First of all, they were talking about memory modules there. The more transistors you can fit on them, the bigger memory modules will be. With 64bit computing on the horizon it's about time they increased module sizes and made 2G and 4G modules as common as 512M and 1G are today.
Second of all, you don't have to put more stuff on the chip. They just say they now can do it. They also can make smaller chips doing the same thing which means better yield and less cost.
Kinda like Farenheit 911? I'm disappointed in Kerry if he does this. This country is based on freedom of speech. If I can buy Mein Kampf, I should be able to buy whaterver the heck I please. It's my money after all.
Show me anything remotely resembling MSDN and MS Knowledge Base for any of the products that come with, say, RedHat distro. Or ANY linux-based product at all.
1. Write code that nobody will be able to run/fix/maintain on their own, provide very little documentation (ever heard of development and program management specs?) 2. Give the code away for free 3. Profit from the support contracts your customers will inevitably need
META REFRESH works just fine. It doesn't work if you launch IE from Frontpage to preview stuff in browser, but if it's on the actual website somewhere it works fine.
Seriously, this guy is not doing any good for himself (as a self-proclaimed "expert") by disclosing that he's been struggling for half a year with the problem that could have been solved by a 15 minute call to MS Support.
I'm using LaCie 2.5" one precisely for what you've described - to keep my shit separate from shit owned by my employer.
This is the model I own: http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10106
One good thing about it is that it doesn't require a separate power supply - it's USB powered. They have even smaller (physically) models, but those are much more expensive.
g system. I mean, seriously. I'd understand if someone from Apple was talking about this stuff, but looking at Java, especially the parts in any way related to the UI, I can't help but wonder just how badly a company can shoot itself in the foot. The only reason why we're not seeing tons of Java apps everywhere is because of this moronic and slow Swing library.
First list your goods at $99.95, and then (a day later) put a "25% off" on them. Trained American consumer will flock to whatever you sell because it's now "on sale".
I'd actually be surprised if there are no bugs in
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
in SP2. They've gone through pretty much everything, re-hashed a lot of stuff, sometimes on a very deep level. Tons of bugs were fixed. There's not a software company in the world that could release something like this with zero bugs. Not even demi-god Linus Torvalds is capable of such a monumental technological feat as releasing code without bugs.
Having said that, it's all about risk management. If you're willing to postpone SP2 roll out in your org you've got to estimate the risks of not rolling it out, too. As I said it fixes a lot of issues, and if there's a bug or two the benefits still outweigh the risks by a wide margin.
Now that would be a victory whole slashdot could enjoy. Read this for more details: http://vai.com/AllAboutSteve/postcard_040220.html
Guess what, I quote:
For instance, If you go to Itunes and download a song for $.99, Apple retains about $.34 and the label receives about $.65. Labels then calculate a royalty base price to apply to the artists deal points. Following are some of the deductions:
a. A packaging fee (container cost) of up to, and sometimes more than, 25%. That's 25% of retail which is $.99 equaling about $.25 (by the way, there is no packaging on a digital download).
b. A 15% deduction for free goods. That's an additional $.15 or so. (There is usually no free goods with digital downloads unless someone is ripping it from the net.
That leaves a royalty base price of close to $.60 per track that the artists royalty is calculated against. If an artist receives 15 points in their deal (and remember, that's a very good deal) then he is entitled to aprox. $.09 a track. This is then cut in half because of the "new technology clause" that is incorporated into most deals. The artists royalty is then calced out at $.04-.05 a download and from that, 100% of it is withheld by the label to go towards recoupment of any advances to make the record, advances in general, tour support, radio promotion and other things in some cases. Most managers and producers are paid from record one and are paid regardless of the expenses, leaving the artists with even more of a recoupment burden before they start to see any income.
Quote ends. Suddenly hollywood people look like Mother Theresa.
s-wise. I mean, come on. Establishing a flagship service without even checking if its name has been registered already? I smell something funny here. These fellas may be a bit too carried away with technology. Technology, unfortunately, is not the only thing there is to business these days. Legal issues are just as important.
Not e-voting per se, but the roll-up of results from different regions of Russia is fully electronic. The elections are now not much more than a silly farce there. Whoever controls the KGB (aka FSB) and central elections commission (Centerizbirkom) wins the elections.:0) That, plus full control over media (which US government also has, but not to such a degree) and you have a perfect combination for "controlled democracy".
they'll say "they now have intentions". I'd be extremely careful with this shit. Either they give the community perpetual, royalty-free, worldwide license on technology covered by their patents or they can't be trusted.
While it is true that companies start to realize that automation can help them with the quality of their software, companies that lay off testers or don't perform manual ad-hoc testing on top of what's automated are most likely poorly managed.
The thing is, once you automate something your automation will walk the same code path that was fixed after you logged your bugs after you ran this test case first time. It is very likely that the code paths that you're testing will never be touched again and therefore will never be broken.
There is a possibility that interaction of the API that you've tested with other APIs will cause it to fail, though, and automation will catch that (if it's good) so any time spent on automation is time well spent.
My point here is, there MUST be ad-hoc testing performed on the product, and the only purpose of automation is to free up testers' time to do more ad-hoc stuff, or automate large matrices of testing that would be prohibitively expensive to test manually more than once. Anyone who relies completely on automation is NOT TESTING THEIR PRODUCT WELL!
To add to that, any sufficiently sophisticated automation infrastructure requires serious maintenance. It is not uncommon to have a dozen test case failures every time you run it, and half of the time these failures are test case's fault.
So it's not like you can fire everyone and have an untrained monkey do everything else. Anyone who thinks like this is a fucking moron.
Slashdot Mirror
First of all, they were talking about memory modules there. The more transistors you can fit on them, the bigger memory modules will be. With 64bit computing on the horizon it's about time they increased module sizes and made 2G and 4G modules as common as 512M and 1G are today.
Second of all, you don't have to put more stuff on the chip. They just say they now can do it. They also can make smaller chips doing the same thing which means better yield and less cost.
Kinda like Farenheit 911? I'm disappointed in Kerry if he does this. This country is based on freedom of speech. If I can buy Mein Kampf, I should be able to buy whaterver the heck I please. It's my money after all.
Show me anything remotely resembling MSDN and MS Knowledge Base for any of the products that come with, say, RedHat distro. Or ANY linux-based product at all.
This is that easy:
1. Write code that nobody will be able to run/fix/maintain on their own, provide very little documentation (ever heard of development and program management specs?)
2. Give the code away for free
3. Profit from the support contracts your customers will inevitably need
META REFRESH works just fine. It doesn't work if you launch IE from Frontpage to preview stuff in browser, but if it's on the actual website somewhere it works fine.
Seriously, this guy is not doing any good for himself (as a self-proclaimed "expert") by disclosing that he's been struggling for half a year with the problem that could have been solved by a 15 minute call to MS Support.
I'm using LaCie 2.5" one precisely for what you've described - to keep my shit separate from shit owned by my employer.
6
This is the model I own: http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=1010
One good thing about it is that it doesn't require a separate power supply - it's USB powered. They have even smaller (physically) models, but those are much more expensive.
g system. I mean, seriously. I'd understand if someone from Apple was talking about this stuff, but looking at Java, especially the parts in any way related to the UI, I can't help but wonder just how badly a company can shoot itself in the foot. The only reason why we're not seeing tons of Java apps everywhere is because of this moronic and slow Swing library.
First list your goods at $99.95, and then (a day later) put a "25% off" on them. Trained American consumer will flock to whatever you sell because it's now "on sale".
in SP2. They've gone through pretty much everything, re-hashed a lot of stuff, sometimes on a very deep level. Tons of bugs were fixed. There's not a software company in the world that could release something like this with zero bugs. Not even demi-god Linus Torvalds is capable of such a monumental technological feat as releasing code without bugs.
Having said that, it's all about risk management. If you're willing to postpone SP2 roll out in your org you've got to estimate the risks of not rolling it out, too. As I said it fixes a lot of issues, and if there's a bug or two the benefits still outweigh the risks by a wide margin.
Now that would be a victory whole slashdot could enjoy. Read this for more details: http://vai.com/AllAboutSteve/postcard_040220.html
Guess what, I quote:
For instance, If you go to Itunes and download a song for $.99, Apple retains about $.34 and the label receives about $.65. Labels then calculate a royalty base price to apply to the artists deal points. Following are some of the deductions:
a. A packaging fee (container cost) of up to, and sometimes more than, 25%. That's 25% of retail which is $.99 equaling about $.25 (by the way, there is no packaging on a digital download).
b. A 15% deduction for free goods. That's an additional $.15 or so. (There is usually no free goods with digital downloads unless someone is ripping it from the net.
That leaves a royalty base price of close to $.60 per track that the artists royalty is calculated against. If an artist receives 15 points in their deal (and remember, that's a very good deal) then he is entitled to aprox. $.09 a track. This is then cut in half because of the "new technology clause" that is incorporated into most deals. The artists royalty is then calced out at $.04-.05 a download and from that, 100% of it is withheld by the label to go towards recoupment of any advances to make the record, advances in general, tour support, radio promotion and other things in some cases. Most managers and producers are paid from record one and are paid regardless of the expenses, leaving the artists with even more of a recoupment burden before they start to see any income.
Quote ends. Suddenly hollywood people look like Mother Theresa.
s-wise. I mean, come on. Establishing a flagship service without even checking if its name has been registered already? I smell something funny here. These fellas may be a bit too carried away with technology. Technology, unfortunately, is not the only thing there is to business these days. Legal issues are just as important.
Now these books will appear on every god damn P2P network out there.
The bOOble search engine for the good stuff.
And MD5 sum would be nice, too. Post it here.
I mean, really, who cares.
Not e-voting per se, but the roll-up of results from different regions of Russia is fully electronic. The elections are now not much more than a silly farce there. Whoever controls the KGB (aka FSB) and central elections commission (Centerizbirkom) wins the elections. :0) That, plus full control over media (which US government also has, but not to such a degree) and you have a perfect combination for "controlled democracy".
That's pretty much what it is, I guess. SP2 is almost 300MB in size.
they'll say "they now have intentions". I'd be extremely careful with this shit. Either they give the community perpetual, royalty-free, worldwide license on technology covered by their patents or they can't be trusted.
That I'm exercising my constitutional right to have privacy. If they want to plant a bug because of this, this country is in a DEEP trouble.
If I encrypt something with a 256 bit key not even lord almighty will be able to decrypt my babbling in a reasonable timeframe. :-)
Exactly. There's A LOT of cost that's not obvious to the employee. You will cost your employer $200-250K per year if you make $80-100K.
One employee is roughly $250K per year including all benefits and everything else. So you're saying this product takes 64 people to maintain? :-)
That's the whole point of releasing the code under GPL or its variants.
While it is true that companies start to realize that automation can help them with the quality of their software, companies that lay off testers or don't perform manual ad-hoc testing on top of what's automated are most likely poorly managed.
The thing is, once you automate something your automation will walk the same code path that was fixed after you logged your bugs after you ran this test case first time. It is very likely that the code paths that you're testing will never be touched again and therefore will never be broken.
There is a possibility that interaction of the API that you've tested with other APIs will cause it to fail, though, and automation will catch that (if it's good) so any time spent on automation is time well spent.
My point here is, there MUST be ad-hoc testing performed on the product, and the only purpose of automation is to free up testers' time to do more ad-hoc stuff, or automate large matrices of testing that would be prohibitively expensive to test manually more than once. Anyone who relies completely on automation is NOT TESTING THEIR PRODUCT WELL!
To add to that, any sufficiently sophisticated automation infrastructure requires serious maintenance. It is not uncommon to have a dozen test case failures every time you run it, and half of the time these failures are test case's fault.
So it's not like you can fire everyone and have an untrained monkey do everything else. Anyone who thinks like this is a fucking moron.