The non-compete, I'm guessing, would have been regarding the unix source code that was licensed (not sold) to SCO... which would make good sense right? Why would SCO buy the completel rights to it if Novell could turn around and compete with them using it?
Of course, that has nothing to do with OTHER operating systems.. Novell has always been in the networked OS market, and using linux is hardly any differnet than using Novell's old stuff in that respect. Linux is not unix, as everyone except SCO is fond of saying.
I mean, I understand reasonably well the benchmarks used... but my question is this:
In the past, we always looked to the DoE or DoD for who had the fastest computers... they had stuff we could only dream of.. huge, fast clusters of funky computers we've never heard of.
Now, a university built one out of macs... and it competes with the same benchmarks.
What I wonder is, are there applications the old-style supercomputers are still better at, or has technology simply advanced since then? (Things like 10gig ethernet and ghz processors and memory busses, etc)... have we simply surpassed them? Don't just feed me some line about I/O either....
For a problem that can be broken into millions of discrete, independent chunks, sure, distributed.net's model is fantastic, and works really well... (seti, folding, distributed.net, etc)
For something where you need lots of feedback from nodes, (like these benchmarks, and lots of simulation work), bandwidth is everything.
BEcause, although we can easily argue that the computer owner is the only one ultimately who CAN be responsible for what it does.. that's not practical. Nor is making the ISP entirely responsible.
In fact, if we take this too far, trying to find some ultimate party to blame for everything, we end up with a bloated legal and beurocratic mess, where everyone is afraid to do anything.
ISPs should publish guidelines to customers regarding keeping their systems secure. ISPs should revoke connections if customers are hacked too many times.
No, the computer owner should not be responsible by default legally... like any other crime, one should have to PROVE who caused the maliciouis act.
The whole idea that we have to find SOMEONE to blame, even if we don't know who really did it, is a bad one.
There are areas in the polar region where the bottoms of craters are in eternal shade, and that is precisely what these studies are talking about.
And when we say "The dark side of the moon".. we are referring to either a Pink Floyd album, or the side of the moon that is currently in darkness.. so the dark side of the moon is indeed always dark.. just like the dark side of the earth.
Used by pilots, perhaps only military, to help differentiate between differnet people in radio chatter.
Sounds are processed such that actually come from different places relative to the pilot, both horizontically and vertically, making it much easier to focus on one person. Even when the pilot moves his head, the absolute position of the channels does not.
However, MOST small and medium sized businesses don't even do offiste backup. They back up to a server somewehre in the buildling, and that's that.
Tapes are not as reliable as you think; I've had more than my fair share of DLT tapes go bad. Further, they don't last that long on the shelf.
If we are talking about long-term archival storage for financial records, as required by law in many places, that's a totally different issue than making sure you have a backup of the last 2 weeks of incremental data in case someone erases something.
Electron flow, current flow, and energy are not the same thing.
Energy does not come from the wall and go into the ground.
A better way to look at it is:
Energy is generated at the power station, and is consumed at the house. Both the ground AND the wire are part of the same circuit; power is transferred over the entire mechanism.
Guys you can argue the technical merits all you want.. today's consumer has a short memory.
If MS makes it look for a short while like linux isn't really secure, and does an okay job of convincing people, the facts don't matter; the get more market, we get less.
What linux needs is an evil marketing company, on par with MS.
Having a bunch of distributions that do the same thing different ways definately helps things.
Seriously, it was good, it is nice that linux can do well...
but do you know why, for instance, Macintosh has the most consistent and best user interface out there? Because they aren't developing it for 100 different platforms.
I'm not suggesting things should be closed.. but doing something different just for the sake of doing something different holds linux back now. Developers need a solid target.
There is no good reason why we can't standardize on one basic layout and packaging system.. it wouldn't stop or even slow down anyone from doing whatever they want.. there is nothing fundamentally better about the way Redhat lays things out, -vs- Mandrake -vs- Gentoo -vs- Debian.
Dicking around with filesystem layout and packagaing standards doesn't help anything nowadays, it just fragments the platform.
I can't figure out why these guys thinkg a DVDR is a backup solution a) Likely to fail b) Look how much time, and how many discs it will take to back up 1TB.
The realistic backup solution for stuff like this is: stuff like this.
Back up to a set of hard drives. Seriously. The cost/MB is still the cheapest out there, and it's more flexible, and heck, way faster than tape.
ITs' not just identical numbers of cylinders and heads, but identical mappings of those to virtual cylinders/heads that you see in IDE.
No, it won't screw anything up, but performance will suffer.
The idea is that all heads can move in parallel with some types of raid. you don't want one drive writing it's block to have to move farther than the other one..
As for 3ware, I have a 12 port 3ware controller with 12 120 gig drives in it... and though its' tough for me to judge performance, as I use it chiefly over 100mbps ethernet, I will say it never seems to have hte IDE blocking problems when moving around large files that you see with normal IDE (which makes sense, considering the OS is talking to a real controller, which is taking care of all the IDE stuff behind the scenes.)
I don't think the performance is the same as a high performance scsi setup, but it certainly is good. and cheap.
Why spend money on work when you can let others prove your point.
You can whine all you want about how everyone and their dog had this first.. but everyone out there is still using IE... and this feature came before there was enough feature gap to get people to start switching in droves. A week after this is out, the history won't matter, IE will do popup blocking, and people will still use IE, and the fact that mozilla also supports it will be irrelevant.
From a marketing point of view, it makes perfect sense.
Okay.. so last spring, I got my first mac. It was a leap of faith.. for sure. I've always been a low-level systems guy; I like linux, I don't like windows... like most here I guess.
Now, I'm a mac freak. IT's really that good.
Is it worth $129? My first reaction was one of feeling ripped off.. I mean, I just bought this not even a year ago.. shouldn't I get a cheap or even free upgrade?
Well, I bought it. I installed it. Yes, I read about a few quirks, like with firewire, and a warning about filevault.. both of which are not currently things I need.
Panther is better. It's not a quantum leap, it's not Windows 95 -vs- Windows XP, it's still OS X.. it just has some nice improvements, that I'm sure you've all heard about. More than that, it's smoother, works better.. the eyecandy is just the surface. All the unix stuff I have still works fine too.. I had zero adjustment time in getting to use panther. After the install, I just kept working.. "Oh gee, finder looks different". "Hey, Mail is better!". The odd dialog box from the keychain (which mac apps use to store perseonal information, usually passwords), stating that an application that requested access had changed.. that's it.
I've come to realize that macs are not cheap. I didn't keep using OS X, or fall for mac stuff because it was the fastest, or the cheapest.. I did it because it's provided me with a work environment like none I've ever used... and if that means paying apple a couple hundred bucks a year for them to keep churning out stuff like this, I'm all for it.
Cool... can you point me to the software that will pop up a password request box overliad over the real box on, say, slashdot? Or mozilla mail? Will it work with my other applications too?
This isn't just about filling in forms or passwords automatically, it's about the user interface for doing so.
they are talking more about the user interface....
A password field pops up in an application. their software pops up a dialog right over top, and asks you for the master password. It then finds your password and fills in the box.
Slashdot Mirror
The non-compete, I'm guessing, would have been regarding the unix source code that was licensed (not sold) to SCO... which would make good sense right? Why would SCO buy the completel rights to it if Novell could turn around and compete with them using it?
Of course, that has nothing to do with OTHER operating systems.. Novell has always been in the networked OS market, and using linux is hardly any differnet than using Novell's old stuff in that respect. Linux is not unix, as everyone except SCO is fond of saying.
Just because you have a way to make money doesn't mean it's illegal for someone else to detract from it.
I mean, come on, get real.
Lots of things can hurt business.
Your competitor selling stuff cheaper than you can hurt it.. should that be wrong too?
I mean, I understand reasonably well the benchmarks used... but my question is this:
In the past, we always looked to the DoE or DoD for who had the fastest computers... they had stuff we could only dream of.. huge, fast clusters of funky computers we've never heard of.
Now, a university built one out of macs... and it competes with the same benchmarks.
What I wonder is, are there applications the old-style supercomputers are still better at, or has technology simply advanced since then? (Things like 10gig ethernet and ghz processors and memory busses, etc)... have we simply surpassed them? Don't just feed me some line about I/O either....
Interconnect is very important.
This is nothing like distributed.net.
For a problem that can be broken into millions of discrete, independent chunks, sure, distributed.net's model is fantastic, and works really well... (seti, folding, distributed.net, etc)
For something where you need lots of feedback from nodes, (like these benchmarks, and lots of simulation work), bandwidth is everything.
Just let them have their privacy. They'll take it anyway. Don't treat them like kids. The internet isn't the same thing to you as it is to them.
Tell them not to do anything illegal.
It's unlicensed, there is a big difference.
You cannot just use this spectrum however you see fit, there are rules, quite serious ones.
You have every right to complain if the device in question is illegal according to the regs.
But when they say that, they visualize the moon.. a full moon. And in that case, they are correct.
IF we see no moon (because it's dark) there isn't really anything to refer to a dark side of, right? RIGHT?
BEcause, although we can easily argue that the computer owner is the only one ultimately who CAN be responsible for what it does.. that's not practical.
Nor is making the ISP entirely responsible.
In fact, if we take this too far, trying to find some ultimate party to blame for everything, we end up with a bloated legal and beurocratic mess, where everyone is afraid to do anything.
ISPs should publish guidelines to customers regarding keeping their systems secure.
ISPs should revoke connections if customers are hacked too many times.
No, the computer owner should not be responsible by default legally... like any other crime, one should have to PROVE who caused the maliciouis act.
The whole idea that we have to find SOMEONE to blame, even if we don't know who really did it, is a bad one.
There are areas in the polar region where the bottoms of craters are in eternal shade, and that is precisely what these studies are talking about.
And when we say "The dark side of the moon".. we are referring to either a Pink Floyd album, or the side of the moon that is currently in darkness.. so the dark side of the moon is indeed always dark.. just like the dark side of the earth.
Used by pilots, perhaps only military, to help differentiate between differnet people in radio chatter.
Sounds are processed such that actually come from different places relative to the pilot, both horizontically and vertically, making it much easier to focus on one person. Even when the pilot moves his head, the absolute position of the channels does not.
Hard drives are not good for off-site backup, I already acknowledged that. At least, not the kind you want to tote to a vault.
Offsite multi-year storage? Agreed.
However, MOST small and medium sized businesses don't even do offiste backup. They back up to a server somewehre in the buildling, and that's that.
Tapes are not as reliable as you think; I've had more than my fair share of DLT tapes go bad. Further, they don't last that long on the shelf.
If we are talking about long-term archival storage for financial records, as required by law in many places, that's a totally different issue than making sure you have a backup of the last 2 weeks of incremental data in case someone erases something.
Electron flow, current flow, and energy are not the same thing.
Energy does not come from the wall and go into the ground.
A better way to look at it is:
Energy is generated at the power station, and is consumed at the house. Both the ground AND the wire are part of the same circuit; power is transferred over the entire mechanism.
Guys you can argue the technical merits all you want.. today's consumer has a short memory.
If MS makes it look for a short while like linux isn't really secure, and does an okay job of convincing people, the facts don't matter; the get more market, we get less.
What linux needs is an evil marketing company, on par with MS.
Having a bunch of distributions that do the same thing different ways definately helps things.
Seriously, it was good, it is nice that linux can do well...
but do you know why, for instance, Macintosh has the most consistent and best user interface out there? Because they aren't developing it for 100 different platforms.
I'm not suggesting things should be closed.. but doing something different just for the sake of doing something different holds linux back now. Developers need a solid target.
There is no good reason why we can't standardize on one basic layout and packaging system.. it wouldn't stop or even slow down anyone from doing whatever they want.. there is nothing fundamentally better about the way Redhat lays things out, -vs- Mandrake -vs- Gentoo -vs- Debian.
Dicking around with filesystem layout and packagaing standards doesn't help anything nowadays, it just fragments the platform.
Totally correct.
Actually, I thought I included the word "onsite" in my post.. I guess I erased it.
Depending on the scale of your operation, removables can still be significantly cheaper than tape.
I can't figure out why these guys thinkg a DVDR is a backup solution
a) Likely to fail
b) Look how much time, and how many discs it will take to back up 1TB.
The realistic backup solution for stuff like this is: stuff like this.
Back up to a set of hard drives. Seriously. The cost/MB is still the cheapest out there, and it's more flexible, and heck, way faster than tape.
head tracking.
ITs' not just identical numbers of cylinders and heads, but identical mappings of those to virtual cylinders/heads that you see in IDE.
No, it won't screw anything up, but performance will suffer.
The idea is that all heads can move in parallel with some types of raid. you don't want one drive writing it's block to have to move farther than the other one..
As for 3ware, I have a 12 port 3ware controller with 12 120 gig drives in it... and though its' tough for me to judge performance, as I use it chiefly over 100mbps ethernet, I will say it never seems to have hte IDE blocking problems when moving around large files that you see with normal IDE (which makes sense, considering the OS is talking to a real controller, which is taking care of all the IDE stuff behind the scenes.)
I don't think the performance is the same as a high performance scsi setup, but it certainly is good. and cheap.
Lots of motherboards come with 4 IDE channels now, and onboard IDE raid. Very common, not expensive.
I think his point was more that he purposely didn't want panther, so he bought his mac early.
The dude shoudl go get his free upgrade now though... he won't be able to later.
The good innovate,
but the best immitate.
Or..
Why spend money on work when you can let others prove your point.
You can whine all you want about how everyone and their dog had this first.. but everyone out there is still using IE... and this feature came before there was enough feature gap to get people to start switching in droves. A week after this is out, the history won't matter, IE will do popup blocking, and people will still use IE, and the fact that mozilla also supports it will be irrelevant.
From a marketing point of view, it makes perfect sense.
Okay.. so last spring, I got my first mac. It was a leap of faith.. for sure. I've always been a low-level systems guy; I like linux, I don't like windows... like most here I guess.
Now, I'm a mac freak. IT's really that good.
Is it worth $129? My first reaction was one of feeling ripped off.. I mean, I just bought this not even a year ago.. shouldn't I get a cheap or even free upgrade?
Well, I bought it. I installed it. Yes, I read about a few quirks, like with firewire, and a warning about filevault.. both of which are not currently things I need.
Panther is better. It's not a quantum leap, it's not Windows 95 -vs- Windows XP, it's still OS X.. it just has some nice improvements, that I'm sure you've all heard about. More than that, it's smoother, works better.. the eyecandy is just the surface. All the unix stuff I have still works fine too.. I had zero adjustment time in getting to use panther. After the install, I just kept working.. "Oh gee, finder looks different". "Hey, Mail is better!". The odd dialog box from the keychain (which mac apps use to store perseonal information, usually passwords), stating that an application that requested access had changed.. that's it.
I've come to realize that macs are not cheap. I didn't keep using OS X, or fall for mac stuff because it was the fastest, or the cheapest.. I did it because it's provided me with a work environment like none I've ever used... and if that means paying apple a couple hundred bucks a year for them to keep churning out stuff like this, I'm all for it.
No, that pops up a global dialog box that asks if it's okay to use this password.
.
IBM is talking about overlaying an input box on top of the psasword box you are trying to type in, for your master password..
visually more seamless.
Cool...
can you point me to the software that will pop up a password request box overliad over the real box on, say, slashdot? Or mozilla mail? Will it work with my other applications too?
This isn't just about filling in forms or passwords automatically, it's about the user interface for doing so.
they are talking more about the user interface....
A password field pops up in an application. their software pops up a dialog right over top, and asks you for the master password. It then finds your password and fills in the box.
visually, it makes more sense.