The other consideration is that they estimated 0.1% of the energy would be needed to power 5 times more than we use currently (no pun intended). That means that _IF_ this is our only source of energy (which it won't be), we would be using such a small percentage of the energy that it the impact may be virtually impercievable.
Actually, many companys have been doing so for years with no problems. It is only the zeaolts for open-source that don't realize that not all good software comes from open-source.
Disclaimer: I am not Anti-Microsoft. Hell, I run apache on Win2K sometimes (GASP!)
Our company setup an Exchange server and standardized Outlook on every workstation a few years ago. The result:
We had to hire a very expensive exchange consultant.
The number of viruses that came into our system rose from virtually none to, "Let's have company meetings on virus saftey since it's happening so much".
The hardware and software resources for our mail systems rose at least twofold...
...while our downtime did the same thing.
I've never thought a simple mail server could use hundreds of megs of ram for a small company!
As a tech you have to tell management to listen to the experts (you and your team). I've found it's better to put your job on the line and fight for the Right Thing then succomb to management dictatorship. If they fire you, fine, they're idiots. You don't want to work for a company that doesn't value your expert opinion.
Now that we've told management to fsck themselves, we are running Qmail on linux. Our mail system now has over 3500 users and over 1000 domain names which runs better than Exchange did with only a few hundred users.
True, but on the flipside, _IF_ they actually come out with SMP in Q2 like planned, they will still be on scheduale. The reworked core may not be as major as you think, and I'd bet that Compaq and others aren't even planning on looking to P4 until early 2002 anyway. This still gives them over a year of P4 and over 6 months of the modified SMP P4
The Mustang had some serious fab-cost problems (mainly in the large amount of cache). There's nothing wrong with this if you can sell a large volume, but AMD just didn't see the volume for the server market right now.
With Intel lacking SMP support for the P4 through next year, AMD will be ahead with a Dual [name your Athlon variation here].
At the same time, this doesn't make Intel incompetent. Intel knows that most servers are not built on the latest chip, rather, chips that have been well tested. Server CPU's are usually a few steps before the top of the line. By the time Compaq, Dell, etc. are comfortable with the P4, SMP will most likely be available.
When one of our customers "moves" a domain name to our system we have a nightly perl script that does a regex on the whois record for their domain to see if they actually changed the DNS and Tech contact over to our systems.
Without whois, we would have a very hard time determining who had control over what domain, and where that domain was hosted!
The V5 6000 is not a potential failure. As announced on the 13th it IS a failure.
"While we are sympathetic to the disappointment this may cause to a small number of our loyal gaming consumers, we are looking forward to seeing this incredible technology marketed to the visual simulation industry where visual quality is the most important attribute."
I agree. I think that the Gartner Group just did a study that showed that almost 90% of IE users were willing to use another browser if it only had a plugable JVM.
We have flex time with core hours as well. A well organized company should not need to be chatting with eachother in meetings and the like all day long. As long as there are around 3 - 4 core hours a day, your productivity should only increase.
Amen! I can't tell you how many problems I've had with the registry. Doing any sort of automation is a PAIN with M$ stuff because you have to code through strange API's (ie ADSI) in VBScript (OT: VB is _NOT_ a real language!). However, If I want to config BIND, or Apache, I just have a perl script dynamically build out a zone or conf file respectively. It's also a _LOT_ less resource intensive to rebuild a plaintext conf file then it is to build out a config using ADSI or the registry COM.
I disagree with the fact that it is even a monopoly. I think if ATT or whoever spent the money to lay the lines, they should have exclusive rights as to what services they provide. If you didn't like TCI service, you have public airwaves (I've been living fine w/o the need for cable), and one if not two different satellite options. There is competition, just different technology.
Same with Internet. Other ISPs should not be allowed to leech off of ATT's cable lines, because those ISPs didn't build the infrastructure. There _IS_ competition: You have many options: DSL, Satellite, Dialup - all through different companies.
On a semi-serious note: this shows how although we've actually observed micro-evolution, macro-evolution is tough to believe (unless you have a lot of faith).
At least the exadrive doesn't look like a toy. What's up with the Network Engine's Fisher-Price like case? Pretty soon where going to have iStorage racks!
It wasn't pro-Microsoft, it was technically accurate. Michael decided not to be religious about it, just factually sound regardless of company (gasp). And, sad but true, I agree that IE is a far superior browser.
A couple of comments:
Abortion: My problem with voting democrat is not that they'll keep abortion legal - it should be (sad but true). However, it should _NOT_ be subsidized by the government, which the democrats have been doing. Now the government will take responsibilities for your (stupid) actions! Ludicrous!
Although Nader my unfairly try to make an economy where no salary is over $100K, the sad truth is that most people who make over $100K don't deserve it, and the people making them the money (eg working class) at $30-50K should be given a huge pay raise. Reward hard work but don't allow exploitation.
You are right on the money (no pun intended). Linux is a great server, and for most users (unless it's one of us slashdotters) linux is not a good alternative on the desktop. The only case where I disagree is with employees that do all of their work through your company intranet (web based, of course).
For example, you have 100 customer server rep's, and all of the account managing software, call tracking, incident response systems are web-based. Then you just need a 100 ThinkNic's which run Linux and are very tight. You really don't need anything but a browser.
Other than the above, I personally think that win2k makes a great workstation.
Preach it! I'm glad someone decided to mention the fact that Sharky's definition of low-end is way off. My 486DX2/66 works just fine! I'm just really surprised that no one seems to really realize what "low-end" means anymore.
I would have expected the majority of the postings on/. to comment on this outrageous issue!
As far as "banning" exploits, there's too much legal precendence to allow this. Sure, drugs are illigal, but you can learn about the growing of weed on the 'net. Or what about bombs? Remember those "forbidden subjects" CD-Roms, and all of the "ancarchy cookbook" volumes? Not to mention all of the web sites inspired by such subject matter.
They may make cracking illigal but they can't prohibit us from discussing computer security or posting exploits.
Force you? That's like saying if you wrote a utility that only worked on Linux that you where forcing people to move off of windows or mac to use your utility.
The user can not and should not have full control over how a site looks or performs. This promotes inconcitancy and eventually "web anarchy" - a company has a right to how their image appears.
If you can't be bothered to write something that works without crap like Javascript and Flash then you obviously don't want me at your site!
You're absolutly right. I'm looking for a more sophisticated user that allows me to use advanced technologies to enhance their web browsing experience. Those who do not appreciate it are a waste of bandwidth and CPU cycles.
Slashdot Mirror
The other consideration is that they estimated 0.1% of the energy would be needed to power 5 times more than we use currently (no pun intended). That means that _IF_ this is our only source of energy (which it won't be), we would be using such a small percentage of the energy that it the impact may be virtually impercievable.
Fast or not, your moral concious should prevent you from purchasing from Intel (as much as reasonably possible). Face Intel.
...If I lived in a country stupid enough to censor such things, I would most definatly use: http://www.anonymizer.com/.
And then they'll sue the creators of C for the unlicensed use of malloc.
You can't trust closed-source software. Period.
Actually, many companys have been doing so for years with no problems. It is only the zeaolts for open-source that don't realize that not all good software comes from open-source.
I thought you got banned from slashdot? Oh, I see, you changed your L to and I and a 1 to an L... very tricky.
Our company setup an Exchange server and standardized Outlook on every workstation a few years ago. The result:
- We had to hire a very expensive exchange consultant.
- The number of viruses that came into our system rose from virtually none to, "Let's have company meetings on virus saftey since it's happening so much".
- The hardware and software resources for our mail systems rose at least twofold...
- ...while our downtime did the same thing.
I've never thought a simple mail server could use hundreds of megs of ram for a small company!As a tech you have to tell management to listen to the experts (you and your team). I've found it's better to put your job on the line and fight for the Right Thing then succomb to management dictatorship. If they fire you, fine, they're idiots. You don't want to work for a company that doesn't value your expert opinion.
Now that we've told management to fsck themselves, we are running Qmail on linux. Our mail system now has over 3500 users and over 1000 domain names which runs better than Exchange did with only a few hundred users.
The bottom line: Exchange _REALLY_ sucks!
True, but on the flipside, _IF_ they actually come out with SMP in Q2 like planned, they will still be on scheduale. The reworked core may not be as major as you think, and I'd bet that Compaq and others aren't even planning on looking to P4 until early 2002 anyway. This still gives them over a year of P4 and over 6 months of the modified SMP P4
The Mustang had some serious fab-cost problems (mainly in the large amount of cache). There's nothing wrong with this if you can sell a large volume, but AMD just didn't see the volume for the server market right now.
With Intel lacking SMP support for the P4 through next year, AMD will be ahead with a Dual [name your Athlon variation here].
At the same time, this doesn't make Intel incompetent. Intel knows that most servers are not built on the latest chip, rather, chips that have been well tested. Server CPU's are usually a few steps before the top of the line. By the time Compaq, Dell, etc. are comfortable with the P4, SMP will most likely be available.
I would like to second this.
When one of our customers "moves" a domain name to our system we have a nightly perl script that does a regex on the whois record for their domain to see if they actually changed the DNS and Tech contact over to our systems.
Without whois, we would have a very hard time determining who had control over what domain, and where that domain was hosted!
RAMBUS would be better off doing some engineer-shopping to develop a truely competetive product to DDR-SDRAM.
The V5 6000 is not a potential failure. As announced on the 13th it IS a failure.
"While we are sympathetic to the disappointment this may cause to a small number of our loyal gaming consumers, we are looking forward to seeing this incredible technology marketed to the visual simulation industry where visual quality is the most important attribute."
I agree. I think that the Gartner Group just did a study that showed that almost 90% of IE users were willing to use another browser if it only had a plugable JVM.
We have flex time with core hours as well. A well organized company should not need to be chatting with eachother in meetings and the like all day long. As long as there are around 3 - 4 core hours a day, your productivity should only increase.
Amen! I can't tell you how many problems I've had with the registry. Doing any sort of automation is a PAIN with M$ stuff because you have to code through strange API's (ie ADSI) in VBScript (OT: VB is _NOT_ a real language!). However, If I want to config BIND, or Apache, I just have a perl script dynamically build out a zone or conf file respectively. It's also a _LOT_ less resource intensive to rebuild a plaintext conf file then it is to build out a config using ADSI or the registry COM.
I disagree with the fact that it is even a monopoly. I think if ATT or whoever spent the money to lay the lines, they should have exclusive rights as to what services they provide. If you didn't like TCI service, you have public airwaves (I've been living fine w/o the need for cable), and one if not two different satellite options. There is competition, just different technology.
Same with Internet. Other ISPs should not be allowed to leech off of ATT's cable lines, because those ISPs didn't build the infrastructure. There _IS_ competition: You have many options: DSL, Satellite, Dialup - all through different companies.
On a semi-serious note: this shows how although we've actually observed micro-evolution, macro-evolution is tough to believe (unless you have a lot of faith).
At least the exadrive doesn't look like a toy. What's up with the Network Engine's Fisher-Price like case? Pretty soon where going to have iStorage racks!
It wasn't pro-Microsoft, it was technically accurate. Michael decided not to be religious about it, just factually sound regardless of company (gasp). And, sad but true, I agree that IE is a far superior browser.
A couple of comments: Abortion: My problem with voting democrat is not that they'll keep abortion legal - it should be (sad but true). However, it should _NOT_ be subsidized by the government, which the democrats have been doing. Now the government will take responsibilities for your (stupid) actions! Ludicrous! Although Nader my unfairly try to make an economy where no salary is over $100K, the sad truth is that most people who make over $100K don't deserve it, and the people making them the money (eg working class) at $30-50K should be given a huge pay raise. Reward hard work but don't allow exploitation.
You are right on the money (no pun intended). Linux is a great server, and for most users (unless it's one of us slashdotters) linux is not a good alternative on the desktop. The only case where I disagree is with employees that do all of their work through your company intranet (web based, of course).
For example, you have 100 customer server rep's, and all of the account managing software, call tracking, incident response systems are web-based. Then you just need a 100 ThinkNic's which run Linux and are very tight. You really don't need anything but a browser.
Other than the above, I personally think that win2k makes a great workstation.
Preach it! I'm glad someone decided to mention the fact that Sharky's definition of low-end is way off. My 486DX2/66 works just fine! I'm just really surprised that no one seems to really realize what "low-end" means anymore.
/. to comment on this outrageous issue!
I would have expected the majority of the postings on
That's the same question I asked! I'm on a PII350 w/a voodoo3 and I'm running most everything at very reasonable speeds!
As far as "banning" exploits, there's too much legal precendence to allow this. Sure, drugs are illigal, but you can learn about the growing of weed on the 'net. Or what about bombs? Remember those "forbidden subjects" CD-Roms, and all of the "ancarchy cookbook" volumes? Not to mention all of the web sites inspired by such subject matter.
They may make cracking illigal but they can't prohibit us from discussing computer security or posting exploits.
Force you? That's like saying if you wrote a utility that only worked on Linux that you where forcing people to move off of windows or mac to use your utility.
The user can not and should not have full control over how a site looks or performs. This promotes inconcitancy and eventually "web anarchy" - a company has a right to how their image appears.
If you can't be bothered to write something that works without crap like Javascript and Flash then you obviously don't want me at your site!
You're absolutly right. I'm looking for a more sophisticated user that allows me to use advanced technologies to enhance their web browsing experience. Those who do not appreciate it are a waste of bandwidth and CPU cycles.