Sorry; we are talking past each other. If something is sufficiently well described as to pass the tests of patentability.. to wit, describing a clear and repeatable "embodiment" of the invention, this is an "invention," not a mere "idea". Simple ideas are a dime a dozen. Describing them in sufficient detail to describe an embodiment (and a workable embodiment at that) constitutes an "invention," and is far more difficult.
The GPL is not at all "about" enabling companies like Red Hat to make money. It is about free software, and ensuring that the type of freedom that the GPL envisions is not compromised. Red Hat fully knew this when they elected to construct a business model around this kind of freedom. In electing to create their business, they are first party to enabling companies like CentOS to be.
And for the record, Red Hat is "skating" on the backs of people who've spent their precious personal time to create quality software, essentially for the good of humanity.
Consider that when considering this in the future, would you please?
Well. I'm a bit ambivalent about this. One the one hand, I agree with you. On the other, Microsoft hasn't called anyone anything, because a company can't do that. It has no voice. It has representatives, who have voices, most notably Bill Gates. Bill, if you'll note, has basically moved on. I doubt very much the legion of SW engineers working for M$ think that FOSS is evil. They were probably quietly laughing at Bill the entire time.
You were modded insightful by an army of Slashdot lemmings who weren't aware that you cannot actually patent an "idea". It wasn't an idea he had, it was an invention--far more than merely an "idea".
The Constitution does not so much a attempt to apply scope or definitional power of this subject. I.e., it essentially has no say. There is nothing to "usurp". I.e., the Constitution simply does not work the way you think it works.
One could (theoretically) realize actual savings from the deployment of an OS. For example, most large organizations have virus/malicious software cleanup teams. These folks earn paychecks; if they could be reduced because an OS was more secure, there would be an actual savings. If M$ actually spent time analyzing where corporations realize their IT OPEX, and coded things into their client OSses to reduce that, they could very easily have a tantalizing winner.
Depends what segment you're talking about. There isn't one market for HDD's, there are many. In both the enterprise archival and consumer mass storage segments, drives are sold pretty much $/TB. In that segment, you won't see significant penetration for 4-6 years. In other segments, sooner. I agree with you: I want a flash SSD for my laptop currently; it just hasn't quite yet reached the right price point. It will soon. And you're right: it's not $/GB that will be the deciding factor there.
There's also no reason to assume one way or the other. For example, I expect to put BOTH flash SSD and SATA into my desktop system shortly. I will continue to use the SATA for archival. I'll use the flash SSD as a working set.
Do you have 15K 2.5" drives in your workstation already? I have 15K 3.5" drives for my working set.
However, if you're like me, you must know that you are most unusual. It's a niche, surely, but hardly the mass market.
I couldn't quite figure out if the article willfully ignored the advent of SSDs or was written before they were available... As for the post by Argent, I wasn't sure if that was addressed to me or not - if so, I have no idea what you're talking about. Your post has absolutely nothing to do to with my original response. Argent's post refers to "flash memory". You said the article ignored SSD's, however it did not. "Flash memory" is the technology that SSD's are composed of. Did you not know this? "Flash memory" is all over the article.
Flash SSD's will not replace SATA drives anytime within the next 4-6 years. In technology time, that's such long period of time, it would be quite difficult to make a credible projection for the consumer market space. For servers, where the segment is dominated by 10K/15K drives, you can expect flip over within 18 months.
If you think one of the big problems with employer-provided insurance is lack of direct reactions from customers, you must think that single payer is just crazy.
I actually don't have much of an opinion of what's going on in this thread; tend to be a man-made causes if global warming skeptic; tend to think that a clean environment is the responsibility of a good caretaker; puts me kinda middle of the road, eh?
Anyway, as per your question. No matter your degree, if you're not working as a scientist, you aren't one.
XenServer provides all the features a centralized management system provides.
Shrug. I tried it again about 2 months ago. Terminated the eval mid stream. To be sure, we called tech support. We were sure. What you're saying just isn't true. I suspect it's what the Xen developers tell themselves, but the problem is: they just don't get it.
Until they do, I along with the vast market, will have no interest in them.
*cough* Since it happens all the time already, what happens when it becomes unbootable?
This happened, once, due to some shenanigans of our own. We restored the SQL Server database on a pristine install. Didn't take very long.
But I digress. The market agrees with me. That's why Citrix has to give it away, you know. Perhaps ranting like yours is why Citrix has yet to field a centralized management system. If so, this will be to their ongoing downfall. What they offer is just not what the community wants, you know?
As for what I'd prefer, it's Virtuozzo's model, where every hypervisor host is a member of the management server cluster. But that's a story for a different day.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Did you mean to say, you think we'll be getting SSD's in the SATA segment sooner? This could be. But project for me what you think is the correct %decrease in price for both SATA drives and SSD's. Put them in a spreadsheet. Tell me when $/GB is less for SSD's. Do keep in mind that there is nothing to say that areal density in spinning media is finished...
I think the 15K segment is finished, partly because the SDD's are increasing far more quickly in performance than spinning media. The 15K segment is performance-driven.
The 15K segment will hold on a little while longer yet, though. The uncertainty associated with performance-degradation after use, along with the less well publicized URE problems, will hold enterprises back for a bit.
LOL. Citrix XenServer was so not viable, they had to give it away. Sarcastic remarks aside, I run a virtual data center with over 800 virtual machines. I would not replace my VMWare with Citrix, even with Citrix being "free". The "free" Citrix would hurt my opex so much, it would cost me money. Do you know how much money it means to add a percentage to our system admin load on 800 virtual machines? The Citrix guys aren't even to the point of "getting it," yet. When they have a product with a centralized management server, get back to me.
It will be more than 6 years before SSD's surpass the commodity SATA segment in $/GB, and $/GB is definitively what drives Tier 2 storage. So while the enterprise 10K/15K's years are numbered (I expect days of total destruction NLT 2011), SATA will be around for a while.
Flash drives have longer MTBF than spinning media... so they last longer. However, a less well known fact is that flash drives have a URE rate 10-100X worse than spinning media does typically today. It's getting fixed, but the fellow you're replying to is basically wrong.
Well. I think that diesel engines get better mileage for a variety of reasons. Reason #1 is that diesel fuel has higher BTU / gallon over gasoline. So, since the fuel has more energy actually in it, we shouldn't be particularly surprised that the engines benefit...
I don't know why they force you to agree to it. Unless there's some sort of union agreement or tenure issue, most people are at-will employees, at least in the US, and can be fired at any time for any reason.
That's not how big corporate America works. They require a documentation trail to avoid wrongful termination lawsuits. Those lawsuits can be real stingers, because the offended parties may be part of some minority group, sick, or allege slander/libel on the part of the company or one of the deciding parties.
This is one of the reasons that during major layoffs large companies often hand out a sheet of the age spread of the employees. "See, we laid off from a range of ages, you can't sue us for age discrimination".
You have to remember that at will employment only lets you terminate for LEGAL REASONS. The terminated party can easily allege an illegal reason, or allege slander/libel (i.e., "Big company may have only laid me off, but Mr. Big Executive told HR I suck, and it's not true. He libeled me.")
Well, really they just need to make sure the policy is well understood. Insubordination at work is generally grounds for dismissal. How far they can get their fingers into your at home behavior is a very good question, but I will ignore that one. By plastering the EULA in front of you, they can argue that they are sure you knew the policy.
I believe that it would be illegal for a employer to "fire" you (terminate you for cause) for refusing to sign a legal agreement during your employment. "Let you go," probably, "fire," I think not. If they do "fire" you under such circumstances, I suggest that this would be actionable.
Careful with your "cross out" advice. Sounds reasonable, but I think that there states in which the outcome is not what you think it might be.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry; we are talking past each other. If something is sufficiently well described as to pass the tests of patentability.. to wit, describing a clear and repeatable "embodiment" of the invention, this is an "invention," not a mere "idea". Simple ideas are a dime a dozen. Describing them in sufficient detail to describe an embodiment (and a workable embodiment at that) constitutes an "invention," and is far more difficult.
Anyway, as per subject:
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/inventing/patent-ideas/
http://www.patentlawportal.com/information/patentability/can-you-patent-an-idea.html
C//
They take existing free software, package it, and sells it as part of a complete package, including support.
This is a little inaccurate. They don't actually sell the software. They sell the support. Check their license. :-)
C//
The GPL is not at all "about" enabling companies like Red Hat to make money. It is about free software, and ensuring that the type of freedom that the GPL envisions is not compromised. Red Hat fully knew this when they elected to construct a business model around this kind of freedom. In electing to create their business, they are first party to enabling companies like CentOS to be.
And for the record, Red Hat is "skating" on the backs of people who've spent their precious personal time to create quality software, essentially for the good of humanity.
Consider that when considering this in the future, would you please?
C//
You will only manage to set the upper price for gas.
This assumes that the petroleum doesn't have another profitable use, such as plastics. This assumption is probably correct, I'm just sayin'.
Well. I'm a bit ambivalent about this. One the one hand, I agree with you. On the other, Microsoft hasn't called anyone anything, because a company can't do that. It has no voice. It has representatives, who have voices, most notably Bill Gates. Bill, if you'll note, has basically moved on. I doubt very much the legion of SW engineers working for M$ think that FOSS is evil. They were probably quietly laughing at Bill the entire time.
C//
You were modded insightful by an army of Slashdot lemmings who weren't aware that you cannot actually patent an "idea". It wasn't an idea he had, it was an invention--far more than merely an "idea".
And who says Slashdot can't amuse?
C//
I don't disagree. And I don't think it's a training issue at all. Bluntly, it's lock-in with Office, and very especially Exchange/Outlook.
C//
The Constitution does not so much a attempt to apply scope or definitional power of this subject. I.e., it essentially has no say. There is nothing to "usurp". I.e., the Constitution simply does not work the way you think it works.
C//
One could (theoretically) realize actual savings from the deployment of an OS. For example, most large organizations have virus/malicious software cleanup teams. These folks earn paychecks; if they could be reduced because an OS was more secure, there would be an actual savings. If M$ actually spent time analyzing where corporations realize their IT OPEX, and coded things into their client OSses to reduce that, they could very easily have a tantalizing winner.
C//
Depends what segment you're talking about. There isn't one market for HDD's, there are many. In both the enterprise archival and consumer mass storage segments, drives are sold pretty much $/TB. In that segment, you won't see significant penetration for 4-6 years. In other segments, sooner. I agree with you: I want a flash SSD for my laptop currently; it just hasn't quite yet reached the right price point. It will soon. And you're right: it's not $/GB that will be the deciding factor there.
There's also no reason to assume one way or the other. For example, I expect to put BOTH flash SSD and SATA into my desktop system shortly. I will continue to use the SATA for archival. I'll use the flash SSD as a working set.
Do you have 15K 2.5" drives in your workstation already? I have 15K 3.5" drives for my working set.
However, if you're like me, you must know that you are most unusual. It's a niche, surely, but hardly the mass market.
C//
I couldn't quite figure out if the article willfully ignored the advent of SSDs or was written before they were available... As for the post by Argent, I wasn't sure if that was addressed to me or not - if so, I have no idea what you're talking about. Your post has absolutely nothing to do to with my original response.
Argent's post refers to "flash memory". You said the article ignored SSD's, however it did not. "Flash memory" is the technology that SSD's are composed of. Did you not know this? "Flash memory" is all over the article.
Flash SSD's will not replace SATA drives anytime within the next 4-6 years. In technology time, that's such long period of time, it would be quite difficult to make a credible projection for the consumer market space. For servers, where the segment is dominated by 10K/15K drives, you can expect flip over within 18 months.
C//
If you think one of the big problems with employer-provided insurance is lack of direct reactions from customers, you must think that single payer is just crazy.
C//
I actually don't have much of an opinion of what's going on in this thread; tend to be a man-made causes if global warming skeptic; tend to think that a clean environment is the responsibility of a good caretaker; puts me kinda middle of the road, eh?
Anyway, as per your question. No matter your degree, if you're not working as a scientist, you aren't one.
C//
XenServer provides all the features a centralized management system provides.
Shrug. I tried it again about 2 months ago. Terminated the eval mid stream. To be sure, we called tech support. We were sure. What you're saying just isn't true. I suspect it's what the Xen developers tell themselves, but the problem is: they just don't get it.
Until they do, I along with the vast market, will have no interest in them.
C//
*cough* Since it happens all the time already, what happens when it becomes unbootable?
This happened, once, due to some shenanigans of our own. We restored the SQL Server database on a pristine install. Didn't take very long.
But I digress. The market agrees with me. That's why Citrix has to give it away, you know. Perhaps ranting like yours is why Citrix has yet to field a centralized management system. If so, this will be to their ongoing downfall. What they offer is just not what the community wants, you know?
As for what I'd prefer, it's Virtuozzo's model, where every hypervisor host is a member of the management server cluster. But that's a story for a different day.
C//
What happens when your single management server goes down,
Happens all the time. I restart it.
C//
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Did you mean to say, you think we'll be getting SSD's in the SATA segment sooner? This could be. But project for me what you think is the correct %decrease in price for both SATA drives and SSD's. Put them in a spreadsheet. Tell me when $/GB is less for SSD's. Do keep in mind that there is nothing to say that areal density in spinning media is finished...
I think the 15K segment is finished, partly because the SDD's are increasing far more quickly in performance than spinning media. The 15K segment is performance-driven.
The 15K segment will hold on a little while longer yet, though. The uncertainty associated with performance-degradation after use, along with the less well publicized URE problems, will hold enterprises back for a bit.
C//
LOL. Citrix XenServer was so not viable, they had to give it away. Sarcastic remarks aside, I run a virtual data center with over 800 virtual machines. I would not replace my VMWare with Citrix, even with Citrix being "free". The "free" Citrix would hurt my opex so much, it would cost me money. Do you know how much money it means to add a percentage to our system admin load on 800 virtual machines? The Citrix guys aren't even to the point of "getting it," yet. When they have a product with a centralized management server, get back to me.
C//
It will be more than 6 years before SSD's surpass the commodity SATA segment in $/GB, and $/GB is definitively what drives Tier 2 storage. So while the enterprise 10K/15K's years are numbered (I expect days of total destruction NLT 2011), SATA will be around for a while.
C//
Flash drives have longer MTBF than spinning media... so they last longer. However, a less well known fact is that flash drives have a URE rate 10-100X worse than spinning media does typically today. It's getting fixed, but the fellow you're replying to is basically wrong.
C//
Well. I think that diesel engines get better mileage for a variety of reasons. Reason #1 is that diesel fuel has higher BTU / gallon over gasoline. So, since the fuel has more energy actually in it, we shouldn't be particularly surprised that the engines benefit...
C//
Windows 7 may be better than vista, but surely your going to wait for SP1*...
Dude. Windows 7 is Vista SP2. Like, everyone knows that man.
C//
I don't know why they force you to agree to it. Unless there's some sort of union agreement or tenure issue, most people are at-will employees, at least in the US, and can be fired at any time for any reason.
That's not how big corporate America works. They require a documentation trail to avoid wrongful termination lawsuits. Those lawsuits can be real stingers, because the offended parties may be part of some minority group, sick, or allege slander/libel on the part of the company or one of the deciding parties.
This is one of the reasons that during major layoffs large companies often hand out a sheet of the age spread of the employees. "See, we laid off from a range of ages, you can't sue us for age discrimination".
You have to remember that at will employment only lets you terminate for LEGAL REASONS. The terminated party can easily allege an illegal reason, or allege slander/libel (i.e., "Big company may have only laid me off, but Mr. Big Executive told HR I suck, and it's not true. He libeled me.")
C//
Well, really they just need to make sure the policy is well understood. Insubordination at work is generally grounds for dismissal. How far they can get their fingers into your at home behavior is a very good question, but I will ignore that one. By plastering the EULA in front of you, they can argue that they are sure you knew the policy.
C//
I believe that it would be illegal for a employer to "fire" you (terminate you for cause) for refusing to sign a legal agreement during your employment. "Let you go," probably, "fire," I think not. If they do "fire" you under such circumstances, I suggest that this would be actionable.
Careful with your "cross out" advice. Sounds reasonable, but I think that there states in which the outcome is not what you think it might be.
C//