Hey, that's nice. So let's see, what you're saying is essentially that every corporation out there that uses Windows (sorry, 'windoze') for DNS, domain controllers, file serving, web applications, backend infrastructure and the sort - all of them are somehow retarded and can't get anything meaningful done. They're all wrong, and you somehow have it right. Because you've figured out 'enterprise computing'. Right? IOW, if someone who uses Windows (or 'windoze') dares claim that this article seems like just another piece of sensationalist flamebait fare that slashbots like you enjoy so much - then by definition they must be a 'fanboy'
Actually, at least in the case of the LATAM/Spain exports you couldn't be more wrong. My experience with the Simpsons and also Ren & Stimpy is an extremely well done localization job. These productions are full of little quirky cultural references and jokes that would never withstand a transliteration, and yet they were amazingly funny. In fact, some of the episodes (especially the Ren & Stimpy) ones are even funnier when compared with the english versions. But it all depends on the skills of the people doing the work.
The problem with Wikipedia is the 'pedia' part. Everyone expects that it will have the same quality than a professionally-edited, controlled dead tree publication. And as much as it's popular to claim around here, is simply not true. It's a vast mass of useful information and just plain wrong crap, sprinkled with quite a bit of biased bullshit that not even the Register (ouch) would publish.
Good for general info and getting lost in interesting links in a lazy afternoon.
Encyclopedia? Nope, sorry.
They should have called it something else and they wouldn't have to deal with the criticism of not 'scaling' to that level.
Yes well, I suppose if I was looking for an Access replacement I'd fully expect to have my ass kicked and surprised into next week.
When you consider MySQL in a vacuum and in the context of a limited set of tasks for which it has been optimized over the course of its history then MySQL absolutely rocks. But "kick ass database" in my world means a little more than that.
In any case, I'm not making the case that MySQL sucks - it doesn't. Just that surely/i? there's a reason it's so far behind Postgres, and I'm pretty confident it's not the size of the community (which supposedly imbues any project with magical mystical powers).
The wx* series workstations (which you can buy with Linux) do rock though, and are far better hardware-wise than their Dell equivalents. The HP boxes are also far quieter (considering the number of fans you have to cram into a case with two mondo processors generating enough heat to melt sand) than any other workstation I've ever used, and that includes the old SGI ones.
The OSS world has shown it can make kickass databases
No, the "OSS world" has made no such thing. The two actually performant, enterprise-ready databases available under a free license are derived from commercial products that were open sourced by corporations (Postgres - CA Ingres | Firebird - Borland/Inprise Interbase).
The only "pure" from scratch free database server (MySQL) is just now coming of age (welcome to 2005!) by adding niceties like stored procedures and triggers.
If you judge OSS by its track record in producing database servers they tend to look really bad, so I'd avoid it if possible.
No. Open source have *never* released *any* program that works as it's meant to - everything they've ever released has been faulty. This is obviously now so part of their release early, release often strategy that they can't stop releasing defective rubbish. I'm sick of "it'll be fixed in the next release", and "the upgrade fixes all the problems". Right back to their earliest days, *no* open source product has ever worked properly
Something similar to this ? I don't know about the *AA or WalMart, but Microsoft has been paying billions in the past few years to settle with Sun, Gateway, RealNetworks and just about everyone with a valid competitive claim (Gateway) or a grudge (Real).
Many slashbots think 3 billion dollars is 'chump change' to a company to Microsoft, but of course these outlays (called 'one-time charges') affect the bottom line and therefore the stock price of a company in a very real way.
As in "they work unless you drop them from a building into a pool" fine.
Those not so smart phones have a bad reputation
In your mind maybe. The Treo has a bad reputation as well. So do some brands of toasters.
everyone got to see the new media center work
Yeah, a preproduction model crashed and not one ever worked, ever again. Wait, is this one of those things you intend to use a sound bytes for the rest of eternity in your "M$ sux let me tell you why" diatribes? Kinda like the "Microsoft sues schools and takes candy away from children" one you use so much? Oh, I remember. They sure do make for great FUD, don't they?
I got off the Creative crack train a while ago. They make decent hardware, but their drivers and their utility software absolutely suck rocks.
I've moved on to Turtle Beach and been happy ever since. Much more stable drivers and pretty much comparable hardware (with some nicer high-end stuff).
Ahhhh, twitter. Good old twitter. Riddle me this if you will. Media Center PCs (set-top boxes and the like) work fine. The Xbox works fine. SmartPhones work fine. At least no worse than any other comparable consumer electronic products made by any other company.
So... given Microsoft's track record here so far, are you serious, or are you just taking another opportunity to do your 'M$ is teh suxx0rz" routine?
Just curious, really. Your posts have an ever so slight edge of apparent intelligence that it would be unfair to dismiss them outright.
Strata locations are dated just like anything else
Well, I'll be modded down as a 'troll' again I'm sure, but I'll lay it out for you in the simplest possible way.
Geological strata are not 'dated', you dumbass. They are the dating system. All you need is to find a well-known layer (like the famous K-T one) to use as reference and bob's your uncle. Completely unambiguous. No mythical creatures or faith involved.
Almost all civilizations have oral or written records of giants and dwarves (trust me, LOTR is not a new idea). These, as most other legends, must have some sort of factual origin that has been lost over time. I find the argument that species 'shrink' (evolutionary time) in response to the stress of a closed ecological system just a little bit off since AFAIK it hasn't been proven.
But all 'little men' fun arguments aside, I can't see why there couldn't have been species parallel to Homo sapiens sapiens (other than the popularly accepted ones) at one evolutionary point or another. Heck, for all we know there could have been species of semi-sentient gorillas at any point. We just don't know.
I mean live penguins have been carbon dated at 8,000 years old
That's a nice link. Hallellujah brother! Of course the author of this incisive essay fails to take into account the fact that there is enough evidence of simple geological strata location to debunk any claim that dinosaurs lived only 20,000 years ago.
First it was "the dinosaurs didn't really exist!" then it was "the dinosaur bones were put there to test our faith!" and now it's "the dinosaurs are not really that old!"
God yes, we all know no european country has ever done that. Even assuming your argument of 'without cause' is valid. Europe has been a shining beacon of peace, justice and enlightenment throughout modern history. So it's only fair that they also control the DNS root servers. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
I don't think any of our SQL Server boxes have dual processors
Most of our SQL boxes are *quad* Xeon rigs. We don't turn on hyperthreading (that would probably be dumb), but I wonder what would happen to our licenses if we did. If we paid for a 4-CPU license and I hop over to the BIOS to turn HT on... does that mean I'm violating the EULA because I'm running the thing on eight processors? What about the Server 2003 license?
Weird. I mean, if you're running a single physical Xeon or P4 box and you buy a single CPU license of whatever server product and then you turn on HT, are you in violation of the licensing agreement?
Only on Slashdot can people clap and cheer at the attempts of a company (Sony) to lock-in consumers into their own little licensed DRM system, as long as they 'stick it to Microsoft' in the process.
You can't make this stuff up. I can only imagine the chest thumping and writhing I'd be reading if this was Apple or IBM instead. Too funny.
... except that Oracle might pull a 'MySQL' on MySQL themselves and kindly inform them that if they intend to use InnoDB for commercial purposes they'll have to pay up. IOW, Oracle might require licensing for every commercial (no-GPL) version of MySQL sold.
The biggest database vendor just confirmed that you can be too clever for your own good when you design your licensing schemes.
I'm not sure this is a metaphor I can accept for the stuff
So let's see. It's perfectly acceptable for someone to claim MSSQL is not an innovation (in itself) because it comes from Sybase. Microsoft has a lot of products that are derived from technologies they've purchased (IE, FrontPage, Access, their original C compiler, VB, etc.) Of course we can all pretend that IE is not much different from Mosaic or VB.NET is not in any way superior to the original 'Thunder' prototype Cooper sold them. After all, this is not 'true' innovation the way we like to think of it, like Napster or ICQ or Bitorrent or Groove or OS X (which themselves are of course based in work previously done by other companies and individuals).
But, it's completely unacceptable to try to make the argument that Linux does not innovate because it's a (IMO, bad) clone of UNIX, or that GNOME and KDE simply clone the Windows UI or that no open source editor (think JEdit) is innovative because, well, there's Emacs over there. Firefox? Nope, based on Netscape. Postgres? CA Ingres. Firebird? Interbase. Following that train of thought, if innovation is MySQL then I don't want it - they're just getting stored procedures this year. Kinda changes things, doesn't it?
Microsoft is the only one who "gets it" about how technology is an interrelated puzzle
MS is the company that has taken a few productivity apps and crated an integrated Office suite that actually works together. They came up with COM/OLE and then started tying things in a way that businesses for many years have found rather useful. Their server products integrate very well, and so do their development tools. Now they are doing the next generation of this stuff with.NET instead of COM as a glue technology. Color me jaded but there is no such thing in open source, at least not to the extent that Microsoft has reached.
there should be a consistency across technology
I don't know about this but I sure don't think open source with the 'not invented here' problem and their dozens of different widget sets and slightly incompatible GUIs have it right, either. Maybe Apple are the ones who will get this right. At least in Windows and OS X you have a single presentation layer API to deal with. And let's not even get into backwards compatibility, which is still one of Microsoft's crowning achievements. People don't like change. Every time Microsoft changes the Office UI they take a risk. They're slammed because it's 'bloated and useless', but if they didn't they'd be called 'stagnant'. Yipeee!
there is no comparable technology "out there" to Microsoft's COM model
This is a dear argument to most slashbots - it's the equivalent of saying my PS2 is not an innovative or useable product - and use the Atari 2600 as proof for the argument. CORBA remained in many ways the lofty preserve of the UNIX enterprise - certainly no one did a complete binary-level object protocol that tied everything from the desktop to the browser to the enterprise and out (and provided the tools to work with that infrastructure). Are there technologies out there that are similar to COM? Sure. Is there prior art? Sure. Did anyone else take component technology to that level and delivered it to a few hundred million people? Nope. Hey, ask the GNOME folks. Surely they had compelling reasons to 'come up' with gconf and bonobo, eh?
If you choose to dismiss the incremental evolution of technology as a form of innovation then absolutely nothing is new anymore. It's all OK when that measuring stick is used with Microsoft and it makes for some great flamewars, but it's not acceptable when applied to anyone else, expecially open source.
As always, this article is just another big bashfest that gives the slashbots a chance to come out of the woodwork to rehash their Clippy and Bob jokes and puts some more money in OSTG's pockets from all those ad impressions. Great business model!
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, that's nice. So let's see, what you're saying is essentially that every corporation out there that uses Windows (sorry, 'windoze') for DNS, domain controllers, file serving, web applications, backend infrastructure and the sort - all of them are somehow retarded and can't get anything meaningful done. They're all wrong, and you somehow have it right. Because you've figured out 'enterprise computing'. Right? IOW, if someone who uses Windows (or 'windoze') dares claim that this article seems like just another piece of sensationalist flamebait fare that slashbots like you enjoy so much - then by definition they must be a 'fanboy'
Well, that pretty much nails it then. You win!
Actually, at least in the case of the LATAM/Spain exports you couldn't be more wrong. My experience with the Simpsons and also Ren & Stimpy is an extremely well done localization job. These productions are full of little quirky cultural references and jokes that would never withstand a transliteration, and yet they were amazingly funny. In fact, some of the episodes (especially the Ren & Stimpy) ones are even funnier when compared with the english versions. But it all depends on the skills of the people doing the work.
Good for general info and getting lost in interesting links in a lazy afternoon.
Encyclopedia? Nope, sorry.
They should have called it something else and they wouldn't have to deal with the criticism of not 'scaling' to that level.
Yes well, I suppose if I was looking for an Access replacement I'd fully expect to have my ass kicked and surprised into next week.
When you consider MySQL in a vacuum and in the context of a limited set of tasks for which it has been optimized over the course of its history then MySQL absolutely rocks. But "kick ass database" in my world means a little more than that.
In any case, I'm not making the case that MySQL sucks - it doesn't. Just that surely/i? there's a reason it's so far behind Postgres, and I'm pretty confident it's not the size of the community (which supposedly imbues any project with magical mystical powers).
The wx* series workstations (which you can buy with Linux) do rock though, and are far better hardware-wise than their Dell equivalents. The HP boxes are also far quieter (considering the number of fans you have to cram into a case with two mondo processors generating enough heat to melt sand) than any other workstation I've ever used, and that includes the old SGI ones.
No, the "OSS world" has made no such thing. The two actually performant, enterprise-ready databases available under a free license are derived from commercial products that were open sourced by corporations (Postgres - CA Ingres | Firebird - Borland/Inprise Interbase).
The only "pure" from scratch free database server (MySQL) is just now coming of age (welcome to 2005!) by adding niceties like stored procedures and triggers.
If you judge OSS by its track record in producing database servers they tend to look really bad, so I'd avoid it if possible.
No... to them it's probably brain science =)
That's a great idea, they're both more expensive than Exchange and I'll still be locked into a commercial vendor! Wow!
Perspectives are a wonderful thing.
Many slashbots think 3 billion dollars is 'chump change' to a company to Microsoft, but of course these outlays (called 'one-time charges') affect the bottom line and therefore the stock price of a company in a very real way.
As in "they work unless you drop them from a building into a pool" fine.
Those not so smart phones have a bad reputation
In your mind maybe. The Treo has a bad reputation as well. So do some brands of toasters.
everyone got to see the new media center work
Yeah, a preproduction model crashed and not one ever worked, ever again. Wait, is this one of those things you intend to use a sound bytes for the rest of eternity in your "M$ sux let me tell you why" diatribes? Kinda like the "Microsoft sues schools and takes candy away from children" one you use so much? Oh, I remember. They sure do make for great FUD, don't they?
Nothing Microsoft will ever work.
Right.
You're absolutely spot on but... you've been saving that for five years just to get a +5 funny mod? Does this not bother you, even a little bit?
I've moved on to Turtle Beach and been happy ever since. Much more stable drivers and pretty much comparable hardware (with some nicer high-end stuff).
So... given Microsoft's track record here so far, are you serious, or are you just taking another opportunity to do your 'M$ is teh suxx0rz" routine?
Just curious, really. Your posts have an ever so slight edge of apparent intelligence that it would be unfair to dismiss them outright.
Well, I'll be modded down as a 'troll' again I'm sure, but I'll lay it out for you in the simplest possible way.
Geological strata are not 'dated', you dumbass. They are the dating system. All you need is to find a well-known layer (like the famous K-T one) to use as reference and bob's your uncle. Completely unambiguous. No mythical creatures or faith involved.
That's it. Thanks for playing.
But all 'little men' fun arguments aside, I can't see why there couldn't have been species parallel to Homo sapiens sapiens (other than the popularly accepted ones) at one evolutionary point or another. Heck, for all we know there could have been species of semi-sentient gorillas at any point. We just don't know.
That's a nice link. Hallellujah brother! Of course the author of this incisive essay fails to take into account the fact that there is enough evidence of simple geological strata location to debunk any claim that dinosaurs lived only 20,000 years ago.
First it was "the dinosaurs didn't really exist!" then it was "the dinosaur bones were put there to test our faith!" and now it's "the dinosaurs are not really that old!"
Pathetic.
God yes, we all know no european country has ever done that. Even assuming your argument of 'without cause' is valid. Europe has been a shining beacon of peace, justice and enlightenment throughout modern history. So it's only fair that they also control the DNS root servers. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
Most of our SQL boxes are *quad* Xeon rigs. We don't turn on hyperthreading (that would probably be dumb), but I wonder what would happen to our licenses if we did. If we paid for a 4-CPU license and I hop over to the BIOS to turn HT on... does that mean I'm violating the EULA because I'm running the thing on eight processors? What about the Server 2003 license?
Weird. I mean, if you're running a single physical Xeon or P4 box and you buy a single CPU license of whatever server product and then you turn on HT, are you in violation of the licensing agreement?
Tweak the BIOS, go to jail!
*head explodes*
You can't make this stuff up. I can only imagine the chest thumping and writhing I'd be reading if this was Apple or IBM instead. Too funny.
Uh, and I'm guessing it's about to go through the roof.
It's ECMA, not ANSI.
The biggest database vendor just confirmed that you can be too clever for your own good when you design your licensing schemes.
So let's see. It's perfectly acceptable for someone to claim MSSQL is not an innovation (in itself) because it comes from Sybase. Microsoft has a lot of products that are derived from technologies they've purchased (IE, FrontPage, Access, their original C compiler, VB, etc.) Of course we can all pretend that IE is not much different from Mosaic or VB.NET is not in any way superior to the original 'Thunder' prototype Cooper sold them. After all, this is not 'true' innovation the way we like to think of it, like Napster or ICQ or Bitorrent or Groove or OS X (which themselves are of course based in work previously done by other companies and individuals).
But, it's completely unacceptable to try to make the argument that Linux does not innovate because it's a (IMO, bad) clone of UNIX, or that GNOME and KDE simply clone the Windows UI or that no open source editor (think JEdit) is innovative because, well, there's Emacs over there. Firefox? Nope, based on Netscape. Postgres? CA Ingres. Firebird? Interbase. Following that train of thought, if innovation is MySQL then I don't want it - they're just getting stored procedures this year. Kinda changes things, doesn't it?
Microsoft is the only one who "gets it" about how technology is an interrelated puzzle
MS is the company that has taken a few productivity apps and crated an integrated Office suite that actually works together. They came up with COM/OLE and then started tying things in a way that businesses for many years have found rather useful. Their server products integrate very well, and so do their development tools. Now they are doing the next generation of this stuff with .NET instead of COM as a glue technology. Color me jaded but there is no such thing in open source, at least not to the extent that Microsoft has reached.
there should be a consistency across technology
I don't know about this but I sure don't think open source with the 'not invented here' problem and their dozens of different widget sets and slightly incompatible GUIs have it right, either. Maybe Apple are the ones who will get this right. At least in Windows and OS X you have a single presentation layer API to deal with. And let's not even get into backwards compatibility, which is still one of Microsoft's crowning achievements. People don't like change. Every time Microsoft changes the Office UI they take a risk. They're slammed because it's 'bloated and useless', but if they didn't they'd be called 'stagnant'. Yipeee!
there is no comparable technology "out there" to Microsoft's COM model
This is a dear argument to most slashbots - it's the equivalent of saying my PS2 is not an innovative or useable product - and use the Atari 2600 as proof for the argument. CORBA remained in many ways the lofty preserve of the UNIX enterprise - certainly no one did a complete binary-level object protocol that tied everything from the desktop to the browser to the enterprise and out (and provided the tools to work with that infrastructure). Are there technologies out there that are similar to COM? Sure. Is there prior art? Sure. Did anyone else take component technology to that level and delivered it to a few hundred million people? Nope. Hey, ask the GNOME folks. Surely they had compelling reasons to 'come up' with gconf and bonobo, eh?
If you choose to dismiss the incremental evolution of technology as a form of innovation then absolutely nothing is new anymore. It's all OK when that measuring stick is used with Microsoft and it makes for some great flamewars, but it's not acceptable when applied to anyone else, expecially open source.
As always, this article is just another big bashfest that gives the slashbots a chance to come out of the woodwork to rehash their Clippy and Bob jokes and puts some more money in OSTG's pockets from all those ad impressions. Great business model!
'market share'??