My point? If mozilla ever starts to be a credible browser threat, IIS7 (or 8 or whatever) will suddenly either not work with mozilla at all, OR give lower priority treatment to mozilla requests. Or, better yet, just occasionally drop requests, making it even harder to diagnose.
Now I've heard some paranoid things before, but Microsoft is not quite so stupid as to cripple the performance of their software for a competing browser, just to make "15% of the web" slower to surf for Mozilla users. They will INSTANTLY lose credibility with MANY IIS MAINTAINERS. Companies tend to get pissed off when software excludes some of their customers. (Ignoring those companies in bed with Microsoft, of course.)
Works fine when I use IE7.5, but danged if Mozilla 1.01.02RC3 (cause that's about where they'll be) crashes sometimes!
You're trying to make fun of the version numbering for Mozilla, but I've got IE 6 installed right now, which lists it's version number as: 6.0.2600.0000.xpclnt_qfe.010827-1803.
Yes, that is what it says in the "About MSIE" window for "version."
Mozilla will be a great product eventually, but unfortunately I agree with Joel Spolsky [joelonsoftware.com] that good software takes ten years to write [joelonsoftware.com], and you should NEVER [joelonsoftware.com] rewrite code from scratch.
Mozilla is great software NOW, it only took four years, and it was re-written from scratch to compete with MSIE and blow away the last version of Netscape.
Sounds like you and Joel need to revise your views?
This can be spun many ways. Could it be that Microsoft found these ten flaws thanks to their month of heavy code checking in February, and are working on fixes for them?
I mean, why is it a failure to find flaws and fix them? If you're trying to get trustworthy computing, seems like it's a failure if you don't fix any flaws.
You realize they make other motherboards with PS/2 slots, right? Just because they have a non-legacy motherboard doesn't mean you have to buy it, or that they're phasing out all other boards. They're not stupid, just cutting-edge.
Re:Titanium is also very flexible.
on
The Sexiest Metal
·
· Score: 2
The only thing it has going over steel in these cases is buzzword compliance and price (if it's more expensive, it must be better!)
Actually in the case of metals, the cost is usually related to how rare the metal is (i.e. how much higher demand is than supply), and/or how much it costs to form it (in the case of steel).
BS...why don't you sort the dam thing by cluster versus non-clustered.
OK I did that as well, and MySQL doesn't show up in the list at all... I'm not trying to say SQL Server is better than Oracle. Just that it is AT LEAST approaching Oracle, and both perform much better than MySQL.
MS is the only one doing cluster testing.
Actually IBM DB2 was listed on the clustered results page as well. Where is Oracle in clustering?
Have you ever looked at Oracle or DB2 both are far superior database solutions to Microsoft SQL.
Exactly how are you measuring superiority? SQL Server 7 has been stable, it has all the features we could possibly want, it integrates nicely with our windows environment (which was not my choice, btw), and it is inexpensive compared to Oracle. According to the TPC benchmarks, it is outperforming Oracle in certain situations, so the performance is definitely up there.
I am not familiar with DB2, but I was under the impression it was not as good as Oracle or SQL Server 7.
"Due to its significant JDBC (Java Database Connectivity) driver problems, SQL Server was limited to about 200 pages per second for the entire test..."
Uhhh yeah, sounds like a fair benchmark... using JDBC drivers that are known to be buggy with SQL Server 2000? I, and most people using SQL Server, don't use JDBC drivers for most things.
But I guess if you only read the front pages of mysql.com for information on benchmarks, you might like to believe MySQL won...
SQL Server beating MySQL on many fronts? eweek DB benchmark
"Due to its significant JDBC (Java Database Connectivity) driver problems, SQL Server was limited to about 200 pages per second for the entire test..."
Yes, for old-fashioned client-server use. If you want to use your SQL Server for storage of data that's accessible through Internet, which is most of the usage you will see today (I don't know about intranet, though), you are in the 20k$ range, AFAIK
You are wrong. $5K per license for SQL Server 2000 standard edition (what most small to medium businesses would use... hell, even large businesses). Read this page:
with SQL 2000 at $20,000 per processor that won't change anytime soon
Nice of you to quote the highest possible price per processor. We have SQL Server 7 licensed for two processors, it was expensive, but NOWHERE NEAR $20,000 per proc! I just checked the SQL 2000 licensing. Yeah, $20K per proc for the ENTERPRISE EDITION. This is like on Spaceballs where the guy orders the ship to go at "LUDICROUS SPEED!"
SQL Server 2000 is $5K per processor for unlimited client access. If you've only got 5-25 people accessing, it's less than that ($1K-$2K).
It's also not really fair to compare it to Linux/Apache/MySQL, as SQL Server 2000 beats MySQL on MANY fronts, including speed and options.
I'm no fan of MS in general, but SQL Server 7 is the best piece of software I've ever used, and I'm sick of the FUD.
I sitll support the paranoid people, because there is always the chance that M$ will extend and extinguish what it has embraced, but with them having submitted everything to ECMA, that's really an outside worry.
But I've always felt that the whole nine movie plan was a bit of revisionist history after people didn't get the "Episode IV" joke-cum-homage to old time serials ("...our story so far:").
Speaking of revisionist history!
When Star Wars was originally released, it didn't state "Episode IV" or "A New Hope." It just had the title, Star Wars. After the movie's success, the plans started forming for a 9-part series with sequels and prequels.
Take a look at the trivia page at IMDB on Star Wars.
Also, trying doing a search for "Star Wars" at IMDB. You'll notice episodes I, II, V, and VI all have the numbering system, but episode IV is just called "Star Wars." (I've noticed IMDB is generally really anal about details like this... look at the entries for the three LOTR movies, and you'll see Gandalf's character name changing from Grey to White... cool.)
51683 [mozilla.org]: Unable to have 2 differently named bookmarks for the same url.
Perhaps this bug is not deemed to be 'serious' since the point of having bookmarks is diminished when you store more than one pointing at the same place, right? Why would you do that?
However, ever since 0.9.7, things didn't seem so peachy. The same Mozilla snaps that were brining me so much joy were crashing on a regular basis. Even the official releases were crashing.
1. And you reported these crashes to bugzilla so they could be addressed, right?
2. I have had VERY FEW crashes since 0.9.7. Perhaps there are installation problems on your machine?
The little things that I thought were really cool, were deemed to be not so and disabled.
Such as?? BTW, mozilla is open source, so it would be possible to have your own build with features you like added to it. Course, I'd wait until 1.0 is out and stable...
Yeah, Red Herring [redherring.com] carried the story, and with a little lower "fluff factor". At least, it seemed to me . ..
That's strange, since the byline on the MSNBC article says they got it from Red Herring. I guess the MS in MSNBC has their editors used to trimming articles for the lowest common denominator?
When I try to do it the 30 second way, I always seem to end up 20-30 seconds into the program, and then I have to scan back... With all the zipping back and forth, it ends up being easier to have just done the FF trick initially.
What I do is 30-second skips, and then the 'instant replay' button (which goes back 5 seconds at a time) a few times until I don't see my show anymore. I've found this is MUCH* faster than the old way.
* MUCH == approximately 1 second faster.
Re:Except...
on
PVR For Linux
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
So Tivo deliberatly omits stuff like 30-second skip
Easily enabled with a backdoor code that you can easily enter with your remote. I have it, and it works great. TiVo feels, and many people agree, that the three-step FF/RW functionality is easier to use than 30-second skips, especially for people with slow reflexes... (FF/RW have built-in 'jump back' features that pretty accurately measure most people's ability to NOT stop the fast-forwarding soon enough after they see their show come back on.)
makes it inconvenient to archive stuff long-term
Yeah, like that very inconvenient "dump to tape" feature which includes a nice screen at the beginning telling you the program name and air date before starting the program. Or the fact that they've allowed all the networking add-on hardware and software, even though they could have pretty easily come down on those guys, or made it EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to hack. Or the fact that TiVolution (a guy that regularly posts to TiVo forums and is an employee of TiVo) has come out to say that there will be some sort of networking enhancements made to TiVo's via a coming upgrade.
occasionally includes some pointless promotion menu item
Which I usually don't bother viewing... they aren't in the way at all, say, like a huge slashdot ad appearing before the replies. And they are often timely, like the Oscar-related video ads available a couple nights before the Oscar broadcast.
doesn't integrate well with your network and fileserver(s), etc.
Huh? You are apparantly not familiar with the very nice TiVo networking hacks. I especially like accessing my TiVo via the webserver I put inside it so I can schedule shows I find out about at work.
There are no corporate pressures in the "longhair linus" camp to hold people back. Free Tivo clones are going to rock!
Just as much as Linux does, sure. But no normal people I know use Linux. No normal people I know think Linux "rocks." Yes it is cool that people can put together a PVR if they want. Some cool projects will come of it. But TiVo killer, it isn't. By the time they get something to compete with the current TiVo, TiVo will have Series 2 and assorted upgrades ready. It does exactly what I want it to do.
Re:what about the human side
on
Hospital Robots
·
· Score: 2
The technology and all is okay, but healing is not just medicines. Having a nurse to talk to and do the psychological healing is very important for a patient.
In a hospital its not just the medicines which cure you, it has to come from inside too. If Robots are used extensively it can create a sort of coldness which wont be really good, especially for patients who are under depression
Did it say they are replacing every human in the hospital with a robot? NO! But why pay someone to carry drugs around the building when a robot can do it much more efficiently?
Slashdot Mirror
My point? If mozilla ever starts to be a credible browser threat, IIS7 (or 8 or whatever) will suddenly either not work with mozilla at all, OR give lower priority treatment to mozilla requests. Or, better yet, just occasionally drop requests, making it even harder to diagnose.
Now I've heard some paranoid things before, but Microsoft is not quite so stupid as to cripple the performance of their software for a competing browser, just to make "15% of the web" slower to surf for Mozilla users. They will INSTANTLY lose credibility with MANY IIS MAINTAINERS. Companies tend to get pissed off when software excludes some of their customers. (Ignoring those companies in bed with Microsoft, of course.)
Works fine when I use IE7.5, but danged if Mozilla 1.01.02RC3 (cause that's about where they'll be) crashes sometimes!
You're trying to make fun of the version numbering for Mozilla, but I've got IE 6 installed right now, which lists it's version number as: 6.0.2600.0000.xpclnt_qfe.010827-1803.
Yes, that is what it says in the "About MSIE" window for "version."
Mozilla will be a great product eventually, but unfortunately I agree with Joel Spolsky [joelonsoftware.com] that good software takes ten years to write [joelonsoftware.com], and you should NEVER [joelonsoftware.com] rewrite code from scratch.
Mozilla is great software NOW, it only took four years, and it was re-written from scratch to compete with MSIE and blow away the last version of Netscape.
Sounds like you and Joel need to revise your views?
This can be spun many ways. Could it be that Microsoft found these ten flaws thanks to their month of heavy code checking in February, and are working on fixes for them?
I mean, why is it a failure to find flaws and fix them? If you're trying to get trustworthy computing, seems like it's a failure if you don't fix any flaws.
You realize they make other motherboards with PS/2 slots, right? Just because they have a non-legacy motherboard doesn't mean you have to buy it, or that they're phasing out all other boards. They're not stupid, just cutting-edge.
Sorry Abit, you lost my business right there.
Gee, I hope they can survive.
The only thing it has going over steel in these cases is buzzword compliance and price (if it's more expensive, it must be better!)
Actually in the case of metals, the cost is usually related to how rare the metal is (i.e. how much higher demand is than supply), and/or how much it costs to form it (in the case of steel).
They are the ones with the legs on backwards, for obvious reasons.
...Flo's Filet, I must agree with you.
BS...why don't you sort the dam thing by cluster versus non-clustered.
OK I did that as well, and MySQL doesn't show up in the list at all... I'm not trying to say SQL Server is better than Oracle. Just that it is AT LEAST approaching Oracle, and both perform much better than MySQL.
MS is the only one doing cluster testing.
Actually IBM DB2 was listed on the clustered results page as well. Where is Oracle in clustering?
If you blindly get one database based on some 3rd party benchmarks you are not going to get the best solution.
I don't trust benchmarks AT ALL. I was merely countering the stupid "MySQL outperforms Oracle and MS SQL Server" claims from eweek...
Have you ever looked at Oracle or DB2 both are far superior database solutions to Microsoft SQL.
Exactly how are you measuring superiority? SQL Server 7 has been stable, it has all the features we could possibly want, it integrates nicely with our windows environment (which was not my choice, btw), and it is inexpensive compared to Oracle. According to the TPC benchmarks, it is outperforming Oracle in certain situations, so the performance is definitely up there.
I am not familiar with DB2, but I was under the impression it was not as good as Oracle or SQL Server 7.
it kicked sql servers ass on eweek
I quote from the eweek article:
"Due to its significant JDBC (Java Database Connectivity) driver problems, SQL Server was limited to about 200 pages per second for the entire test..."
Uhhh yeah, sounds like a fair benchmark... using JDBC drivers that are known to be buggy with SQL Server 2000? I, and most people using SQL Server, don't use JDBC drivers for most things.
But I guess if you only read the front pages of mysql.com for information on benchmarks, you might like to believe MySQL won...
Try the TPC page, where Microsoft SQL Server 2000 owns the top 3 spots for performance. This is comparing SQL Server 2000 vs. Oracle on all kinds of high end machines (presumably to remove the hardware as the bottleneck). I think most people would agree Oracle is considered to be the top-end RDBMS, and here MS SQL 2000 beats it.
SQL Server beating MySQL on many fronts? eweek DB benchmark
"Due to its significant JDBC (Java Database Connectivity) driver problems, SQL Server was limited to about 200 pages per second for the entire test..."
Uhhh yeah, sounds like a fair benchmark.
Yes, for old-fashioned client-server use. If you want to use your SQL Server for storage of data that's accessible through Internet, which is most of the usage you will see today (I don't know about intranet, though), you are in the 20k$ range, AFAIK
a sp
You are wrong. $5K per license for SQL Server 2000 standard edition (what most small to medium businesses would use... hell, even large businesses). Read this page:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/production.
with SQL 2000 at $20,000 per processor that won't change anytime soon
Nice of you to quote the highest possible price per processor. We have SQL Server 7 licensed for two processors, it was expensive, but NOWHERE NEAR $20,000 per proc! I just checked the SQL 2000 licensing. Yeah, $20K per proc for the ENTERPRISE EDITION. This is like on Spaceballs where the guy orders the ship to go at "LUDICROUS SPEED!"
SQL Server 2000 is $5K per processor for unlimited client access. If you've only got 5-25 people accessing, it's less than that ($1K-$2K).
It's also not really fair to compare it to Linux/Apache/MySQL, as SQL Server 2000 beats MySQL on MANY fronts, including speed and options.
I'm no fan of MS in general, but SQL Server 7 is the best piece of software I've ever used, and I'm sick of the FUD.
I sitll support the paranoid people, because there is always the chance that M$ will extend and extinguish what it has embraced, but with them having submitted everything to ECMA, that's really an outside worry.
Ahh yes... an outside worry. More like even-odds!
Good luck, though.
I can run
No?
Thank you, move along.
This guy could write the dialog for comic-book-guy on The Simpsons.
But I've always felt that the whole nine movie plan was a bit of revisionist history after people didn't get the "Episode IV" joke-cum-homage to old time serials ("...our story so far:").
Speaking of revisionist history!
When Star Wars was originally released, it didn't state "Episode IV" or "A New Hope." It just had the title, Star Wars. After the movie's success, the plans started forming for a 9-part series with sequels and prequels.
Take a look at the trivia page at IMDB on Star Wars.
Also, trying doing a search for "Star Wars" at IMDB. You'll notice episodes I, II, V, and VI all have the numbering system, but episode IV is just called "Star Wars." (I've noticed IMDB is generally really anal about details like this... look at the entries for the three LOTR movies, and you'll see Gandalf's character name changing from Grey to White... cool.)
There is a huge bug with bookmarks:
51683 [mozilla.org]: Unable to have 2 differently named bookmarks for the same url.
Perhaps this bug is not deemed to be 'serious' since the point of having bookmarks is diminished when you store more than one pointing at the same place, right? Why would you do that?
However, ever since 0.9.7, things didn't seem so peachy. The same Mozilla snaps that were brining me so much joy were crashing on a regular basis. Even the official releases were crashing.
1. And you reported these crashes to bugzilla so they could be addressed, right?
2. I have had VERY FEW crashes since 0.9.7. Perhaps there are installation problems on your machine?
The little things that I thought were really cool, were deemed to be not so and disabled.
Such as?? BTW, mozilla is open source, so it would be possible to have your own build with features you like added to it. Course, I'd wait until 1.0 is out and stable...
Yeah, Red Herring [redherring.com] carried the story, and with a little lower "fluff factor". At least, it seemed to me . . .
That's strange, since the byline on the MSNBC article says they got it from Red Herring. I guess the MS in MSNBC has their editors used to trimming articles for the lowest common denominator?
When I try to do it the 30 second way, I always seem to end up 20-30 seconds into the program, and then I have to scan back... With all the zipping back and forth, it ends up being easier to have just done the FF trick initially.
What I do is 30-second skips, and then the 'instant replay' button (which goes back 5 seconds at a time) a few times until I don't see my show anymore. I've found this is MUCH* faster than the old way.
* MUCH == approximately 1 second faster.
So Tivo deliberatly omits stuff like 30-second skip
... they aren't in the way at all, say, like a huge slashdot ad appearing before the replies. And they are often timely, like the Oscar-related video ads available a couple nights before the Oscar broadcast.
Easily enabled with a backdoor code that you can easily enter with your remote. I have it, and it works great. TiVo feels, and many people agree, that the three-step FF/RW functionality is easier to use than 30-second skips, especially for people with slow reflexes... (FF/RW have built-in 'jump back' features that pretty accurately measure most people's ability to NOT stop the fast-forwarding soon enough after they see their show come back on.)
makes it inconvenient to archive stuff long-term
Yeah, like that very inconvenient "dump to tape" feature which includes a nice screen at the beginning telling you the program name and air date before starting the program. Or the fact that they've allowed all the networking add-on hardware and software, even though they could have pretty easily come down on those guys, or made it EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to hack. Or the fact that TiVolution (a guy that regularly posts to TiVo forums and is an employee of TiVo) has come out to say that there will be some sort of networking enhancements made to TiVo's via a coming upgrade.
occasionally includes some pointless promotion menu item
Which I usually don't bother viewing
doesn't integrate well with your network and fileserver(s), etc.
Huh? You are apparantly not familiar with the very nice TiVo networking hacks. I especially like accessing my TiVo via the webserver I put inside it so I can schedule shows I find out about at work.
There are no corporate pressures in the "longhair linus" camp to hold people back. Free Tivo clones are going to rock!
Just as much as Linux does, sure. But no normal people I know use Linux. No normal people I know think Linux "rocks." Yes it is cool that people can put together a PVR if they want. Some cool projects will come of it. But TiVo killer, it isn't. By the time they get something to compete with the current TiVo, TiVo will have Series 2 and assorted upgrades ready. It does exactly what I want it to do.
The technology and all is okay, but healing is not just medicines. Having a nurse to talk to and do the psychological healing is very important for a patient.
In a hospital its not just the medicines which cure you, it has to come from inside too. If Robots are used extensively it can create a sort of coldness which wont be really good, especially for patients who are under depression
Did it say they are replacing every human in the hospital with a robot? NO! But why pay someone to carry drugs around the building when a robot can do it much more efficiently?
Some Japanese companies now use robots to deliver mail.
Yes, I call these robots "SMTP Servers."
Pretty catchy, huh kids?