I think you said a ton and didn't even realize it. It makes sense that the next step to overselling is to "streamline" current overhead. This move will only save DH money and increase their profit, for the time being.
We've had more clients sign up with us looking for what they usually call "real" email then anything else in the past 6 months or so. Though we focus on businesses and most clients require some kind of complex hosting solution, a number of small businesses have signed up looking for something other then their current provider, usually either comcast, yahoo or gmail.
I can think of many reasons for Dreamhost to do this, as providing good email service can be difficult, especially with the spammers and various providers implementing their own "standards". I could see SH doing this just to get that monkey off their back...
The Exchange/Outlook comment? I mean come on. The author, in order to prove how bad outlook is, pimps Online Free email services? Who the hell is this guy and why is he writing articles on the topic if he's never worked(obviously) in a corporate environment? His best quip is that Outlook doesn't have threaded views? Is he for real?
IMO, this just speaks to their level of maturity as an IT industry in China if they think a 25-yr old has enough experience in the IT industry to lead a team, let alone communicate facets of all his project experiences.
If the direction is being set by someone that is not a senior, I cannot see any value-add or reason to use these companies.
Yes, bad queries can run amuck, which is why you give them access to a slaved reporting instance of the DB.
Your tables are not precious, and they're not even yours, they are your customers. Let them run their queries on the reporting database, never the production DB.
Exactly, we don't tell people who have stalkers to "get over it". We institute means to protect the person who is being harassed (i.e. don't come within 50 feet). That metaphor doesn't hold up - people being stalked do not have a tendency to engage their stalker in conversation.
I am utterly shocked by the responses on/. about this issue. I understand that an adult should "know better", but it's absurd to blame the woman for this.
If I'm walking to my car after leaving the grocery store, almost get run-over by someone in a car not paying attention to what they're doing and I yell at them for their carelessness, is it my fault if they go home and, because they are 'so upset' that I yelled at them, put a gun to their head? Obviously not. Does it matter if the driver that almost hit me was a 16yr-old girl? Nope, doesn't change a thing.
I find it hard to bite that the woman -intended- for the girl to kill herself, but rather wanted to get back at her for the things she did. If the woman knew the child would that's one thing, but most tweens/teenagers have some form of angst. They are also old enough to know right from wrong, and if this girl didn't know that a 'friend' or 'boy' was something she would get over with time, the parents should have told her so much.
Unfortunately much of the code is autogenerated by a 3rd-party billing system that has invalid embedded HTML in their php variables and code. We don't have access to the source and have made due the best we can. Besides the invalid HTML, the system is good at what it does and is a mature application from a functional standpoint.
On our list of priorities the web-site w3 validation is right below our next marketing effort.
Seriously. Who cares how "huge" they are - if they are incapable of providing reasonable levels of security and administration then they need to be blacklisted. If users start to complain, have a pre-written response stating why the BL was done.
This is unacceptable. Who cares if it's google, our servers don't deserve this garbage. Punish Google on the BLs until they fix their systems. End of story.
I used it as an example of how it was much faster for the developer to make it using Flash authoring tools to get the look he was after then using HTML. Of course you could make a similar site using HTML+CSS - that's not the point.
It also take significantly fewer request to load(i.e. 2) then a normal site.
I should have said "in an optimized manner" instead of 'fast'. Instead of splitting hairs my point is that Flash is designed to do particular things and has the tools to do them in a reasonable way.
Did you look at the link I posted at all? Even the older versions of Flash were split with JS ~50/50 on the various datapoints.
I'm not implying it's a bad thing to try, but seriously. Did you even look at the JS code that is your "framework" to this stuff? Let me grab you a piece:
do {
v1 = 2 * p.random(1) - 1;// between -1.0 and 1.0
v2 = 2 * p.random(1) - 1;// between -1.0 and 1.0
s = v1 * v1 + v2 * v2;
} while (s >= 1 || s == 0);
var multiplier = Math.sqrt(-2 * Math.log(s)/s);
nextNextGaussian = v2 * multiplier;
haveNextNextGaussian = true;
return v1 * multiplier;
The JS engines are not optimized to do the above. Sure they will do it, but not with any semblance of efficiency.
Of course, if you're referring to "my Flash animations move faster than my DHTML animation", that's just plain user-error. The Flash animations work better because Flash Studio works out all the timings of the motions for you. If you Actionscripted your motions, they'd come out about the same as they would in Javascript. (And being nearly the same language, it's possible to try the same motion code in both.) Completely and utterly false.
JS interpreters are not optimized to do image manipulation, DOM updates, etc. Now this isn't to say they aren't moving in that direction, but as of now they are atrocious at these tasks.
Flash is a completely separate environment from the browser, is vector based and inherently performs animation better. Right now it's always faster(CPU %) to do an animation in Flash then it is to do the same animation in JS.
but this is like a polished-turd. Flash doesn't exist anymore to do animation or dynamic graphics, it exists to run fast. JS engines were not designed to process this kind of data efficiently, as seen by your CPU graph when running the demos.
I don't want to take away from the work, because it's a slick hack, but it's not the right tool for this job.
100% agreed. Google played chicken with the auction and thought they could get someone else to pay for the licenses they themselves would end up using.
I know Google's wealth is just on paper but they are supposed to be smart enough to know that, and not play with fire if they don't want to get burned.
They have cheap 128-bit cert that have Root in almost all browsers. The only issue we have run into is windows mobile devices.
If you're just after a basic root cert, RapidSSL(Equifax) is your best bet. If you need the stronger, blood-of-your-first-born cert, Verisign is the place to go.
We constantly have clients that think they can get 100000 TB of storage and 1000000 ZB of transfer for $3.95/mth. Then they get attitudes when we charge them $30/Mbps.
I'm torn as to lay blame to other providers for running unethical marketing campaigns.(e.g. get unlomited everything only to have a buried clause in a TOS/AUP/etc. that nullifies all the marketing promises.) or people not performing due-diligence.
Slashdot Mirror
Reminds me of an old adage from the 20th century:
"Those who can't do, teach."
We've gotten more attrition from yahoo, msn, google, etc. over the past 12 months then in the prior 4 years.
Take that for what it's worth.
Kind Regards,
I think you said a ton and didn't even realize it. It makes sense that the next step to overselling is to "streamline" current overhead. This move will only save DH money and increase their profit, for the time being.
We've had more clients sign up with us looking for what they usually call "real" email then anything else in the past 6 months or so. Though we focus on businesses and most clients require some kind of complex hosting solution, a number of small businesses have signed up looking for something other then their current provider, usually either comcast, yahoo or gmail.
I can think of many reasons for Dreamhost to do this, as providing good email service can be difficult, especially with the spammers and various providers implementing their own "standards". I could see SH doing this just to get that monkey off their back...
Regards,
Haven't we known this for some time?
The Exchange/Outlook comment? I mean come on. The author, in order to prove how bad outlook is, pimps Online Free email services? Who the hell is this guy and why is he writing articles on the topic if he's never worked(obviously) in a corporate environment? His best quip is that Outlook doesn't have threaded views? Is he for real?
Regards,
IMO, this just speaks to their level of maturity as an IT industry in China if they think a 25-yr old has enough experience in the IT industry to lead a team, let alone communicate facets of all his project experiences.
If the direction is being set by someone that is not a senior, I cannot see any value-add or reason to use these companies.
You are supporting them, so make it happen.
Yes, bad queries can run amuck, which is why you give them access to a slaved reporting instance of the DB.
Your tables are not precious, and they're not even yours, they are your customers. Let them run their queries on the reporting database, never the production DB.
Regards,
I am utterly shocked by the responses on
If I'm walking to my car after leaving the grocery store, almost get run-over by someone in a car not paying attention to what they're doing and I yell at them for their carelessness, is it my fault if they go home and, because they are 'so upset' that I yelled at them, put a gun to their head? Obviously not. Does it matter if the driver that almost hit me was a 16yr-old girl? Nope, doesn't change a thing.
I find it hard to bite that the woman -intended- for the girl to kill herself, but rather wanted to get back at her for the things she did. If the woman knew the child would that's one thing, but most tweens/teenagers have some form of angst. They are also old enough to know right from wrong, and if this girl didn't know that a 'friend' or 'boy' was something she would get over with time, the parents should have told her so much.
Unfortunately much of the code is autogenerated by a 3rd-party billing system that has invalid embedded HTML in their php variables and code. We don't have access to the source and have made due the best we can. Besides the invalid HTML, the system is good at what it does and is a mature application from a functional standpoint.
On our list of priorities the web-site w3 validation is right below our next marketing effort.
Regards,
Seriously. Who cares how "huge" they are - if they are incapable of providing reasonable levels of security and administration then they need to be blacklisted. If users start to complain, have a pre-written response stating why the BL was done.
This is unacceptable. Who cares if it's google, our servers don't deserve this garbage. Punish Google on the BLs until they fix their systems. End of story.
Regards,
I used it as an example of how it was much faster for the developer to make it using Flash authoring tools to get the look he was after then using HTML. Of course you could make a similar site using HTML+CSS - that's not the point.
It also take significantly fewer request to load(i.e. 2) then a normal site.
I do every day.
I should have said "in an optimized manner" instead of 'fast'. Instead of splitting hairs my point is that Flash is designed to do particular things and has the tools to do them in a reasonable way.
JS does not.
Array join (array size 1000, 500 iterations)
JS: FF2 - 375ms, Flash - 303ms
substring (10000 iterations)
JS: FF2 - 16ms, Flash - 3ms
Did you look at the link I posted at all? Even the older versions of Flash were split with JS ~50/50 on the various datapoints.
I'm not implying it's a bad thing to try, but seriously. Did you even look at the JS code that is your "framework" to this stuff? Let me grab you a piece:
do {
v1 = 2 * p.random(1) - 1;
v2 = 2 * p.random(1) - 1;
s = v1 * v1 + v2 * v2;
} while (s >= 1 || s == 0);
var multiplier = Math.sqrt(-2 * Math.log(s)/s);
nextNextGaussian = v2 * multiplier;
haveNextNextGaussian = true;
return v1 * multiplier;
The JS engines are not optimized to do the above. Sure they will do it, but not with any semblance of efficiency.
found this:
http://www.oddhammer.com/actionscriptperformance/set4/
don't know the accuracy, but interesting nonetheless.
JS interpreters are not optimized to do image manipulation, DOM updates, etc. Now this isn't to say they aren't moving in that direction, but as of now they are atrocious at these tasks.
Flash is a completely separate environment from the browser, is vector based and inherently performs animation better. Right now it's always faster(CPU %) to do an animation in Flash then it is to do the same animation in JS.
Regards,
no idea - I'm not a flash guy by trade. If you want to talk Java and JavaFX I'm all for it. :)
Kind Regards,
Flash, when used non-gratuitously, has always run fast for me. Check out http://varriastudios.com/ for a site that illustrates what I'm talking about.
This is some great work....
but this is like a polished-turd. Flash doesn't exist anymore to do animation or dynamic graphics, it exists to run fast. JS engines were not designed to process this kind of data efficiently, as seen by your CPU graph when running the demos.
I don't want to take away from the work, because it's a slick hack, but it's not the right tool for this job.
Regards,
100% agreed. Google played chicken with the auction and thought they could get someone else to pay for the licenses they themselves would end up using.
I know Google's wealth is just on paper but they are supposed to be smart enough to know that, and not play with fire if they don't want to get burned.
Tough Shit Google.
JRuby.
Sprint has had this via MobiTV for at least 3 years.
We pay $10/cert.
They have cheap 128-bit cert that have Root in almost all browsers. The only issue we have run into is windows mobile devices.
If you're just after a basic root cert, RapidSSL(Equifax) is your best bet. If you need the stronger, blood-of-your-first-born cert, Verisign is the place to go.
Regards,
We constantly have clients that think they can get 100000 TB of storage and 1000000 ZB of transfer for $3.95/mth. Then they get attitudes when we charge them $30/Mbps.
I'm torn as to lay blame to other providers for running unethical marketing campaigns.(e.g. get unlomited everything only to have a buried clause in a TOS/AUP/etc. that nullifies all the marketing promises.) or people not performing due-diligence.
Regards,