Unless you build your own flavor of brand x (linux, etc) to your own needs... then no not really. That's the problem, an OS (in my mind) should simply function enough to run my applications as quickly as possible.
But I think ya missed the humor attempt...which pretty much means I failed miserably at the post.
An OS should be first and foremost both secure and fast. It should have a very small footprint and...
You are attempting to bash Vista. Cancel or Allow.
DAMNIT!
In this current age of everyone being connected at their homes/cars/offices, security will be an increasingly uphill battle. The biggest threat to security is always the loose nut behind the keyboard;)
However, it does bring up some interesting points. For years now, the trend has been toward increasing powerful desktops that run stand-alone, but communicate as a collective. The problem now is that since more and more folks are familiar/comfortable with machines, they tend to get more "creative" and daring on what they attempt to do at work. As IT costs continue to rise on a per-seat basis for the hardware and support, and the constant cost of revamping security measures - it's a wonder why we haven't gone 'back to the primitive". We started with the dumb terminal and mainframe... why not revisit the old friend?
Thin nets are, in my opinion, a very viable solution to these beasts of machines we have to keep running. With the wealth of available switches and communications technology (which has become rather inexpensive for their capabilities, as compared with a few years ago), there is no real reason a company couldn't introduce terminal environments. Now, that's not to say there wouldn't be design challenges and needs for some high-powered stations to exist for specific business needs - but 90% of a persons work day consists of checking email, checking/writing documents, reading websites and running proprietary applications. Most of the big apps, like Oracle, are accessible via web interfaces - all the work load is being done outside of the users desktop anyway. Why not take it one step further and move the bulk of all processing power to the server side. Cheap to maintain, MUCH easier to secure... and a few high end servers in a grid layout would be very resilient to failure.
Now, cutting down the need for hands and feet would of course lead to some unemployed folks...so the ideas are not without impact But, overall...there are more pro's than con's to using a centralized computing model for many reasons vs. our current standard of wide distribution./discuss
The real meat n' potatoes of VMWare is it's ESX class (IMHO). It doesn't run on linux, rather a specifically built core w/ lots of little applets and such (which are based om linux).
The problem with Virtual PC (and even VMWare Server) is that they run on top of an existing OS, rather than being installed bare metal. You have unneeded overhead and another point of failure vs. the bare metal custom install.
In all actuallity, MS has been heading towards virtulization ever since it bought the Virtual PC product (thus leading to Virtual server) --> but they realize that the game will not be won at that level (which is why they are now free) but rather featured combined in a specific OS build designed around them.
Even within the company, Dev's in generals have no "real world" clue (no offense of course) to how things are. Guys like us have to take the brunt of the bashing, as we support the products you guys make;) No one will scream about India in your ear, but they sure as hell would tell us what they think of the situation as a whole (usually intertwined with some of the most impressive expletives I've ever run across). Also, having several dev friends out in WA still (and a dabbler of sorts myself), being a developer is a complete 180deg turn from being a support person. You have a task, a project, a goal. You are comfortable within your little confines, all the pieces you make have to fit in the puzzle. Support guys have to understand the entire spectrum -- everything that happens from when power energizes the pathways to the proc to why Symantec's shitty drivers bugcheck the box every 30 minutes (a rant for another day perhaps). It's a whole other subculture, filled with its own rules and regrets.
As far as each site being its own entity -- yes this is true to an extent. I know that the boys in TX have a quite different outlook than the boys in WA or NC. Even at the management level, there always seemed to be a power play going on over all these new strategies on how to deal with (the lack of) product support. Each location seemed to govern themselves as if they were the only site in existence. While this strategy works for some types of business, in our collaboration-heavy world, all it does it throw up barriers.
I really hope guys still listen. To us, the customers were speaking louder and louder every day...but it seemed that no one really cared to listen. You can't fix a broken infrastructure by piling on more "future changes" and "new initiatives". You strip it down, tune it up and put it back out in the world with a vengeance.
It's good to know there are people on the inside that haven't committed themselves to drinking the kool-aid 100% yet;) I think Microsoft is one hellova company -- but from my perspective, is slipping further and further into IBMism every day.
"To the optimist, the glass is half full. To the pessimist, half empty. To the engineer, it's twice as big as it needs to be."
Having worked for Microsoft's PSS team on-and-off several times, Microsoft truly has no idea where it's going. Even within its own ranks, guys who had been there for 15+ years could barely recognize the company as it is today. Internal wars, endless meetings/bureaucracy and loss of focus are the biggest hindrances. India, of course, is a 4-letter word as far as many are concerned ("It's not about the money...." - Yeah right). People who are truly gifted and could benefit the company are turned away, while politics and buddy-buddy rules bring people in who, honestly, have no clue. It's a downward spiral. I do hope that someday they will regain control of this frenzied beast, and put power back in the hands of the engineers.
It's always been a truly education experience working for them, both on a technical and social level...something I wouldn't trade for the world.
If they used concrete, they wouldn't have needed all the slaves. The head guy would have given the contract to his brother-in-law, who then got 40 of his friends (who take turns taking breaks) to do all the concrete work. Budget for a "refresh" every 10 years or so due to cracks.
See...couldn't have happened.
So not only do I have to worry about some punk kids trying to hack my Gibson all the time, now I have to check the copy guy at the door.
What is the world coming to!?
Slashdot Mirror
We looked at porn on (gasp) PAPER! BAN THE HERETICAL PAPER DEMONS!!! Religious nut jobs should be exterminated for the good of the species.
Unless you build your own flavor of brand x (linux, etc) to your own needs... then no not really. That's the problem, an OS (in my mind) should simply function enough to run my applications as quickly as possible. But I think ya missed the humor attempt...which pretty much means I failed miserably at the post.
An OS should be first and foremost both secure and fast. It should have a very small footprint and... You are attempting to bash Vista. Cancel or Allow. DAMNIT!
If this keeps up, there will be no one to farm gold in WoW. The horror!!!!
Al Gore should sue, he invented everything!
In this current age of everyone being connected at their homes/cars/offices, security will be an increasingly uphill battle. The biggest threat to security is always the loose nut behind the keyboard ;)
However, it does bring up some interesting points. For years now, the trend has been toward increasing powerful desktops that run stand-alone, but communicate as a collective. The problem now is that since more and more folks are familiar/comfortable with machines, they tend to get more "creative" and daring on what they attempt to do at work. As IT costs continue to rise on a per-seat basis for the hardware and support, and the constant cost of revamping security measures - it's a wonder why we haven't gone 'back to the primitive". We started with the dumb terminal and mainframe... why not revisit the old friend?
Thin nets are, in my opinion, a very viable solution to these beasts of machines we have to keep running. With the wealth of available switches and communications technology (which has become rather inexpensive for their capabilities, as compared with a few years ago), there is no real reason a company couldn't introduce terminal environments. Now, that's not to say there wouldn't be design challenges and needs for some high-powered stations to exist for specific business needs - but 90% of a persons work day consists of checking email, checking/writing documents, reading websites and running proprietary applications. Most of the big apps, like Oracle, are accessible via web interfaces - all the work load is being done outside of the users desktop anyway. Why not take it one step further and move the bulk of all processing power to the server side. Cheap to maintain, MUCH easier to secure... and a few high end servers in a grid layout would be very resilient to failure.
Now, cutting down the need for hands and feet would of course lead to some unemployed folks...so the ideas are not without impact But, overall...there are more pro's than con's to using a centralized computing model for many reasons vs. our current standard of wide distribution. /discuss
The real meat n' potatoes of VMWare is it's ESX class (IMHO). It doesn't run on linux, rather a specifically built core w/ lots of little applets and such (which are based om linux).
The problem with Virtual PC (and even VMWare Server) is that they run on top of an existing OS, rather than being installed bare metal. You have unneeded overhead and another point of failure vs. the bare metal custom install.
In all actuallity, MS has been heading towards virtulization ever since it bought the Virtual PC product (thus leading to Virtual server) --> but they realize that the game will not be won at that level (which is why they are now free) but rather featured combined in a specific OS build designed around them.
Just don't say anything about Scientology... or they'll bankrupt you and have California hunt you down on hate-crime charges.
To quote the great Ron White: You can't fix stupid. /sigh
I'd call it FUMS.
I for one welcome our diabetes resistant mouse overlords...or whatever.
Robots will someday claim that parts of humans infringe on their IPs.
I LOL'd a bit when I read this. Must be from LC...
As far as each site being its own entity -- yes this is true to an extent. I know that the boys in TX have a quite different outlook than the boys in WA or NC. Even at the management level, there always seemed to be a power play going on over all these new strategies on how to deal with (the lack of) product support. Each location seemed to govern themselves as if they were the only site in existence. While this strategy works for some types of business, in our collaboration-heavy world, all it does it throw up barriers.
I really hope guys still listen. To us, the customers were speaking louder and louder every day...but it seemed that no one really cared to listen. You can't fix a broken infrastructure by piling on more "future changes" and "new initiatives". You strip it down, tune it up and put it back out in the world with a vengeance.
It's good to know there are people on the inside that haven't committed themselves to drinking the kool-aid 100% yet ;) I think Microsoft is one hellova company -- but from my perspective, is slipping further and further into IBMism every day.
"To the optimist, the glass is half full. To the pessimist, half empty. To the engineer, it's twice as big as it needs to be."
Having worked for Microsoft's PSS team on-and-off several times, Microsoft truly has no idea where it's going. Even within its own ranks, guys who had been there for 15+ years could barely recognize the company as it is today. Internal wars, endless meetings/bureaucracy and loss of focus are the biggest hindrances. India, of course, is a 4-letter word as far as many are concerned ("It's not about the money...." - Yeah right). People who are truly gifted and could benefit the company are turned away, while politics and buddy-buddy rules bring people in who, honestly, have no clue. It's a downward spiral. I do hope that someday they will regain control of this frenzied beast, and put power back in the hands of the engineers. It's always been a truly education experience working for them, both on a technical and social level...something I wouldn't trade for the world.
They should really think about a better firewall for their Gibson.
If they used concrete, they wouldn't have needed all the slaves. The head guy would have given the contract to his brother-in-law, who then got 40 of his friends (who take turns taking breaks) to do all the concrete work. Budget for a "refresh" every 10 years or so due to cracks. See...couldn't have happened.
If you order the fried chicken and watermellon, do you get beaten by cops before being sent to git-mo?
So not only do I have to worry about some punk kids trying to hack my Gibson all the time, now I have to check the copy guy at the door. What is the world coming to!?