Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: HETE, HP, Regression

Slashback with more on cheap satellites, the relative speeds of threads under Linux and two strains of Windows, a skeptical response to the idea that crowds of people are retreating to dial-up access, and some tantalizing hints at products killed along with the HP calculator division. Lies, Damn Lies, Statistics, Benchmarks, Etc. Writing with a followup to the Slashdot post titled, "Who Has Faster Pipes? Linux, Win2000, WinXP Compared" Splinton had this to say: "In this article, Ed Bradford compares semaphores, mutexes and window's critical sections. Pthreads look good, but Win2Ks critical sections are twice as fast again!"

The computing equivalent of Area 51? A short while back HP closed its calculator division. Many have thought HP's calculator department was unprofitable. This was not the case. Many have thought they had no innovation. This was not the case. Turns out that management had 4% workforce to kill and they were part of the cut.

This article explains more. It turns out they had designed several Linux based PDA's ready to produce that were killed by management. Sounds interesting? Go check it out.

The biggest expense was the 12 gross of Estes D engines ... Satellite Designer writes: "The topic of low cost satellites having been mooted here recently, I though I'd alert readers to another such project. The HETE-2 satellite recently located a cosmic gamma-ray burst precisely enough that (with a lot of help from friends) an afterglow was detected, identifying its source. HETE-2 cost $26 million, only 1/3 of what a 'small' scientific satellite normally costs.

A lot of commercial 'off the shelf' technology went into HETE. Nothing from Radio Shack, but there are quite a few parts from Digi-Key onboard. You can't save money by using cheap parts (but you *can* save money by using easily obtainable parts), and you can't achieve reliability by using expensive parts (but you *can* help reliability by using the parts best suited for your application). The radical thing about HETE's parts selection was that it considered parts in the application context (as one would do in a normal engineering process), rather than restricting selection to a QPL assembled to meet irrelevant requirements.

The real trick to keeping costs down is to do the job with as small a team as possible in the minimum time possible. Rather than employing a large team of specialists, HETE's scientific investigators did much of the engineering and technical work. A small, carefully selected engineering team filled in the knowledge gaps."

Quitting isn't easy, and why bother? dmarsh writes: "This new article from C|Net seems to be a total contradiction to last week's "Dump Broadband, Dig Out Your Modem!" thread's article. I guess the important difference being that this one is backed up by an actual survey by the National Cable and Telecommunications Association."

Goes to show, in a large group of people you can probably find at least some who fit nearly any premise. As always, question the source ;)

15 of 233 comments (clear)

  1. I'm retreating to ISDN by ColdBoot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    but only because I'm moving and the &^%$# phone company isn't offering DSL there yet.

    But if people don't need DSL, then dropping back makes sense. After all, it IS money!

  2. I wonder about the statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The 825,000 new subscribers brings the total number of U.S. cable modem customers to 6.4 million, about 9.1 percent of the 70 million homes able to receive the service, the National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA) said...

    I wonder whether (1) this many people signed up for the service during the period, or (2) this many people finally received their hardware/installation. Everybody knows that the pool of broadband installers is vastly outnumbered by the pool of broadband salespeople. No flamebait here, just wondering if the mass sign-up occurred in 2Q or 3Q...

    Also, consider the source of the statistics ("Our research shows that our product is 100% safe...")

    My broadband provider starting sticking extra fees into my bill earlier this year. It's only $6/month, but it's still lame as hell. I'm revolting by dusting off my ol' 56K USR at home & taking advantage of that T-1 at work. BellSouth can rip off someone else.

  3. PR hogwash by Exmet+Paff+Daxx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    this [survey] is backed up by an actual survey by the National Cable and Telecommunications Association.

    -Slashback

    Goes to show, in a large group of people you can probably find at least some who fit nearly any premise. As always, question the source ;)

    -Timothy

    Well, OK, let's question the source. the National Cable & Telecommmunications Assosciation is "is the principal trade association of the cable television industry in the United States". So basically, they're the RIAA of the cable industry. And they just published a survey that says that consumers are subscribing to broadband in mass quantitites.

    Ok, I question the source. This is like Shell Oil publishing a study that concludes that burning gasoline provides valuable fertilizer for wetlands. Why give PR machines free press?

    --
    If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
  4. HP calcs unprofitable?? by Virtex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Many have thought HP's calculator department was unprofitable. This was not the case.

    If their calculator division was making money, then why on earth was it chosen to be closed down? They should have chosen something that was loosing them money. If there were no departments loosing money, then they shouldn't have had to cut *any* departments.

    --
    For every post, there is an equal and opposite re-post.
    1. Re:HP calcs unprofitable?? by M-G · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ahh, but you have to remember that being profitable isn't good enough. You have to have double-digit growth in order to keep your stock price going up.

      HP has a giant cash cow in the printer business. But printers aren't very buzzword compliant, and don't give analysts anything interesting to talk about. So the money coming in from printers is used to finance whatever projects Carly thinks will give the stock price a boost.

    2. Re:HP calcs unprofitable?? by dprice · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the last couple years, HP's philosophy has been to concentrate on a few areas. It was the reason that they spun off their test and measurement division as Agilent Technologies. HP currently wants to concentrate on computers and the internet. I guess the calculators did not fit into their vision of a computer and internet world.

      Personally, I think they should have given the calculator division to Agilent when it was spun off. It seems to line up with Agilent's mission of making specialized electronic devices.

  5. Re:Two strains of Windows, eh? by czardonic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I heard that people aren't flocking like sheep to buy Windows XP, which is good news if it is true.

    It might be good news, but not for alternative OSs. It simply means that M$ has saturated the market with their previous versions of Windows, and there aren't any compelling reasons to change. Anybody who was going switch from Win98, just switched to Win2K or ME, and isn't about to run out and buy XP. That said, they ain't buying Linux either.

    --
    Takahashi Rumiko made beats! DON, taku, DON, taku. . .
  6. Seeing is not using by Wonko42 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I saw XP at a Fry's and was not impressed. It contains more graphics and junk, which means that it needs yet more powerful computers than before to accomplish the same tasks.

    You saw Windows XP at Fry's? I'm assuming you mean you saw a demo computer running XP, and not that you merely saw the box sitting on a shelf. By your logic, I could say "I saw Linux at my friend's house and was not impressed. It was nothing but text and stuff."

    I shouldn't have to tell you that the interface isn't the OS. If everyone judged Linux by its interface and nothing else (which, unfortunately, is often the case), people would have an absurdly skewed view of Linux. Think about how many different window managers and themes there are for Linux. Just because one of them looks like shit doesn't mean the underlying OS kernel sucks.

    The same holds true for Windows. Sure, the interface may be full of goofy alpha blending and unnecessary menu fade-ins and mouse pointer shadows and other things, but when you replace explorer.exe with a third-party shell (or merely disable the extra eye candy via the Control Panel), all that stuff goes away and you're left with what is without a doubt the most stable version of Windows I've ever seen.

    1. Re:Seeing is not using by jspaleta · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The same holds true for Windows. Sure, the interface may be full of goofy alpha blending and unnecessary menu fade-ins and mouse pointer shadows and other things, but when you replace explorer.exe with a third-party shell (or merely disable the extra eye candy via the Control Panel), all that stuff goes away and you're left with what is without a doubt the most stable version of Windows I've ever seen.


      stablest windows version isn't saying a whole heck of a lot. An analogous quote would something like "the new twinkie xp is the healthiest twinkie hostess has ever made"


      So after paying for 3.1, 3.11, win95, win98, win2k, winme, (forget winNT for the moment becuase it was never marketed for home consumer use), we finally have a windows product that might actually be stable enough to be worth its cost...now if I could only trade in all those old MS licenses for all the MS Oses that I have kicking around for a stable windows product. MS calls it a new Os, I call it a sorely needed basic upgrade...too bad I have to pay through the nose once again for basic functionality I should have had a decade ago.


      As far as interface!=windows xp. Show me a major windows application that can fully function from the commandline. Show me a useful scriptable terminal shell environment that comes with windows xp. The interface IS MS windows. You might be able to graft on a less functional 3rd party wm/file manager other than explorer, but what you are paying for when you buy xp is the interface and all the time and effort spent getting the bells and whistles (and MSN ads...dont forget those) in place. If you were paying for the effort MS put into stability from Os release to release, each version of windows would have a fair price of about $2...and the upgrade to xp would be free patch, like the virus patches are. I've never really understood that, poor stability leads to data loss just like virus do...but MS doesn't hand out free stability upgrades, they sell them as new Os releases. I shouldn't have to keep paying for promised stability. Paying for new features is one thing...pay for basic features I should have had when I bought the Os is extortion...but that's okay pretty soon we will all be paying a monthly fee to get access to or windows system thanks to .net....so we will never have to "buy" a MS Os again, ever.

      rant off
      -jef

    2. Re:Seeing is not using by jspaleta · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Windows is generally used as a GUI environment


      True enough...and this is the point. Windows IS generally used as a GUI environment in a home consumer market, the orignal post in this thread was talking about the GUI interface being shotty, the reply I flamebaited was trying to make the point that the interface XP has isn't all that important...the underlying OS kernel is much much better and that is the important thing to MS....and I disagree. Let me also say that I didn't think clearly though the last post...I was trying to avoid the server agruments hence why I said ignore NT...though my comments about a useful shell environment was totally wrong headed...because commandline tools really are server argument and that just garbled my main thrust...which is XP for the consumer desktop solution is all about the interface....and that's what MS has put the time and effort into developing in XP...the things geared toward the consumer desktop market (including the product activation) my point about the commandline and shell interfaces was that in the consumer desktop market these are not important factors...


      MS is putting the big dollar developing into the spit and polish of XP...you as a home desktop PC owner are not paying for the promise of stability...you are paying for the features...and MS knows this. The people who paid for the stability were the companies that shelled out big bucks for NT support in the good old days and MS is finally giving the home consumer a taste of a stable system in w2k and now xp.


      You've obviously never looked at Windows Update [microsoft.com]. Microsoft does a pretty good job of offering critical updates


      Are you honestly telling me that I can get enough windows updates for my win98 systems to bring the stability up to the point to match xp? I'm not talking about new feature rich explorer updates or messenger updates...I'm talking about basic stability issues, which I think are as critically important to keeping data intact as updates to prevent viri and internet exploits. I don't expect any release of any software to be perfect...but I don't think it unreasonable to expect the purchase of a product gives me access to continued updates that help prevent system crashes or system lockups. MS wants to release XP chock full of new kernel and new extra features and abilities, fine that's great...but to drop support for the older Oses which still have glaring stability problems and force people to buy into a new Os yet again...with new hardware yet again...seems a tad disrespectful.
      Good think the EULA washes MS clean of any responsbility to make a best effort to ensure the product actually works as claimed before you even open the software box. I'm not asking for a path from 95 to XP...I dont want XP's features I want a computer i bought 4 years ago that met the specs of win98 to be reach a decent level of stability...I don't think I should have to buy a whole new Os with a whole new hardware spec to finally get to the point where the Os can claim to be stable and can last a week without rebooting...hence why I run BSD and linux on the older boxes now...I can be confident that updates affecting stability will be made available for the older architecture. I have no problem paying for productivity updates, (new features, new tools) but I have a big problem being told I have to buy a stability update, when the product I bought should have been stable to begin with.

      -jef

  7. Re:Two strains of Windows, eh? by SuzanneA · · Score: 4, Insightful
    OTOH, it also means that any new 'anti-open source' technologies that they introduce in XP or future OS releases are less likely to become the de facto standard.

    I'm not saying any of those technologies are in XP, I don't know, I have it (via MSDN) but have no intention of installing it on any machines, as you say, there simply isn't any real incentive.

  8. Re:Two strains of Windows, eh? by czardonic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, BUYING. BUYING RedHat. BUYING Mandrake, etc. I would imagine that people switching from Windows are more likely to buy a boxed, supported distro.

    --
    Takahashi Rumiko made beats! DON, taku, DON, taku. . .
  9. Re:Broadband defections. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Maybe instead of paying a high-price monthly cable fee, you should instead spend it on buying movies rather than stealing them.

  10. Re:HP was the greatest by evocate · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unfortunately, the key word in your subject is "was". The HP company that whose products we loved is no longer around. It's been homogenized, downsized and chipped away by "management teams" like the current one. They have lived up to their titles:they've "managed". The company isn't closed; it has "managed" to survive.
    HP was founded by engineers. Engineering is what they knew, and that's how they competed. Today, HP is run by b-schoolers; engineering really isn't their forte. But they know advertising and finance and marketing. So that's what they rely on; that's how they compete. They leave the real innovation to their "partners" (guess who I'm talking about) who promise them success in terms they can understand: market share and intrinsic stock option value. Meanwhile, the company dissolves from the inside into yet another sales staff and yet another brand for the same old Same Old.
    The Hewletts and the Packards might stop the Compaq deal, but all the rats together still can't stop their sinking ship from taking them under. It will take great innovation, not great speeches about "innovation". Good luck HP, you're gonna need it.

  11. usenet service by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 3, Insightful


    By capping off uploads and killing off the divx groups @home completely negated the purpose of broadband


    Subscribe to external news sources - probably put you down $10/mo. Sure, that's ANOTHER $10 a month out of your pocket. But if you're feeling squirley, consider what that costs the provider.


    The traffic used to have a set cost as defined by upkeep of the internal network - call it "internal cost". Now the same traffic has that internal cost as well as the cost associated with increased traffic from the upstream provider. Its possible that the cost of this external traffic is less than the cost of providing better usenet service. Its also very possible this same traffic now has considerably higher cost.


    In any case - you get better usenet service.