Newly update content of 000-198 exam with free braindumps download

Make your concepts crystal clear for 000-198 exam topics with 000-198 Free PDF and go through complete question bank several time so that you can memorize and master all the 000-198 sample test. You really do not need to download any of the free contents from internet because, those are outdated. Just practice our 000-198 Free PDF and pass your exam.

Exam Code: 000-198 Practice test 2022 by team
IBM Security Access Manager V7.0 Implementation
IBM Implementation tricks
Killexams : IBM Implementation tricks - BingNews Search results Killexams : IBM Implementation tricks - BingNews Killexams : VGA In Memoriam

The reports of the death of the VGA connector are greatly exaggerated. Rumors of the demise of the VGA connector has been going around for a decade now, but VGA has been remarkably resiliant in the face of its impending doom; this post was written on a nine-month old laptop connected to an external monitor through the very familiar thick cable with two blue ends. VGA is a port that can still be found on the back of millions of TVs and monitors that will be shipped this year.

This year is, however, the year that VGA finally dies. After 30 years, after being depreciated by several technologies, and after it became easy to put a VGA output on everything from an eight-pin microcontroller to a Raspberry Pi, VGA has died. It’s not supported by the latest Intel chips, and it’s hard to find a motherboard with the very familiar VGA connector.

The History Of Computer Video

A character and color set for the Motorola 6847 VDG, found in the TRS-80 Color Computer. Image source
A character and color set for the Motorola 6847 VDG, found in the TRS-80 Color Computer. This image is displayed at the VDG’s full resolution of 256 by 192 pixels.  Image source.

Before the introduction of VGA in 1987, graphics chips for personal computers were either custom chips, low resolution, or exceptionally weird. One of the first computers with built-in video output, the Apple II, simply threw a lot of CPU time at a character generator, a shift register, and a few other bits of supporting circuitry to write memory to a video output.

The state of the art for video displays in 1980 included the Motorola 6845 CRT controller and 6847 video display generator. These chips were, to the modern eye, terrible; they had a maximum resolution of 256 by 192 pixels, incredibly small by modern standards.

Other custom chips found in home computers of the day were not quite as limited. The VIC-II, a custom video chip built for the Commodore 64, could display up to 16 colors with a resolution of 320 by 200 pixels. Trickery abounds in the Commodore 64 demoscene, and these graphics capabilities can be pushed further than the original designers ever dreamed possible.

When the original IBM PC was released, video was not available on the most bare-bones box. Video was extra, and IBM offered two options. The Monochrome Display Adapter (MDA) could display 80 columns and 25 lines of high resolution text. This was not a graphic display; the MDA could only display the 127 standard ASCII characters or another 127 additional characters that are still found in the ‘special character’ selection of just about every text editor. The hearts, diamonds, clubs, and spades, ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠, were especially useful when building a blackjack game for DOS.

The IBM CGA displaying the title screen of King's Quest in 300x200 resolution. Image source
The IBM CGA displaying the title screen of King’s Quest in 300×200 resolution. Image source.

IBM’s second offering for the original PC was far more colorful option. The Color Graphics Adapter (CGA) turned the PC into a home computer. Up to 16 colors could be displayed with the CGA card, and resolutions ranged from 40×25 and 80×25 text mode graphics to a 640×200 graphics mode.

Both the MDA and CGA adapters offered by IBM were based on the Motorola 6845 with a few extra bits of hardware for interfacing with the 8-bit ISA bus, and in the case of many cards, a parallel port. This basic circuit would be turned into a vastly superior graphics card released in 1982, the Hercules Graphics Card.

Hercules offered a 80×25 text mode and a graphics mode with a resolution of 720×348 pixels. Hercules’ resolution was enormous at the time, and was still useful for many, many years after the introduction of the superior VGA. Most dual-monitor setups in the DOS era used Hercules for a second display, and some software packages, AutoCAD included, used a second Hercules display for UI elements and dialog boxes.

Still, even with so many choices of display adapters available for the IBM PC, graphics on the desktop was still a messy proposition. Video cards included dozens of individual chips, implementing the video circuit on a single board was difficult, resolution wasn’t that great, and everything was really based on a Motorola CRT controller. Something had to be done.

The Introduction of VGA

While the PC world was dealing with graphics adapters consisting of dozens of different chips, all based on a CRT controller designed in the late 70s, the rest of the computing world saw a steady improvement. 1987 saw the introduction of the Macintosh II, the first Mac with a color display. Resolutions were enormous for the time, and full-color graphics were possible. There is a reason designers and digital artists prefer Macs, and for a time in the late 80s and early 90s, it was the graphics capabilities that made it the logical choice.

Other video standards blossomed during this time. Silicon Graphics introduced their IRIS graphics, Sun was driving 1152×900 resolution displays. Workstation graphics, the kind used in $10,000 machines, were very good. So good, in fact, that resolutions available on these machines frequently bested the resolution found in cheap consumer laptops of today.

By 1986, the state of graphics on the Personal Computer were terrible. The early 80s saw a race for faster processors, more memory, and an oft-forgotten race to have more pixels on a screen. The competition for more pixels was so intense it was defined in the specs for the 3M Computer – a computer with a megabyte of memory, a megaFLOP of processing power, and a megapixel display. Putting more pixels on a display was just as important as having a fast processor, and in 1986, the PC graphics card with the best resolution – Hercules – could only display 0.25 megapixels.

The DE-9 connector (above) used for CGA, EGA, and Hercules cards, and DE-15 connector (below) used for VGA
The DE-9 connector (above) used for CGA, MDA, and Hercules cards, and DE-15 connector (below) used for VGA

In 1987, IBM defined a new graphics standard to push the graphics on their PC to levels only workstations from Apple, Sun, and SGI could compete with. This was the VGA standard. It was not built on a CRT controller; instead, the heart of the VGA chipset was a custom ASIC, a crystal, a bit of video RAM, and a digital to analog converter. This basic setup would be found in nearly every PC for the next 20 years, and the ASIC would go through a few die shrinks and would eventually be integrated into Intel chipsets. It was the first standard for video and is by far the longest-lived port on the PC.

When discussing the history of VGA, it’s important to define what VGA is. To everyone today, VGA is just the old-looking blue port on the back of a computer used for video. This is somewhat true, but a lie of omission – the VGA standard is more than just a blue DE-15 connector. The specification for VGA defines everything about the video signals, adapters, graphics cards, and signal timing. The first VGA adapters would have 256kB of video RAM, 16 and 256-color palettes, and a maximum resolution of 800×600. There was no blitter, there were no sprites, and there was no hardware graphics acceleration; the VGA standard was just a way to write values to RAM and spit them out on a monitor.

Still, all of the pre-VGA graphics card used a DE-9 connector for video output. This connector – the same connector used in old ‘hardware’ serial ports – had nine pins. VGA stuffed 15 pins into the same connector. The extra pins would be extremely useful in the coming years; data lines would be used to identify the make and model of the monitor, what resolutions it could handle, and what refresh rates would work.

The Downfall of VGA

VGA would be improved through the 1980s and 1990s with the introduction of SVGA, XGA, and Super XGA, all offering higher resolutions through the same clunky connector. This connector was inherently designed for CRTs, though; the H-sync and V-sync pins on the VGA connector are of no use at all to LCD monitors. Unless the monitor you’re viewing this on weights more than 20 pounds and is shooting x-rays into your eyes, there’s no reason for your monitor to use a VGA connector.

The transition away from VGA began alongside the introduction of LCD monitors in the mid-2000s. By 2010, the writing was on the wall: VGA would be replaced with DisplayPort or HDMI, or another cable designed for digital signals needed by today’s LCDs, and not analog signals used by yesteryear’s CRTs.

VGA ThumbDespite this, DE-15 ports abound in the workspace, and until a few years ago, most motherboards provided a D-sub connector, just in case someone wanted to use the integrated graphics. This year, though, VGA died. Intel’s Skylake, their latest chip that is now appearing in laptops introduced during CES this month, VGA support has been removed. You can no longer buy a new computer with VGA.

VGA is gone from the latest CPUs, but an announcement from Intel is a bang; VGA was always meant to go quietly. Somehow, without anyone noticing, you cannot search Newegg for a motherboard with a VGA connector. VGA is slowly disappearing from graphics cards, and currently the only cards you can buy with the bright blue plug are entry-level cards using years-old technology.

VGA died quietly, with its cables stuffed in a box in a closet, and the ports on the back of a monitor growing a layer of dust. It lasted far beyond what anyone would have believed nearly 30 years ago. For the technology that finally broke away from CRT controller chips of the early 1980s, VGA would be killed by the technology it replaced. VGA was technically incompatible with truly digital protocols like DisplayPort and HDMI. It had a storied history, but VGA has finally died.

Wed, 20 Jul 2022 12:00:00 -0500 Brian Benchoff en-US text/html
Killexams : AIOps for the Modern Enterprise: Real-World Advice & Implementation Tips from the Pros

Channelcast Sponsored

Building AI and automation into the business is one of this year’s top priorities for CTOs and CIOs. Yet amid all the hype, it can be difficult to figure out what to expect from AIOps initiatives and how to measure success once they have been implemented.


Register Now

In this ChannelCast, Rich Lane, Forrester Senior Research Analyst; Steve Breen, head of managed services at ANS; and Mark Banfield, chief revenue officer of LogicMonitor, share tips, tricks and real-life examples of how modern organizations are using AIOps to drive positive business outcomes for themselves and their clients.

Join LogicMonitor, Forrester, ANS and The Channel Company to learn:

• The definition and role of AIOps within modern I&O
• Best practices of AIOps adoption
• How to build a business case for AIOps within your organization
• Key criteria for evaluating an AIOps or observability platform

Register Now.

Tue, 11 May 2021 13:08:00 -0500 text/html
Killexams : Dealing With System-Level Power

Analyzing and managing power at the system level is becoming more difficult and more important—and slow to catch on.

There are several reasons for this. First, design automation tools have lagged behind an understanding of what needs to be done. Second, modeling languages and standards are still in flux, and what exists today is considered inadequate. And third, while system-level power has been a growing concern, particularly at advanced nodes and for an increasing number of mobile devices that are being connected to the Internet, many chipmakers are just now beginning to wrestle with complex power management schemes.

On the tools front, some progress has been made recently.

“It might not be 100% there yet, but the tools are now starting to become available,” said Rob Knoth, product management director for Cadence‘s Digital & Signoff Group. “So we’re at a bit of an inflection point where maybe a year or five years from now we’ll look back and see this is about the time when programmers started moving from the, ‘’Hey, we really need to be doing something about this’ stage into the, ‘We are doing something about it’ mode.”,

Knoth pointed to technologies such as high-level synthesis, hardware emulation, and more accurate power estimation all being coupled together, combined with the ability to feed data from the software workloads directly all the way through silicon design to PCB design to knit the whole system together.

There has been progress in the high-level synthesis area, as well, in part because engineering teams have new algorithms and they want to be able to find out the power of that algorithm.

“It’s no longer acceptable to just look at an old design and try to figure it out,” said Ellie Burns, product manager of the Calypto Systems Division at Mentor, a Siemens Business. “It doesn’t really work very well anymore. So you have to be able to say, ‘I want to experiment with an algorithm. What power does it have during implementation?’”

This can mean running the design through to implementation as quickly as possible to determine power numbers. “Power is most accurate down at the gate level,” Burns said. “We’re a million miles from that, so what do you do? We’ve also seen some applications of machine learning where you start to learn from the gate-level netlist, etc., and can begin to store that and apply that from emulation.”

All of these techniques and others are becoming important at 10/7nm, where dynamic current density has become problematic, and even at older nodes where systems are required to do more processing at the same or lower power.

“Part of this is optimizing signal integrity,” said Tobias Bjerregaard, CEO of Teklatech. “Part of it is to extend timing. What’s needed is a holistic approach, because you need to understand how power affects everything at the same time. If you’re looking at power integrity and timing, you made need to optimize bulk timing. This is not just a simple fix. You want to take whatever headroom is available and exploit what’s there so that you can make designs easier to work with.”

Bjerregaard said these system issues are present at every process node, but they get worse as the nodes shrink. “Timing, routability and power density issues go up at each new node, and that affects bulk timing and dynamic voltage drop, which makes it harder to close a design and achieve profitability.”

Design teams have always focused on power/performance/area triumvirate, but at the system level power remains the biggest unsolved problem. Andy Ladd, CEO of Baum, said virtual platform approaches try to bring performance analysis to the system level, but power is not there yet.

“Power is all back-end loaded down at the gates and transistor level, and something needs to shift left,” Baum said. “For this we need a faster technology. A lot of the tools today just run a piece of the design, or a segment of a scenario. They can’t run the whole thing. If you really want to optimize power at the system level, you have to include the software or realistic scenarios so the developers know how that device is going to run in a real application. Something needs to change. The technology has got to get faster, and you still have to have that accuracy so that the user is going to have confidence that what they are seeing is good. But it has to change.”

Graham Bell, vice president of marketing at Uniquify, agreed there is a real gap at the system level. “We don’t see solutions that really understand the whole hierarchy from application payloads, all the different power states that each of the units or blocks inside the design, whether they are CPUs or GPUs or other special memory interfaces. All of these things have different power states, but there is no global management of that. So there needs to be some work done in the area of modeling, and there needs to be some work done in the area of standards.”

The IEEE has been actively pushing along these lines for at least the last few years but progress has been slow.

“There have been some initial efforts there but certainly instead of being reactive, which a lot of solutions are today, you really want to have a more proactive approach to power management,” Bell said.

The reactive approach is largely about tweaking gates. “You’re dealing with the 5% to 10% of power,” said Cadence’s Knoth. “You’re not dealing with the 80% you get when you’re dealing at the algorithm level, at the software level, at the system level — and that’s really why power is really the last frontier of PPA. It requires the entire spectrum. You need the accuracy at the silicon and gate level, but yet you need the knowledge and the applications to truly get everything. You can’t just say, ‘Pretend everything is switching at 25%,’ because then you are chasing ghosts.”

Speaking the same language
One of the underlying issues involves modeling languages. There are several different proposals for modeling languages, but languages by themselves are not enough.

“I look at some of those modeling languages that look at scenarios, and they are great, but where do they get their data from?” asked Mentor’s Burns. “That seems to be the problem. We need a way to take that, which is good for the software, but you need to bring in almost gate-level accuracy.”

At the same time, it has to be a path to implementation, Ladd said. “You can’t create models and then throw them away, and then implement something else. That’s not a good path. You’ve got to have an implementation path where you are modeling the power, and that’s going to evolve into what you’re implementing.”

Consistent algorithms could be helpful in this regard, with knobs that helps the design team take it from the high-level down to the gate level.

“The algorithm itself needs to be consistent,” said Knoth. “Timing optimization, power measurement — if you’re using the same algorithms at the high level as well as at the gate level, that gives the correlation. We’re finally at the point where we’ve got enough horsepower that you can do things like incredibly fast synthesis, incredibly large capacities, run real software emulation workloads, and then be able to harvest that.”

Still, to be able to harvest those, the data vectors are gigantic. As a result, the gate-level netlist for SoC power level estimation is not practical. The data must somehow be extracted because it’s tough enough to get within 15% accuracy in RTL, let alone bringing that all the way back up to the algorithm.

Increasingly at smaller geometries, thermal is also a consideration that cannot be left out of the equation.

Baum’s Ladd noted once the power is understood, then thermal can be understood.

“This is exactly why we’ve all been chasing power so much,” Knoth said. “If you don’t understand the power, thermal is just a fool’s errand. But once you understand the power, then you understand how that’s physically spread out in the die. And then you understand how that’s going to impact the package, the board, and you understand the full, system-level componentry of it. Without the power, you can’t even start getting into that. Otherwise you’re back into just making guesses.”

Fitting the design to the power budget
While power has long been a gating factor in semiconductor design, understanding the impact at the system level has been less clear. This is changing for several reasons:

• Margin is no longer an acceptable solution at advanced nodes, because the extra circuitry can impact total power and performance;
• Systems companies are doing more in-house chip design in complex systems, and
• More IP is being reused in all of those designs, and chipmakers are choosing IP partly on the basis of total system power.

Burns has observed a trend whereby users are saying, “‘This is my power budget, how much performance can I get for that power budget?’ I need to be pretty accurate because I’m trying to squeeze every bit of juice out. This is my limit, so the levels of accuracy at the system level have to be really really high.”

This requires some advanced tooling, but it also may require foundry models because what happens in a particular foundry process may be different than what a tool predicts.

“If an IP vendor can provide power models, just like performance models, that would benefit everybody,” said Ladd. “If I’m creating an SoC and I’m creating all these blocks and I had power models of those, that would be great because then I can analyze it. And when I develop my own piece of IP later, I can develop a power model for that. However, today, so much of the SoC is already made in third party IP. There should be models for that.”

UPF has been touted as the solution to this, but it doesn’t go far enough. Some vendors tout hardware-based emulation as the only solution to this in order to fully describe the functionality.

“You need the activity all together, throughout the design,” said Burns. “That’s the difficult part. If you had the model on the UPF side, we need that. But then how do we take how many millions of vectors in order to get real system-level activity, and maybe different profiles for the IP that we could deliver?”

Knoth maintained that if the design team is working at a low enough granularity, they are dealing with gates. “UPF for something like an inverter, flip flop or even a ROM is fine, but when you abstract up to an ARM core level or something like that, suddenly you need a much more complex model than what UPF can give you.”

While the UPF debate is far from over, Bell recognized there really is a gap in terms of being able to do the system-level modeling. “We’re really trying to do a lot of predictive work with the virtual prototyping and hardware emulation, but we’re still a long way away from actually doing the analysis when the system is running, and doing it predictively. We hear, ‘We’ll kind of build the system, and see if all of our prototyping actually plays out correctly when we actually build the systems.’ We’ve played with dynamic voltage and frequency scaling, we do some of the easy things, or big.LITTLE schemes that we see from ARM and other vendors, but we need to do a lot more to bring together the whole power hierarchy from top to bottom so we understand all of the different power contributors and power users in the design.”

Further, he asserted that these problems must be solved as there is more low power IP appearing in the marketplace, such as for DDR memories.

“We’re moving to low power schemes, we’re moving to lower voltage schemes, and what we’re trying to do with a lot of that IP is to reduce the low power footprint. The piece that designers need to struggle with is what happens with their ability to have noise immunity and have reliability in the system. As we push to lower power in the system, we’re reducing voltages, and then we are reducing noise margins. Somehow we have to analyze that and, ideally, in the real running design somehow predictably adjust the performance of the design to work with real operating conditions. When you power up with an Intel processor, it actually sets the supply voltage for the processor. It will bump it up and down a certain number of millivolts. That kind of dynamic tuning of designs is also going to have to be a key feature in terms of power use and power management,” he said.

Related Stories
Transient Power Problems Rising
At 10/7nm, power management becomes much more difficult; old tricks don’t work.
Power Challenges At 10nm And Below
Dynamic power density and rising leakage power becoming more problematic at each new node.
Closing The Loop On Power Optimization
Minimizing power consumption for a given amount of work is a complex problem that spans many aspects of the design flow. How close can we get to achieving the optimum?
Toward Real-World Power Analysis
Emulation adds new capabilities that were not possible with simulation.

Sat, 16 Jul 2022 12:00:00 -0500 en-US text/html
Killexams : 9 tips to prevent phishing

Phishing, in which an attacker sends a deceptive email tricks the recipient into giving up information or downloading a file, is a decades-old practice that still is responsible for innumerable IT headaches. Phishing is the first step for all kinds of attacks, from stealing passwords to downloading malware that can provide a backdoor into a corporate network.

The fight against phishing is a frustrating one, and it falls squarely onto IT's shoulders.

We spoke to a wide range of pros to find out what tools, policies, and best practices can help organizations and individuals stop phishing attacks, or at least mitigate their effects. Following are their recommendations for preventing phishing attacks.

1. Don’t respond to emotional triggers

Armond Caglar, a principal consultant with a cyber data science firm Cybeta, says that users must understand the psychology behind phishing emails in order to resist them. "The most common and successful phishing emails are usually designed with bait containing psychological triggers that encourage the user to act quickly, usually out of a perceived fear of missing out," he explains. "This can include emails purporting to be from parcel companies indicating a missed delivery attempt, unclaimed prizes, or important changes to various corporate policies from an HR department. Other lures can include triggers designed to encourage a user to act out of a sense of moral obligation, greed, and ignorance, including those capitalizing on current events and tragedies."

He adds that "in terms of how to recognize and avoid being scammed from phishing, it is important for the user to ask themselves, 'am I being pushed to act quickly?' or 'Am I being manipulated?'"

The antidote to this sort of induced anxiety is to remember that you can always step back and take a breath. "If an e-mail already looks weird, and it’s pushing you to do something (or increasing your blood pressure), chances are, it’s a phishing e-mail," says Dave Courbanou, an IT technician at Intelligent Product Solutions. "It’s fast and easy for an IT colleague or professional to check an e-mail for you. Cleaning up after a successful phish could take days, weeks, or months, depending on what was at stake, so do not hesitate to ask your IT contacts to check any e-mail for you for any reason."

Copyright © 2022 IDG Communications, Inc.

Tue, 02 Aug 2022 06:53:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Thought Leadership Is The New Strategy For Corporate Growth

Business growth can be enabled in many ways, yet most corporations still focus on the most traditional ways – whether sales, new products, new markets, new brands, mergers and acquisitions, etc. What many corporations don’t seem to value and/or understand is the power of knowledge sharing. Let’s face it, we are all being challenged to deal with change management in every aspect of our business and no one has all of the answers that the 21t century global market has presented us with. As such, this represents a unique opportunity for corporations and their leaders to cross pollinate knowledge with clients and strategic partners to enable growth and innovation through the power of thought leadership.

Thought leadership is clearly a different type of growth strategy for corporations. Consulting and service companies – such as McKinsey, PwC, Deloitte, IBM and others – have been at the forefront of thought leadership. Corporations must now begin to assess, package and share their own best practices, knowledge-sets, case studies and highly skilled and talented leaders to serve as value-added resources to fuel business growth.

Today’s corporate leaders must be potent pioneers -- blazing new paths few would go down and having the courage to see them all the way through to the end. To be a pioneer, you need to trust yourself enough to share the unique ways that you think as a thought leader, continually testing your constructively disruptive ideas and ideals. Beyond business growth, thought leadership can fuel growth and opportunities for employee engagement and infuse excitement back into a workplace culture. Employees want their executives to be more vocal in sharing their perspectives about the future. They want leaders that are proactive about informing them of what’s upon the horizon so they can prepare themselves for what’s next and contribute in more meaningful and purposeful ways. Employees have grown tired of the next PowerPoint presentation and want to know more about their executive leaders – who they are as people and what really drives their thinking. Employees want their leaders to know that they are just as aware of change management requirements for growth as their leaders. Employees want more cross pollination of sharing since everyone sees the business through a different lens – and this is when diversity of thought can be a breakthrough.

It’s time for corporations to showcase their executives as thought leaders that can strengthen client and supply chain relationships by discovering new ways to make things better in order to grow better together. Diversity of thought is undervalued and misunderstood because people just want to hear themselves talk about what they believe are the right solutions – rather than being more open-minded to embrace new perspectives, regardless of hierarchy or rank. This is why there are so many self-proclaimed thought leaders inside of corporations who are not being taken seriously enough and who associate themselves with leeches and loafers rather than lifters and leaders. These are the leaders that are too disruptive and make it difficult for change management to happen with the required clarity and alignment of thought.

Strategic growth requires a deep understanding of what a company is great at doing and identifying those developmental areas that will allow – it to optimally flourish. Yes, you can hire consultants to solve your problems – but they should now play an even more hands-on facilitation role where they can help you connect the dots, see them more clearly and understand the opportunities for growth within each interconnection point – as you seek to build more holistic relationships with your clients who share your vision, best practices and strategic plans for your future. In a world fueled with change, high-touch, high-trust and highly collaborative relationships are in order.  Be more strategic and collaborative about how you engage in the process of change and the role that knowledge sharing plays.

As you begin to use thought leadership as a strategy for business growth and innovation, here are seven questions that will get you started as your organization continues its transformation process during this time of change management.

1.  What Do You Solve For?

Know what your organization can solve for most effectively and showcase your solution-sets. The changing landscape of the marketplace has made it more difficult for organizations to identify what they are great at solving for – both internally with their employees and externally with clients and supply chain partners.

You have existing clients and business development prospects that can greatly benefit from the competencies and capabilities that you can offer. Allow thought leadership to overcome the traps associated with the dangers of complacency that can lead to the commoditization of your business. Stop being order takers and allow thought leadership to provide a value-added component to your business model that strengthens your marketplace reputation and makes your client relationships more profitable.

2.  Who Are the Game Changers?

Those leaders in your organization that are applying new ways of thinking to propel growth, innovation and opportunity are the game changers. They are the ones that intimately know the mechanics involved with each line of business, trends, latest challenges, competitive pressures and where the growth opportunities exist. Game changers represent those in your innovation lab that champion ideas and fuel new thinking.

They are not afraid to change the conversation  as corporate entrepreneurs and constructive disruptors  that seek to change paradigms, challenge the status quo and enhance  existing business models and client relationships.

3.  What Are the Most Impactful Best Practices?

Existing best practices are the protocols and methods used to operate more efficiently and effectively. These operating methodologies and frameworks transcend time and new marketplace demands.

Based on your clients, lines of business and industry change management requirements – how can your best practices fuel growth for your business when shared and implemented with your clients. Talking about your best practices is a conversation you should be well-prepared to have, making it less likely you’ll be blindsided because you didn’t think through all the issues. You might even own a subject matter that could reinvent your industry.

4.  Where Are the Subject Matter Experts (SME)?

Identify the experts of your business and those people that have witnessed transformation over the years and have implemented proven solutions. Don’t get them confused with the game changers;  these are the ones that touch the business and every aspect of it, every day. They are the leaders that have lived the long history of client relationships and know their counterparts in the industry you serve. They have become experts as a result of their experience and in many cases are known as the thought leaders in your company.

Subject matter experts are the go-to knowledge resource and they are the ones that can guide growth strategies and provide the best recommendations for implementation. They know where the traps exist and what has historically worked and not worked in the past – and the present.

5.  What Are the Innovative Breakthroughs?

Identify the innovative breakthroughs that made your organization stronger and that allow you to serve your clients better.  What are the new technologies introduced and strategic investments made that your business and your clients have benefited from?

Many times there are breakthroughs in an organization that are not viewed as such – but that your clients and industry would benefit from. Always be mindful of the new ways you are thinking and how you are moving the business forward. Don’t assume that others wouldn’t see it as an innovation. Leverage every innovation for the betterment of your organization, its people, brand and client relations. You don’t always need to compare yourself to innovators like Google, Samsung and Apple. Breakthroughs come in all shapes and sizes. The key is that your breakthrough can be measured and shared with your clients to propel growth and opportunity.

6.  Where Do the Real Relationships Exist?

Assess the relationships that are demonstrating real value and that stimulate growth, innovation and opportunity. Like breakthroughs, the best relationships come in different shapes and sizes. Some relationships are cost centers, others are profit centers.

Not all client relationships are fully optimized because it takes time to see beyond the most obvious opportunities.  It’s difficult to explore the opportunities for abundance with clients when your portfolio of products and services may only represent the surface of what your corporation is fully capable of delivering.

The key is to know which relationships are adding value to your brand, products, services and people. Evaluate your supply chain and the strategic partnerships embedded throughout the chain. Once you have identified them, share your success stories, the best practices they helped you create, the impact on employee morale, a new client relationship, the new ways you approached and set-forth the standard for building relationships and the role they play to fuel growth of your business.

7.  What Are the Desired Outcomes?

Explore your current revenue streams and the parts of your business that generate the desired outcomes after you have identified the aforementioned points 1 – 6. Corporate growth strategies are about driving real measureable and sustainable results that impact the bottom line. The investment in corporate growth can be costly and risky. This is why it is so important to discover new ways to capture growth through strategic knowledge sharing / thought leadership that makes your corporation stand out from the crowd.

Thought leadership allows you and your clients to broaden each other’s observations of what’s possible to cultivate expansive innovation – and through this process create greater strategic focus to determine the most probable opportunities to seize the greatest potential in the relationship. The result: you realize the power that is inherent by sharing the momentum of the success and significance that you are both capable of creating with one another.

Remember this: we are transitioning from a knowledge based to a wisdom based economy. It’s no longer about what you know – but what you do with what you know. In the wisdom based economy, it’s always about trust, transparency and collaboration. A client relationship is about adding value in everything you do and how you do it.  Everyone wants to grow during this time of uncertainty where many are reinventing themselves to find their footing – you must position your organization and its leaders as catalysts for growth through thought leadership.

Follow-me on Twitter @GlennLlopis.   Join our LinkedIn Group.

Mon, 18 Aug 2014 01:46:00 -0500 Glenn Llopis en text/html
Killexams : What’s The Deal With UEFI?

It seems like there are two camps, the small group of people who care about UEFI and everyone else who doesn’t really notice or care as long as their computer works. So let’s talk about what UEFI is, how it came to be, what it’s suitable for, and why you should (or shouldn’t) care.

What is UEFI?

UEFI stands for Unified Extensible Firmware Interface, a standard held by an organization known as the United EFI Forum. Intel came out with EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface) and later made the spec public as UEFI. As a spec, implementation details change between vendors and manufacturers, but the goal is to present an OS bootloader’s standard and understandable structure. This makes it much easier to write an OS as you no longer need to worry about all the messy business of actually starting the chipset.

Several IBVs (Independent Bios Vendors) offer their implementations of UEFI that OEMs who produce motherboards can license and use in their products. Some examples would be AMI, Phoenix, and InSyde. You’ve likely seen their logo or just the text of their name briefly flash on the screen before your OS of choice properly boots.

Let’s talk about how UEFI boots. Generally, there are a few different phases. We generally say since there are many implementations and many of them do things out of spec. There are three general phases: Security (SEC), Pre-EFI Initialization (PEI), and Drive Execution Environment (DXE). Each is a mini operating system. Because Intel is the one who started EFI and later turned it into UEFI, much of the design is built around how Intel processors boot up. Other platforms like ARM might not do much in the SEC or PEI phase.

In a multi-core system, all the processors race to get a semaphore or read EAX, and one is designated the BSP (bootstrap processor). The losers all halt until the BSP starts themThe boot process for X86 processors is a bit strange. They start in real mode (though most processors these days are technically unreal), with a 20-bit address space (1MB of addressable memory) for backward compatibility reasons. As the processor continues to boot, it switches to protected mode and then finally to long mode. In a multi-core system, all the processors race to get a semaphore or read EAX, and one is designated the BSP (bootstrap processor). The losers all halt until the BSP starts them via an IPI (inter-processor interrupt). Ordinarily, there is an onboard SPI flash chip with firmware mapped into the end of the physical 32-bit region of memory. The Intel Management Engine (ME) or AMD Platform Security Processor (PSP) does most of the SEC phase, such as flushing the cache and starting the processors.

Once the processors are started, PEI has officially begun. On Intel systems, there is no system RAM in most of PEI. This is because memory needs to be trained and links initialized before the processor can use them. The ever relentless push for more and more speed from RAM means that the RAM needs to be tested, calibrated, and configured on every boot as different RAM sticks have other parameters. Many systems cache these parameters for faster boot times, but they often need to be invalidated and retrained as the RAM sticks age. The PSP handles memory training and loading UEFI on some AMD systems before the main x86 processor is pulled out of reset. For Intel systems, they use a trick called XIP (execute in place) which turns the various caches into temporary RAM. There is only a small stack, a tiny amount of heap space, and no static variables for PEI. Many Intel server platforms rely on the Board Management Controller (BMC) to train memory, as training large amounts of memory takes a very long time.

After initializing RAM and transferring the contents of the temporary cache, we move to DXE. The DXE phase provides two types of services: boot and runtime. Runtime services are meant to be consumed by an OS, services such as non-volatile variables. Boot services are destroyed once ExitBootServices is called (typically by the OS loader), but they are services like keyboard input and graphical drivers. BDS (boot device selection) runs in DXE and is how the system determines what drive to boot (hard drive, USB, etc.).

This has been a very dense and x86 specific overview. Many architectures such as ARM eschew UEFI for something more like coreboot, linuxboot, or LK, where it boots a small Linux kernel that then kexec’s into a much larger kernel. However, many ARM platforms can also leverage UEFI. Only time will tell which way the industry moves.

How It Came To Be

In 2005, UEFI entirely replaced EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface), the standard Intel had put forth a few years prior. EFI borrowed many things from Windows of that period, PECOFF image formats, and UEFI, in turn, borrowed practices from EFI. Before EFI, there was good old BIOS (Basic Input Output System). The name originated from CP/M systems of 1975. In that period, the BIOS was a way for the system to boot and provide a somewhat uniform interface for applications by providing BIOS interrupt calls. The calls allowed a program to access the input and outputs such as the serial ports, the RTC, and the PCI bus. Phoenix and others reverse-engineered the proprietary interface that IBM created to manufacture IBM compatible machines, which eventually led to something close to a standard.

Is It Better Than BIOS?

The biggest complaint with UEFI is that it is a closed black box with unimaginable access to your computer and stays resident after the computer boots.Yes and no, depending on your perspective. Many OS vendors like UEFI because they generally make their lives easier as the services provided make it easy to give a homogenous experience booting. The Linux community, generally speaking, is agnostic at best and antagonistic at worst towards UEFI. The BIOS interface is pushing 45 years as of the time of writing and is considered legacy in every sense. Another point in UEFI’s corner is that it facilitates selecting different boot devices and updating the firmware on your machine. UEFI uses GUID Partition Table (GPT) over Master Boot Record (MBR) — considerd a plus as MBR is somewhat inflexible. Many platforms shipped today are based on the open-source EDK2 project from TianoCore, an implementation of UEFI that supports X86, ARM, and RISCV.

The biggest complaint with UEFI is that it is a closed black box with unimaginable access to your computer and stays resident after the computer boots. BIOS is appealing since the interface is well-known and generally is non-resident. UEFI can be updated easier but also has a much more vital need for updates. A UEFI update can brick your system entirely. It will not boot, and due to the fuses being blown on the unit, it is almost physically impossible to fix it, even for the manufacturer. Significant amounts of testing go into these updates, but most are hesitant to push many updates because of the amount of work required.

Why You Should or Shouldn’t Care

At the end of the day, you care if you can use your computer for the things that are important to you. Whether that’s playing a game, writing an email, or making a new computer, it doesn’t matter as long as the computer does what you want. And booting is just one oft-forgotten step in making that happen. If you care about knowing every single piece of code your machine runs, you need to buckle in for a long ride. There are companies such as Librem going to long lengths to make sure that tricky problems like memory init are running in non-proprietary blobs. You can still tweak UEFI, [Hales] being a great example of tweaking the BIOS of an old school laptop. Open-source tools for inspecting and understanding what’s going on under the hood are getting better.

Ultimately it is up to you whether you care about the boot process of your device.

Wed, 03 Aug 2022 11:59:00 -0500 Matthew Carlson en-US text/html
Killexams : Cybersecurity Market – 2022 by Manufacturers, Regions, Size, Share, Forecast to 2028

New Jersey, United States – Cybersecurity Market 2022 – 2028, Size, Share, and Trends Analysis Research Report Segmented with Type, Component, Application, Growth Rate, Region, and Forecast | key companies profiled -IBM (US), Cisco (US), Check Point (Israel), and others.

The development of the Cybersecurity Market can be ascribed to the developing complexity of digital assaults. The recurrence and power of digital tricks and violations have expanded over the course of the past 10 years, bringing about gigantic misfortunes for organizations. As cybercrimes have expanded essentially, organizations overall have directed their spending security advances to reinforce their in-house security foundations. Designated assaults have seen an ascent lately, invading targets’ organization framework and all the while keeping up with secrecy. Aggressors that have a particular objective as a top priority generally assault endpoints, organizations, on-premises gadgets, cloud-based applications, information, and different other IT frameworks. The essential thought process behind designated assaults is to interfere with designated organizations or associations’ organizations and take basic data. Because of these designated assaults, business-basic tasks in associations are adversely affected by business disturbances, protected innovation misfortune, monetary misfortune, and loss of basic and touchy client data. The effect of designated digital assaults influences designated associations as well as homegrown and worldwide clients.

According to our latest report, the Cybersecurity market, which was valued at US$ million in 2022, is expected to grow at a CAGR of approximate percent over the forecast period.

Receive the sample Report of Cybersecurity Market Research Insights 2022 to 2028 @

Cybersecurity Market necessities develop at a higher rate than spending plans intended to address them. The majority of the little firms come up short on a financial plan and IT security mastery to take on improved network protection answers to defend their organizations and IT foundations from different digital assaults. The restricted capital subsidizing can be a significant controlling component for a few little and medium-sized organizations embracing the online protection model. Emerging companies in emerging nations across MEA, Latin America, and APAC frequently face a test to secure money and suitable subsidizing to embrace network protection answers for their business. The capital financing in these organizations is significantly procured for defending business-basic activities, now and again leaving less or no subsidizing for improving high-level network protection arrangements. Besides, network safety financial plans in the arising new companies are lacking to execute Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs) and Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) arrangements.

The distributed computing model is generally embraced because of its strong and adaptable framework. Numerous associations are moving their inclination toward cloud answers for improving on the capacity of information, and furthermore, as it gives far off server access on the web, empowering admittance to limitless registering power. The execution of a cloud-based model empowers associations to deal with every one of the applications as it gives a particular testing examination that runs behind the scenes. The execution of cloud can permit associations to join valuable Cybersecurity Market advancements, for example, programming characterized edges, to make vigorous and exceptionally secure stages. States in numerous nations issue extraordinary rules and guidelines for cloud stage security, which drives the Cybersecurity Market development across the globe. SMEs are continually looking to modernize their applications and foundations by moving to cloud-based stages, like Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) and Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS).

Division Segment

Based on components, the cybersecurity market is segmented into hardware, software, and services. Cybersecurity technology is offered by various vendors as an integrated platform or a tool that integrates with enterprises’ existing infrastructure. Vendors also offer cybersecurity hardware associated with services that help organizations in implementing the required solution in their current infrastructure. In latest years, several developments have been witnessed in cybersecurity software and related hardware development kits.

Cybersecurity services are classified into professional and managed services. Professional services are further segmented into consulting, risk, and threat assessment; design and implementation; training and education; and support and maintenance. The demand for services is directly related to the adoption level of cybersecurity solutions. The adoption of cybersecurity solutions is increasing for securing business-sensitive applications.

Access the Premium Cybersecurity market research report 2022 with a full index.

Regional Analysis

North America, being a technologically advanced region, tops the world in terms of the presence of security vendors and cyber incidents. As the world is moving toward interconnections and digitalization, protecting enterprise-critical infrastructures and sensitive data have become one of the major challenges. North America is an early adopter of cybersecurity solutions and services across the globe. In North America, the US is expected to hold a larger market share in terms of revenue. The increasing instances of cyber-attacks are identified as the most crucial economic and national security challenges by governments in the region.

Businesses in this region top the world in terms of the adoption of advanced technologies and infrastructures, such as cloud computing, big data analytics, and IoT. Attacks are increasing dramatically and becoming more sophisticated in nature and targeting business applications in various industry verticals. Sophisticated cyber attacks include DDoS, ransomware, bot attacks, malware, zero-day attacks, and spear phishing attacks.
The infrastructure protection segment accounted for the largest revenue share in 2022, of the overall revenue. The high market share is attributed to the rising number of data center constructions and the adoption of connected and IoT devices. Further, different programs introduced by governments across some regions, such as the Critical Infrastructure Protection Program in the U.S. and the European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP), are expected to contribute to market growth. For instance, the National Critical Infrastructure Prioritization Program (NIPP), created by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), helps in identifying the list of assets and systems vulnerable to cyber-attacks across various industries, including energy, manufacturing, transportation, oil & gas, chemicals, and others, which is damaged or destroyed would lead to national catastrophic effects.

Competitors List

Major vendors in the global cybersecurity market include IBM (US), Cisco (US), Check Point (Israel), FireEye (US), Trend Micro (Japan), NortonLifeLock (US), Rapid7 (US), Micro Focus (UK), Microsoft (US), Amazon Web Services (US), Oracle (US), Fortinet (US), Palo Alto Networks (US), Accenture (Ireland), McAfee (US), RSA Security (US), Forcepoint (US), Sophos PLC (UK), Imperva (US), Proofpoint (US), Juniper Network (US), Splunk (US), SonicWall (US), CyberArk (US), F-secure (Finland), Qualys (US), F5 (US), AlgoSec (US), SentinelOne (US), DataVisor (US), RevBits (US), Wi-Jungle (India), BluVector (US), Aristi Labs (India) and Securden (US).

The following are some of the reasons why you should Buy a Cybersecurity market report:

  • The Report looks at how the Cybersecurity industry is likely to develop in the future.
  • Using Porter’s five forces analysis, it investigates several perspectives on the Cybersecurity market.
  • This Cybersecurity market study examines the product type that is expected to dominate the market, as well as the regions that are expected to grow the most rapidly throughout the projected period.
  • It identifies latest advancements, Cybersecurity market shares, and important market participants’ tactics.
  • It examines the competitive landscape, including significant firms’ Cybersecurity market share and accepted growth strategies over the last five years.
  • The research includes complete company profiles for the leading Cybersecurity market players, including product offers, important financial information, current developments, SWOT analysis, and strategies.

Click here to download the full index of the Cybersecurity market research report 2022

Contact Us:
Amit Jain
Sales Co-Ordinator
International: +1 518 300 3575
Email: [email protected]

Thu, 14 Jul 2022 00:25:00 -0500 Newsmantraa en-US text/html
Killexams : computerworld
tt22 029 iphone 14 thumb pod

Today in Tech

iPhone 14: What's the buzz?

Join Macworld executive editor Michael Simon and Computerworld executive editor Ken Mingis as they talk about the latest iPhone 14 rumors – everything from anticipated release date to price to design changes. Plus, they'll talk about...

Wed, 27 Jul 2022 04:41:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Putting Smart Tech on Old Machines

Most manufacturing equipment is designed and deployed to last at least a couple decades. In that timeframe, tons of important new technology is introduced. Many manufacturers seek ways to derive the benefits of advanced-manufacturing technology without having to replace existing equipment that remains in fine working order. Yet many of the existing machines were simply not designed to support new technology.

One current example is connectivity. The Internet of Things (IoT) offers a wide range of benefits, but tying it to older machines is not easy.

“It is difficult to deploy IoT solutions alongside legacy equipment. The reason is that legacy systems were designed with particular requirements in mind, such as minimal data transferred at relatively long update rates,” Steve Mustard, cybersecurity chair at the Automation Federation, told Design News. “As a result, the infrastructure is not suited to the modern IoT and big data approach of large volumes of data transmitted in near-real-time.”

Shiny Buttons on Old Machines

Sticking new technology on legacy equipment can lead to problems when the older equipment isn’t structured to support data-driven tools. “Often, end-users try to bolt on these new solutions and they create a complex problem from a maintenance point of view,” said Mustard. “If the organization becomes dependent on the new IoT and big data solution – if they run their business based on the output of this equipment – they can find themselves unable to function if the complicated and unreliable infrastructure does not deliver.”

Mustard, who will address this syllabu in detail at the Atlantic Design and Manufacturing show in New York on June 13 in the session, Teaching Old Equipment New Tricks: Tips to Overcome Retrofitting Challenges, suggests a detailed consideration of all options, from investing in new equipment to reconsidering the need for new solutions. “The best approach is to identify the business need and design an end-to-end architecture that works, rather than trying to bolt-on IoT to a legacy environment,” said Mustard.

Cyber Security and Legacy Equipment

Cybersecurity is another critical consideration when connecting older equipment to the outside world. Much of this equipment was conceived to live in an air-gapped world. “Legacy equipment was not designed with security in mind. It was designed to be used in relatively secure facilities with everything self-contained,” said Mustard. “IoT solutions are all about enabling businesses to get real-time data from manufacturing systems in order to manage the business, communicate with suppliers and customers, and with machinery manufactures who are maintaining the production line.”

Mustard also noted that the IoT equipment itself may not be entirely secure. Manufacturers need to take a ground-up approach to cybersecurity. They need to assume none of the equipment comes with bullet-proof security. “IoT is not designed with security in mind – it is first and foremost about delivering the technical requirements as quickly as possible and making the solution easy to use,” said Mustard.

Cybersecurity functions must be considered independent of manufacturing needs and ease-of-use. “Security makes things more difficult and takes more time, so is a counter to manufacturing objectives,” said Mustard. “Coupling together legacy systems with new IoT solutions exposes many vulnerabilities that can lead to cyber incidents.”

Moving to New Equipment May Be Cheaper

Adding new tech to existing equipment successfully required a full reconsideration of what needs to be accomplished and what’s the best strategy for doing it. ““The temptation is to go straight to the latest technical solution and work out how it can meet a requirement,” said Mustard. “In many cases, if the requirement is properly understood it may be possible to achieve it with fewer, less disruptive changes, to the existing environment.”


One of the advantages of IoT is that it’s relatively inexpensive compared with most machines and automation systems. Yet that low cost may be a siren song. “It’s easy to conclude that the latest IoT device is cheaper than upgrading legacy hardware if one looks only at unit costs. However, if one considers the changes required to the infrastructure, the additional training required for maintenance, and so on, then it may not be cheaper long-term,” said Mustard. “The best approach is to correctly define the business requirement, produce alternative solutions and properly cost the entire implementation and ongoing maintenance, then compare the two.”

Rob Spiegel has covered automation and control for 17 years, 15 of them for Design News. Other subjects he has covered include supply chain technology, alternative energy, and cyber security. For 10 years, he was owner and publisher of the food magazine Chile Pepper.

Image courtesy of the Association Advancing Automation.

Thu, 07 Jul 2022 12:00:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Pivotree Announces the Launch of Pivotree™ WMS Improving Operational Efficiency by over 20%

The proprietary MACH certified Warehouse Management System (WMS) reduces costs and improves order fulfillments through advanced inventory accuracy

TORONTO, July 19, 2022 /PRNewswire/ - Pivotree Inc. (TSXV:PVT) ("Pivotree'' or the "Company"), a leading provider of frictionless commerce solutions, announced the launch of its latest Pivotree™ Warehouse Management System (WMS). Pivotree™ WMS eliminates friction in warehouse operations by reducing costs and improving order fulfillments through inventory accuracy and increased operations performance visibility.

PIvotree Inc. (CNW Group/Pivotree Inc.)

Pivotree™ WMS is a feature rich WMS platform with robust technical architecture. The platform supports multiple brands, and warehouses with complex and varied business processes on a single, shared SaaS infrastructure. WMS delivers employees and customers a truly frictionless experience. The WMS complements and integrates into Pivotree's supply chain and overall commerce portfolio, including IBM Sterling OMS and Fluent Commerce OMS platforms and services.

With this most latest expansion of services and reinvestment in WMS to complement OMS (Order Management System) implementation solutions, Pivotree continues its leading role in supporting customers across the entirety of their frictionless commerce and supply chain digital transformation journey. The improved system increases warehouse operations efficiency through a flexible, headless technical stack and compostable architecture.

"Our Supply Chain WMS customers spoke, and we listened. With the launch of our own SaaS-based WMS platform, we will be able to simplify integrations while we seamlessly deliver a functionally rich, scalable, WMS solution," said Jim Brochu, General Manager, Supply Chain, Pivotree. "By leveraging modern analytics and user experience, our customers achieve over  a 20% reduction in labor costs and technology spend over legacy platforms.  We're also partnering with leading AMR (Autonomous Mobile Robot) and IoT companies to create an open ecosystem of fulfillment innovators."

As a global leader in frictionless commerce, Pivotree has the tools and expertise to deliver exceptional warehouse solutions. "Our goal is to help drive the next generation supply chain. We are dedicated to eliminating redundancies, inaccuracies, inefficiencies and latencies to ensure we are optimizing warehouse operations, especially as the world continues to deal with supply chain issues" said Abhishek Mishra, Product Manager, Pivotree. "By integrating seamlessly with other platforms and services, Pivotree's WMS is able to draw benefits from commerce ready e2e supply chain fulfillment solutions without loss of functionality, disruption to operations or requiring an expensive implementation."

Pivotree's portfolio of digital products, as well as our managed and professional services help provide B2B2C digital businesses with true end-to-end service to manage complex digital commerce platforms, along with ongoing support from strategic planning through product selection, deployment, and hosting, to data and supply chain management.

For more information on Pivotree's latest WMS, click here.

Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

About Pivotree
Pivotree, a leader in frictionless commerce, designs, builds and manages digital platforms in Commerce, Data Management, and Supply Chain for over 250 major retail and branded manufacturers globally. Pivotree's portfolio of digital solutions, managed and professional services help provide retailers with true end-to-end solutions to manage complex digital commerce platforms, along with ongoing support from strategic planning through platform selection, deployment, and hosting, to data and supply chain management. Headquartered in Toronto, Canada with offices and customers in the Americas, EMEA, and APAC, Pivotree is widely recognized as a high-growth company and industry leader. For more information, visit


View original content to download multimedia:

SOURCE Pivotree Inc.

Mon, 18 Jul 2022 23:03:00 -0500 en-US text/html
000-198 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List