Slashdot Mirror

IDC is as much beholden to MS as @Stake was & you saw what happened there when you embarass Microsoft
Play ball or lose money/job.

It can be understand internationaly and is not "indian centric" ;-)

k = kilo = 1 000 = 10e3
M = mega = 1 000 000 = 10e6 .....

See the list of all size expresion 10 power of ...

See the list of expresion 2 power of ...

For instance you can use k$ or M$ ;-)
OR better, k$/s which is a way michael dell is counting on his retail site :o)

It can be understand internationaly and is not "indian centric" ;-)

k = kilo = 1 000 = 10e3
M = mega = 1 000 000 = 10e6 .....

See the list of all size expresion 10 power of ...

See the list of expresion 2 power of ...

For instance you can use k$ or M$ ;-)
OR better, k$/s which is a way michael dell is counting on his retail site :o)

Anyway, if your data needs are past this level, you need to think about hiring an IS person, not buying a backup gadget.

What makes this gadget a poor value is the level of safety is provides. All you're doing is copying your data from one hard disk to another. Two disks are better than one, but not that much better, especially if they're in the same building.

Serious backup solutions use reliable offline media. Hard disks are pretty reliable these days, but still not as reliable as a tape or CD. Plus you can stick them in a fireproof box or store them offsite. Add some HSM software and you've got a storage system that's as big as you need it to be.

No self-respecting campus network lacks this technology, but the SOHO user has been seriously neglected. Somebody needs to scale the tech down, and design the usual hand-holding front end so that you don't need a lot of training to manage the media. This has been an issue for years, even when SOHO computing consisted of one or two non-networked system. I guess catering to the low-end user is just not profitable enough.

Here are some links. See esp. the REST Wiki:
Adam Bosworth's Weblog: Learning to REST
Bitworking - The Well-Formed Web - REST
Debate foams over SOAP 1.2 - REST versus SOAP
How To Convert Rpc To Rest
http://www.xfront.com/ - REST Tutorial, XML et al - Roger Costello's site
ITworld.com - XML IN PRACTICE - XML, Web Services, and the REST Architecture
Mark Baker, Tech Curmudgeon - REST - Transport, transfer and coordination in HTTP
O'Reilly Network: REST vs. SOAP at Amazon [June 24, 2003]
Paul Prescod's REST Resources
Reliable delivery in HTTP - REST
REST A Web-Centric Approach to State Transition - Paul Prescod
REST could burst SOAP's bubble - Hoobler
REST Faq - Alternative to SOAP XML
REST SlideShow: Representational State Transfer: An Architectural Style for Distributed Hypermedia Interaction
REST wiki - Representational State Transfer - alternative to SOAP XML
rest-discuss Message 2330 - ROP vs RPC vs OOP pt 1
Roots of REST - SOAP Debate - Paul Prescod Yahoo! Groups : rest-discuss Messages :Message 1314 of 1646
Roy T. Fielding - REST Architect
Sean McGrath BLOG - REST proponent
W3C mailing-list search service on REST
Why you should not use RPC for GET
xml-dev - Re: [xml-dev] SOAP-RPC and REST and security
XML.com: In a Lather About Security - SOAP security vs REST security
Yahoo! Groups : rest-discuss Messages : 2371-2428 of 2428

The G5 spanks the Opteron in many of the non-gaming tests, except for the Photoshop tests.

Isn't photoshop the reason for buying a mac?

And what about all those announcements?

Microsoft asks Mac users, "How can we get your business?'

Merrill Lynch, whose technology group recently began coverage of Red Hat, noted in a research note last week that "open source and Mac adoption is still in infancy in the enterprise market." However, "we should see explosive growth in the years to come as corporations look to achieve cost savings within their IT departments."

Using IDC's own estimate for G5/OSX server shipments through 2007, as well as its internal data on OSX operating system attach rates and server pricing, Merrill reckons that the enterprise G5 market could be worth $529 million by 2007. "This represents a [compound annual growth rate] of 61 percent over the 5-year period from 2002-2007," the note said.

Japanese telco to aid Mac phone development

Mac, G5 systems move out enterprise's mainframe

New G5 chips, but no 64-bit OS X for at least two years (too late).

"We're saying that OSX/G5s will eat Unix," Gantz said.

Is Computer Associates contemplating dumping Windows?

If you have been following Microsoft attempts to hold onto counties, cities, states, governmental bodies, governments, corporations and people, you know the headlines have gone from talk to action.

The governments that are starting to move over tend to be mostly poorer countries, or ones with large, largely computer-free populaces. Brazil and China are good examples of this trend. In those places, OSX/G5 adoption has been picking up steam to the point that if a second world country told MS to take a hike, it would hardly rate a Slashdot story on a slow day. .

THE NATIONAL HEALTH Service is considering using the OSX operating system & G5s in a 2.3 billion deal that could affect as many as 800,000 PCs if a pilot is successful.

Nine German cities poised to adopt OSX/G5

Official: China to invest in OSX/G5-based software industry

The US Army has abandoned Windows and chosen OSX for a key component of its "Land Warrior" programme, according to a report in National Defense Magazine. The move, initially covering a personal computing and communications device termed the Commander's Digital Assistant (CDA), follows the failure of the previous attempt at such a device in trials in February of this year, and is part of a move to make the device simpler and less breakable.

According to program manager Lt Col Dave Gallop this is part of a broader move towards OSX/G5 by the US Army: "Evidence shows that OSX is more stable. We are moving in general to where the Army is going, to OSX/G5-based OS."

Sun Microsystems is the odd man out. It has an impressive array of powerful enemies: IBM, Microsoft, Intel, HP, Red Hat, Apple, Novell, and more. It has only a weakened Oracle as a friend, and Oracle too has made a "bet the company" move to OSX/G5. OSX/G5 threatens many of Sun's traditional products as sharply a

...Apple Mail has done this since Panther came out.

...and Outlook 2003 has done this since before Panther came out.

On October 21st 2003 to be precise, as opposed to Panther on October 24th 2003.

Incidentally has anyone noticed that Panther has Microsoft style crash error reporting back to Apple now?

Congratulations, you just invented EEPROMs.

Basically, the idea is that if both you and the authenticator know the secret password, but you don't want to transmit it, the authenticator sends you some random chunk of data, say message M. You encrypt it using some (presumably one-way) algorithm, using your password as the encryption key to create W. The authenticator also encrypts the same chunk, and, when you send back your W, compares it do his own known-good W. Assuming they match, it means you have the password. The password itself is never sent plaintext.

You seem to be assuming that there is one secret key for the whole system. This would be completely useless, and is obviously not the case. You would need one secret key per person, as I'm sure American Express knows.

Depends how metaphysically you mean that. I say not. There is one universe, but an effectivelty infinite number of ways to observe it. Are two different observations of the same universes tantamount to having different universes? I dunno. This ties in directly to the old Eastern proverb of "If a tree falls in a forest...".

What constitutes an "observer"?

I'll change the question somewhat. An observer is you. You (presumably) don't perturb the system. But any *observation* regarding the system that gives you information by definition must have interacted with the system, and vice versa. This gives the possibility that the system changed in significant ways during the time you made the measurements. Thus, it's observations, not observers, that matters. A subtle distinction.

Classic example is if I'm determining the position of an electron. How would I do that? Presumably with a series of photons, which I would aim at the general area where the electron might be. When one bounced back, I could calculate where the electron was. But there's a problem - depending on the wavelength of light I use, the measurement is imprecise, and there is a standard error of half a wavelength. So, with visible light, I can only get to within, say, a few hundred nanometers. Not good.

What do I do to fix the problem? Go with light of a shorter wavelength. Say x-rays. Now, we're down to the Angstrom level. Lots more accurate.

Now Heisenberg comes in to play. So let's say I've determined the position of the electron with near infinite accuracy using a short wavelength and thus extremely high energy photon. Since I determined the position of the electron by bouncing this electron off of it, what happened to the electron? Well, I sure blasted the hell out of it with those x-rays. So I effectively know nothing about its momentum.

So, to more accurately measure position, I have to do something to the system which ultimately makes measuring momentum impossible. There are a number of variable pairs like this - Energy and time, for instance. Basically, variable pairs like this have units that multiply into Energy*time. (momentum is distance, momentum is Energy*time/distance).

Going back to the cat, it's effectively a system that exists in one of two valid states, which can be easily perturbed. Doing anything to the system that tells you its state can also change its state. But Schrodinger wasn't talking about HUP, really, although the two concepts are inexorably linked. If he were, he would have said something like, if you determine 100% whether it's dead, you can no longer know whether it's a Tabby or a Persian any longer. What he was actually elucidating is the following: a state that is a superposition (ie, weighted average essentially) of all valid states is, in quantum, also a valid state, and is the only thing that can be assumed in an unperturbed system. Hence, "alive and dead" is a valid state, because "alive" and "dead" are. See more Here regarding superposition.

Actually, that last statement is a tad off but I'm not writing a textbook. If anyone wants to call me on it, please do so I can put more people with physics abilities on my friends list. ;)

And ye shall all bow at the Altar of Shiny Blinkiness

As Bruce Schneier says super-encryption technologies are like a single, indestructible fence post anchoring a much weaker defense curtain. The defense is indestructible only so long as the enemy runs directly into the fence post. However, it's much easier to circumvent the fence post and cut through the fence. Social engineering, poor policies, key theft and other routes make it much easier possible for hackers to get around conventional forms of strong encryption. And quantum computing is no different.

"Quantum cryptography has the potential for making the strongest link, in a series of very weak links, even stronger," Schneier says.

For those in the audience that dont get the 'I-lost-my-cat-dept' it's in reference to Schrodinger's cat, a quantum theory of superposition. You can find what it's about here.

Its referred to in the article

Joe Job [joa~juhb]
A Joe job is an e-mail spoofing exploit in which someone sends out huge volumes of spam that appear to be from someone other than the actual source. A Joe job is sometimes conducted as an act of revenge on someone who reports a spammer to their Internet service provider (ISP) or publicly advocates anti-spam legislation. The perpetrator is said to be Joeing the legitimate owner of the e-mail address they use. The Joe job is one of the oldest spamming operations in existence, and one of the simplest ones to carry out: the spammer may not have to do anything more than change the "Reply To" address in their e-mail program.

They might be doing Linux, but they are certainly not keen on the idea and are only doing so because their customers keep asking for it. Well, at least they are listening to their customers I suppose, so there is that, but it still feels to me like Sun has seriously lost its sense of direction recently. I suspect a lot of FUD filled editorial is going to be written under banners like "Has the SPARC gone out for Sun?" real soon now.

Still, at least Apple's star seems to be rising at the moment. ;)

/. seems to forget that *Slashdot is a blog.* Look for the definition of a blog, and you'll find /. fits. It's one of the most successful, is on steroids, and has gone commercial, but this is really Taco's blog and we are all just guests. /.ers not caring about blogs is kind of like a human that doesn't care about oxygen. It shows how pathetic many /.ers are, since they don't know the definition of what they're slamming (standard procedure around here).

I'm surprised the spammers don't hang out here...Oh wait, they just spam the articles instead of the comments.

A flowchart is an abstraction, and does not necessarily (in fact seldom does) describe software in its entirity.

A flowchart can cover the logical flow of a single function, a stateful class, an algorithm, a user interaction sequence, or any other level of granularity. The data required is global within that view of that part of the system -- that could translate in implementation to local, member, namespace or global variables.

Nothing in a flowchart requires the use of "goto" in implementation. The most common implementation of flowcharts (in my experience) uses a state engine, and can be developed in any language (including those without "goto").

The fact that a naive implemented in line-numbered BASIC may be easiest using "goto" and global variables doesn't detract from the fact that other language constructs like loops and subroutine calls, and various levels of scoping, can achieve the same result -- all described by the same abstract flowchart.

First, understand that "flowchart" is a concept, not a particular notation. It is, quite literally, a diagram that describes a logical flow that includes sequences and decision points. Here is a sample definition.

A flowchart is an abstraction, and does not necessarily (in fact seldom does) describe software in its entirity.

A flowchart can cover the logical flow of a single function, a stateful class, an algorithm, a user interaction sequence, or any other level of granularity. The data required is global within that view of that part of the system -- that could translate in implementation to local, member, namespace or global variables.

Nothing in a flowchart requires the use of "goto" in implementation. The most common implementation of flowcharts (in my experience) uses a state engine, and can be developed in any language (including those without "goto").

The fact that a naive implemented in line-numbered BASIC may be easiest using "goto" and global variables doesn't detract from the fact that other language constructs like loops and subroutine calls, and various levels of scoping, can achieve the same result -- all described by the same abstract flowchart.

First, understand that "flowchart" is a concept, not a particular notation. It is, quite literally, a diagram that describes a logical flow that includes sequences and decision points. Here is a sample definition.

Amazing how many people quote this crap without any understanding what they are saying.

First, understand that "flowchart" is a concept, not a particular notation. It is, quite literally, a diagram that describes a logical flow that includes sequences and decision points. Here is a sample definition. Search for "flowchart" and you will get hits on organisational structure, process management, Six Sigma, project management, and yes, software development. State and activity diagrams in UML are a particular notation for modern flowcharting.

Flowcharts remain a significantly powerful tool for various aspects of software design, especially user interaction sequences and state logic for UIs, as well as process modeling. They are essential in capturing conceptual business flows during analysis, as well as in describing algorithms in a visually obvious way (somewhere where pseudocode fails), even though they algorithm may not be implemented in that manner.

Flowcharts haven't been a particularly useful tool for program implementation for some time -- but they're still essential and actively used in design.

I sure wish we could get a lead on what they're smokin'. I still say it surpasses anything that's ever been discovered anywhere else on the planet.

You've said that the offending code cannot be 'cleaned' from Linux. Why not?
Sontag: I'm not sure that it can't be. The question becomes, will it? Beyond the 80 or so lines of code that we show under nondisclosure to interested parties, we have identified some examples of more than a million lines of code that have gone into Linux in the form of programs and files such as NUMA (non-uniform memory access), RCU (read, copy, update), and the JFS (the Journal File System from AIX).

So all they got is just 80 lines of code, don't they? That's the whole story ... after all, even in the unlikely event that the court decides adding RCU,NUMA etc. to linux is a breach of contract, they clearly don't have any IP claims over this code.

In other words: if you follow closely what SCO are saying, you realise that all the IP claims they may (and then again, may not) have is not more than 80 lines of code. Isn't it lovely?

nice try

kilo means 1000
period

only in the computer world does it mean anything else.

This site defines what computer folks should be using: the kibi

summary: kilo=1000=10^3
kibi=1024=2^10

I agree the user interface is a mess. Perhaps going what is called MDI (multiple document interface) in the Windows world would be a step in the direction.

1) SPAM would be identified by "them" and once "they" have flagged a financial account as collecting revenue from SPAM, it is frozen/etc. ("them"/"they" being one of the initial problems with this solution).

2) You are right, once this was in effect, a company could use it as a weapon against a competitor. This would have to be solved by:

a) Requiring that the ill-gotten gains from SPAM are refunded no matter what the circumstances (read: not all funds, per say just those generated from SPAM).

b) Even Joe Jobs are traceable, so any competitors that are proven to have caused the SPAM sales would be liable for damages of lost sales (read: the money they refunded because it was generated from SPAM) as well as any additional legal / technical / compensatory damages / etc on top of a fatty fine. Besides... I'm sure a law such as this would help "encourage" companies trading online to better watch their sales trends / figures / etc. So it's possible that some other fraudulent charges could be caught for fear of such a law
For example: When my credit card number was stolen a few years ago, my billing address was in California while the products were being overnighted to Eastern Europe... Gee, anyone think this should have raised a red flag? Especially since the overnighting cost more then the product? But the important thing is that I'm not bitter about it now... nope, not bitter one @#$%@#$ bit... Not a #%^^#$ bit... no... ;)

"I think this [website] comes from a few individuals in the open-source community, which tends to paint a bad picture of the community as a whole. I think most in the open-source community are good, hard-working developers that want to create some great things. It's unfortunate that a few bad apples spoil the image of the whole group." - Blake Stowell, September 25 2003

Thanks to SearchEnterpriseLinux for their coverage, but we must disagree with the statement that our site "excerpts several comments SCO officials have allegedly made about Linux during the past year or so." None of these comments are "allegedly" -- they're 100% verifiable fact, statements made in front of God and everyone...which is the point of providing links, so the reader can check the full original context. Of greater significance is the assumption that our creation must be motivated by anger; since we don't know Darl personally, our feelings could best be described as "affection". Like Saeed al-Sahaf, McBride proves that "truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense." With his rampant contradictions and defiance of all logic, he provides us with the finest gift of all -- the gift of laughter. Rather than provide needless attempts at witty commentary, we prefer to let his statements speak for themselves.

Agreed, that the general behavior of "Swen" is that of a virus.

However, I still stand by my statement that using a vulnerability in Outlook to auto-execute is like the behavior of a worm. So is running in the background and sending out e-mails of itself (as defined here).

The SirCam worm also behaved like Swen, in that it arrived as an attachment or was copied to a network share, played with the registry, etc.

And I didn't mean to say it required Outlook. I meant that "all it takes is for some guy to open Outlook," meaning that the minimum user interaction level would be if you open Outlook, and the worm is the topmost message, bam, it gets previewed and executed if you're not all patched up.

In addition, Symantec is classifying it as a worm. So you'd better go try to explain to them why they're wrong, too.

----
On a lighter note, WTFA (Wrote The FA) could be a humorous comeback to "RTFA".

Someone: /makes a comment
Slashdotter: RTFA!
Someone: WTFA! And I'm right!

• contractor punch lists
• P.E.R.T. charts
• A replacement for Microsoft Project
• Emergency notification call list trees
• Web site content change propagation update tool
• Human Resource function support (Did Bill, tell his department? How about Sue? ... )
• Legal case tracking
• And of course, nachos :-)

See http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gc i341011,00.html and http://www.co.fort-bend.tx.us/county_services/OEM/ citizens_band.htm

haha, so you want them it run a piece of copper from the aircraft to the earth?

I'm sure the other poster meant grounding referring to a connection to a common conductor representing base voltage, not to a metal spike in the soil.

I had the same thought. The technique is called rotoscoping, and if you look in the DVD Special Features you can see how it's done. All of Waking Life is done using this technique. I wasn't aware while I was watching, but I had a suspicion as certain things felt just too realistic to be normal animation.

MRAM @ whatis.techtarget.com
MRAM @ Webopedia
MRAM @ German Wikipedia

.. the Theroy of Schrodinger's cat...where by if you put a cat in a box, its not truely dead until you look at it again...

That has got to be the most brief, yet entirely confusing description of that theory I've ever heard! =)

Some more facts may help clear up some confusion.

Yes, and I realize that DSL modems aren't like classic modems in terms of modulating/demodulating digital signals into analog voice frequencies. However that DSL modem still requires modulation; it's just done over non-voice frequencies and with different techniques (such as carrierless amplitude/phase (CAP) modulation, discrete multitone (DMT) modulation and quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM)). Oh, and the term is easily understood by 80% of the slashdot readers and I'm a pragmatist at heart.

FYI, the "DSL modem" was powered by a running car, not by battery alone. Interesting to hear cable TV/Internet was up, thanks; my cell service "shouldn't" have been affected, but it was. It's not clear to me whether that was a "circuits busy" or a "cell-towers-weren't-powered" problem although I suspect the former; I did get 2 calls through out of about 20.

1. Get a brush.

2. Brush Schrodinger's cat.

3. Count the hairs in the brush.

4. Patent stupid idea.

5. Profit!

BTW, how do you make the square brackets "[site]" after a web link go away in your post?

ok, it might have some quantum computing ability,but that is far from accepted fact

Check out this page -- the math is way over my head, but it does clearly state that the human brain works on quantum principles.

It also has many, many links to supporting papers.

My mind was blown back in March of 2000, when I read an article that stated the brain worked on quantum principles, so if we wanted to create a computer as powerful as the human brain we needed to understand quantum physics.

3 weeks later, I read an article which said we had identified a quantum effect and could reproduce it in the lab: entanglement.

Basically, entanglement allows instantaneous communication at a distance; by changing the spin of one electron, the spin of its entangled pair is also changed. This article shows that (in 1997) they had tested it to a distance of 7 miles; they say there's no theoretical limit to the distance it could work at.

What blew my mind was that combining the two articles -- the human brain works on quantum principles, and one of those principles is communication at a distance -- I now believe that telepathy is possible.

Then I thought of the (admittedly anecdotal) evidence: we've all heard about a mother knowing when a child is in danger. But how many times have you heard of a father knowing? Me either. It must be that, during the 9 months the child is inside the mother's womb, exchanging fluids, that they are performing entanglement with each other.

Thinking further, we hear about twins being much more closely linked than any mother and child. This also makes sense, since they are right next to each other and have more opportunity to entangle than mother and child, whose brains are about 2 feet apart.

I'd imagine we're in the first 10% or so of our "evolution" of telepathy, since we communicate with words and rarely use entanglement to communicate. That's really neat, because most people think "we're top of the food chain, we're perfect" but we are still evolving capabilities.

The article also mentions that SETI may be doomed to failure since it's looking for radio signals, and any sufficiently advanced species would use entanglement for their communications since it's much faster and more efficient.

I agree. What is it about XML that brings out the anti-KISS in people? There won't be any web if HTML was so complicated!

1 googol is 1E100, while 128 bits is 2^128=3.4E38?

Seems there is a common misconception that was debunked as early as 1997 .

HDCP-encrypted DVI is called HDMI (High Definition Multimedia Interface).

I'm definitely not a techie, and even I understand (most) of the definitions given at whatis.com. More helpful may be the "advanced" search, where you can turn off the hits for webpages and news articles (so you only get the encyclopedia-ish hits).

I'm definitely not a techie, and even I understand (most) of the definitions given at whatis.com. More helpful may be the "advanced" search, where you can turn off the hits for webpages and news articles (so you only get the encyclopedia-ish hits).

You may be overestimating the way extra users impact an ISP. Speakeasy itself charges $20 for dialup access. Some no-frills ISPs charge half that. Now, the cheapest possible NetShare account costs $20, of which Speakeasy keeps $10. For this, they're actually doing a lot less than they have to do for a dialup customer. In particular they don't have to provide a local Point of Presence. I don't know much this costs, but it must be a pretty big fraction of an ISP's budget.

Another economic consideration. When somebody decides to become a SpeakEasy admin, they're extending SpeakEasy's customer base and taking all the economic risk of said extension. If it turns out that you can't sell enough NetShare accounts to cover the cost of your T1 connection, you're the only one that's out of pocket. SpeakEasy isn't out a penny -- in fact, they've made a few bucks on that T1.

That's something to think about before you drop $700 on a T1 router. And you should also consider the customer support that your "customers" should expect you to provide.

without much imagination....
Spain has put 80,000 Linux computers in schools

The Wrong Choice: After picking NT, Trampoline firm leaps to Linux

You're obviously an idiot so sit back and learn. It's not a CD-R or DVD-R, it's a magneto optical drive, they were hot shit in the early 90's but cost a bundle. The difference is that WORM drives are single session and use a magneto-optical process. Click the links and learn:

Click here to get a clue ...
Click here to buy one ...

I'm looking forward to this! I personally am sick and tired of filesystems as we know them today. Today's filesystems are a strict hierarchy, the existence of which is only necessary in the systems of yester-year.

A filesystem based on a relational database will have some characteristics to which today's filesystems can only aspire:

1. ACID - In every way that the underlying database supports Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, and Durability, so now will the filesystem. In so far as the database is robust, the filesystem will be robust. Please spare me the comments about the supposed unreliability of SQL Server. Itâ(TM)s certainly more reliable than NTFS; which is itself very good.

2. As an offshoot of the above - Imagine multiple file updates to a filesystem which is transactional! Imagine that transaction failing and being able to just rollback the changes without touching every file in your program! Imagine being able to make file changes programmatically without having to worry about locking because the engine will do it for you (just handle any exceptions)! Yeah, you could do all that today if you like. But it takes extensive to make it happen.

3. Operational characteristics - We can run queries against databases. We can index them. We can cluster them. We can replicate them. We can access them easily from any development platform you can imagine. Now your filesystem is a database. The possibilities make me shiver! :+) Maybe the initial implementation wonâ(TM)t get all this right. But at least it stands a chance.

4. Another offshoot from #3 - Security. Databases are inherently better than filesystems (IMNSHO) at enforcing security and enabling administration of security.

I only have reservations about one issue with the database as filesystem area: recovery. Currently, all good and low-tech filesystem recovery tools really are based on the filesystem allocation table sort of scheme. Obviously, databases usurp this category of tried and true tools. However, good tools already do exist that allow recovery of relational databases. Itâ(TM)s just a matter of getting easily accessible tools of this sort into the hands of professionals that need them. It's more of a training issue I guess, but it will still need addressing.

I know many people will have a knee jerk reaction to this idea, and I understand why. But I would encourage people to keep an open mind to this. While there will probably be some issues with the idea, there's so much more that could easily be done with a filesystem on top of a database than could be done easily (or well) with a traditional filesystem.

And for you hard-core naysayers out there, you have to ask yourself this: If this is such a bad idea, then why did Oracle provide this as a feature too?

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gc i212506,00.html

- Adam

No, it can't.

For a given signal-to-noise ratio, double the bitrate still requires double the bandwidth. Improvement in modulation techniques can only serve to more closely approximate the theoretical.

But it's hard to take VB seriously as a "production" language, no matter how widely abused for real-world purposes, or how cute its IDE is, or how sentimental M$ is about the product that launched their global crime spree.

Perhaps just a coincidence, but VB is a godawful beer, too.

Lifted from here -

Find out what 'Volume Licensing Options for 2003' really mean for your enterprise from industry expert, Laura DiDio. Laura's expertise in the industry has taken her from being a reporter in the high-tech trade press to covering the networking industry's top analyst firms. She is currently an analyst at Yankee Group where she covers Microsoft's initiatives.

Look's like she's still covering Microsoft's Initiatives. Anyone want to see a pic of this hottie? ;)

She looks like she could have some credibility having as much press experience as she has, but I'm still concerned that she's just looking at the comments versus code. -B

Did you boot the client workstations over the network (Using PXE or something similar?) or did you boot both the clients and the server from CD? (The story mentioned the LTSP

I'm curious about how difficult it is to boot clients over the network.

Actually, 1024 is a kibi.