Again, depends if you need bulk storage, or fast i/o. If, to get the IO throughput required, you need to purchase far more hard drive spindles than you otherwise would need for the capacity required, then the total amount of storage you get being less with SSD may not be an issue (so long as it is "enough"). e.g. (fake numbers), if you need say 100k iops and 1tb of space, this could perhaps be done with 10 magnetic disks, or 2 SSDs. the additional space provided by the magnetic disk is of no use if your only reason for purchasing multiple disks is to gain IOPs.
Many big corps like ebay are likely far more concerned with gaining higher throughput than more storage space.
essentially because SSD has far better IOPs, you need less units to get the same speed. So you can cut the size of the storage array in half. Ebay are clearly io bound rather than needing huge storage space. So for them, its a win.
It comes back to using the correct tool for the job. Forget what the media release says, use what works. If you're after a laptop OS FreeBSD is not it. Linux is not really there either. Windows has its problems as well. The only laptop I've seen that actually reliably works as advertised with suspend/restore/etc in a reliable manner is a Mac.
.. the cost of a software license pales in comparison to the cost of switching due to (in no particular order): certifying your mission critical apps, lost time due to reinstalling the OS on every PC you have, dealing with 2 different environments if you don't, re-training users and dealing with general fall-out. Never mind the associated risks with getting halfway through the change to find some showstopper, or paying for the employee time to attempt to pre-empt these before starting.
Bad economy = maintain status quo. NOT go for high-risk/potentially high return change.
Thing is, network owners WANT to be able to control what their network is being used for. If you're a carrier and simply just sell pipes, sure - open access from point to point. CHarge by the gig, whatever.
If you're an endpoint, you sure as shit want to make sure that only the traffic you want reaching your devices is actually allowed through.
Exactly. End-to-end as a mandatory access scenario is for GNU hippies like RMS who believe in unicorns and that everybody should hold hands an sing.
The ABILITY to do end to end transit when both parties agree to such is a very good thing to have, yes - but to assume that end-to-end should always work in the real world where we have assholes out there who want to rip you off (money, cpu, bandwidth, etc) and basically fuck you over is never going to be realistic.
NIce troll. You know, except for stuff like ZFS, Dtrace, and other "not invented here" stuff that the linux crowd refuse to embrace to maintain some semblance of compatibility with the rest of the world. But yes, they suffer from many of the same problems, though to a lesser degree, as linux. Given that the desktop is not the target environment for FreeBSD, the lack of wireless N is of little consequence. Couldn't care less if my firewall has wireless N or not, however i do care that it can sit there and process packets in a reliable manner without needing to be patched every 5 minutes (2 security updates for FreeBSD this year in total) or breaking in strange and mysterious ways when I *do* patch it, like Linux.
Given that the average life expectancy for a PC is 3-5 years, and microsoft stopped shipping XP in volume about 3 years ago, XP won't be around much longer.
That's true. He is also free to continue pushing the GPLed version that has already been released. You cannot retroactively de-GPL code.
Only if he was entitled to actually publish it in the first place. If the company paid him to write it, or he wrote it whilst employed by them under a contract stating that all works produced reverted to company ownership, then he's liable to be sued for publishing company IP (NOT HIS) without proper authorisation.
Just because someone releases something as GPL - if it was not authorised for release, and the copyright holder has not agreed to its release then its not likely to legally remain GPL.
This is the sort of thing you should make extremely clear between yourself and the company prior to release. I suspect if this lad goes to court trying to get the company to release code, they're likely to sue HIM into oblivion - with much deeper pockets and the law on their side.
I'd re-read your employment contract, because unless you're extremely lucky or don't work in... well... any industry involving technology or process invention then I'd suggest there's a very good chance that your contract states that anything you develop (even at home) whilst under their employ is theirs.
ugliness is subjective. NSX came out around the time of the 355, testarossa, F40, etc.
But all that is beside the point.
Never said apple are un-assailable. The point being - you can compare items on spec sheet numbers, but there are subjective things (such as ugliness or lack of it) that don't show on a spec sheet. Your example of the 430 interior for one - thats not a spec sheet item, and if you were comparing numbers on a bit of paper, it wouldn't rate a mention. You think its ugly. I personally don't but thats my opinion. Spec sheet doesn't take that into account at all.
It's the same with electronics gear. For example - Apple screens are excellent. Not necessarily in terms of the pixel resolution, but colour reproduction, viewing angle, and brightness consistency across the entire screen - a number of factors that aren't often on the spec sheet. Apple touch pads are second to none. OS X is only available on Mac, etc. Whether or not these things matter to you, only you can decide once using the device. They are part of the complete package, however and not on the spec sheet.
I'm a motorcyclist so I'll use a bike analogy:D On paper all the Jap 600cc supersports are within 5% of each other on power, weight, top sped, quarter mile, etc. However they all feel very different to actually ride - and this doesn't show when simply comparing spec sheets.
1. Did you write it on work time. 2. Even if you did not write it on work time, did you write it whilst employed there, after signing a contract signing over rights to all works you produce (whilst under their employment) related to the industry you work in, to the company?
If either 1 or 2 are true, then sorry, the company owns it. Workplace contracts: read them.
Having done the linux thing for years (started with slackware in 96) i have to say I agree. FreeBSD is better in that respect (they generally don't break shit from release to release - linux on the other hand has previously swapped my DMZ and OUTSIDE nics when i upgraded the kernel due to different hardware detection order) but its still not exactly user friendly. Part of the problem with linux is no stable ABI for releasing binary only drivers. Yes. We get it. Open souce people would prefer to have source for drivers.
However, the alternative is less drivers available. Get the market share THEN demand open drivers. Trying to dictate to hardware vendors how they shall support your product when you have a miniscule market share is never going to get you anywhere.
Since when is installing alterntiaves to known insecure software and following security best practice by not running everything as administrator not simple?
This, a million times this. Apple do not compete on spec vs price. However, in actual use their gear is generally pretty bloody hard to beat, and its also why they're so anal about protecting the IOS user interface and iphone/ipad styling.
Comparing spec sheets between apple and clone equipment doesn't show the whole story. Go and actually USE the devices back to back and pick which one you prefer. For some people the trade-offs go in favour of apple, for others they don't.
Another car analogy: its like comparing a 400hp turbo jap import against a Ferrari F430. Power:weight may be similar, on paper spec may be similar, but i guarantee you that the F430 is a more complete package.
For whom? Dead virus infected PCs drive PC sales, which drive microsoft OEM licenses. Try convincing the shareholders your idea is a good option, and i'm sure you'll be laughed at all the way to the bank. Microsoft's current model has proven to be in he top 2 most successful software marketing strategies of all time.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, depends if you need bulk storage, or fast i/o. If, to get the IO throughput required, you need to purchase far more hard drive spindles than you otherwise would need for the capacity required, then the total amount of storage you get being less with SSD may not be an issue (so long as it is "enough"). e.g. (fake numbers), if you need say 100k iops and 1tb of space, this could perhaps be done with 10 magnetic disks, or 2 SSDs. the additional space provided by the magnetic disk is of no use if your only reason for purchasing multiple disks is to gain IOPs.
Many big corps like ebay are likely far more concerned with gaining higher throughput than more storage space.
essentially because SSD has far better IOPs, you need less units to get the same speed. So you can cut the size of the storage array in half. Ebay are clearly io bound rather than needing huge storage space. So for them, its a win.
For others, maybe not so much.
For sites like ebay i have no doubt this makes sense. For the average small business I suspect they are far less IO bound and need storage...
It comes back to using the correct tool for the job. Forget what the media release says, use what works. If you're after a laptop OS FreeBSD is not it. Linux is not really there either. Windows has its problems as well. The only laptop I've seen that actually reliably works as advertised with suspend/restore/etc in a reliable manner is a Mac.
Bad economy = maintain status quo. NOT go for high-risk/potentially high return change.
I do this network shit for a living. I'm aware of what I'm talking about, perhaps you misunderstood my point.
Thing is, network owners WANT to be able to control what their network is being used for. If you're a carrier and simply just sell pipes, sure - open access from point to point. CHarge by the gig, whatever.
If you're an endpoint, you sure as shit want to make sure that only the traffic you want reaching your devices is actually allowed through.
Exactly. End-to-end as a mandatory access scenario is for GNU hippies like RMS who believe in unicorns and that everybody should hold hands an sing.
The ABILITY to do end to end transit when both parties agree to such is a very good thing to have, yes - but to assume that end-to-end should always work in the real world where we have assholes out there who want to rip you off (money, cpu, bandwidth, etc) and basically fuck you over is never going to be realistic.
NIce troll. You know, except for stuff like ZFS, Dtrace, and other "not invented here" stuff that the linux crowd refuse to embrace to maintain some semblance of compatibility with the rest of the world. But yes, they suffer from many of the same problems, though to a lesser degree, as linux. Given that the desktop is not the target environment for FreeBSD, the lack of wireless N is of little consequence. Couldn't care less if my firewall has wireless N or not, however i do care that it can sit there and process packets in a reliable manner without needing to be patched every 5 minutes (2 security updates for FreeBSD this year in total) or breaking in strange and mysterious ways when I *do* patch it, like Linux.
old devices need upgrading for ipv6. including: desktops, routers and.... *gasp* firewalls.
... with tabs that take up more room due to being curved
Because just about zero people care about vector based video.
Given that the average life expectancy for a PC is 3-5 years, and microsoft stopped shipping XP in volume about 3 years ago, XP won't be around much longer.
The contract that defines your pay level, hours of work, and other conditions.
Kinda contrary to the fact that he was "working day and night for the company" as someone reposted above (from his blog).
If he was "working for the company day and night" then surely he was writing this code whilst working on their project, or under their employ.
Only if he was entitled to actually publish it in the first place. If the company paid him to write it, or he wrote it whilst employed by them under a contract stating that all works produced reverted to company ownership, then he's liable to be sued for publishing company IP (NOT HIS) without proper authorisation.
Just because someone releases something as GPL - if it was not authorised for release, and the copyright holder has not agreed to its release then its not likely to legally remain GPL.
This is the sort of thing you should make extremely clear between yourself and the company prior to release. I suspect if this lad goes to court trying to get the company to release code, they're likely to sue HIM into oblivion - with much deeper pockets and the law on their side.
I'd re-read your employment contract, because unless you're extremely lucky or don't work in ... well... any industry involving technology or process invention then I'd suggest there's a very good chance that your contract states that anything you develop (even at home) whilst under their employ is theirs.
ugliness is subjective. NSX came out around the time of the 355, testarossa, F40, etc.
But all that is beside the point.
Never said apple are un-assailable. The point being - you can compare items on spec sheet numbers, but there are subjective things (such as ugliness or lack of it) that don't show on a spec sheet. Your example of the 430 interior for one - thats not a spec sheet item, and if you were comparing numbers on a bit of paper, it wouldn't rate a mention. You think its ugly. I personally don't but thats my opinion. Spec sheet doesn't take that into account at all.
It's the same with electronics gear. For example - Apple screens are excellent. Not necessarily in terms of the pixel resolution, but colour reproduction, viewing angle, and brightness consistency across the entire screen - a number of factors that aren't often on the spec sheet. Apple touch pads are second to none. OS X is only available on Mac, etc. Whether or not these things matter to you, only you can decide once using the device. They are part of the complete package, however and not on the spec sheet.
I'm a motorcyclist so I'll use a bike analogy :D On paper all the Jap 600cc supersports are within 5% of each other on power, weight, top sped, quarter mile, etc. However they all feel very different to actually ride - and this doesn't show when simply comparing spec sheets.
1. Did you write it on work time. 2. Even if you did not write it on work time, did you write it whilst employed there, after signing a contract signing over rights to all works you produce (whilst under their employment) related to the industry you work in, to the company?
If either 1 or 2 are true, then sorry, the company owns it. Workplace contracts: read them.
Having done the linux thing for years (started with slackware in 96) i have to say I agree. FreeBSD is better in that respect (they generally don't break shit from release to release - linux on the other hand has previously swapped my DMZ and OUTSIDE nics when i upgraded the kernel due to different hardware detection order) but its still not exactly user friendly. Part of the problem with linux is no stable ABI for releasing binary only drivers. Yes. We get it. Open souce people would prefer to have source for drivers.
However, the alternative is less drivers available. Get the market share THEN demand open drivers. Trying to dictate to hardware vendors how they shall support your product when you have a miniscule market share is never going to get you anywhere.
Since when is installing alterntiaves to known insecure software and following security best practice by not running everything as administrator not simple?
This, a million times this. Apple do not compete on spec vs price. However, in actual use their gear is generally pretty bloody hard to beat, and its also why they're so anal about protecting the IOS user interface and iphone/ipad styling.
Comparing spec sheets between apple and clone equipment doesn't show the whole story. Go and actually USE the devices back to back and pick which one you prefer. For some people the trade-offs go in favour of apple, for others they don't.
Another car analogy: its like comparing a 400hp turbo jap import against a Ferrari F430. Power:weight may be similar, on paper spec may be similar, but i guarantee you that the F430 is a more complete package.
You claiming Linux or OS X has an equal market share to XP now?
For whom? Dead virus infected PCs drive PC sales, which drive microsoft OEM licenses. Try convincing the shareholders your idea is a good option, and i'm sure you'll be laughed at all the way to the bank. Microsoft's current model has proven to be in he top 2 most successful software marketing strategies of all time.
Is this really a surprise?