Posts made by PhlipElder

@nadnerB said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

Saw on X/Twitter a Corvette race motor in pieces because of this. Gotta wonder if the owner let a "buddy" drive.

@nadnerB said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

Robertson = Square
"Invented" in Canada.
It's the best all around head design because it allows for the torque to remain in the screw when the driver is in some way off-tilted from perpendicular.

A drywall canon and deck canon won't allow for anything less than perpendicular so Phillips wins the day there.

Qualifier: I've done lots of subcontractor work.

@nadnerB said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

Huh?

A 1.16 MB !!! PNG for a little thumbnail example like image?

Seriously! Think of the Storages! 8*O

@scottalanmiller said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

It just boggles my mind that the plain English, or the Queen's English if you're a Canucklehead like me, is right freaking there.

Seriously.

Exactly. You just listed why in zero possible way can you be confused. It's plain as day that there is nothing that applies to Avimark.

Why are you arguing that it can be used and showing that it can't?

I'm done with this.

I've verified my interpretation as well as AVIMark's mini-setup as being valid.

Cognitive Dissonance. I suggest looking it up.

@CCWTech said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@CCWTech said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@Obsolesce We're going to have to agree to disagree.

The peer-to-peer setup has been around since Token Ring that I can think of off the top and abides by Microsoft's licensing.

We've been through audits in peer-to-peer settings, as mentioned SMB was our bread and butter, with nary an issue with setups like the p2p mentioned in AVIMark for their tiny setup. We're usually the ones schooling the auditors anyway.

TTFN

So you're saying Microsoft licensing terms do not apply if installed on devices on peer to peer networks?

You've got a lot of theft under your belt, then. Willful ignorance of terms. MVP of SBS means shit... as does (wrongfully) convincing auditors of theft.

As mentioned, let's agree to disagree. TTFN

EDIT: If you really think you have a case then report it to the BSA.

Accusing someone of theft based on an subjective interpretation of terms and conditions is a pretty serious accusation.

Suffice it to say, put up or shut up.

It is theft. There is no other way to look at it. The fact that you have to interpret it subjectively and not objectively speaks volumes.

And it's not the BSA that investigates. Microsoft works with a different company. One of the vet clinics that I am personally aware of that believes you can do this is being audited because they got caught.

BSA is in Canada.

As I've mentioned, peer to peer has been around for a very long time.

What I'm being told here is that every peer to peer setup was illegal and thus theft. Yet, in the audits we've participated in when a peer to peer was involved none were knocked for it.

It's pretty easy to sling the mud and armchair quarterback like this.

Show me some Microsoft based resources that clearly interpret things they way that is being stated here. Since the semantics and legalese seem to be the catch let's see a clear statement from Microsoft that a peer to peer setup where folks are sharing files and a printer or two is indeed illegal and thus "theft" as it's being called here.

Show me the money.

A high school student could understand this. You can not use it to host a server with certain exceptions. Because AVImark is not using just file share services, it doesn't fit the exceptions. That's it. So easy to understand.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/UseTerms/Retail/Windows/11/UseTerms_Retail_Windows_11_English.htm

It just boggles my mind that the plain English, or the Queen's English if you're a Canucklehead like me, is right freaking there.

Seriously.

@CCWTech said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@Obsolesce We're going to have to agree to disagree.

The peer-to-peer setup has been around since Token Ring that I can think of off the top and abides by Microsoft's licensing.

We've been through audits in peer-to-peer settings, as mentioned SMB was our bread and butter, with nary an issue with setups like the p2p mentioned in AVIMark for their tiny setup. We're usually the ones schooling the auditors anyway.

TTFN

So you're saying Microsoft licensing terms do not apply if installed on devices on peer to peer networks?

You've got a lot of theft under your belt, then. Willful ignorance of terms. MVP of SBS means shit... as does (wrongfully) convincing auditors of theft.

As mentioned, let's agree to disagree. TTFN

EDIT: If you really think you have a case then report it to the BSA.

Accusing someone of theft based on an subjective interpretation of terms and conditions is a pretty serious accusation.

Suffice it to say, put up or shut up.

It is theft. There is no other way to look at it. The fact that you have to interpret it subjectively and not objectively speaks volumes.

And it's not the BSA that investigates. Microsoft works with a different company. One of the vet clinics that I am personally aware of that believes you can do this is being audited because they got caught.

BSA is in Canada.

As I've mentioned, peer to peer has been around for a very long time.

What I'm being told here is that every peer to peer setup was illegal and thus theft. Yet, in the audits we've participated in when a peer to peer was involved none were knocked for it.

It's pretty easy to sling the mud and armchair quarterback like this.

Show me some Microsoft based resources that clearly interpret things they way that is being stated here. Since the semantics and legalese seem to be the catch let's see a clear statement from Microsoft that a peer to peer setup where folks are sharing files and a printer or two is indeed illegal and thus "theft" as it's being called here.

Show me the money.

@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@Obsolesce We're going to have to agree to disagree.

The peer-to-peer setup has been around since Token Ring that I can think of off the top and abides by Microsoft's licensing.

We've been through audits in peer-to-peer settings, as mentioned SMB was our bread and butter, with nary an issue with setups like the p2p mentioned in AVIMark for their tiny setup. We're usually the ones schooling the auditors anyway.

TTFN

So you're saying Microsoft licensing terms do not apply if installed on devices on peer to peer networks?

You've got a lot of theft under your belt, then. Willful ignorance of terms. MVP of SBS means shit... as does (wrongfully) convincing auditors of theft.

As mentioned, let's agree to disagree. TTFN

EDIT: If you really think you have a case then report it to the BSA.

Accusing someone of theft based on an subjective interpretation of terms and conditions is a pretty serious accusation.

Suffice it to say, put up or shut up.

@Obsolesce We're going to have to agree to disagree.

The peer-to-peer setup has been around since Token Ring that I can think of off the top and abides by Microsoft's licensing.

We've been through audits in peer-to-peer settings, as mentioned SMB was our bread and butter, with nary an issue with setups like the p2p mentioned in AVIMark for their tiny setup. We're usually the ones schooling the auditors anyway.

TTFN

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@JaredBusch said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

Historically, QuickBooks has only used file sharing for this. The remote users are opening the QuickBooks data file over the network. This matches the restrictions last I knew.

exactly this.

Please reread the Device Restrictions section without all of the underlines especially the part where "internal" is mentioned and "the following purposes:" after that. It's very clear that one can use a Windows Desktop OS for shared internal services. That hasn't changed at all.

By very definition: Peer-to-Peer.

I've been doing this a very long time in the SMB/SME markets. Former SBS MVP and all that.

Tell me a time when any IT tech in those markets hasn't encountered a peer-to-peer setup of desktop operating systems sharing who knows what in a rat's nest of patchwork.

If peer-to-peer wasn't a thing, or illegit as being claimed here, then why did Microsoft have the clause I pointed to included? That is by very definition peer-to-peer.

Again, definitions of words are important here. We can't apply IT Tech definitions to legal definitions. The whole 32-bit memory limitation thing is a good example of that. All y'all know that Windows 32-bit being held down to 4GB of addressable RAM was an arbitrary choice by Microsoft to force-sell their Advanced/Enterprise products that could address more RAM right?

@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@JaredBusch said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

Historically, QuickBooks has only used file sharing for this. The remote users are opening the QuickBooks data file over the network. This matches the restrictions last I knew.

exactly this.

Please reread the Device Restrictions section without all of the underlines especially the part where "internal" is mentioned and "the following purposes:" after that. It's very clear that one can use a Windows Desktop OS for shared internal services. That hasn't changed at all.

@JaredBusch said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

We've gone through plenty of audits where QuickBooks has a company file on one PC while there are two or more other PCs accessing that company file. No issues there.

Historically, QuickBooks has only used file sharing for this. The remote users are opening the QuickBooks data file over the network. This matches the restrictions last I knew.

AVImark is connecting to a database server running on the host computer to my understanding. This is not file services, print services, IIS, or ICS.

I added to my post above.

Their system specifications clarify exactly what their setup is and does. The small setup is peer to peer. No server OS required.

RTFM

@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:

@CCWTech seems super clear to me, and always has been:

Seems obvious to me:

We've gone through plenty of audits where QuickBooks has a company file on one PC while there are two or more other PCs accessing that company file. No issues there.

If the app is behaving similarly then there's nothing wrong with the setup being on Windows 10/11. Especially if the vendor indicates that it is appropriate to do so. I'm sure they wouldn't be running afoul of Microsoft's licensing.

EDIT: It's important to define what the word "server" means in this context. It does not mean what we normally use that word for. Think lawyers not IT techs.

EDIT2: Those underlines are very selective. Why was internal missed after personal? That word is also very important along with the words that come after the word "purposes:".

EDIT3: There is a dearth of info on their site about anything product setup/install related. So, post something that shows requirements for their software to run please.

EDIT4: Waaayyyy down in the search results: https://software.covetrus.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2021/03/AVImark-hardware-specifications.pdf

Looks to be exactly like the QuickBooks setup when used in a tiny operation as indicated here. So, no brainer.

The Server/Client software clearly states a server operating system is required. Again, no brainer.

If the product says it can run on Windows 10 or 11 and falls under the 20 connection limit then go for it but with one caveat: Make sure the hardware has ECC memory to avoid a memory flipped bit error that can wreak havoc and at least a RAID 1 array between two SATA SSDs.

@nadnerB said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

@PhlipElder not sure it’s from Aus. That one is left hand drive, and I don’t recognise the license plate format.

Yikes. I reversed that. I stand corrected on the location of the truck, but the motto still applies as far as the investment where it counts.

Bling is ... bling. ;0)

@nadnerB said in Random Thread - Anything Goes:

Firefox, because…

The Australian truckie equivalent of a Rat Rod. Probably has one of the best boss setups under that cab.

Side note:

I've been renewed in the Microsoft MVP Program! :0)

@scottalanmiller said in Configure Mastodon to Use Zoho ZeptoMail for SMTP Email:

@PhlipElder said in Configure Mastodon to Use Zoho ZeptoMail for SMTP Email:

All of our mail servers are properly set up with a SmartHost, SPF, and DMARC. We don't have any reputation issues. That's a 2000s kind of problem.

No, it's current. Microsoft blacklists entire datacenters still. There's a lawsuit in Illinois about it that they lost. It's a very real thing still that RBL are used by the majors (like Microsoft, but not Google) and used to shut down entire ISPs and IP blocks. I've been brought in to help providers with these issues, it's a huge legal problem and if you don't get hit with it, it seems like it doesn't exist, and if you do get hit, it seems like there's no recourse (hint: there isn't.)

We're dealing with a client who has their site hosted in a Yandex.RU data centre and guess what? Yeah, some putz between their web server and ProofPoint has a sinkhole because Ukraine. The web server can e-mail @Outlook.Com because they have servers around the world but not ProofPoint.

We've had lots of issues over the years where one midbone/backbone provider either shapes or blocks packets from another because they're in a contract dispute. Poof. Packets gone.

@scottalanmiller said in Installing Mastodon 4.1.2 on Debian 11:

@PhlipElder what are you using Mastodon for over there? Internal corporate use? Private group? Public server?

This is a testing instance for us, but we hope to take it live soon and it is going to be public.

The instances we've set up are off the FediVerse for private corporate, political, or personal use.

There was some discussion of setting up for public consumption given the mass exodus after Musk bought Twitter but given the fickleness of tech peeps we didn't because everyone wants attention, so it was only a matter of time before they went back to the main public square that is Titter.

There are a few that have stuck it out with their own instance to build a personal community which is pretty neat, but there's no exposure that compares to Titter. None.

@scottalanmiller said in Installing Mastodon 4.1.2 on Debian 11:

@PhlipElder said in Installing Mastodon 4.1.2 on Debian 11:

I've not had the time to compile them into a How To as of yet as each successive install has needed to be tweaked so keeping a public facing How To is out of the question.

I think that the Mastodon team has had the same issue and just gave up, lol.

Yeah, their notes are based on Ubuntu 19.x LTS with some copy & paste to try and cover Ubuntu 20.x LTS. It took about half a dozen run throughs before we were confident we had a stable configuration. We host all of the instances in-house.

@scottalanmiller said in Installing Mastodon 4.1.2 on Debian 11:

@PhlipElder said in Installing Mastodon 4.1.2 on Debian 11:

We install on Ubuntu and yeah, their documentation really sucks. There's lots of little tweaks that need to be done outside of what they have.

Current or LTS? I tried on current and there are some super recent breaking changes in the last few weeks that basically don't work on Ubuntu 23.04. I didn't try LTS because once doing that, I looked and Debian 11 felt like the better choice and it worked with a LOT fewer tweaks. At least Debian 11 is current, at the moment (but not for long, lol.)

That Mastodon requires Ruby 3.0.6, what the heck. I couldn't get it to run on 3.0.4 with the latest Mastodon 4.1.2 and Ubuntu couldn't compile 3.0.6 successfully and it isn't available for it any other way and Mastodon isn't yet compatible with Ruby 3.1 or 3.2, which is even more ridiculous.

ugh.

We're on 20.04.x LTS and recently on 22.04.x LTS. Getting deployed on 22.04.x LTS required a bit of intervention via GitHub help request. But, we ended up figuring it out along with another poster on that GitHub thread.

Mastodon is very particular about component versions. So, while we take the out of the box Ubuntu LTS version there's been times where we've tweaked the repository for a specific component version.