You're absolutely right. VB may have still come out on top for "building business applications" but who did they ask? "Developers." That's a pretty big umbrella, and how was the question phrased? What were the other languages that made up the last 35%?
The best thing about this article is that first posters can mention Beowulf clusters and actually be on topic. Thanks, Alan!
It's an interesting sound bite piece, but I think he fails to address the main area of resistance to Open Source, the loss of intellectual property. If a software company has a long R&D before receiving any income on a product, then they immediately release that product as Open Source, competitors can use the source code at no charge.
Of course, the competitors could not possibly understand the product as well as the inventors, so no PHB in his right mind would choose a cheaper solution over a better solution, right?
A middle-ground solution could be providing the source code to the company with the provision that it can't be disclosed to a competitor. That is, use a very limited source code liscense rather than Open Source.
This doesn't apply to the use of the Linux operating system in the workplace, which is, of course, a win-win solution. The initial investment has been recouped by the inventor(s) and only goodness can follow in the wake of this ship of code. (insert birds chirping happily)
Perl5 is actively maintained by someone other than Larry. Perl6 is being written by someone other than Larry.
That's the beauty of open source, isn't it? Larry Wall is not perl. He couldn't stop perl if he wanted to.
People are not just brands, but they can be used for branding purposes. Perl has benefitted because Larry Wall is an excellent spokesperson. Oreilly has benefitted because Larry Wall is an excellent brand.
The 'superstars' of the Open Source community, like Linus and Larry Wall, are complete human beings, with all of the depth and complexity you would expect from a real person, but they can be used for branding purposes.
Larry Wall is much more than just perl, but since perl cannot be owned, Oreilly bought the next best thing, Larry himself. I don't say this to be critical of either Larry or Oreilly. Larry has not sold out, or betrayed anyone. He does what he wants to do and is well compensated for it. The perl community benefits, Oreilly benefits, Larry benefits, but one way Oreilly benefits is because they get exclusive use of the Larry Wall brand.
Unlike a bar of soap, Larry could pack up and tell Oreilly to find someone else.
Some might say that this dehumanizes Larry Wall, that he shouldn't allow his name and personality to be used like this, but in the end, he will not be remembered as a brand, but as the complex person that he is.
Normally I stay clear of the whole hacker/cracker thing, but did it ever occur to you that the guys from L0pht didn't raise the issue for a reason? Maybe L0pht doesn't give a rat's ass about the distinction and the perceived misuse by the press. Whatever the origin of either word, hacker has been in use for a relatively long time as a slang word for computer criminal. If I suddenly decide that I want people to refer to me as an Algorithm Distributor or Code Simian instead of programmer or developer, does that mean that anyone will actually start using those words? No. Not unless I found and fund a huge company of political correctness to trumpet the cause. Maybe the National Association for the Advancement of Algorithm Distributors.
You're right of course about the web servers. An expert - from L0pht or anywhere else - should have been consulted to enlighten MTV about the relative strengths and weaknesses of web servers.
If you look at this test as a contest between NT and Linux, then it proves nothing. Also, it's not an accurate test of ZD's abilities to secure a web server vs. another company.
It does provide a behind-the-scenes look at how both sides (for lack of a better word) work. Details were provided on how the system was secured and how it was compromised. An admin reading this article might see parallels to his own situation. A clueless newbie might find the details of the crack amusing.
I thought the article was well done. Both NT and Linux can be secured, but most aren't... at least not against a determined and skilled attacker.
I don't think open source is the solution. Who would be interested in maintaining and supporting an AOL client? What self-respecting hacker would devote time and resources to plugging a script-kiddie hole this lame?
From what I understand, the Trojan gets the password from the user's hard drive. It does not require them to type it in again. What kind of security model is this? Is the passwrod stored in a plain text file called password.txt, or maybe they give it a.aol extension to really throw off those bad hackers!
Exam the business model carefully. If AOL were to open up their software, it would simply invite a competitor to offer the service in a more focused way. That is, an AOL for women only or musicians only, or whatever. Who would devote time to fixing bugs and providing improvements? Not geeks.
I really didn't mean for that to be a Troll. I just thought that the article was written in an unintentionally humorous way.
I'm a Mac Bigot, and I'm typing this on a rev. A iMac.
Seriously, this is a non-story. A chip has been delayed because of a bug. Even if you clock-chip your current G4 it won't matter because the OS can't load the chip enough to cause the error.
Indeed, another source said, this issue might never evince itself in Macs, since the OS doesn't manipulate data rapidly enough to cause the problem -- the glitch would more likely effect more-efficient embedded operating systems.
Ouch.
Press Release: The new bug will not likely affect your computer, the OS blows so hard you'll never notice.
I'm not apologizing for the reboot problem - it's unacceptable from any standpoint - but I think there will be a lot of workstation usage out of G4's. Even with MacOS X, it's just not a big server platform...
Please remove Blade Runner from the above list. If you take the time to understand what's going on in this movie, you'll see that it has nothing at all in common with the rest of the list.
( I haven't seen The Matrix, so it may not belong on the list, either. )
At the company where I work, a program trolls through our email and deletes anything older than a few months. The idea isn't to prevent any record under any circumstances, but to provide a common business practice which can be helpful if subpoenaed (?)
If no such common business practice exists, then it may seem as if a company is withholding evidence when they are not.
I think this has been discussed a little in another thread, but the Voight-Kampf test did not measure intelligence or the ability to "pass" as human, it measured empathy as a measure of true humanity.
This is an important distinction. The replicants were already Turing compliant, but they were not human. Dick believed that empathy was the defining aspect of being human. Dick's replicants would have been able to pass any Turing test with ease. In fact, they passed the most difficult Turing test of all: they were able to live in human society, hold jobs, sing Opera, make love; but they weren't human.
They [sic] key to stopping all this hacking is a massive worldwide sting. In fact, I suspect one is underway already, although I have no evidence of it. It's just a sense I have.
The key to stopping all this bad writing on the internet is a massive worldwide clue-by-four. In fact, I suspect one is hurtling toward my head right now, although I have no evidence of it. It's just a sense I have. Maybe I should ask my editor. Nevermind, he's been fired and replaced by Word 2000.
This is a great idea. Let's install the most byzantine operating system imaginable. Congress and tHoR will grind to a halt. Libertarianism through bad software! Bad UI coders of the world unite!
The discussion following this article is interesting, but did anyone else think this was a Slashtroll, that is, an article written with the intent to make it on Slashdot. The big key is actually mentioning/. in the text. About three of Byte's articles every week are of this variety, now it looks like Zdnet is learning a thing or two.
Slashdot Mirror
You'll need at least two if you want to be an architect. Three, if you expect to charge the big bucks.
You're absolutely right. VB may have still come out on top for "building business applications" but who did they ask? "Developers." That's a pretty big umbrella, and how was the question phrased? What were the other languages that made up the last 35%?
Because I care:
GUID
Win98 profiling
Professor Spokesman
Astroturf
Ads as news
Video
Hello "negative_karma" (if that is your real name).
/. login for trolls and karma lowering comments? I've thought about creating a Bat Guano account for just this purpose.
.sig and slyly irreverant user name.
Do you use this
I only ask because of your
The best thing about this article is that first posters can mention Beowulf clusters and actually be on topic. Thanks, Alan!
It's an interesting sound bite piece, but I think he fails to address the main area of resistance to Open Source, the loss of intellectual property. If a software company has a long R&D before receiving any income on a product, then they immediately release that product as Open Source, competitors can use the source code at no charge.
Of course, the competitors could not possibly understand the product as well as the inventors, so no PHB in his right mind would choose a cheaper solution over a better solution, right?
A middle-ground solution could be providing the source code to the company with the provision that it can't be disclosed to a competitor. That is, use a very limited source code liscense rather than Open Source.
This doesn't apply to the use of the Linux operating system in the workplace, which is, of course, a win-win solution. The initial investment has been recouped by the inventor(s) and only goodness can follow in the wake of this ship of code. (insert birds chirping happily)
You don't follow perl that closely do you?
No, I don't.
Perl5 is actively maintained by someone other than Larry. Perl6 is being written by someone other than Larry.
That's the beauty of open source, isn't it? Larry Wall is not perl. He couldn't stop perl if he wanted to.
People are not just brands, but they can be used for branding purposes. Perl has benefitted because Larry Wall is an excellent spokesperson. Oreilly has benefitted because Larry Wall is an excellent brand.
No, I don't think I missed your point.
The 'superstars' of the Open Source community, like Linus and Larry Wall, are complete human beings, with all of the depth and complexity you would expect from a real person, but they can be used for branding purposes.
Larry Wall is much more than just perl, but since perl cannot be owned, Oreilly bought the next best thing, Larry himself. I don't say this to be critical of either Larry or Oreilly. Larry has not sold out, or betrayed anyone. He does what he wants to do and is well compensated for it. The perl community benefits, Oreilly benefits, Larry benefits, but one way Oreilly benefits is because they get exclusive use of the Larry Wall brand.
Unlike a bar of soap, Larry could pack up and tell Oreilly to find someone else.
Some might say that this dehumanizes Larry Wall, that he shouldn't allow his name and personality to be used like this, but in the end, he will not be remembered as a brand, but as the complex person that he is.
Company : Brand
The Coca Cola Company : Coke, Surge,etc...
3Com : Palm
Intel : Pentium
Oreilly & Assoc. : Larry Wall, Perl
Transmeta : Linus
Normally I stay clear of the whole hacker/cracker thing, but did it ever occur to you that the guys from L0pht didn't raise the issue for a reason? Maybe L0pht doesn't give a rat's ass about the distinction and the perceived misuse by the press. Whatever the origin of either word, hacker has been in use for a relatively long time as a slang word for computer criminal. If I suddenly decide that I want people to refer to me as an Algorithm Distributor or Code Simian instead of programmer or developer, does that mean that anyone will actually start using those words? No. Not unless I found and fund a huge company of political correctness to trumpet the cause. Maybe the National Association for the Advancement of Algorithm Distributors.
You're right of course about the web servers. An expert - from L0pht or anywhere else - should have been consulted to enlighten MTV about the relative strengths and weaknesses of web servers.
Thanks for parsing this, for a minute I thought you were Not A Retarded Slashdotter.
I almost didn't take your post seriously.
Hey, moron! You misspelled endlessly. If you can't type a word as simple as that, head back to segfault or alt.moron.mindless.rambling!
BTW, whatever window manager you use blows, unless of course you're not on Linux, in which case you blow!
What does this test prove?
If you look at this test as a contest between NT and Linux, then it proves nothing. Also, it's not an accurate test of ZD's abilities to secure a web server vs. another company.
It does provide a behind-the-scenes look at how both sides (for lack of a better word) work. Details were provided on how the system was secured and how it was compromised. An admin reading this article might see parallels to his own situation. A clueless newbie might find the details of the crack amusing.
I thought the article was well done. Both NT and Linux can be secured, but most aren't... at least not against a determined and skilled attacker.
I don't think open source is the solution. Who would be interested in maintaining and supporting an AOL client? What self-respecting hacker would devote time and resources to plugging a script-kiddie hole this lame?
.aol extension to really throw off those bad hackers!
From what I understand, the Trojan gets the password from the user's hard drive. It does not require them to type it in again. What kind of security model is this? Is the passwrod stored in a plain text file called password.txt, or maybe they give it a
Exam the business model carefully. If AOL were to open up their software, it would simply invite a competitor to offer the service in a more focused way. That is, an AOL for women only or musicians only, or whatever. Who would devote time to fixing bugs and providing improvements? Not geeks.
I really didn't mean for that to be a Troll. I just thought that the article was written in an unintentionally humorous way.
I'm a Mac Bigot, and I'm typing this on a rev. A iMac.
Seriously, this is a non-story. A chip has been delayed because of a bug. Even if you clock-chip your current G4 it won't matter because the OS can't load the chip enough to cause the error.
Indeed, another source said, this issue might never evince itself in Macs, since the OS doesn't manipulate data rapidly enough to cause the problem -- the glitch would more likely effect more-efficient embedded operating systems.
Ouch.
Press Release: The new bug will not likely affect your computer, the OS blows so hard you'll never notice.
G4's are usually going to be used as servers
I'm not apologizing for the reboot problem - it's unacceptable from any standpoint - but I think there will be a lot of workstation usage out of G4's. Even with MacOS X, it's just not a big server platform...
...yet.
Please remove Blade Runner from the above list. If you take the time to understand what's going on in this movie, you'll see that it has nothing at all in common with the rest of the list.
( I haven't seen The Matrix, so it may not belong on the list, either. )
You shouldn't have given it away, but I am shocked and amazed and delighted.
Mr. Gore, do you have any plans to invent an intRAnet to go with this fabulous internet of yours? My company sure could use one!
At the company where I work, a program trolls through our email and deletes anything older than a few months. The idea isn't to prevent any record under any circumstances, but to provide a common business practice which can be helpful if subpoenaed (?)
If no such common business practice exists, then it may seem as if a company is withholding evidence when they are not.
Has anyone noticed that "Harsh Realm" is the bastard offspring of "Strange Luck" and "VR-5" (or whatever it was called) ?
D. B. Sweeney plus virtual reality equals "Harsh Realm."
Don't worry, that sucking noise you hear is just the script.
I think this has been discussed a little in another thread, but the Voight-Kampf test did not measure intelligence or the ability to "pass" as human, it measured empathy as a measure of true humanity.
This is an important distinction. The replicants were already Turing compliant, but they were not human. Dick believed that empathy was the defining aspect of being human. Dick's replicants would have been able to pass any Turing test with ease. In fact, they passed the most difficult Turing test of all: they were able to live in human society, hold jobs, sing Opera, make love; but they weren't human.
They [sic] key to stopping all this hacking is a massive worldwide sting. In fact, I suspect one is underway already, although I have no evidence of it. It's just a sense I have.
The key to stopping all this bad writing on the internet is a massive worldwide clue-by-four. In fact, I suspect one is hurtling toward my head right now, although I have no evidence of it. It's just a sense I have. Maybe I should ask my editor. Nevermind, he's been fired and replaced by Word 2000.
This is a great idea. Let's install the most byzantine operating system imaginable. Congress and tHoR will grind to a halt. Libertarianism through bad software! Bad UI coders of the world unite!
The discussion following this article is interesting, but did anyone else think this was a Slashtroll, that is, an article written with the intent to make it on Slashdot. The big key is actually mentioning /. in the text. About three of Byte's articles every week are of this variety, now it looks like Zdnet is learning a thing or two.
Or a compliment for that matter.