The common way of working with a browser history function is manytimes a frusturating experience.
It's bad to the point of borderline broken. Hopefully there are no IP issues (in the property sense), and this may lead to improvements making usinging browser history less like pulling teeth.
My initial thought was since when can a private company seize private property? It seems they got it as part of a deal with the government...but that being said, why a $40k Porsche? It's said this guy made over $1M.
Mr Boe said the Porsche was seized mainly for its symbolic value, as the obvious fruit of an illegal trade.
Makes sense, and it's a great idea. Getting hundreds of thousands of dollars does not make an attention getting headline, and not have made slashdot. Taking his Porsche, now that's a headline grabber.
AOL is known for being marketing savy, and that's what this is about.
The search engines of MSN and Yahoo! are nothing more than engines that search throught paid listings (ads) with enough "backfill" included to try and hide the fact.
Neither one understands who their primary customer is. Hint: it is not the advertiser.
Talk is cheap. Neither Yahoo! or MSN have yet shown any evidence of having anything even close to competing with Google for the informeed searcher (notice [MSN, are you listening?] I didn't call the searcher the "consumer".)
If you have not already, I encourage you to watch the introduction during MacWorld 04 (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf04/). This app looks very powerful for its price.
Has anyone had much experience with the live amplifier functionality? Is it good enough to use for amature type live performances when piped through a sound system?
While the fine amount is what is grabbing the headlines, the Windows Media Player removal is where the meat is. The fine is a "cost of doing business" to Microsoft. The WMP/free OS is hitting MS where it hurts.
The "new" OS will have greater impact than the fine ever will. It is ashame the headlines will probably fixate on the dollar (euro) figure.
And just because they may know the syntax, that does not mean they can write code worth a crap. I took over a project where a guy wrote his own xml parser while there were tons of free ones on the market. That was a disgusting mess the ended up being easier to convert to real parser rather than fix some parsing problems. He also used count to 1 billion loops when spawning external processes because he didn't know about waitFor(). At first we could not figure out why his code was so slow. Add on top this was all done in static void main, which no other methods or calls.
He has moved on to writing web application in RPG for another department, where every new group of pages gets deployed on a new port...they seem lost on the whole url concept
Knowing Java is like knowing English (or any language.) Just because you know the language does not mean you are any good at writing poetry.
This is one of Microsoft's most important products. Finacially, there is a huge amount of "positive perception" riding on SQL server.
Businesses may run on one of their OSes, but businesses run IN SQL Server. This product can make or (more critically) brake businesses. If rumors of major problems with SQL server screwing up business were to get out, corporate perception of them would tank.
They have no real choice with this product but to try and make sure it is ready (and take more time if needed) rather than push it to market.
As someone who does search engine optimization of his own sites, I believe there is an important distinction between ethical and non-ethical (spam) activities.
Search Engine Optimization - doing all things possible to tell a search engine what your page is about while being balanced for humans to read as well. Ethical. Sometime considered spam when really the search engine returns poor results; usually due to the page you are looking for not being easy to understand for spiders.
Search Engine Manipulation - trying to doing things to get search engines to return your page in results when the page may not otherwise be something the engine considers relevent or high quality. Showing something different for the search engine falls under this category, is commonly refered to as cloaking, and is against many search engines "rules" for designing pages. Not ethical, aka spam.
I've been on vacation and away from internet and most mass media for a week. Got back on Monday and have noticed a drop in traffic to my web sites while I was gone. Didn't have a clue why. Well, now I know.
I'll be watching this very closely. Inktomi (sp?) sucked, which is what this is based on. I think it's too early to tell right now if the results are any good. Along the same lines, it will probably take about 6 months for marketers to learn to effectivly spam the results, which is something Google has historically been very good at keeping at bay.
This will be interesting to watch over the next few months.
People are asking why Google wants/needs to go public.
Here's the deal...private Google stock is held by too many people. They are at the threshold of legally be required to make their books public, and for all intentensive purposes acting like a publically held company.
As long as they will be required to act like a public company, there is a large financial incentive for them to take the next step and trade publically.
Whether they need the money or not...it is knocking on their door (both corp. and personally) asking to be taken. This knocking is (or maybe was) too hard for them to resist.
Quote:As usual, Wally World is asking others to innovate on their behalf, to their benefit, and asking the supplier to foot the bill. The suppliers don't have a choice, because if you're not in Wal~Mart, you're not anywhere.
Reply1: The wholesalers won't foot the bill, it'll be passed down the food chain to the consumers.
Reply#1 is correct...the net costs will be passed on to consumers. In the case, Wal-Mart (I believe correctly) thinks the the addition of RFID's will lower overall costs. The net gain in productivity and efficiency more than makes up for the addition few cent charge for each tag.
This is no different than when Wal-Mart mandated EDI to eliminate paper and phone based ordering and billing.
So yes, the cost difference will be passed on the consumers, just that it will be a price decrease instead of an increase.
And yes, Wally World is asking others to innovate on their behalf...so what? Since when is increasing net effieciency of a supply chain a bad thing? This will force innovation in an otherwise unorganized and inneffiecent industry. How else with this innovation occur?
I for one think this is a good thing, and (very) long overdue.
I just got a similar reply to my +5 post which lists definitions directly from the government spec. (I litterally added nothing to my post other than text from the spec.) I would expect Anonymous Coward didn't write the government spec. There are probably more of these posts from the same person or script.
Mods...please mod this (my) post down...I just wanted to point out this "plagerism!" guy is not only doing this to Eric's post.
Evaluation assurance level 1 (EAL1) - functionally tested EAL1 provides a basic level of assurance by an analysis of the security functions using a functional and interface specification and guidance documentation, to understand the security behaviour.
Evaluation assurance level 2 (EAL2) - structurally tested EAL2 provides assurance by an analysis of the security functions, using a functional and interface specification, guidance documentation and the high-level design of the TOE, to understand the security behaviour.
Evaluation assurance level 3 (EAL3) - methodically tested and checked
EAL3 provides assurance by an analysis of the security functions, using a functional and interface specification, guidance documentation, and the high-level design of the TOE, to understand the security behaviour.
Evaluation assurance level 4 (EAL4) - methodically designed, tested, and reviewed EAL4 provides assurance by an analysis of the security functions, using a functional and complete interface specification, guidance documentation, the high-level and low-level design of the TOE, and a subset of the implementation, to understand the security behaviour. Assurance is additionally gained through an informal model of the TOE security policy.
Sun has not owned Cobalt for a very long time IIRC. Do they still have anything substantial they got out of the purchase, or was the whole this money down the drain at this point?
Did they need to purchase Cobalt to "get their heads around" Linux? Did they need Cobalt to figure out how to make a low end Intel server? Maybe Sun has less between their ears than I gave them credit for, but I don't believe either is the case.
Seems like a bad business decision to purchase them to me, but maybe I'm missing something.
Solaris adds a great deal of value to Sun hardware, but by itself it isn't worth much unless you absolutely need it. At best the x86 edition is barely competition for Free Software Unix projects in the GNU/Linux and *BSD communities, which scale better, cost less, support more hardware, and are easier to configure, customize and maintain.
Sun's PR portrays Linux as a "toy" os. This comment doesn't seem to put Solaris in a very positive light on x86. If Solaris is so good from an OS perspective why is the take up on the x86 platform so small? I understand Sun's proprietary hardware is good, so since nothing else is supported (officially) on it people need to use Solaris.
When it comes to comments about the OS, do supporters of Solaris have their heads in the sand when it comes to Linux, or is there a real advantage?
This is a fine FYI general info PR type article, but it holds little substance. Real power examples would be helpful. 6-8 hour of PDA battery time really does not mean very much without more detailed battery output or PDA power requirement specs. A black and white palm zaire (sp?) takes much less power than a PocketPC device with a good sized color screen and Wi-Fi. Not to mention does it mean constant use, or average (1.5-2hr) use with 6hr standby?
Interesting none the less, but there wasn't much meat to this.
If the CallSmart system has to pay these fess, any other tone prompted computer callin PBX should have to qualify as well...that's essentially all CallSmart is.
As a US citizen I am both pissed off, and embarrased this is how my country is helping us "advance" telco technology and telco business models.
A decent number of companies took up dual Athlons because of their great price to performance ratio
What major brands? They have seemed to be white-boxes based on what I have seen. I want a major brand. I've seen too many people burned by mom and pop brands.
Slashdot Mirror
The common way of working with a browser history function is manytimes a frusturating experience.
It's bad to the point of borderline broken. Hopefully there are no IP issues (in the property sense), and this may lead to improvements making usinging browser history less like pulling teeth.
-Pete
My initial thought was since when can a private company seize private property? It seems they got it as part of a deal with the government...but that being said, why a $40k Porsche? It's said this guy made over $1M.
Mr Boe said the Porsche was seized mainly for its symbolic value, as the obvious fruit of an illegal trade.
Makes sense, and it's a great idea. Getting hundreds of thousands of dollars does not make an attention getting headline, and not have made slashdot. Taking his Porsche, now that's a headline grabber.
AOL is known for being marketing savy, and that's what this is about.
-Pete
Aren't MSN and Yahoo just product search engines as it is with enough backfill included to try and hide the fact?
-Pete
The search engines of MSN and Yahoo! are nothing more than engines that search throught paid listings (ads) with enough "backfill" included to try and hide the fact.
Neither one understands who their primary customer is. Hint: it is not the advertiser.
Talk is cheap. Neither Yahoo! or MSN have yet shown any evidence of having anything even close to competing with Google for the informeed searcher (notice [MSN, are you listening?] I didn't call the searcher the "consumer".)
-Pete
If you have not already, I encourage you to watch the introduction during MacWorld 04 (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf04/). This app looks very powerful for its price.
Has anyone had much experience with the live amplifier functionality? Is it good enough to use for amature type live performances when piped through a sound system?
-Pete
While the fine amount is what is grabbing the headlines, the Windows Media Player removal is where the meat is. The fine is a "cost of doing business" to Microsoft. The WMP/free OS is hitting MS where it hurts.
The "new" OS will have greater impact than the fine ever will. It is ashame the headlines will probably fixate on the dollar (euro) figure.
-Pete
I agree with your statements if a distinction is added between procedural and object oriented languages.
I have seen too many "old school" developers who havn't the foggiest idea about OO who think they can code in Java because they know the syntax.
All languages are not equal.
And just because they may know the syntax, that does not mean they can write code worth a crap. I took over a project where a guy wrote his own xml parser while there were tons of free ones on the market. That was a disgusting mess the ended up being easier to convert to real parser rather than fix some parsing problems. He also used count to 1 billion loops when spawning external processes because he didn't know about waitFor(). At first we could not figure out why his code was so slow. Add on top this was all done in static void main, which no other methods or calls.
He has moved on to writing web application in RPG for another department, where every new group of pages gets deployed on a new port...they seem lost on the whole url concept
Knowing Java is like knowing English (or any language.) Just because you know the language does not mean you are any good at writing poetry.
Think Mobile's SpeedPass but with a smart object instread of a dumb keyfob.
-Pete
This is one of Microsoft's most important products. Finacially, there is a huge amount of "positive perception" riding on SQL server.
Businesses may run on one of their OSes, but businesses run IN SQL Server. This product can make or (more critically) brake businesses. If rumors of major problems with SQL server screwing up business were to get out, corporate perception of them would tank.
They have no real choice with this product but to try and make sure it is ready (and take more time if needed) rather than push it to market.
-Pete
As someone who does search engine optimization of his own sites, I believe there is an important distinction between ethical and non-ethical (spam) activities.
Search Engine Optimization - doing all things possible to tell a search engine what your page is about while being balanced for humans to read as well. Ethical. Sometime considered spam when really the search engine returns poor results; usually due to the page you are looking for not being easy to understand for spiders.
Search Engine Manipulation - trying to doing things to get search engines to return your page in results when the page may not otherwise be something the engine considers relevent or high quality. Showing something different for the search engine falls under this category, is commonly refered to as cloaking, and is against many search engines "rules" for designing pages. Not ethical, aka spam.
-Pete
I've been on vacation and away from internet and most mass media for a week. Got back on Monday and have noticed a drop in traffic to my web sites while I was gone. Didn't have a clue why. Well, now I know.
I'll be watching this very closely. Inktomi (sp?) sucked, which is what this is based on. I think it's too early to tell right now if the results are any good. Along the same lines, it will probably take about 6 months for marketers to learn to effectivly spam the results, which is something Google has historically been very good at keeping at bay.
This will be interesting to watch over the next few months.
-Pete
People are asking why Google wants/needs to go public.
Here's the deal...private Google stock is held by too many people. They are at the threshold of legally be required to make their books public, and for all intentensive purposes acting like a publically held company.
As long as they will be required to act like a public company, there is a large financial incentive for them to take the next step and trade publically.
Whether they need the money or not...it is knocking on their door (both corp. and personally) asking to be taken. This knocking is (or maybe was) too hard for them to resist.
-Pete
Quote:As usual, Wally World is asking others to innovate on their behalf, to their benefit, and asking the supplier to foot the bill. The suppliers don't have a choice, because if you're not in Wal~Mart, you're not anywhere.
Reply1: The wholesalers won't foot the bill, it'll be passed down the food chain to the consumers.
Reply#1 is correct...the net costs will be passed on to consumers. In the case, Wal-Mart (I believe correctly) thinks the the addition of RFID's will lower overall costs. The net gain in productivity and efficiency more than makes up for the addition few cent charge for each tag.
This is no different than when Wal-Mart mandated EDI to eliminate paper and phone based ordering and billing.
So yes, the cost difference will be passed on the consumers, just that it will be a price decrease instead of an increase.
And yes, Wally World is asking others to innovate on their behalf...so what? Since when is increasing net effieciency of a supply chain a bad thing? This will force innovation in an otherwise unorganized and inneffiecent industry. How else with this innovation occur?
I for one think this is a good thing, and (very) long overdue.
I just got a similar reply to my +5 post which lists definitions directly from the government spec. (I litterally added nothing to my post other than text from the spec.) I would expect Anonymous Coward didn't write the government spec. There are probably more of these posts from the same person or script.
:-)
Mods...please mod this (my) post down...I just wanted to point out this "plagerism!" guy is not only doing this to Eric's post.
Move along...nothing more to see here.
Evaluation assurance level 1 (EAL1) - functionally tested
EAL1 provides a basic level of assurance by an analysis of the security functions using a functional and interface specification and guidance documentation, to understand the security behaviour.
Evaluation assurance level 2 (EAL2) - structurally tested
EAL2 provides assurance by an analysis of the security functions, using a functional and interface specification, guidance documentation and the high-level design of the TOE, to understand the security behaviour.
Evaluation assurance level 3 (EAL3) - methodically tested and checked
EAL3 provides assurance by an analysis of the security functions, using a functional and interface specification, guidance documentation, and the high-level design of the TOE, to understand the security behaviour.
Evaluation assurance level 4 (EAL4) - methodically designed, tested, and reviewed
EAL4 provides assurance by an analysis of the security functions, using a functional and complete interface specification, guidance documentation, the high-level and low-level design of the TOE, and a subset of the implementation, to understand the security behaviour. Assurance is additionally gained through an informal model of the TOE security policy.
Oh come on! Think for a minute. It's not like reality has every stopped them before! Why this different?
Sun has not owned Cobalt for a very long time IIRC. Do they still have anything substantial they got out of the purchase, or was the whole this money down the drain at this point?
Did they need to purchase Cobalt to "get their heads around" Linux? Did they need Cobalt to figure out how to make a low end Intel server? Maybe Sun has less between their ears than I gave them credit for, but I don't believe either is the case.
Seems like a bad business decision to purchase them to me, but maybe I'm missing something.
www.vonage.com
There are others too, but I don't know them off the top of my head.
Solaris adds a great deal of value to Sun hardware, but by itself it isn't worth much unless you absolutely need it. At best the x86 edition is barely competition for Free Software Unix projects in the GNU/Linux and *BSD communities, which scale better, cost less, support more hardware, and are easier to configure, customize and maintain.
Sun's PR portrays Linux as a "toy" os. This comment doesn't seem to put Solaris in a very positive light on x86. If Solaris is so good from an OS perspective why is the take up on the x86 platform so small? I understand Sun's proprietary hardware is good, so since nothing else is supported (officially) on it people need to use Solaris.
When it comes to comments about the OS, do supporters of Solaris have their heads in the sand when it comes to Linux, or is there a real advantage?
-Pete
All I can think of is a PDA docking station with a 1 gallon can of methanol attached.
Imagine that bugger sitting on your desk. So much for small and compact.
-Pete
Can someone who knows more about this than me enlighten us on whether these things are rechargeable?
I have a hard time seeing these things catch on if they are one time use.
-Pete
This is a fine FYI general info PR type article, but it holds little substance. Real power examples would be helpful. 6-8 hour of PDA battery time really does not mean very much without more detailed battery output or PDA power requirement specs. A black and white palm zaire (sp?) takes much less power than a PocketPC device with a good sized color screen and Wi-Fi. Not to mention does it mean constant use, or average (1.5-2hr) use with 6hr standby?
Interesting none the less, but there wasn't much meat to this.
-Pete
If the CallSmart system has to pay these fess, any other tone prompted computer callin PBX should have to qualify as well...that's essentially all CallSmart is.
As a US citizen I am both pissed off, and embarrased this is how my country is helping us "advance" telco technology and telco business models.
-Pete
A decent number of companies took up dual Athlons because of their great price to performance ratio
What major brands? They have seemed to be white-boxes based on what I have seen. I want a major brand. I've seen too many people burned by mom and pop brands.
-Pete