Yes, that was here in Texas. An insurance company was offering to install, for free, a GPS device that would monitor where you drove, which routes, how fast, etc and adjust your rate accordingly. The selling point being, that if you drove very little or on roads with low accident probability, your rates would be reduced. I am not sure how many signed up or if it is even still being offered. Pretty much everyone I talked to about it laughed and said, "you are kidding - who would do such a stupid thing." I agree - the last thing I need is my every movement logged in some database.
You obviously have not been in this business very long. All the major OS's have had expoits that comprimised them at one time or another - including Linux.
Linux vs M$ is not the first heated battle over performance and it will not be the last. One thing is for sure in this industry, the performance leader today will not be the performance leader tomorrow. I will personally have to endure days of the "I told you so-ers" in the near future. Does it matter? Not really. I still have an elephant to eat. And what is the best way to do that...one bite (err server) at a time. There is a lot more to selecting a platform(s) for developing/running large enterprise operations than simple benchmarks.
Keep in mind folks, we are the technical brains that keep corporate America running. With the very obvious shortage of experienced talent out there I dare say we will always have the upper hand when it comes to selecting who we work for and what platforms we do that work on. To that end, if management starts trying to define implementation based entirely on benchmarks...well I hope they have been taking some night classes.
Cant read the article, guess we/.ed the server. But frankly, I could give a rats ass what people say about Linux.
I USE IT BECAUSE I LIKE IT.
I will continue to contribute in whatever manner possible because I want others to like the same things I do. If Linux goes away as yet another flash-in-the-pan, I wont care. I WILL STILL LIKE IT. I will continue to use it until I no longer LIKE IT. Then I will find something else I like.
Maybe that is too simple for some. But I have been in this game way too long to use something just because it its the most popular or has the best "reputation". If it didn't work FOR me, I would use one of to the other choices out there.
This is fairly lame comment. There are only 2 data points published. Go dig up usage numbers from 95-97, add the two from the article, then connect the dots.... YIB...its a curve of the exponential nature....
Well, I guess we/.'ed the server...only made it through about half then it went south. Oh well.
Grated there are numerous errors both historically and others, however there is a point I think the author is trying to make. Having not exactly finished the article, I am going out on a limb here. But I think the point is one size does not fit all.
All the IT organizations I have interacted with in recent years recite this singular thought like a mantra.
I dont know about others, but I get results because I still treat systems architecture and software development as a art. I cut corners in the "software engineering", "process documentation", and other more bureaucratic areas where it makes sense without compromising the final product. This drives IT types crazy.
I have noticed this more in recent years than in the 80's. Back in the days of PDP's, Vaxen, BSD, etc, each project had its own set of challenges. We were allowed the freedom to overcome those by whatever methods were available.
The 90's were just the opposite...try to do every project using the same template.
So is the pendulum swinging back? Have we come full circle ? I dont know. But I do know that OSS gives me the tools I need to crank out solutions at an ever increasing rate to meet demand. I also know that IT types are watching very closly trying to figure out "How'ed they do that!!!".
Not interested thank-you. The current product has too big a foot print and too many "bells and whistles" for a _word processor_. (not to mention performance).
That being said, does this mean they would have to port the Win32 API to support it ?..... Hummm, that could make things real interesting.
This is just another part of their FUD campaign. Did anyone catch the article in Windows NT magazine (Dec 98 by Mark Russinovich) talking about how Linux was only suitable for the small server market. The reasoning being that the kernel is single threaded and hence Linux will never be able to "fully utilize" multiple cpu's...etc..etc.
Its the IT managers et al that actually purchase servers for the data centers they need to keep in their camp. If M$ wins the data centers, they win the game. Period.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that was here in Texas. An insurance company was offering to install, for free, a GPS device that would monitor where you drove, which routes, how fast, etc and adjust your rate accordingly. The selling point being, that if you drove very little or on roads with low accident probability, your rates would be reduced. I am not sure how many signed up or if it is even still being offered. Pretty much everyone I talked to about it laughed and said, "you are kidding - who would do such a stupid thing." I agree - the last thing I need is my every movement logged in some database.
You obviously have not been in this business very long. All the major OS's have had expoits that comprimised them at one time or another - including Linux.
Linux vs M$ is not the first heated battle over performance and it will not be the last. One thing is for sure in this industry, the performance leader today will not be the performance leader tomorrow. I will personally have to endure days of the "I told you so-ers" in the near future. Does it matter? Not really. I still have an elephant to eat. And what is the best way to do that...one bite (err server) at a time. There is a lot more to selecting a platform(s) for developing/running large enterprise operations than simple benchmarks.
Keep in mind folks, we are the technical brains that keep corporate America running. With the very obvious shortage of experienced talent out there I dare say we will always have the upper hand when it comes to selecting who we work for and what platforms we do that work on. To that end, if management starts trying to define implementation based entirely on benchmarks...well I hope they have been taking some night classes.
Lighten up on those scoobie snacks. Maybe I should as well...I too see it! Its been there right in front of me all along....*LOL
Good one!!!
Oh and to the AC posting the PERL code earlier...
What are you possibly thinking ???
Cant read the article, guess we /.ed the server.
But frankly, I could give a rats ass what people say about Linux.
I USE IT BECAUSE I LIKE IT.
I will continue to contribute in whatever manner possible because I want others to like the same things I do. If Linux goes away as yet another flash-in-the-pan, I wont care. I WILL STILL LIKE IT. I will continue to use it until I no longer LIKE IT. Then I will find something else I like.
Maybe that is too simple for some. But I have been in this game way too long to use something just because it its the most popular or has the best "reputation". If it didn't work FOR me, I would use one of to the other choices out there.
Yet another confirmation of Dilberts Salary Theorem.
For those that havent seen it.
Postulate 1: Knowledge = Power
Postulate 2: Time = Money
Power = Work/Time
Since Knowledge=Power and Time = Money
Knowledge = Work/Money
Solve for Money and you will see that as
Knowledge approaches 0, Money approaches infinity, regardless of the amount of Work done.
This is fairly lame comment. There are only 2 data points published. Go dig up usage numbers from 95-97, add the two from the article, then connect the dots.... YIB...its a curve of the exponential nature....
Well, I guess we /.'ed the server...only made it
through about half then it went south. Oh well.
Grated there are numerous errors both historically
and others, however there is a point I think the author is trying to make. Having not exactly finished the article, I am going out on a limb here. But I think the point is one size does not fit all.
All the IT organizations I have interacted with in recent years recite this singular thought like a mantra.
I dont know about others, but I get results because I still treat systems architecture and software development as a art. I cut corners in the "software engineering", "process documentation", and other more bureaucratic areas where it makes sense without compromising the final product. This drives IT types crazy.
I have noticed this more in recent years than in the 80's. Back in the days of PDP's, Vaxen, BSD, etc, each project had its own set of challenges.
We were allowed the freedom to overcome those by whatever methods were available.
The 90's were just the opposite...try to do every project using the same template.
So is the pendulum swinging back? Have we come full circle ? I dont know. But I do know that OSS
gives me the tools I need to crank out solutions at an ever increasing rate to meet demand. I also know that IT types are watching very closly trying to figure out "How'ed they do that!!!".
Not interested thank-you. The current product has
too big a foot print and too many "bells and whistles" for a _word processor_. (not to mention performance).
That being said, does this mean they would have to
port the Win32 API to support it ?.....
Hummm, that could make things real interesting.
This is just another part of their FUD campaign.
Did anyone catch the article in Windows NT magazine (Dec 98 by Mark Russinovich) talking about how Linux was only suitable for the small server market. The reasoning being that the kernel is single threaded and hence Linux will never be able to "fully utilize" multiple cpu's...etc..etc.
Its the IT managers et al that actually purchase servers for the data centers they need to keep in their camp. If M$ wins the data centers, they win the game. Period.