tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22311364.post5567595343882964033..comments2024-03-27T21:40:39.130-07:00Comments on Small Biz Thoughts by Karl W. Palachuk: OOF - What's Your Policy?Karl W. Palachukhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10854725002875547297noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22311364.post-80043216653783419692008-08-29T12:09:00.000-07:002008-08-29T12:09:00.000-07:00Sorry, Gareth. I'm stealing that.That's funny.Sorry, Gareth. I'm stealing that.<BR/><BR/>That's funny.Karl W. Palachukhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10854725002875547297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22311364.post-28730027025977711192008-08-29T10:23:00.000-07:002008-08-29T10:23:00.000-07:00My first mobile phone (cell) had a voicemail messa...My first mobile phone (cell) had a voicemail message along the lines of;<BR/><BR/>"Thanks for calling, I am in the office at the moment, please call again when I'm out."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Regards, GarethAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22311364.post-37121393788538726622008-08-29T08:38:00.000-07:002008-08-29T08:38:00.000-07:00Memories indeed...The POSIX subsystem got installe...Memories indeed...<BR/><BR/>The POSIX subsystem got installed by default, didn't it? I remember having to rip it from production systems because of multiple security vulnerabilities. I was quite happy using it with the NT4 Resource Kit POSIX utilities as I had come direct from SunOS/FreeBSD/Linux to NT4 and wasn't prepared to regress back to the DOS commands :-)<BR/><BR/>93 - most likely would have been NetBSD. FreeBSD was 94.<BR/><BR/>I think we've drifted waaayy off topic however... Cobwebs indeed.stryqxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11725668205462749500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22311364.post-84981578076564140212008-08-28T06:56:00.000-07:002008-08-28T06:56:00.000-07:00Ahhhh . . . Memory lane.Do you remember that old N...Ahhhh . . . Memory lane.<BR/><BR/>Do you remember that old NT systems shipped with a POSIX compatible component. No one outside Microsoft ever installed it.<BR/><BR/>The first Microsoft Mail I hooked to the internet (1993) required a unix box. We didn't use xenix. I think we used freebsd.<BR/><BR/>Too many cobwebs.Karl W. Palachukhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10854725002875547297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22311364.post-78052395769705848232008-08-28T06:17:00.000-07:002008-08-28T06:17:00.000-07:00OOF ends up becoming part of the backscatter probl...OOF ends up becoming part of the backscatter problem - I personally don't like them and don't use them myself. Great post on how to use OOF if you do use it.<BR/><BR/>BTW, XENIX was the OS used that hosted the e-mail system. Microsoft licensed the UNIX source code from AT&T, outsourced development/porting to SCO and branded it XENIX. Not entirely correct, but close enough for the purposes of brevity.<BR/><BR/>XENIX was used extensively inside Microsoft, not only for internal e-mail but also as a mail bridgehead between the XENIX-hosted system, the MSMail systems and the early Exchange systems and also acted as their SMTP gateway to the world. I also vaguely remember that ftp.microsoft.com was a XENIX system at which point it eventually got replaced with NT4.0 (might have been something between the XENIX and NT4.0 system though).<BR/><BR/>XENIX has a very important place in the development of UNIX and UNIX-like systems on the Intel platform. Hard to think that during the early years of Microsoft that the migration off DOS was going to be to XENIX!stryqxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11725668205462749500noreply@blogger.com