A lot of Microsoft's customers without email functionality
xanadu
Posts: 3,347
MS has been down all day. If you were lucky enough to be connected to them before it started and leave the connection open you'll still have access to cached emails. If not you can't authenticate except for webmail where there are some other issues, specifically permissions issues. Some users mailboxes that have custom rights assigned to them are opening in other users on the same domains mail clients! They just violated so many laws on so many levels I hope their insurance company kicks them to the curb!
Comments
I've ran exchange on a $1000 server in a mop closet for years on end without downtime. It's plenty stable until someone screws up (like this update rolled out without proper testing). Privacy and security also come with the territory. I've seen plenty of mismanaged boxes of all flavors. These are networks with lots of users, vpn/telecommuters, BYOD networks, etc. There are servers that require certain software. It's nuts to deal with because you don't have complete control over it.
Exactly. It would be incredible if there was a system where most software packages had beta versions with published, reviewable code that anyone can review and find bugs with, which are used by anyone who can afford the potential instability or who wants the new features, as well as release versions that have been proven stable by extensive beta testing which are used by those for which stability is critical. Oh wait, that's what *nix is!
The keep finding bugs, patching the kernel and other packages... you'd think they could get it right after nearly 25 years.
Having switched over to another OS that is part of the minority seems to have led to less frustration. At this point, it does little good to blame Microsoft if you still choose to use their OS and products.
Current Status: Engineers have completed development of the fix and have checked it into a cumulative update which is expected to deploy to the affected environment by Monday, May 25, 2015, at 11:00 PM UTC.
And I've yet to see an official *nix from Linus that runs without any 3rd party assist.
They did. They called it Windows XP and it combined the robust underpinnings of the Windows NT business system with broad support for consumer media devices.
Everything they have done since XP has been mostly UI tweaks meant to make it look different so people will think they need to upgrade, usually harming productivity more than helping. Vista was a disaster and I still find 7 annoying as hell. On new machines I use 8 but with ClassicShell, and I have normal desktop substitutes for all the Metro junk, which makes the UI tolerable.
It is jarring that something as basic as the dialog that pops up when you copy a file to a location where a previous version exists with the same name is so different on XP, 7, and 8, but that doesn't mean it was never "finished," just that when it should have been finished they kept screwing with it.
It's worse than that. Even if the thing was perfect, complete and bug free and never changed it would acquire bugs as time goes by. What I mean is that as soon as someone dreams up a new feature the OS should have then the fact that it does not have that feature becomes a bug. Such feature-bugs could be support for new hardware or new architectures, support for new files systems, network protocols etc, support from application level features like plug-n-play/hot swap, etc, etc.
@abecedarian I think I get a hint of what you mean but it's not clear.
Firstly Linux is not *nix, whatever that actually means. Unix was is whole operating system. Linux is just a kernel. You can build an OS on the kernel, like Debian or RedHat or OpenWrt or Android. All very different.
Similarly Unix and Windows are not really comparable. Unix does not have a GUI even. Windows depends on it. Again the meaning here eludes me.
Linus Torvalds does not make a Unix, or any kind of operating system. He is responsible for a kernel. Of course that kernel is useless without a lot of external support. You need a compiler to build it not to mention and OS to run that on, and all the tools required to configure it. You need a boot loader to get it up and running.
When it does run you need a means to interact with it, a shell or whatever, you need all the usual user utilities, then you have an operating system.
This is all intentional and as it should be. If you are waiting for "an official *nix from Linus that runs without any 3rd party assist" you are going to be waiting forever.
This is not a bad thing.
Hmm...Is there anything wrong with a "bash Microsoft" thread?
Or do you believe we should accept everything "as is" without question?
Speaking of bash, have you ever tried to look at your command prompt history after you close the session? hahaha j/k. I use every OS I can get my hands on. Still don't have a favorite, in fact I'm starting to hate them all. GNOME doesn't look like windows 8 but it's getting there, luckily I don't have to use it or install it or pay for it. There is a lot to be said there.
I thought everything said so far was constructive. Back on topic email is still down resulting in authentication errors for lots of people. I'm supposed to be migrating email right now. Instead I'm going to my cousins for lunch. So being down may not be such a bad thing after all.
In fact this worked out great!
Windows has its problems, as does any particular flavor of *nix, and none are immune to operator error, and neither requires a GUI for server administration.
I discovered this today, which is a good example of how later versions of Windows have technical improvements: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication
But of course, Google Chrome manages to get around that pesky issue: