An extra number of (previously) MS only developers having a better option of porting their code than they ever did before. Sounds like a good thing doesn't it...?
Personally I'd welcome more apps on Linux or any other none MS platform - and using a core Microsoft technology isn't a bad thing. It means the development skills are going to be taught and available for some time - even it they never get off the MS platform for 50% of the time.
However, there is a downside - it could, of course, bomb. As a point of interest I mention a previous port of a MS language. Indeed, it could have the same worldwide impact as "Novell NetBasic". For info, I believe it was later relabelled "Novell Script for Netware". There is a reason to the mention of this second spurious piece of trivia, unfortunately it is just a ploy in hope that the other 2 people who tried to script anything in it might be aware of it by the other name can come to my aid and save me from all those people pointing and laughing. I'm sure it was a great idea to rewrite a completely unstable VBScript interpreter for the Netware platform.
The threat to Microsoft isn't flash - its the loss of revenue for its dev tools when people develop using Adobe products. What do you create Flash in again? Oh, of course - thats why they don't like flash...
Silverlight will be big whether we like it or not - the MS based dev houses will use it because MS tells them its going to be big. Do you support it on other platforms or not? The same argument goes for.Net except that its already well on the road to replacing a lot of the architectures of recent MS based products that I see shipped.
Mono and Moonlight make sense but they need to be supported by the community and they need to be better than the MS versions with more functions and less buggy.
People forget where the market share is and how things change and its not by burying heads in the sand. A new tech doesn't mean success unless it is used. Even the big development tools on Linux are ported to MS - why? Because they want market share! Microsoft have a lot of built in market share because of the people who view MS as the only type of computing or applications. Market share comes from being as good at those things and better at the rest...
Hopefully one day we won't have to support those apps because MS will not have a stranglehold any more, until then...
Strangely, a lot of CRTs are very recyclable as the actual tubes are relatively generic as are some of the components - we used break/fix them at work previously when monitors blew. Nowadays its just not cost effective to do it just in terms of staff time when a new monitor is so cheap.
Does this mean that they have an "open source lab" that is unlikely to produce anything with a truly open license?
Perhaps its the lab that is being built using shared technologies and resources and anyone can add their own wing.
Spot on!
There's no reason the theory of these wouldn't work on other platforms given bugs in the "right" plugins. Making them generic enough to run on the different platforms simultaneously might be difficult if not impossible though.
Reading between the lines of the article I'd say that they were using code in web pages called from within a browser running in a specific security zone to then call code that runs with different security controls (like.Net and its own security controls or java or flash). It'd be something like using vbscript to call local.Net code to call java to call another language and trying to break out of the sandbox that way.
Its the relationship between the browser and the security environment of the code that is being run that is the issue and they are implying a trust between the browser and the security environment of the code that is running that perhaps shouldn't be there.
I'd wish good luck to those purists wanting to get a pure version to work on many pieces of hardware...
That said, its not a good reason not to have a pure version...
What it may do is help to drive development towards a pure desktop - drivers and other code would need writing to support the pure version. Perhaps those demanding purity would help to develop it towards that target and may influence manufacturers to open their driver code.
However there is no direct issue with encapsulating ipv4 address ranges within the ipv6 framework.
The issue is more to do with dealing with translation between ipv4 and ipv6 services as it can be processor intensive (if the switches and routers are actually capable).
Blame the system that didn't take idiocy into account during the design...
If people are going to abuse a system - you plan for a level of eventualities where it might happen. If you don't disasters definitely happen.
I'm similar in that I use it on servers and desktops and have done for a considerable time, however, I've also seen this - mostly on incompatible hardware. Its not common but it has happened. I haven't seen it on later distros though...
Experience lets you get around the issue with using the extra boot parameters to diagnose or bypass the issues or you can get around them in other ways but that isn't something an inexperienced user may know how to do.
I don't really think this is an issue to bash linux with though - I've also seen things akin to this on Windows where hardware detection loads incompatible hardware.
I've always had the opinion that IT should include as little clerical work as possible that cannot be automated. Therefore I've spent almost as much of my time writing scripts and programs to take data I know is in existence and putting it in lots of clerical reports over time as I have manually writing them. I mean, I do other things as well but if I didn't handle the reporting side automatically (for the most part) I'd have given up and left too.
However, to me, its this kind of thing that makes IT interesting - the ability to turn around the facts and figures, massaged and ready whenever some boss or other who doesn't understand IT for anything other than Excel comes along - more quickly than they would expect. The problem is to keep managers who know nothing out of the data - except maybe the odd reporting table and you are winning. Back who I started my first programming job this was easy - they didn't know what things were capable of and with a few reusable databases we could show them. Nowadays its a cat fight with every third party vendor to keep the automation we have and with every dumb know it all manager to stop them changing to systems that won't work.
Unfortunately manipulating the organisation into a way of working that allows data to be reused is half the battle in IT. The systems and services we run are largely about this - creating, storing, protecting and making the data as reusable as possible. If you see a system that does nothing to help - dump it! If one takes too long to develop - dump it! If one stores the data in a proprietary and incompatible manner when it doesn't need to - dump it!
IT is no longer a place to sit back - its getting quite as cut-throat as many boardrooms as we are effectively competing with a plethora of third party vendors. In this climate I can see why people want to leave, however, I quite enjoy it.
A natural born CEO?
I know there are people who are, quite naturally it would appear, singleminded, obsessive, competitive and lots of other things from the latest book of management buzzwords but I would always question whether CEO was a natural profession.
You could liken it to tribal chieftain or some such, however, I'm not certain that CEOs would succeed at that in societies that do not match the current conditions.
Exactly! He's right - in the virtualisation scenario a single server is not important. Your virtual servers are important.
With virtualisation - if you've designed your clusters correctly, the servers that are brought back online have all their hardware checks taking place before your virtual servers start running on the nodes anyway. A dead server or a required cluster aware service fails to start - no downtime. You're still running all your virtual servers on other hardware - just not as much of it as the load required is less.
All you are losing by shutting down nodes is spare headroom capacity during the hours it is not required.
Forgive me - I seem to have had a case of grammar ineptitude. That should have read,"I think people often forget that air conditioning isn't actually a cooling solution - if you take the complete picture."
Good point, however, since this is just thermodynamics - why do we actively cool systems?
Managed properly the heat should be able to be utilised in ways far more effective than air conditioning.
I think people often forget that air conditioning isn't actually a cooling solution if you take the whole picture. You are providing more energy and therefore more heat to make a small area temporarily cooler.
Slashdot Mirror
So run Xen clustered - http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/18831.html
Once you have the initial config mastered its easy to deploy to other servers with Autoyast.
I'd also say it was enterprise ready - certainly a *lot* of our infrastructure is now hosted on it and is very stable unless we overload the nodes.
Good news I think...
An extra number of (previously) MS only developers having a better option of porting their code than they ever did before. Sounds like a good thing doesn't it...?
Personally I'd welcome more apps on Linux or any other none MS platform - and using a core Microsoft technology isn't a bad thing. It means the development skills are going to be taught and available for some time - even it they never get off the MS platform for 50% of the time.
However, there is a downside - it could, of course, bomb. As a point of interest I mention a previous port of a MS language. Indeed, it could have the same worldwide impact as "Novell NetBasic". For info, I believe it was later relabelled "Novell Script for Netware". There is a reason to the mention of this second spurious piece of trivia, unfortunately it is just a ploy in hope that the other 2 people who tried to script anything in it might be aware of it by the other name can come to my aid and save me from all those people pointing and laughing. I'm sure it was a great idea to rewrite a completely unstable VBScript interpreter for the Netware platform.
The threat to Microsoft isn't flash - its the loss of revenue for its dev tools when people develop using Adobe products. What do you create Flash in again? Oh, of course - thats why they don't like flash...
Silverlight will be big whether we like it or not - the MS based dev houses will use it because MS tells them its going to be big. Do you support it on other platforms or not? The same argument goes for .Net except that its already well on the road to replacing a lot of the architectures of recent MS based products that I see shipped.
Mono and Moonlight make sense but they need to be supported by the community and they need to be better than the MS versions with more functions and less buggy.
People forget where the market share is and how things change and its not by burying heads in the sand. A new tech doesn't mean success unless it is used. Even the big development tools on Linux are ported to MS - why? Because they want market share! Microsoft have a lot of built in market share because of the people who view MS as the only type of computing or applications. Market share comes from being as good at those things and better at the rest...
Hopefully one day we won't have to support those apps because MS will not have a stranglehold any more, until then...
I don't think anyone can say that the deal helped Novell in the short term... Perhaps this is an attempt to put a nail in the coffin?
And SCO would have been so much better...
Strangely, a lot of CRTs are very recyclable as the actual tubes are relatively generic as are some of the components - we used break/fix them at work previously when monitors blew. Nowadays its just not cost effective to do it just in terms of staff time when a new monitor is so cheap.
Does this mean that they have an "open source lab" that is unlikely to produce anything with a truly open license? Perhaps its the lab that is being built using shared technologies and resources and anyone can add their own wing.
and bags of money with hookers hidden inside
and here I am trying to decide whether opening what seemed like a big bag of money and finding a hooker would be a let down or not...?!?
Spot on! There's no reason the theory of these wouldn't work on other platforms given bugs in the "right" plugins. Making them generic enough to run on the different platforms simultaneously might be difficult if not impossible though.
Reading between the lines of the article I'd say that they were using code in web pages called from within a browser running in a specific security zone to then call code that runs with different security controls (like .Net and its own security controls or java or flash). It'd be something like using vbscript to call local .Net code to call java to call another language and trying to break out of the sandbox that way.
Its the relationship between the browser and the security environment of the code that is being run that is the issue and they are implying a trust between the browser and the security environment of the code that is running that perhaps shouldn't be there.
Units? K - that'll be Kelvin then I guess...
Gamers may have come over fast to XP but they certainly didn't move to NT Workstation or 2000 which is the "XP" line quickly...
I'd wish good luck to those purists wanting to get a pure version to work on many pieces of hardware...
That said, its not a good reason not to have a pure version...
What it may do is help to drive development towards a pure desktop - drivers and other code would need writing to support the pure version. Perhaps those demanding purity would help to develop it towards that target and may influence manufacturers to open their driver code.
Tell us that when your SIP phone calls keep dropping out because your file transfers have the same priority.
Except that companies like nanosolar are starting to use printing technology to put down the cells...
There is extra licensing costs, however some competitors only handle it in software.
However there is no direct issue with encapsulating ipv4 address ranges within the ipv6 framework. The issue is more to do with dealing with translation between ipv4 and ipv6 services as it can be processor intensive (if the switches and routers are actually capable).
Blame the system that didn't take idiocy into account during the design... If people are going to abuse a system - you plan for a level of eventualities where it might happen. If you don't disasters definitely happen.
I'm similar in that I use it on servers and desktops and have done for a considerable time, however, I've also seen this - mostly on incompatible hardware. Its not common but it has happened. I haven't seen it on later distros though... Experience lets you get around the issue with using the extra boot parameters to diagnose or bypass the issues or you can get around them in other ways but that isn't something an inexperienced user may know how to do. I don't really think this is an issue to bash linux with though - I've also seen things akin to this on Windows where hardware detection loads incompatible hardware.
I've always had the opinion that IT should include as little clerical work as possible that cannot be automated. Therefore I've spent almost as much of my time writing scripts and programs to take data I know is in existence and putting it in lots of clerical reports over time as I have manually writing them. I mean, I do other things as well but if I didn't handle the reporting side automatically (for the most part) I'd have given up and left too.
However, to me, its this kind of thing that makes IT interesting - the ability to turn around the facts and figures, massaged and ready whenever some boss or other who doesn't understand IT for anything other than Excel comes along - more quickly than they would expect. The problem is to keep managers who know nothing out of the data - except maybe the odd reporting table and you are winning. Back who I started my first programming job this was easy - they didn't know what things were capable of and with a few reusable databases we could show them. Nowadays its a cat fight with every third party vendor to keep the automation we have and with every dumb know it all manager to stop them changing to systems that won't work.
Unfortunately manipulating the organisation into a way of working that allows data to be reused is half the battle in IT. The systems and services we run are largely about this - creating, storing, protecting and making the data as reusable as possible. If you see a system that does nothing to help - dump it! If one takes too long to develop - dump it! If one stores the data in a proprietary and incompatible manner when it doesn't need to - dump it!
IT is no longer a place to sit back - its getting quite as cut-throat as many boardrooms as we are effectively competing with a plethora of third party vendors. In this climate I can see why people want to leave, however, I quite enjoy it.
A natural born CEO? I know there are people who are, quite naturally it would appear, singleminded, obsessive, competitive and lots of other things from the latest book of management buzzwords but I would always question whether CEO was a natural profession. You could liken it to tribal chieftain or some such, however, I'm not certain that CEOs would succeed at that in societies that do not match the current conditions.
Exactly! He's right - in the virtualisation scenario a single server is not important. Your virtual servers are important. With virtualisation - if you've designed your clusters correctly, the servers that are brought back online have all their hardware checks taking place before your virtual servers start running on the nodes anyway. A dead server or a required cluster aware service fails to start - no downtime. You're still running all your virtual servers on other hardware - just not as much of it as the load required is less. All you are losing by shutting down nodes is spare headroom capacity during the hours it is not required.
Forgive me - I seem to have had a case of grammar ineptitude. That should have read,"I think people often forget that air conditioning isn't actually a cooling solution - if you take the complete picture."
Good point, however, since this is just thermodynamics - why do we actively cool systems? Managed properly the heat should be able to be utilised in ways far more effective than air conditioning. I think people often forget that air conditioning isn't actually a cooling solution if you take the whole picture. You are providing more energy and therefore more heat to make a small area temporarily cooler.