As others (may)have mentioned already, personalization is a tricky business. You may get more false positives ( results that are not quite what you were looking for ), which can be okay but you may even get the kind of false negatives that could lead to perfectly suited to your query pages falling way down in the results set. You may even have to worry about what you are looking for, worrying whether it may confuse the system (e.g searching for a given subject may affect future results based on the fact that you searched for that said subject, even if you may no longer care for it, once you are done researching ). I am sure those and other effects can and will be minimized but it seems unlikely this could become a 'solved problem' anytime soon.
Our systems ( application servers, frameworks, data serialization and unserialization facilities etc ) understand/support XML-RPC, binary XML-RPC, JSON and PHP object notation (ref: PHP serialize() / unserialize() functions).
There is a set of primitives ( string, integers, floats, arrays, structures, timestamps, raw data ) which are the only datatypes developers utilize; the serialization process is transparent. That way, depending on the nature and capabilities of the systems involved in a data interchange procedure, the more efficient transport protocol is utilized ( for example JSON when interfacing with an application server from a Javascript application, XML-RPC when talking to remote XML-RPC servers etc ).
It's probably more important to decide upon a list of primitive constructs and always operate on that kind of datatypes as opposed to figuring out the ideal way to store and retrieve them. You can always come up with an even better way to encode that data later on, anyway.
The book packs a lot of mini reviews, history and, at least for those of us who had the chance to play and feel attached to some of those games, a lot of 'oh, wow, those were the days' moments. If you enjoy CRPGs, you should read this book.
Sooner rather than later we have to realize that email is broken. SMTP was not designed with the kind of functionality that would deal with that the academics and researchers who conceived it never, perhaps, expected would happen.
Spammers abuse and take advantage of the shortcomings of the protocol to no end.
All the heuristic filters of the world combined with all forms of statistical analysis ( Bayesian filtering, etc) can only do that much and that's not forgetting the false positives that cause email we care about being flagged and discarded as spam.
The right people should design the successor to SMTP taking into account the problems related to spam, worms and whatnot ( security as a whole ), the simplicity of the existing SMTP protocol and start building a new architecture of servers and clients around it. Otherwise its always going to a be miss or hit case ( just like it is with those spam filters ).
I had to deal with the same problem. It seems opting for archive and install will help you go through whatever problem (mostly) without any problem once the installation process is over. Going to single user mode (Apple+S on startup) and examining the logs (/var/log/system.log ) will probably tell you what it told me. The WindowsServer segfaults/crashes which is why nothing actually happens after the blue screen. Chances are some of the/System/.. and/or/Library/.. files that affect the operation of the WindowsServer are to blame.
I have been using Parallels for quite some time on my MacBook Pro, in order to use a few apps on Windows ( installed Windows XP Professional on the VM ). It works like a charm, as fast, or at least almost as fast, as if I was to use a separate system for just Windows. I 've also installed Ubuntu today, which runs equally well. According to the rumors-mill, Parallels is getting 3D hardware acceleration soon which means, among other things, you will be able to run games on the VM, get better performance on the desktop and, once Vista comes out and Parallels provides support for EFI, you will get an accelerated desktop experience through Aero. I personally have no other use for Windows other than running one or two apps once in a while and playing games ( Mac OS X is just too good to fallback to Windows for anything else ).
The facts: o NeXT was built by Jobs o NeXT was sold to Apple o OS X came from NeXT o Apple was cofounded by Jobs o Jobs envies BillyG o Jobs loves getting the credit for everything, more or les. He's credited with the success of OS X. Uhm. o Apple and MSFT are not exactly on friendly terms o Most people exposed to Mac OS-X never look back o Most people exposed to Windows get exposed to viruses and so much more and wish they could look back o Apple has invested so much in building its OS and applications o Apple funs would never EVER forgive the company if they would ever replace OS X for Windows o [ Add yours here ]
The fiction: o Apple will replace OS X with Windows
According to Eric Schmidt, advertising on Google News is a simple matter of priority and importance related to other things in their TODO list. To them, adding more news sources is more important than placing the ads - but he makes a point that ads will come sooner or later. Interesting presentation by the way.
What those thieves of history and names are trying to do, would be equivalent to them calling themselves 'Los Angeles' or any other U.S state. Its actually worse than that. The whole attempt to steal the name/history/culture from a country is pathetic and unthinkable.
Is it just me, or Perl has lost much of its old prestige ? Ruby, Python and other languages ( such as the most excellent io language have gained so much momentum and popularity, that Perl just doesn't seem to be getting much attention from the users nowadays. Rightfully so, if I may say.
Google Sitemaps seems to be responsible for those links. You follow Google's suggestion, you get some handy links whenever your site shows up in the results, among other benefits..
Google services get added to the tabs list once they are considered mature enough (either out of beta or too long in beta to be considered 'stable', whatever that may mean to them ).
Google didn't buy Blogger for their adherence to the Atom specs over RSS. This is just silly. They bought blogger.com for it was the 'first' and biggest player in the blog hosting/management business. That and a few other reasons, some obvious some not.
Those researchers must have spent too much time downloading stuff, much of that time lost in downloading bogus files. I suppose one day they said 'enough is enough!, no more masquaraded files, we want our mp3s!', or something like that, so they did it.:)
Creativity and research usually comes from the needs of the very people who conduct it.
"This is one of the most accessible distros to come along in awhile and it marks a big step forward in the progress on Linux on the desktop"
The majority of users have simple, finite needs. They want to be able to browse the net, check Email, chat with friends on IM networks, play music and view pictures, and write documents using Word. Occasionally, they want to play games.
Let's assume there is a Desktop Environment / Operation System that allows them to do all that:
o easily o virus/trojan/spyware free o through a gorgeous UI o crash-free
We can easily exclude Windows from the list. Linux doesn't suffer from viruses / worms but does suffer from everything else. That leaves Mac OS-X. It may not be 100% crash-free but everything else is a given on this platform.
So, how does this Xandros edition make things better for those users? It simply introduces more windows problems to the already flawed Linux desktop experience.
Sure, it allows you to 'easily' run some windows applications directly. But is this really the way to go for making Linux more acceptable by the majority of users?
How about bridging the differences between the various DEs ( KDE, Gnome.. ) ? How about realizing all linux users are necessarily programming/systems gurus or wannabes ? Or even providing some nice, complete applications that don't require you to mess with.. text files and environment variables or even recompile them to get them to run ?
Hopefully, order will prevail the Linux 'anarchy' and something good will come out of all those fine efforts.
We use what we call web-terminals and app-servers. Web-terminals run web servers ( Apache and Zeus, currently ).
App-servers run our custom-built application servers. Those servers host modules. The modules are writen in C/C++. They export methods and events, which are made available through the AppServer via a, what we call, 'binary XML-RPC' interface, as well as plain XML-RPC. Each module provides functionality for a single service, for instance 'search' or 'membership' or whatever. Each App-Server usually hosts over a dozen modules. The modules are implemented as DSOs/DLLs, and (Re)loaded dynamically.
The AppServers offer a lot more : sessions, 'virtual clusters' ( where app servers can talk to each other ), caching and so on, so forth.
We use PHP for the frontend. For interfacing with the App servers we use a PHP 'module' which takes care of invoking methods on the app servers, retrieving results and other related operations.
There is a load balancer ( custom made, which is actually used for managing all our services ) which also manages our Web Cluster. It also manages the 'AppServers cluster'.
So, we have X web terminals and N app-server nodes. Here is what happens when an HTTP request hits our LoadBalancer
1. HTTP-REQUEST reaches Load Balancer 2. Load balancer determines which web-terminal is least busy 3. The least busy web-terminal receives the HTTP request. 4. The PHP script responsible for rendering the page talks to the app-servers cluster by connecting to a node ( via connecting to the Load Balancer which in-turn picks the least busy app-server node ) and invokes methods, which return results, and then it simply renders whatever based on the results set. 5. The load balancer sends the HTTP response to the user.
There is no practical limit to the scalability of the system. Whenever we need more power, we simply add new web-terminals or new app-server nodes.
Our company runs the second most visited site in Greece ( pathfinder.gr ). We decided to go for this architecture after having tried many other 'popular' models. This solution is almost perfect, for us. We get complete power ( C/C++ for the modules ), allow the web-designers/developers to do whatever they want extremely easily and transparently by using a very simple PHP API for invoking methods, there are zero scalability issues, and we can isolate our backend from 'newbie' developers since they can only access it through methods on modules ( coded by our 'experienced' developers ).
Last but not least: the web-developers can use PHP, C/C++, Java, Python, Ruby and whatever else they wish to use for building web-applications, because all they need is an API for communicating with the AppServers cluster.
There is lot more to it, but thats what we do, more or less. We couldn't have been more happy with it.
Sometimes being able to see in the past is more valuable than being able to see in the future. It makes sense for lawyers to try to find ways to look back, for evidence and proof can only be found in the past.
If you have evidence, you can prove your claims. If you can prove your claims, you win a dispute. If you win the dispute in favor of your client, that makes you one good lawyer.
.. The slashdot administrators for keeping the site running so other administrators can come up online and and see what others have to say about their appreciation date:)
If we assume those patent officers are intelligent and familiar with the tasks they were assigned to perform, they must be able to see that so many of those patents either don't make sense, or fall into the 'common sense' category.
If you were an employee who had to deal with issues that seem unfair and unreasonable to you, especially if you were 'sensitive' enough as to even blame, in part, your very self for being part of this stupidity, you may have done the very same thing.
John Caramack puts it all in prespective: "The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying." (on software patents)
The Browser Wars : The Empire Strikes Back
on
IE7 Bugs and Reviews
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Considering the Web the new platform for building applications ( using AJAX, CSS2 and whatever else the Web gurus come up with ), it is a given that Microsoft cannot afford to loose the browser wars.
This actually may turn out to be more important than loosing to Apple or even Linux ( on the desktop ). Their product is the most popular in the market, but the underdogs are catching up fast. They are better in all respects, they get evolved where IE rarely gets updated, geeks love them.. Its a touch call for Microsoft. They are placing their bets on Lonhorn and IE7. Should their new toys fail to meet the raised expectations, Microsoft will loose big. By Google, Apple, IBM and everyone waiting to get his chance against the King.
Nintendo has been leveraging its designers skills, attention to playability, focusing on pure fun VS cutting edge tech for a long time now. This was working in their favor but the other players kept throwing cool/hot technology at the fight until even playability itself seemed less important than slick graphics and multiplayerability elements.
Unless Revolution turns out to be the revolutionary device they expect us to believe it is, Nintendo will not be able to sustain its declining market share, until Nintendo will be no more.
Google may lead the way, may or may not provide the 'best' service ( whatever you consider best ) but it is not alone in the race.
You should check out every other player for they are all trying to offer something different or something more to differentiate or even outperform Google.
I suspect Google's best weapon is the power of habbit. Most people have switched to Google over the recent years and have learned to love it and really feel comfortable with it. This could be one of the many reasons Google is sticking to its simple interface; people are having a hard time getting familiar with something 'new'.
When Google entered the game, there was noone paying attention. Search was considered a somewhat dead service. It was easy for Google to get the king's crown. Things are way different now though. Yahoo!, MSN and the rest will have really hard time trying to catch up with Google - not that they are much worse or better than it is, for that matter.
EA is, no doubt, the leader in the computer games industry. NVidia is into a head 2 head fight with ATI ( ATI is probably going to come out as the winner ), and such a deal will add points in its favor in this 'fight'. Imagine a series of games to comes with a 'NVidia' recommented stamp on the cover.
This has nothing to do with markeeters, the Google name that is. Page and Bryn came up with it when they built the initial google, back in stanford. They thought it was a cool name, they picked it up and thats it.
Slashdot Mirror
As others (may)have mentioned already, personalization is a tricky business. You may get more false positives ( results that are not quite what you were looking for ), which can be okay but you may even get the kind of false negatives that could lead to perfectly suited to your query pages falling way down in the results set.
You may even have to worry about what you are looking for, worrying whether it may confuse the system (e.g searching for a given subject may affect future results based on the fact that you searched for that said subject, even if you may no longer care for it, once you are done researching ).
I am sure those and other effects can and will be minimized but it seems unlikely this could become a 'solved problem' anytime soon.
Our systems ( application servers, frameworks, data serialization and unserialization facilities etc ) understand/support XML-RPC, binary XML-RPC, JSON and PHP object notation (ref: PHP serialize() / unserialize() functions).
There is a set of primitives ( string, integers, floats, arrays, structures, timestamps, raw data ) which are the only datatypes developers utilize; the serialization process is transparent. That way, depending on the nature and capabilities of the systems involved in a data interchange procedure, the more efficient transport protocol is utilized ( for example JSON when interfacing with an application server from a Javascript application, XML-RPC when talking to remote XML-RPC servers etc ).
It's probably more important to decide upon a list of primitive constructs and always operate on that kind of datatypes as opposed to figuring out the ideal way to store and retrieve them. You can always come up with an even better way to encode that data later on, anyway.
The book packs a lot of mini reviews, history and, at least for those of us who had the chance to play and feel attached to some of those games, a lot of 'oh, wow, those were the days' moments. If you enjoy CRPGs, you should read this book.
Sooner rather than later we have to realize that email is broken. SMTP was not designed with the kind of functionality that would deal with that the academics and researchers who conceived it never, perhaps, expected would happen.
Spammers abuse and take advantage of the shortcomings of the protocol to no end.
All the heuristic filters of the world combined with all forms of statistical analysis ( Bayesian filtering, etc) can only do that much and that's not forgetting the false positives that cause email we care about being flagged and discarded as spam.
The right people should design the successor to SMTP taking into account the problems related to spam, worms and whatnot ( security as a whole ), the simplicity of the existing SMTP protocol and start building a new architecture of servers and clients around it. Otherwise its always going to a be miss or hit case ( just like it is with those spam filters ).
I had to deal with the same problem. It seems opting for archive and install will help you go through whatever problem (mostly) without any problem once the installation process is over. Going to single user mode (Apple+S on startup) and examining the logs ( /var/log/system.log ) will probably tell you what it told me. The WindowsServer segfaults/crashes which is why nothing actually happens after the blue screen. Chances are some of the /System/.. and/or /Library/.. files that affect the operation of the WindowsServer are to blame.
Your best source for information on the subject ( other than this ./ thread ) is Apple Discussions 'BSOD' thread.
Well, not only PS3 is dragging Sony further down its doom, but it is even expected as a means to 'save it' ( Can the PS3 Save Sony ) ..
I have been using Parallels for quite some time on my MacBook Pro, in order to use a few apps on Windows ( installed Windows XP Professional on the VM ). It works like a charm, as fast, or at least almost as fast, as if I was to use a separate system for just Windows. I 've also installed Ubuntu today, which runs equally well. According to the rumors-mill, Parallels is getting 3D hardware acceleration soon which means, among other things, you will be able to run games on the VM, get better performance on the desktop and, once Vista comes out and Parallels provides support for EFI, you will get an accelerated desktop experience through Aero. I personally have no other use for Windows other than running one or two apps once in a while and playing games ( Mac OS X is just too good to fallback to Windows for anything else ).
The facts:
o NeXT was built by Jobs
o NeXT was sold to Apple
o OS X came from NeXT
o Apple was cofounded by Jobs
o Jobs envies BillyG
o Jobs loves getting the credit for everything, more or les. He's credited with the success of OS X. Uhm.
o Apple and MSFT are not exactly on friendly terms
o Most people exposed to Mac OS-X never look back
o Most people exposed to Windows get exposed to viruses and so much more and wish they could look back
o Apple has invested so much in building its OS and applications
o Apple funs would never EVER forgive the company if they would ever replace OS X for Windows
o [ Add yours here ]
The fiction:
o Apple will replace OS X with Windows
According to Eric Schmidt, advertising on Google News is a simple matter of priority and importance related to other things in their TODO list. To them, adding more news sources is more important than placing the ads - but he makes a point that ads will come sooner or later. Interesting presentation by the way.
What those thieves of history and names are trying to do, would be equivalent to them calling themselves 'Los Angeles' or any other U.S state. Its actually worse than that. The whole attempt to steal the name/history/culture from a country is pathetic and unthinkable.
Is it just me, or Perl has lost much of its old prestige ? Ruby, Python and other languages ( such as the most excellent io language have gained so much momentum and popularity, that Perl just doesn't seem to be getting much attention from the users nowadays.
Rightfully so, if I may say.
Google Sitemaps seems to be responsible for those links. You follow Google's suggestion, you get some handy links whenever your site shows up in the results, among other benefits..
Google services get added to the tabs list once they are considered mature enough (either out of beta or too long in beta to be considered 'stable', whatever that may mean to them ).
Google didn't buy Blogger for their adherence to the Atom specs over RSS. This is just silly. They bought blogger.com for it was the 'first' and biggest player in the blog hosting/management business. That and a few other reasons, some obvious some not.
Those researchers must have spent too much time downloading stuff, much of that time lost in downloading bogus files. I suppose one day they said 'enough is enough!, no more masquaraded files, we want our mp3s!', or something like that, so they did it. :)
Creativity and research usually comes from the needs of the very people who conduct it.
"This is one of the most accessible distros to come along in awhile and it marks a big step forward in the progress on Linux on the desktop"
.. text files and environment variables or even recompile them to get them to run ?
The majority of users have simple, finite needs. They want to be able to browse the net, check Email, chat with friends on IM networks, play music and view pictures, and write documents using Word. Occasionally, they want to play games.
Let's assume there is a Desktop Environment / Operation System that allows them to do all that:
o easily
o virus/trojan/spyware free
o through a gorgeous UI
o crash-free
We can easily exclude Windows from the list. Linux doesn't suffer from viruses / worms but does suffer from everything else. That leaves Mac OS-X. It may not be 100% crash-free but everything else is a given on this platform.
So, how does this Xandros edition make things better for those users? It simply introduces more windows problems to the already flawed Linux desktop experience.
Sure, it allows you to 'easily' run some windows applications directly. But is this really the way to go for making Linux more acceptable by the majority of users?
How about bridging the differences between the various DEs ( KDE, Gnome.. ) ? How about realizing all linux users are necessarily programming/systems gurus or wannabes ? Or even providing some nice, complete applications that don't require you to mess with
Hopefully, order will prevail the Linux 'anarchy' and something good will come out of all those fine efforts.
Here is a brief overview of what we do here:
We use what we call web-terminals and app-servers. Web-terminals run web servers ( Apache and Zeus, currently ).
App-servers run our custom-built application servers. Those servers host modules. The modules are writen in C/C++. They export methods and events, which are made available through the AppServer via a, what we call, 'binary XML-RPC' interface, as well as plain XML-RPC. Each module provides functionality for a single service, for instance 'search' or 'membership' or whatever. Each App-Server usually hosts over a dozen modules. The modules are implemented as DSOs/DLLs, and (Re)loaded dynamically.
The AppServers offer a lot more : sessions, 'virtual clusters' ( where app servers can talk to each other ), caching and so on, so forth.
We use PHP for the frontend. For interfacing with the App servers we use a PHP 'module' which takes care of invoking methods on the app servers, retrieving results and other related operations.
There is a load balancer ( custom made, which is actually used for managing all our services ) which also manages our Web Cluster. It also manages the 'AppServers cluster'.
So, we have X web terminals and N app-server nodes. Here is what happens when an HTTP request hits our LoadBalancer
1. HTTP-REQUEST reaches Load Balancer
2. Load balancer determines which web-terminal is least busy
3. The least busy web-terminal receives the HTTP request.
4. The PHP script responsible for rendering the page talks to the app-servers cluster by connecting to a node ( via connecting to the Load Balancer which in-turn picks the least busy app-server node ) and invokes methods, which return results, and then it simply renders whatever based on the results set.
5. The load balancer sends the HTTP response to the user.
There is no practical limit to the scalability of the system. Whenever we need more power, we simply add new web-terminals or new app-server nodes.
Our company runs the second most visited site in Greece ( pathfinder.gr ). We decided to go for this architecture after having tried many other 'popular' models. This solution is almost perfect, for us. We get complete power ( C/C++ for the modules ), allow the web-designers/developers to do whatever they want extremely easily and transparently by using a very simple PHP API for invoking methods, there are zero scalability issues, and we can isolate our backend from 'newbie' developers since they can only access it through methods on modules ( coded by our 'experienced' developers ).
Last but not least: the web-developers can use PHP, C/C++, Java, Python, Ruby and whatever else they wish to use for building web-applications, because all they need is an API for communicating with the AppServers cluster.
There is lot more to it, but thats what we do, more or less. We couldn't have been more happy with it.
Sometimes being able to see in the past is more valuable than being able to see in the future. It makes sense for lawyers to try to find ways to look back, for evidence and proof can only be found in the past.
If you have evidence, you can prove your claims. If you can prove your claims, you win a dispute. If you win the dispute in favor of your client, that makes you one good lawyer.
.. The slashdot administrators for keeping the site running so other administrators can come up online and and see what others have to say about their appreciation date :)
If we assume those patent officers are intelligent and familiar with the tasks they were assigned to perform, they must be able to see that so many of those patents either don't make sense, or fall into the 'common sense' category.
If you were an employee who had to deal with issues that seem unfair and unreasonable to you, especially if you were 'sensitive' enough as to even blame, in part, your very self for being part of this stupidity, you may have done the very same thing.
John Caramack puts it all in prespective:
"The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying." (on software patents)
Considering the Web the new platform for building applications ( using AJAX, CSS2 and whatever else the Web gurus come up with ), it is a given that Microsoft cannot afford to loose the browser wars.
This actually may turn out to be more important than loosing to Apple or even Linux ( on the desktop ). Their product is the most popular in the market, but the underdogs are catching up fast. They are better in all respects, they get evolved where IE rarely gets updated, geeks love them.. Its a touch call for Microsoft. They are placing their bets on Lonhorn and IE7. Should their new toys fail to meet the raised expectations, Microsoft will loose big. By Google, Apple, IBM and everyone waiting to get his chance against the King.
Nintendo has been leveraging its designers skills, attention to playability, focusing on pure fun VS cutting edge tech for a long time now. This was working in their favor but the other players kept throwing cool/hot technology at the fight until even playability itself seemed less important than slick graphics and multiplayerability elements.
Unless Revolution turns out to be the revolutionary device they expect us to believe it is, Nintendo will not be able to sustain its declining market share, until Nintendo will be no more.
Google may lead the way, may or may not provide the 'best' service ( whatever you consider best ) but it is not alone in the race.
You should check out every other player for they are all trying to offer something different or something more to differentiate or even outperform Google.
I suspect Google's best weapon is the power of habbit. Most people have switched to Google over the recent years and have learned to love it and really feel comfortable with it. This could be one of the many reasons Google is sticking to its simple interface; people are having a hard time getting familiar with something 'new'.
When Google entered the game, there was noone paying attention. Search was considered a somewhat dead service. It was easy for Google to get the king's crown. Things are way different now though. Yahoo!, MSN and the rest will have really hard time trying to catch up with Google - not that they are much worse or better than it is, for that matter.
EA is, no doubt, the leader in the computer games industry. NVidia is into a head 2 head fight with ATI ( ATI is probably going to come out as the winner ), and such a deal will add points in its favor in this 'fight'. Imagine a series of games to comes with a 'NVidia' recommented stamp on the cover.
This has nothing to do with markeeters, the Google name that is. Page and Bryn came up with it when they built the initial google, back in stanford. They thought it was a cool name, they picked it up and thats it.