I used to read Wired religiously. Once it started being published in the UK, I found it much easier to track down, and it was a monthly must have. I didn't always agree with it, but I found it fascinating for it's fervour and attitude.
Then the UK arm collapsed and I didn't see it for months. When I finally tracked a copy down, nearly every article was about business - who was merging, who was buying, who was selling.
I don't care about that. I wasn't to know who's designing, who's making, who's _thinking_. Wired stopped being the magazine that Internet Doers wanted to read and started being the magazine Internet Buyers wanted to read.
I'll miss it (and Byte another magazine with an enthusiasm for all things new).
While I don't like a lot of Microsoft's code, this isn't all their fault.
If Micron can't write a decent graphics driver (and it's possible, as lots of other graphics drivers _do_ work), that's Micron's fault, not Microsoft's.
A lot of the faults I see (as a tech support person) relate to buggy sound, video and printer drivers provided by 3rd person manufacturers.
Microsoft is nowhere near perfect, but they aren't to blame for _everything_.
Why should internet calls be free? If you want unmetered access, get a leased line or get a cable connection or some other connection that's _designed_ to be connected 24/7. Your call uses infrastructure designed for phone calls of a limited length with only a small percentage of people involved in a call at any one time.
Why should the phone companies give you something for free that costs them money by the minute???
Point to Point connections can never be 'free' for net use, because you need a seperate connection for each user and the phone network was never designed to take any more than 1/10 of the users on-line at any one time.
ADSL and other 'connectionless' systems are what you need, where once your data is on the net, it can travel by whatever means necessary. POTS was never designed to sustain the kind of connections you want.
Wasn't this already tried in the UK? I'm sure one of the banks over here ran a trial with a few machines. It was very popular IIRC. People loved being able to do without their cards.
I don't think he's saying what you think he is. I think he's saying that we don't read hypertext the way we read a book, following the thread of an authors meaning from the start of the book through to the end, but that we read it by zig-zagging from document to document, picking up snippets here and there, like eavesdropping on a thousand educated conversations.
It's a different style of learning, and one that includes a variety of contradictory 'facts'. Unlike book learning, where my school books never disagreed with each otehr becuase they were all chosen by the same people.
We're running a small network (15 machines) and we have a mail server, news server, internet gateway and 2 printers all hanging off of one machine, for less than Microsoft are charging for their thin server.
The machine is, admittedly, a Windows 98 box, which is regularly taken down (once a week) and rebooted. But it works, it's fast and it didn't cost $1500 (it's a pentium 90 with 64MB of RAM).
I can't see where Microsoft's Market for their thin server is.
Well, if they're releasing just thje kernel, then it's not going to be 30 million lines of code, is it?
30 Million appears ot cover _everything_, so if they released just the kernel it would be a lot smaller than that. Also, surely haveing the kernel be open source would make it a lot easier for the people behind WINE and similar things.
Remember, those 30 million lines of code are actually an awful lot of smaller programs running together. It almost certianly includes IE, DirectX, COM, Notepad, Minesweeper, Wordpad, Hyperterminal and 5000 other small programs and DLL's.
That would make it a lot easier to play around with than Mozilla was. You could just modify the TCP/IP stack, or just the Direct3D code, or whatever.
This was at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/1999/0 3-16sql.htm
There's also a long piece on how they think Oracle tried to skew the contest. It's interesting, but I don't know nearly enough about high end servers to comment.
This month, as part of the premiere event of the "getting Results" Web cast series, Microsoft released its response time to the same query issued in the Challenge, announcing that it had achieved an execution time of 1.075 seconds on query five, significantly faster than Oracle's original mark and on par with Oracle's recent result of 0.7 seconds. Microsoft's results were achieved using Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 Enterprise Edition for a total cost of less than $600,000.
"Our solution not only matches Oracle's performance, but it does so at about one-sixteenth the price," says Leland. "It demonstrates that Microsoft offers powerful data warehousing and business intelligence solutions at a cost of ownership that is in line with real-world business realities. That's the core of our approach: to provide business solutions that drive down the cost of ownership and maximize return."
I don't believe in any morality beyond the personal. If you can knock down the walls of reality, they weren't very real. I don't even know what the walls of purpose are.....
Slashdot Mirror
I don#'t get paid overtime.
So I don't work it.
There's a general lack of technically skilled workers, so they can't fire me. I do my job and then I go home.
On the way past, I laugh at hte people working for free.
Delphi is one of the larger Windows IDE's.
How would you like to be able to write one program to work in Windows and on Linux?
I used to read Wired religiously. Once it started being published in the UK, I found it much easier to track down, and it was a monthly must have. I didn't always agree with it, but I found it fascinating for it's fervour and attitude.
Then the UK arm collapsed and I didn't see it for months. When I finally tracked a copy down, nearly every article was about business - who was merging, who was buying, who was selling.
I don't care about that. I wasn't to know who's designing, who's making, who's _thinking_. Wired stopped being the magazine that Internet Doers wanted to read and started being the magazine Internet Buyers wanted to read.
I'll miss it (and Byte another magazine with an enthusiasm for all things new).
But then, I have Slashdot now.
While I don't like a lot of Microsoft's code, this isn't all their fault.
If Micron can't write a decent graphics driver (and it's possible, as lots of other graphics drivers _do_ work), that's Micron's fault, not Microsoft's.
A lot of the faults I see (as a tech support person) relate to buggy sound, video and printer drivers provided by 3rd person manufacturers.
Microsoft is nowhere near perfect, but they aren't to blame for _everything_.
Samael
Why should internet calls be free? If you want unmetered access, get a leased line or get a cable connection or some other connection that's _designed_ to be connected 24/7. Your call uses infrastructure designed for phone calls of a limited length with only a small percentage of people involved in a call at any one time.
Why should the phone companies give you something for free that costs them money by the minute???
Point to Point connections can never be 'free' for net use, because you need a seperate connection for each user and the phone network was never designed to take any more than 1/10 of the users on-line at any one time.
ADSL and other 'connectionless' systems are what you need, where once your data is on the net, it can travel by whatever means necessary. POTS was never designed to sustain the kind of connections you want.
Wasn't this already tried in the UK? I'm sure one of the banks over here ran a trial with a few machines. It was very popular IIRC. People loved being able to do without their cards.
I don't think he's saying what you think he is.
I think he's saying that we don't read hypertext the way we read a book, following the thread of an authors meaning from the start of the book through to the end, but that we read it by zig-zagging from document to document, picking up snippets here and there, like eavesdropping on a thousand educated conversations.
It's a different style of learning, and one that includes a variety of contradictory 'facts'. Unlike book learning, where my school books never disagreed with each otehr becuase they were all chosen by the same people.
We're running a small network (15 machines) and we have a mail server, news server, internet gateway and 2 printers all hanging off of one machine, for less than Microsoft are charging for their thin server.
The machine is, admittedly, a Windows 98 box, which is regularly taken down (once a week) and rebooted. But it works, it's fast and it didn't cost $1500 (it's a pentium 90 with 64MB of RAM).
I can't see where Microsoft's Market for their thin server is.
Well, if they're releasing just thje kernel, then it's not going to be 30 million lines of code, is it?
30 Million appears ot cover _everything_, so if they released just the kernel it would be a lot smaller than that. Also, surely haveing the kernel be open source would make it a lot easier for the people behind WINE and similar things.
Remember, those 30 million lines of code are actually an awful lot of smaller programs running together. It almost certianly includes IE, DirectX, COM, Notepad, Minesweeper, Wordpad, Hyperterminal and 5000 other small programs and DLL's.
That would make it a lot easier to play around with than Mozilla was. You could just modify the TCP/IP stack, or just the Direct3D code, or whatever.
Al Gore invented the Internet, Time Bernere-Lee invented the web.
Do you newbies know nothing?
Samael
This was at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/1999/0 3-16sql.htm
There's also a long piece on how they think Oracle tried to skew the contest. It's interesting, but I don't know nearly enough about high end servers to comment.
This month, as part of the premiere event of the "getting Results" Web cast series, Microsoft released its response time to the same query issued in the Challenge, announcing that it had achieved an execution time of 1.075 seconds on query five, significantly faster than Oracle's original mark and on par with Oracle's recent result of 0.7 seconds. Microsoft's results were achieved using Microsoft SQL Server 7.0 Enterprise Edition for a total cost of less than $600,000.
"Our solution not only matches Oracle's performance, but it does so at about one-sixteenth the price," says Leland. "It demonstrates that Microsoft offers powerful data warehousing and business intelligence solutions at a cost of ownership that is in line with real-world business realities. That's the core of our approach: to provide business solutions that drive down the cost of ownership and maximize return."
I don't believe in any morality beyond the personal.
If you can knock down the walls of reality, they weren't very real.
I don't even know what the walls of purpose are.....