Your information does not seem to be good. Here is a sample from an IHL report showing Linux at 13% in drug stores. Your definition of "failed miserably" must be different from mine.
Is it really plausible that networking standards groups would back a new protocol, released 20 years later than a protocol which preceded the modern internet, and that it would be worse overall?
It is not just plausible, it is a fact. Breaking compatibility completely with IPv4 is a killer flaw.
As far as I can tell, the majority of IBM's point-of-sale systems these days run Linux with the older FlexOS based systems now a small fraction of the installed base. Can anyone confirm?
Is it really a good idea for a company defined by good (and in this case, high-margin) hardware to sell it off in favor of nebulous consulting stuff?
Oh yes indeed, if the margin on the service side of the business is larger than the hardware business it makes loads of sense. Put it this way: it's cheaper for IBM to buy Lenovo PCs for its engineers and consultants than to build them itself.
Wow, Autodesk, the crappiest CAD company of them all. And look, ADSK flat on its back the last five years. Somehow you just know that going to happen to anybody who drinks the Microsoft Koolaid.
So you know the person presenting the argument is biased. However that does not determine whether or not the argument itself is correct. In fact there is a term for your argument: a logical fallacy.
I've bought exactly four pieces of hardware from Sony. The PS1, PS2, PS3, and PSP.
Good for you. I also bought the PS3. The way I was treated by Sony made made my mind up for me: there will be no PS4 in my house. Nor an XBox 361 for that matter. But frankly, I'm more likely to send my money to Microsoft or Apple some than Sony, if that adequately expresses the depth of my digust.
It was a typo, I actually meant 2-3 orders of magnitude. And yes, I mean 100-1000 times slower. Well, actual measurements show Python stuck overall about 2 orders of magnitude slower than C++ with some excursions out in the general direction of three orders of magnitude. That is for compute intensive work, which of course is the topic here. I personally have measured Python running up to a thousand times slower than C++, running things like the good old sieve bench.
So no, expecting a Python program that actually does any significant amount of computation to come as close as 2-3.5 times slower than C++ is wild fantasy.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple moving from underage workers to underage customers.
Your information does not seem to be good. Here is a sample from an IHL report showing Linux at 13% in drug stores. Your definition of "failed miserably" must be different from mine.
Is it really plausible that networking standards groups would back a new protocol, released 20 years later than a protocol which preceded the modern internet, and that it would be worse overall?
It is not just plausible, it is a fact. Breaking compatibility completely with IPv4 is a killer flaw.
Apple breeds haters by being evil. The haters hate evil, see? Apple is just a high concentration of evil, that is why it attracts haters.
Apple's rapacious greed knows no bounds.
Ellison's the prettiest. And he smells like pie.
Cowpie?
The majority of the installed base runs on the IBM proprietary 4690 OS...
IBM 4690 OS still had a market share of 12% in the POS register/client market in June 2005, when IBM was starting to phase it out in favour to IBM Retail Environment for SUSE (IRES)
12% in 2005 does not sound like a majority to me.
Apple doesn't sell hardware, Apple sells Unicorn piss.
As far as I can tell, the majority of IBM's point-of-sale systems these days run Linux with the older FlexOS based systems now a small fraction of the installed base. Can anyone confirm?
Yeah right. Keep in mind that there are various degrees of skill, experience and ability, to put it mildly.
This sounds like a "cool hack". Which, .. ya know.. is "cool" an all... but usually not a good idea for a major piece of software such as GIMP.
Where did you get that idea?
"The more I practice the luckier I get" -- Gary Player, legendary golfer
Is it really a good idea for a company defined by good (and in this case, high-margin) hardware to sell it off in favor of nebulous consulting stuff?
Oh yes indeed, if the margin on the service side of the business is larger than the hardware business it makes loads of sense. Put it this way: it's cheaper for IBM to buy Lenovo PCs for its engineers and consultants than to build them itself.
As it has done with Lenovo and the other manufacturers, the quality will decline.
Lenovo still has a pretty good rep. Anyway, nothing beats the quality of those old IBM card punches.
Wow, Autodesk, the crappiest CAD company of them all. And look, ADSK flat on its back the last five years. Somehow you just know that going to happen to anybody who drinks the Microsoft Koolaid.
What's your agenda?
Maybe not. The IBM PC was way more important.
So you know the person presenting the argument is biased. However that does not determine whether or not the argument itself is correct. In fact there is a term for your argument: a logical fallacy.
I've bought exactly four pieces of hardware from Sony. The PS1, PS2, PS3, and PSP.
Good for you. I also bought the PS3. The way I was treated by Sony made made my mind up for me: there will be no PS4 in my house. Nor an XBox 361 for that matter. But frankly, I'm more likely to send my money to Microsoft or Apple some than Sony, if that adequately expresses the depth of my digust.
once the sony-bashing boulder has started going, there's no stopping it.
Sony worked hard to deserve it. Next one slithering down that path is Apple.
when Nokia signed a pact to switch to Windows Phone, production moved East...
To Mordor?
It was a typo, I actually meant 2-3 orders of magnitude. And yes, I mean 100-1000 times slower. Well, actual measurements show Python stuck overall about 2 orders of magnitude slower than C++ with some excursions out in the general direction of three orders of magnitude. That is for compute intensive work, which of course is the topic here. I personally have measured Python running up to a thousand times slower than C++, running things like the good old sieve bench.
So no, expecting a Python program that actually does any significant amount of computation to come as close as 2-3.5 times slower than C++ is wild fantasy.
WTF do these people come from?
Get hired by Google then tell each other every day that they are smart people, it must be true, just look at all this free food?
Most insightful comment... ever.
Totally agreed, and it's a great reason to get her an Android tablet. Save some money, get more free stuff, and flash sites work too.