and how do you get around reverse DNS for your email server?

 

and how do you get around reverse DNS for your email server?

Reverse DNS is always done at the Name Registrar, not at the ISP. And rDNS service comes included with the domain names, which, of course, I also pay for (about $30 per year per name, IIRC). For this price, I can run as many mail boxes or web services as I want.

Sorry, I'm wrong. Details to follow.

 

i would have to see it to believe it. as far as i know (and checked with couple of local ISPs):
Domain registration = forward DNS control. IP provider (ISP) = reverse DNS control, and they are completely separate since Domain registration does not have hold of the actual IP address assignment and PTR record.

 

Re rDNS: yes, rDNS is controlled by the "ISP" that owns the the IP address.

My mail servers (of which I run a few) are hosted on leased VPSs at about $12 per month. This includes the rDNS service.

They are my machines run off-site for bandwidth purposes, and also that most residential/commercial ISPs block port 80 (prohibiting a functional email server from your home or office). The hardware instances (virtual machine) are mine, the installations, configuration, and management are mine and not controlled by the hostng service.

I also run a secure video conferencing system via a hosted VPS, again for bandwidth reasons, but it is my VPS under my control.

 

My "server stack" at home. It includes a router, local file server, VPN with my office, my "offsite" backup for my business systems, an ERP business system, and other various services.

This is real world stuff with great value and zero cost.

View attachment 358556

AutoCAD 13 ? ... ha! ... I've been using it since version 10! ... and I'm quite good at it. In fact, I'm a programmer and developer.

Does it run well on Linux?

 

AutoCAD 13 ? ... ha! ... I've been using since version 10! ... and I'm quite good at it. In fact, I'm a programmer and developer.

Does it run well on Linux?

Yes, in fact.

But that is an old bookshelf. It's contents have not been updated in at least 20 years. Somewhere around here I've posted a photo.

 

I pay my ISP for data. Nothing else.

Go back and read the very first post in this thread.

Edit: and when I say "My [whatever] is Linux", I actually mean there is physical hardware, controlled, maintained, and managed by me (and no one else) that does those things.

I don't purchase services.

My mail servers (of which I run a few) are hosted on leased VPSs at about $12 per month.

That makes sense... Although it did involve stretching the truth a bit.

 

Yes, in fact.

But that is an old bookshelf. It's contents have not been updated in at least 20 years. Somewhere around here I've posted a photo.

Yeah, now I remember ... you have rather eclectic tastes, my friend.

 

If Windows were so geat with its intended design and simplicity we wouldn't have other options like Linux, BSD, and the like to begin with.

yes, windows isn't free, there's the explanation right there.

 

That makes sense... Although it did involve stretching the truth a bit.

"I don't purchase services" was intended to mean things email, SAS, web hosting, etc, not hardware installations. I'm sorry for the confusion.

It is (today) impossible to run a mail server from ones home (because of Microsoft!), though I used to before port 80 was such an awful thing to offer to Windows users.

And, aside from the above mentioned video server, I host all my own hardware.

When symmetrical fiber is available in my neighborhood, I'll bring that inside, too.

BTW, I run my own phones internally, but I still have to pay for SIP trunks and DIDs. I guess that also makes me a liar.

 

I pay my ISP for data. Nothing else.

So the hardware was free? can I get some?

 

So the hardware was free? can I get some?

Yes. No.

(And they won't run 11)

 

BTW, I run my own phones internally, but I still have to pay for SIP trunks and DIDs.

It's got an LCD screen, but i had to redact it.

 

Windows Pro retails at 200 bucks. A couple years ago I built a new box, below is the capital cost, lets call it 1800 bucks. If I added Windows pro to that it would have come to a round 2,000 bucks, so that means the OS is just 10% of the cost, frankly silly, not a big deal.

But in my case my employer gives me my own MSDN subscription so that means I can run any Windows I want, up ten installs too, even Windows Server + SQL Server, Office and everything else MS sell. So I get Visual Studio (all editions) basically for free. You'll find many medium/large organizations that use MS tools and languages and so on, provide these subscriptions as both an incentive and as a way to maximize skills development of their tech teams.

I don't think I've paid for Windows for over 20 years in fact.

The time I spend pampering Windows and applying band aids and begging it to cooperate is zilch compared to how much time Tinux devotees spend doing precisely that on an almost daily basis. Tinux appeals to people who need to fiddle and tweak and adjust the system all the time.

But as I said already my negative view of Tinux is that it was never designed, its a hodge podge of disparate approaches to this and that, the memory management (as I showed earlier) would be embarrassing even as a student assignment, I mean a process who's job is to seek and kill other processes, if you can't see how that's abysmal design then I pity you.

 

Windows Pro retails at 200 bucks. A couple years ago I built a new box, below is the capital cost, lets call it 1800 bucks. If I added Windows pro to that it would have come to a round 2,000 bucks, so that means the OS is just 10% of the cost, frankly silly, not a big deal.

So, aside from reporting back to Redmond, what does that box do for $2K?

 

So, aside from reporting back to Redmond, what does that box do for $2K?

More than 2K in reality, the wide monitor set me back a few bucks too, so the % cost of Windows (if I had to buy it was more like 15% of the total).

It lets me work, build and test software and never have to worry about performance. The huge memory enables me give it huge workloads and not be impacted (for example a full build of LLVM takes about 30 minutes and that's a huge build). I might easily have five or six IDE instances up at any one time as I work on multiple projects at once.

I spend around 10 hrs a day at my desk working, researching, debugging and so on and a powerful fast machine improves my productivity - of and I can run some serious games (but I do that infrequently).

Trust me, I'm a software engineer and OS afficionado, if Linux really was any good I'd be using it.

 

Damn. I wish Linux would run on such an expensive modem computer.

We still use TRS-80s.

And it's too bad we have no dev tools, either.

Nothing so important is done on Linux. Ever.

Web surfing and Facebook (command line) is all we got.

But, it's all we backwater hackers need.

 

Linux is great choice when developing own device, a single product with specific function that can be replaced by a drop in substitute. that is where line is drawn...

personally i would be only happy LOVE to do a complete transition to Linux (as in Linux desktop). the only real issue is that none of the needed apps would run on it. one could have to run them in VMs, or Wine, but then... performance drops massively. and it sure FEELS like working on TRS-80.

i do not feel like waiting or running bunch of VMs in parallel. while at home or office i could make some of the VMs run on another hardware, but this is just not portable. thing that works without need for bandaids is running everything natively. so $200 is a peanuts compared to my time spent on just making it work. not to mention much bigger cost of lost productivity.

reality is - it took decades for Linux just to get usable Office suite, and it will take much longer to catch up on other fronts. and THIS is the real reason why adoption is limited to single purpose devices (modens, storage, media players, business computing farms...). it is more likely that it will not catch up at all... the hardware may become more powerful so that running bunch of VMs is not much of an issue. then companies that make those software solutions may try to deploy their products as VMs. time will tell...

 

Linux is great choice when deploying own device, a single product with specific function that can be replaced by a drop in substitute. that is where line is drawn...

personally i would be only happy LOVE to do a complete transition to Linux (as in Linux desktop). the only real issue is that none of the needed apps would run on it. one could have to run them in VMs, or Wine, but then... performance drops massively. and it sure FEELS like working on TRS-80.

i do not feel like waiting or running bunch of VMs in parallel. while at home or office i could make some of the VMs run on another hardware, but this is just not portable. thing that works without need for bandaids is running everything natively. so $200 is a peanuts compared to my time spent on just making it work. not to mention much bigger cost of lost productivity.
reality is - it took decades for Linux just to get usable Office suite, and it will take much longer to catch up on other fronts. and THIS is the real reason why adoption is limited to single purpose devices (modens, storage, media players, business computing farms...). it is more likely that it will not catch up at all... the hardware may become more powerful so that running bunch of VMs is not much of an issue. then companies that make those software solutions may try to deploy their products as VMs. time will tell...

If a windows app runs under Wine, it runs at native speed.

Under a VM, it depends on how it's configured, and what else is running in the background on both the guest and host. I've never had any problems in this regard.

The trick to a successful conversion is discovering the equivalent apps that run natively under Linux that do what you need. I agree that trying to shoehorn windows apps into Linux is a waste of time.

I (and my partners and employees) have used Linux for most our work since about 2005.

The remaining is done on XP or Win 10 on Virtualbox.

Win 11 -- or any future Windows spyware -- will never be allowed in my office. Period. Hard stop.

 

It is (today) impossible to run a mail server from ones home (because of Microsoft!), though I used to before port 80 was such an awful thing to offer to Windows users.

I should add: I had to ask my VPS provider for special dispensation to open port 80 on my email boxes. Even they have to be careful not to allow SMTP abuse, as it results in their entire public IP subblock being tainted and listed in RBLs.

I appreciated that I had to prove to them I was capable of running a legitimate, secure email server.