing over the last several years.

It would be a ****ing sight more surprising if it didnt.

> Judging from the amount of it, 5-10% of their readership must be made up of Linux users.

Thats a completely hopeless way of working out their readership.

Its just a tad unlikely that many linux users bother with such dinosaur technology as a printed mag anymore.

Re: No More James Bannan
 

On Oct 11, 8:04*am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:

> Why bother when a decent UI works fine.

Yes, but there are a few things you need to do via the command line
because the option isn't provided in the GUI front-end, especially
when it comes to Exchange. I find that a bit annoying.

Re: No More James Bannan
 

On 11/10/10 12:53, Simon wrote:
> On Oct 11, 8:04 am, "Rod Speed"<rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why bother when a decent UI works fine.
>
> Yes, but there are a few things you need to do via the command line
> because the option isn't provided in the GUI front-end, especially
> when it comes to Exchange. I find that a bit annoying.
>
Like adding 200 users for example? You can add them one by one in a GUI
but that can rapidly become less and less fun.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

The end excuses any evil - Sophocles

Re: No More James Bannan
 

In message <4cb185f4$0$5890$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>, John Tserkezis
wrote:

> I was going to email the mag to tell them, but apparently, if you don't
> create an account and post on their boards, you don't get a say.

I’ve e-mailed them lots of times, and had my letters published more than
once, including the latest issue.

One thing they haven’t publicly responded to as yet, is the use of OEM
prices for Windows licences in their “Master Builder� articles. Microsoft
doesn’t allow you to install an OEM licence for your own use, it has to be
for an “unrelated� party. So you have to use a full-price retail licence.

Re: No More James Bannan
 

On 11/10/10 1:23 PM, Enkidu wrote:

> Like adding 200 users for example? You can add them one by one in a GUI
> but that can rapidly become less and less fun.

You can add multiple users into a Windows Domain using the GUI, why
would you do them one by one?

Re: No More James Bannan
 

"Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote in message
news:i8tva4$28g$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> In message <4cb185f4$0$5890$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>, John Tserkezis
> wrote:
>
>> I was going to email the mag to tell them, but apparently, if you don't
>> create an account and post on their boards, you don't get a say.
>
> I’ve e-mailed them lots of times, and had my letters published more than
> once, including the latest issue.
>
> One thing they haven’t publicly responded to as yet, is the use of OEM
> prices for Windows licences in their “Master Builder� articles. Microsoft
> doesn’t allow you to install an OEM licence for your own use, it has to be
> for an “unrelated� party. So you have to use a full-price retail licence.
>


so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because its on an OEM
version and they dont work\\\bugger

Re: No More James Bannan
 

In message <4cb29567$0$29868$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.c om>, will s
wrote:

> In message <i8too0$u0u$2@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>> Microsoft doesn’t allow you to install an OEM licence for your own use,
>> it has to be for an “unrelated� party. So you have to use a full-price
>> retail licence.
>
> so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because its on an OEM
> version and they dont work\\\bugger

So you’ve just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence for
your own use, in contravention of Microsoft’s licensing terms?

Re: No More James Bannan
 

Stop molesting the followups without mentioning that.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
> will s wrote
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote

>>> Microsoft doesn't allow you to install an OEM licence for your own
>>> use, it has to be for an "unrelated" party. So you have to use a
>>> full-price retail licence.

>> so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because
>> its on an OEM version and they dont work\\\bugger

> So you've just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence
> for your own use, in contravention of Microsoft's licensing terms?

Nope, he never signed up for any purported 'licensing terms' with an OEM product.