Mozilla have fallen into the classic trap of trying to expand its user base via increasing features, as opposed to keeping its user base by increasing quality.
We don't need new features directly in Firefox. Plugins do that. Remember that long ago the project made a conscious choice to take a performance hit to provide third-party access into the browser via the elaborate XUL and plugins frameworks, to minimize pushing code and features onto users who don't need them.
Businesses and networks with lots of of kit which can't store a full IPv4 table now also would not want to spend several $10e9 to replace their routers which can use larger CARAM to support IPv6 tables. If each residential customer fully utilized their 2^64 addresses for random devices and expects them to be publicly routable, the resources required to support each CPE would exceed the resources to route the entirety of the current IPv4 Internet.
One could argue that there are approximately five Internet management cultures, represented roughly by the RIRs and their NOGs (e.g. ARIN and NANOG in North America). Based on 2008 data, RIPE and ARIN countries seem to be doing fairly well in IPv6 HTTP and DNS support, APNIC and maybe RIPE seem ahead for SMTP:
Yes. Some context would be helpful, including what's behind the firewall, the kinds of traffic you think you're accepting, and public expectations of the services available.
Visualizing by port or protocol would be a great way to begin figure out what the traffic is.
Also, CERT and related may remember if any interesting 0-days were released just prior to the first band, etc.
RTFA: "During periods when the station is actively communicating with the ground using high-speed Ku-band communications, the crew will have remote access to the Internet via a ground computer. The crew will view the desktop of the ground computer using an onboard laptop and interact remotely with their keyboard touchpad."
It's difficult, but not impossible, to spread malware via RDP or VNC or X or whatever.
I choose to use Bing with both Chrome and Safari because GIS reminds me that it was designed in the 1990s, whereas Bing's image search has a more functional UI. I also prefer Bing's video search, which naturally extends the idea of the content preview which made Google good in text searches back in the day.
In either case, OSS isn't just a licensing model, it's at least a method of organization and operation, if not a model of how to get things done.
Widespread adoption alone does not make OSS as a licensing model, or as a technology, or as a method of organization, or as a paradigm sustainable or not sustainable. I want to believe that open source is leaving something behind other than added commercial or monetary value to whatever it touches, but it seems despairingly difficult to get that point across on this forum today.
You've neglected much, but especially my last two sentences. I'm not dismissing just a huge section of the marketplace, I'm dismissing the explicitly commercial software marketplace as a validator of the true value of OSS.
Gasoline-powered vehicles have been adopted by more and larger companies around the world than F/OSS, and have been around much longer. That does not automatically make any of the technologies or companies around gasoline-powered vehicles sustainable.
Sourceforge lists 230,000 projects. Taking that as a lower bound for the number of open source projects out there, the list of 500 successful projects you could cite would constitute 0.2% of the listed projects. Wikipedia lists just 16 significant open source organizations. This doesn't scream commercial success or sustainability or robustness of the model in the general case, relative to all the other successful firms who do not operate on the open source model. Even if you made Google an open source company, it's market capitalization of $150 billion would represent 6.5% of the market capitalization of the top 50 NASDAQ companies. A similar argument obtains for Oracle. Clearly, Google is not anywhere near being a primarily open source company, and no combination of the world's open source companies would combine to approach the market capitalization of Google. At $6 billion, Red Hat is only an order of magnitude out.
As with the typical long tail, the top 20 projects look like they account for more external-facing activity than all the remaining projects combined. With respect to internal activity, again the top 50 projects account for more activity than the other 229,950 projects. (Note that my estimates could be off by a factor of 10 in either direction and not affect the substance of the argument.) This doesn't look very sustainable in the repeatability sense, although it might be strongly sustainable in the leaving better things for the future sense.
We would need some kind of objective indicator of strong sustainability (perhaps like a triple bottom line) to be able to meaningfully discuss the sustainability of the open source model.
And then contributors will be able to level-grind to earn more achievements. Let's just hope that they don't turn into one of those corporate situations where internal wiki edits and rcs actions count positively in the performance review regardless of substance.
Read bug 40848 for the list of technical issues. Amongst other things, document windows may display and communicate with each other, or refer to each other, which leads to race conditions, etc.
(The process documented in 40848 also explains why this idea has taken 9.5 years and some skunkworks outside/despite the open development process to get this feature to this point.)
If they know really know enough about social networking to write a game authoring platform, they have enough sales people in their social networks to do this deal.
Alternatively, using said platform, write a game which appeals to sales people...
A lot of flights to and from the US go over Canada right now and going round is impractical and expensive.
... For Canada, as well as being disproportionate to the cost being avoided or opposed.
The major U.S. international airports are almost as far west or east as Canada is wide, and flights to destinations directly on the other side of Canada (central Russia, *stan, India) tend to connect via ports in Western Europe or the Far East anyway. (JFK-KSI or SFO-LHR might become inconvenient, but stopping for two hours in Canada may or may not be more costly in terms of fuel and airport charges than adding two hours to the flight to go around. Mandatory stops in Canada would actually enable fleets of smaller planes to provide long-haul flights because they'd get to refuel in Canada...
Along with Safari, I've been using Chrome since the early spring pre-betas out of interest. It didn't become fully useful until it supported Flash and printing correctly, but since this Fall, it has become the default browser on half of my Macs in place of Safari. I find that Chrome has easier keyboard bindings and more responsive tab switching than Safari, and also doesn't drag on Street View.
The former loads consistently in under one second on my four year old OS X and Windows machines and remains responsive under whatever memory and CPU load, while Firefox since version 3 with just adblock and noscript addons takes over eight seconds to load and hangs all tabs in all windows while waiting for trivial things (e.g. AJAX content updates) to happen in any loaded document window.
Bug 40848 exemplifies the attitude which could sink the non-Gecko part of Firefox in the near future, in that it took years and secret skunkworks by some young turks to get the project to acknowledge and work on a predictable (and predicted) fundamental architectural performance problem relating to pretending that a web browser is like a cooperatively multitasking operating system.
Having developed an internal corporate deployment and configuration management tool to support Firefox 2 on over 4,000 thin desktops, moving Firefox 3 was a non-starter for its large memory profile. Since we were able to get great performance out of Firefox 2 through automagically setting some of the documented about:config settings, we put substantial work into moving to Epiphany before Epiphany gave up on Gecko due to its unpredictable release cycle and uncertain Firefox-linked roadmaps./proudly typed on Safari 4 with Glims
The first 1:20 had character and plot establishment, where we follow the beginnings of Link's self discovery and development as a person arising out of some mysterious tragic death or sacrifice or something. And then Link forgets all that in the montage and last act which packs more story in than had previously occurred in the entire movie, in which he and the princess go on a blood-thirsty impersonal CG rampage to tell an abbreviated story which they didn't have time to show because the pacing and editing was so poor that they managed to fill the first 1:20 with too many story elements which don't matter and which we never see again. There was too many eyecandy town and festival sets filled with people who don't matter to the story, which they could have invested in the ending instead of the bad blue-screen comps of actors in unaltered natural settings. They go through a lot of trouble setting up the sword and imbuing it, and Link with elemental powers, but only use it in a couple of clash-bang sword fights, ignoring that Link has gained super-natural powers along the way. Also, there are lasers from space, and illogical use of a time machine.
In short, this is what Star Trek: Generations could have been if RDM and Brannon Braga had been able to write a movie.
The speed of PCM would need to closely match - or exceed - the speed of DRAM for people to adopt it as a replacement, so I doubt the model would quite be one of non-volatile RAM.
The units they're sampling out now are faster than the main memory on the four year old computer on which I'm typing this response.
The mass popularity of netbooks among both geeks and muggles indicates that fast is no longer the strongest defining feature of a computer.
Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla have fallen into the classic trap of trying to expand its user base via increasing features, as opposed to keeping its user base by increasing quality.
We don't need new features directly in Firefox. Plugins do that. Remember that long ago the project made a conscious choice to take a performance hit to provide third-party access into the browser via the elaborate XUL and plugins frameworks, to minimize pushing code and features onto users who don't need them.
Smartgrid devices need not be addressable on the public network, even if you insist on going with exotic multi-provider billing schemes.
Businesses and networks with lots of of kit which can't store a full IPv4 table now also would not want to spend several $10e9 to replace their routers which can use larger CARAM to support IPv6 tables. If each residential customer fully utilized their 2^64 addresses for random devices and expects them to be publicly routable, the resources required to support each CPE would exceed the resources to route the entirety of the current IPv4 Internet.
One could argue that there are approximately five Internet management cultures, represented roughly by the RIRs and their NOGs (e.g. ARIN and NANOG in North America). Based on 2008 data, RIPE and ARIN countries seem to be doing fairly well in IPv6 HTTP and DNS support, APNIC and maybe RIPE seem ahead for SMTP:
http://www.circleid.com/posts/81166_actual_state_ipv6_deployment/
Yes. Some context would be helpful, including what's behind the firewall, the kinds of traffic you think you're accepting, and public expectations of the services available.
Visualizing by port or protocol would be a great way to begin figure out what the traffic is.
Also, CERT and related may remember if any interesting 0-days were released just prior to the first band, etc.
RTFA: "During periods when the station is actively communicating with the ground using high-speed Ku-band communications, the crew will have remote access to the Internet via a ground computer. The crew will view the desktop of the ground computer using an onboard laptop and interact remotely with their keyboard touchpad."
It's difficult, but not impossible, to spread malware via RDP or VNC or X or whatever.
I choose to use Bing with both Chrome and Safari because GIS reminds me that it was designed in the 1990s, whereas Bing's image search has a more functional UI. I also prefer Bing's video search, which naturally extends the idea of the content preview which made Google good in text searches back in the day.
GIS reminds me that it was developed in the 1990s, whereas Bing's image search uses AJAX to implement a modern UI.
A licensing model isn't a technology?
In either case, OSS isn't just a licensing model, it's at least a method of organization and operation, if not a model of how to get things done.
Widespread adoption alone does not make OSS as a licensing model, or as a technology, or as a method of organization, or as a paradigm sustainable or not sustainable. I want to believe that open source is leaving something behind other than added commercial or monetary value to whatever it touches, but it seems despairingly difficult to get that point across on this forum today.
You've neglected much, but especially my last two sentences. I'm not dismissing just a huge section of the marketplace, I'm dismissing the explicitly commercial software marketplace as a validator of the true value of OSS.
For a $500,000 investment, 13200% p/a is a reasonable rate of return.
Gasoline-powered vehicles have been adopted by more and larger companies around the world than F/OSS, and have been around much longer. That does not automatically make any of the technologies or companies around gasoline-powered vehicles sustainable.
Sourceforge lists 230,000 projects. Taking that as a lower bound for the number of open source projects out there, the list of 500 successful projects you could cite would constitute 0.2% of the listed projects. Wikipedia lists just 16 significant open source organizations. This doesn't scream commercial success or sustainability or robustness of the model in the general case, relative to all the other successful firms who do not operate on the open source model. Even if you made Google an open source company, it's market capitalization of $150 billion would represent 6.5% of the market capitalization of the top 50 NASDAQ companies. A similar argument obtains for Oracle. Clearly, Google is not anywhere near being a primarily open source company, and no combination of the world's open source companies would combine to approach the market capitalization of Google. At $6 billion, Red Hat is only an order of magnitude out.
As with the typical long tail, the top 20 projects look like they account for more external-facing activity than all the remaining projects combined. With respect to internal activity, again the top 50 projects account for more activity than the other 229,950 projects. (Note that my estimates could be off by a factor of 10 in either direction and not affect the substance of the argument.) This doesn't look very sustainable in the repeatability sense, although it might be strongly sustainable in the leaving better things for the future sense.
We would need some kind of objective indicator of strong sustainability (perhaps like a triple bottom line) to be able to meaningfully discuss the sustainability of the open source model.
I use Safari, Chrome, and Camino. And I switched to Bing.
Bing's image search UI reminds me that GIS was designed in the 1990s.
This thread is useless without video!
And then contributors will be able to level-grind to earn more achievements. Let's just hope that they don't turn into one of those corporate situations where internal wiki edits and rcs actions count positively in the performance review regardless of substance.
Why do we assume that it takes a device of a size noticeable to authorities or the public in order to create a globally destructive black hole?
Read bug 40848 for the list of technical issues. Amongst other things, document windows may display and communicate with each other, or refer to each other, which leads to race conditions, etc.
(The process documented in 40848 also explains why this idea has taken 9.5 years and some skunkworks outside/despite the open development process to get this feature to this point.)
If they know really know enough about social networking to write a game authoring platform, they have enough sales people in their social networks to do this deal.
Alternatively, using said platform, write a game which appeals to sales people...
But "Year of qeylIS 786" won't fit in the standard ICAO DOB field...
A lot of flights to and from the US go over Canada right now and going round is impractical and expensive.
... For Canada, as well as being disproportionate to the cost being avoided or opposed.
The major U.S. international airports are almost as far west or east as Canada is wide, and flights to destinations directly on the other side of Canada (central Russia, *stan, India) tend to connect via ports in Western Europe or the Far East anyway. (JFK-KSI or SFO-LHR might become inconvenient, but stopping for two hours in Canada may or may not be more costly in terms of fuel and airport charges than adding two hours to the flight to go around. Mandatory stops in Canada would actually enable fleets of smaller planes to provide long-haul flights because they'd get to refuel in Canada...
Along with Safari, I've been using Chrome since the early spring pre-betas out of interest. It didn't become fully useful until it supported Flash and printing correctly, but since this Fall, it has become the default browser on half of my Macs in place of Safari. I find that Chrome has easier keyboard bindings and more responsive tab switching than Safari, and also doesn't drag on Street View.
Just diff Camino and Firefox.
The former loads consistently in under one second on my four year old OS X and Windows machines and remains responsive under whatever memory and CPU load, while Firefox since version 3 with just adblock and noscript addons takes over eight seconds to load and hangs all tabs in all windows while waiting for trivial things (e.g. AJAX content updates) to happen in any loaded document window.
Bug 40848 exemplifies the attitude which could sink the non-Gecko part of Firefox in the near future, in that it took years and secret skunkworks by some young turks to get the project to acknowledge and work on a predictable (and predicted) fundamental architectural performance problem relating to pretending that a web browser is like a cooperatively multitasking operating system.
Having developed an internal corporate deployment and configuration management tool to support Firefox 2 on over 4,000 thin desktops, moving Firefox 3 was a non-starter for its large memory profile. Since we were able to get great performance out of Firefox 2 through automagically setting some of the documented about:config settings, we put substantial work into moving to Epiphany before Epiphany gave up on Gecko due to its unpredictable release cycle and uncertain Firefox-linked roadmaps. /proudly typed on Safari 4 with Glims
The first 1:20 had character and plot establishment, where we follow the beginnings of Link's self discovery and development as a person arising out of some mysterious tragic death or sacrifice or something. And then Link forgets all that in the montage and last act which packs more story in than had previously occurred in the entire movie, in which he and the princess go on a blood-thirsty impersonal CG rampage to tell an abbreviated story which they didn't have time to show because the pacing and editing was so poor that they managed to fill the first 1:20 with too many story elements which don't matter and which we never see again. There was too many eyecandy town and festival sets filled with people who don't matter to the story, which they could have invested in the ending instead of the bad blue-screen comps of actors in unaltered natural settings. They go through a lot of trouble setting up the sword and imbuing it, and Link with elemental powers, but only use it in a couple of clash-bang sword fights, ignoring that Link has gained super-natural powers along the way. Also, there are lasers from space, and illogical use of a time machine.
In short, this is what Star Trek: Generations could have been if RDM and Brannon Braga had been able to write a movie.
The speed of PCM would need to closely match - or exceed - the speed of DRAM for people to adopt it as a replacement, so I doubt the model would quite be one of non-volatile RAM.
The units they're sampling out now are faster than the main memory on the four year old computer on which I'm typing this response.
The mass popularity of netbooks among both geeks and muggles indicates that fast is no longer the strongest defining feature of a computer.