This could be corporate FUD, who knows. But if this is true, I wish Sun well in crushing Netapp.
[.snip-]
Thank You, Network Appliance
We held an investor and analyst conference today in New York City. All in all, a very positive day, lots of momentum and enthusiasm for where we're headed (and apprecation for the progress we've made - new product launches, and all).
In one of my first investor calls after the event, a large shareholder surprised me though, with, "why do you think NetApps is trying to kill off ZFS?" Er... what? I was totally stunned - it was the first I'd heard that Network Appliance was suing Sun.
My first response was that NetApps probably needs to read this post carefully - talking about the futility of litigation as a mechanism for proprietary companies to stifle the rise of open source competition.
Now having had a chance to read some of the statements their CEO made, here are some updates.
First, Sun did not approach NetApps about licensing any of Sun's patents and never filed complaints against NetApps or demanded anything. ]
NetApps first approached StorageTek behind the cover of a third party intermediary (yes, it sounds weird, doesn't it?) seeking to purchase STK patents. After Sun acquired STK, we were not willing to sell the patents, We've always been willing to license them. But instead of engaging in licensing discussions, NetApp decided to file a suit to invalidate them. To be clear, we never filed a complaint or threatened to do so, nor did anyone, to the best of my knowledge, in the ZFS community.
We're all focused on innovation and winning customers, not litigation.
Second, a word on patents - we use our patent portfolio to protect communities, and indemnify customers - you need only look back to our settlement with Kodak when they attacked the Java community. (That case was heard in Rochester, New York, Kodak's home town, which is a tad different than the East Texas venue Net App appears to have chosen.)
Finally, and perhaps most importantly (again, read here for why), I'd like to thank our friends at NetApps for ensuring every single customer in their installed base is aware of the outstanding economics offered by ZFS as a file system and storage virtualization platform. Please feel free to (learn more here) and get a free trial Thumper storage device here. At $1.50 per gigabyte - open source storage is about a third the price of competitive offerings, with better performance.
And Sun indemnifies its customers, so I'd encourage all interested parties to compare the economics of ZFS and Thumper to what you're currently forced to pay - the savings are absolutely shocking.
The rise of the open source community cannot be stifled by proprietary vendors. I guess not everyone's learned that lesson.
I'm willing to bet that NBC is not making as much money from people purchasing the shows as they are from the advertising during them. I don't download content from iTunes, but do they have any ads? I assumed not, and therefore NBC can see the writing on the wall: they currently can use Nielson to "justify" outrageous amounts of money for ads, and as viewers shift en-masse to pay for the content, their Excel Spreadsheets are showing them they will never get as much $$$ from the paying public as they would from the companies wanting to by "valuable" ad time.
IBM is a bad example for almost anything. I looked at your "JLINQ" thing - guess what: IBM already has this under another name. J2C. It's been out for 6 years.
I have thought for years that there needs to be a "JDK 2.0" series started which would be a clean break from the 1.x series. Keep maintaining the 1.x series, but make a fresh start. Ok Linus...
You should look to your sig to find why IBM is pushing java - it's a migration path from COBOL.
IBM has it's beedy-little hooks in so many companies that still use mainframes that Websphere+WSAD/RAD is a natural compliment to their COBOL/AS400/Big Iron past. IBM's swt is fast, and runs faster than most native win32 apps.(Don't look to eclipse or RAD as proof as they are both bloated to the extreme)
Java is an elegant language - that's the reason it's used so heavily.
I just finished reading that paper and was left with the impression that I had just wasted 10 minutes. I could not find a single insightful part of their algorithm - and in fact can enumerate several 'prior art' occurrences form my CPSC 102 class during my undergrad - all were lab assignments.
I did, however, find this sentence disturbing:
However, given that there is only a single master, its failure is unlikely; therefore our current implementation aborts the MapReduce computation if the master fails. Huh? So, because there is only one master it is unlikely to fail? This job takes hours to run. This is similar to saying that if you have one web server, it is unlikely to fail. I can't help but think this is a logical fallacy. I don't care how simple of complicated a job is - a single-point-of-failure is a single-point-of-failure.
_______|-------|______
shark --------------> google
I do have a point. Google has been for some time shifted any focus from innovation to monetization. Are they really losing that much money that they need this revenue?
Damn lameness filter. It disagrees with the ratio of my 'junk' characters to 'meaningful' characters. Maybe I should just spend this time inciting violence form the grammar nazis?
Concerning Java, Dr. Stroustrup says "Java isn't platform independent; it is a platform. Like Windows, it is a proprietary commercial platform. That is, you can write programs for Windows/Intel or Java/JVM, and in each case you are writing code for a platform owned by a single corporation and tweaked for the commercial benefit of that corporation." Boy, he must be very happy about openJDK. I wonder what his next gripe will be about Java?
More than that. Some people have hypothesized that forces in our dimension that are unbalanced are actually bleeding into adjacent dimensions. Gravity is a great example: it takes something the size of the Earth to hold my feet to the ground. The idea is that all forces are equal in magnitude; the rest of gravitie's impact - pertaining to the earth - is being felt in another dimension, perhaps as another force.
At last check, photons fell under the classical-physics umbrella, as the exist in our dimension of time+space. I'll put it another way:
We need tools that are not covered in a science class that does not have the word "Quantum" out in front; that includes anything in biology, optics, nuclear physics, chemistry, etc.
Throw them all away. Einstein's Garden doesn't work anymore.
Shor's Algo uses a construct - a Q(u)bit - that has characteristics classical physics cannot explain. Another universe? More like another dimension. (Yes, I'm serious like a heart-attack)
I never implied that we rest everything on PHP's codebase. But using things like suexec, PHP'ss disable_functions parameter, and other isolation tools, I can leave my phone on all night without being concerned about that phone call.
Please mod parent and GP up. My thesis was on NP-Complete problems and combinatorial optimization and as soon as I saw "photons" I knew this was bunk. It does not matter what instrument you use: CPU core, Network Node, DNA, Molecule, Q-bit, electron-spin, etc. They are all constructs to illustrate problems. The entire point of NP-complete problems is that they cannot be solved and verified in reasonable time using anything that has a physical limitation: a clock speed, a limited number-of-sides, a finite number of nodes in a graph, finite degrees of spin, etc.
IMO, the only way to reduce NP-Complete problems is using something like quantum entanglement or another similar characteristic that is not bounded by classical physics.
Slashdot Mirror
QED.
One can only imagine what Zune owners think of this....
eom
This could be corporate FUD, who knows. But if this is true, I wish Sun well in crushing Netapp.
[.snip-]
Thank You, Network Appliance
We held an investor and analyst conference today in New York City. All in all, a very positive day, lots of momentum and enthusiasm for where we're headed (and apprecation for the progress we've made - new product launches, and all).
In one of my first investor calls after the event, a large shareholder surprised me though, with, "why do you think NetApps is trying to kill off ZFS?" Er... what? I was totally stunned - it was the first I'd heard that Network Appliance was suing Sun.
My first response was that NetApps probably needs to read this post carefully - talking about the futility of litigation as a mechanism for proprietary companies to stifle the rise of open source competition.
Now having had a chance to read some of the statements their CEO made, here are some updates.
First, Sun did not approach NetApps about licensing any of Sun's patents and never filed complaints against NetApps or demanded anything. ]
NetApps first approached StorageTek behind the cover of a third party intermediary (yes, it sounds weird, doesn't it?) seeking to purchase STK patents. After Sun acquired STK, we were not willing to sell the patents, We've always been willing to license them. But instead of engaging in licensing discussions, NetApp decided to file a suit to invalidate them. To be clear, we never filed a complaint or threatened to do so, nor did anyone, to the best of my knowledge, in the ZFS community.
We're all focused on innovation and winning customers, not litigation.
Second, a word on patents - we use our patent portfolio to protect communities, and indemnify customers - you need only look back to our settlement with Kodak when they attacked the Java community. (That case was heard in Rochester, New York, Kodak's home town, which is a tad different than the East Texas venue Net App appears to have chosen.)
Finally, and perhaps most importantly (again, read here for why), I'd like to thank our friends at NetApps for ensuring every single customer in their installed base is aware of the outstanding economics offered by ZFS as a file system and storage virtualization platform. Please feel free to (learn more here) and get a free trial Thumper storage device here. At $1.50 per gigabyte - open source storage is about a third the price of competitive offerings, with better performance.
And Sun indemnifies its customers, so I'd encourage all interested parties to compare the economics of ZFS and Thumper to what you're currently forced to pay - the savings are absolutely shocking.
The rise of the open source community cannot be stifled by proprietary vendors. I guess not everyone's learned that lesson.
Posted on 05:00AM Sep 06, 2007
Yeah - it's not like they're Geek Squad or anything....
I'm willing to bet that NBC is not making as much money from people purchasing the shows as they are from the advertising during them. I don't download content from iTunes, but do they have any ads? I assumed not, and therefore NBC can see the writing on the wall: they currently can use Nielson to "justify" outrageous amounts of money for ads, and as viewers shift en-masse to pay for the content, their Excel Spreadsheets are showing them they will never get as much $$$ from the paying public as they would from the companies wanting to by "valuable" ad time.
IBM is a bad example for almost anything. I looked at your "JLINQ" thing - guess what: IBM already has this under another name. J2C. It's been out for 6 years.
c# is still in the doldrums for adoption. Unlike other posters that may claim something without data: Java is still the most widely used language with more than 7x the marketshare of C#.
You should look to your sig to find why IBM is pushing java - it's a migration path from COBOL.
IBM has it's beedy-little hooks in so many companies that still use mainframes that Websphere+WSAD/RAD is a natural compliment to their COBOL/AS400/Big Iron past. IBM's swt is fast, and runs faster than most native win32 apps.(Don't look to eclipse or RAD as proof as they are both bloated to the extreme)
Java is an elegant language - that's the reason it's used so heavily.
Give him a break - he's probably finishing up his c# class freshman year, along with his new sense of entitlement.
I can feel the grammar Nazi's stalking me even now...
I did, however, find this sentence disturbing: However, given that there is only a single master, its failure is unlikely; therefore our current implementation aborts the MapReduce computation if the master fails. Huh? So, because there is only one master it is unlikely to fail? This job takes hours to run. This is similar to saying that if you have one web server, it is unlikely to fail. I can't help but think this is a logical fallacy. I don't care how simple of complicated a job is - a single-point-of-failure is a single-point-of-failure.
_______|-------|______
shark --------------> google
I do have a point. Google has been for some time shifted any focus from innovation to monetization. Are they really losing that much money that they need this revenue?
Damn lameness filter. It disagrees with the ratio of my 'junk' characters to 'meaningful' characters. Maybe I should just spend this time inciting violence form the grammar nazis?
..95% of the other documents on the web are Word 2003 format.
Nice - it's only taken us, what, 14 months to show Al Gore his movie is science fiction?
How dare you present a link that makes the OP look like a tool!
More than that. Some people have hypothesized that forces in our dimension that are unbalanced are actually bleeding into adjacent dimensions. Gravity is a great example: it takes something the size of the Earth to hold my feet to the ground. The idea is that all forces are equal in magnitude; the rest of gravitie's impact - pertaining to the earth - is being felt in another dimension, perhaps as another force.
At last check, photons fell under the classical-physics umbrella, as the exist in our dimension of time+space. I'll put it another way:
We need tools that are not covered in a science class that does not have the word "Quantum" out in front; that includes anything in biology, optics, nuclear physics, chemistry, etc.
Throw them all away. Einstein's Garden doesn't work anymore.
Not crank.
Shor's Algo uses a construct - a Q(u)bit - that has characteristics classical physics cannot explain. Another universe? More like another dimension. (Yes, I'm serious like a heart-attack)
I never implied that we rest everything on PHP's codebase. But using things like suexec, PHP'ss disable_functions parameter, and other isolation tools, I can leave my phone on all night without being concerned about that phone call.
well-played old chap.......... ;)
Please mod parent and GP up. My thesis was on NP-Complete problems and combinatorial optimization and as soon as I saw "photons" I knew this was bunk. It does not matter what instrument you use: CPU core, Network Node, DNA, Molecule, Q-bit, electron-spin, etc. They are all constructs to illustrate problems. The entire point of NP-complete problems is that they cannot be solved and verified in reasonable time using anything that has a physical limitation: a clock speed, a limited number-of-sides, a finite number of nodes in a graph, finite degrees of spin, etc.
IMO, the only way to reduce NP-Complete problems is using something like quantum entanglement or another similar characteristic that is not bounded by classical physics.
very untrue.
php, for example, has a disable_functions parameter that prevents scripts from doing thing they should not be doing.
I feel for the hosting companies that you have been with that do not audit their boxes.
Regards,