They could just shut off their servers and go home.
Bandwidth costs money. The number of applications which support the CDDB concept has increased tremendously since it's initiation. Consider for instance Microsoft's media player which ships with Win98/Win2000 now includes CDDB access.
We're talking millions of users out there. Do you seriously think someone's home DSL can handle this?
There is no way that the service could ever be sustained without some sort of commercial venture.
Although it's certainly a service which the RIAA could take up as a free value-add to the music community. Not sure why they don't do it on their own since they already have access to this information without having to deal with people hand entering it and getting it wrong.
Hmm, I think history has passed you by while you are still driving a horse and buggy.:)
DEC never had a lead... they were trying to garner some of IBM's marketshare.
As far as prices... Office is still much cheaper than the alternatives cost when they entered the market. i.e. a $500 suite replaced a set of 3-4 software packages that each cost $500 individually. Office has not gone up in price by any signifigant degree since it first came out.
Hardware prices. Do you know how much a 486DX50, 16M of RAM, 17" monitor, would have cost you back in '93? About $5,000.
Today one can buy a PIII-550, 128M RAM, 20 gig harddrive, 19" color monitor and all the bells and whistles with a Windows 2000 license for under $1,000.
Windows 2000 is most certainly not expensive when it comes to hardware.
I was simply pointing out in everything I had done I had yet to see Window 2000 crash, even though I have done some things purposefully to try to cause problems.
We have QC staff at work whose whole purpose in life is to try ot break software. I think I understand the difference.
You raise interesting issues, but just how much of this is FUD?
If a problem is large enough it is not uncommong to get in contact with the developers at a commercial company to help solve it. At work we've had this experience with Oracle, Microsoft and many other smaller companies.
I don't know about the licensing thing, I've never heard or encountered any real problems. Companies have lawyers that work for them to keep this stuff in check, if it becomes a problem it will be dealt with.
But going back to the article, the licensing agreements especially for say Oracle are rather steep and I do agree that long term the prices are going to have to go down in order for them to keep marketshare.
"Better to have a handful of nickels than no dimes."
I agree, but Microsoft certainly isn't sitting idle. I've been working with Windows 2000 since february at home and I have yet to cause it to fail in any way.
Daily reboots have never been an issue with NT to begin with. Microsoft is pushing in the direction of NT/2000, not win 9x, so your statement is doomed given time.
I think it's very dangerous to continue thinking things such as "the core OS has great stability that MS products lack"...
It was this same thinking "Of course linux is faster than NT" that led to the disappointment from the mindcraft benchmarking.
We don't hear that "faster" statement much anymore, and it's hard to test for stability. But, I still wouldn't be to smug about it.
The article said that they might have to move to an open source model...
Or they will have to lower their licensing costs.
It's far more likely that they'll simply lower the cost of their product, than start giving it away for free.
Besides I don't see any competition for either Oracle or Microsoft on the database side of things from Open Source. Well unless a miracle happens and IBM GPL's DB/2, but that's unlikely.
Ahh I remeber it now... The arguments on comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:
"The Amiga is slow, old and obsolete. It's dead, time to move on."
"Oh yeah! They use the Amiga to render the scenes in Babylon 5. Yeah! And I heard they used an Amiga 2000 to prop the doors open when rendering Jurassic Park!"
Years from now in comp.os.linux.advocacy when people point out how pointless Linux is in the modern world, the advocates will now be able to say "Oh yeah! Well they used Linux machines to render Lord of the Rings!"
Hmm, there must be some hidden version of slashdot that you are reading, because that type of intelligent commentary is not what I've been finding here.
Can you give me the URL?
Maybe before saying the accusations are untrue you should go back and reread some of the slashdot articles. The support for Napster articles would be a good start.
If you want to use vi/gcc then you should learn how to write portable code which will compile in that environment and the CodeWarrior environment.
I don't understand what the big deal is. You seem to be accusing the TA of trying to lock you into the CodeWarrior environment, but on the other hand the only way you're going to have a problem is if you lock yourself into this gcc environment.
Obviously if there was bad data in the database, and the application crashed upon initializing with this bad data, it would cause the whole application system to fail.
I've had this happen with some poorly written systems in the past, and usually it requires a DBA or someone to go in and correct the bad data element in a table.
It is definately a case of a bad system design, no application should be that intolerant of input parameters that it fails to work. Especially not on a war ship.
If they didn't have a DBA or developer or whatever on board to fix it, they would have had to tow it back to the docks.
I suspect it's reasonable to assume that a warship out at sea doesn't have an open radio network port handy to telnet into.
Somehow I don't think our military is going to make the same mistake as Khan did in Star Trek II.
Go back and reread the article. What possible facts do you have which supports the notion that it was an OS Failure?
Some inept journalist who says "The system crashed". What does that mean? We had our Oracle server crash the other day, yet at no point was it the fault of the OS(HPUX).
The Oracle server problem caused all the apps on the remote terminals to fail to function as well.
You can go right ahead and call names. You really aren't in a position to do so considering you appear to have very little understanding of system design or how an OS functions in relation to it's applications.
You are trying to insert something in between the lines.
Nowhere does the article state it took out the LAN... It says it took out LAN consoles and remote terminals.
What does that mean? The article doesn't tell us, but one can imply that these were basically Network computers attached with maybe say a Java app, or a web page, or something.
Come on, you can't possibly be sitting there with a straight face and telling me that you actually think an NT Server going into BSOD would take out a LAN? Give me a break.
See, this is an example of that lack of critical thinking...
What do you think it means by LAN consoles and remote terminal units crashing?
They might have had a web app server, and the web pages don't come up.
Think about it... Have you ever dealt with endusers? When they say "My computer crashed." what does that mean?
You can tell by the tone of the whole article that it is not technically specific. They talk about a database overflow in one instance, and a divide by the number zero elsewhere...
Yesterday I read a post where someone commented on how unfortunately ignorant most slashdot posters are.
This is an example of one such person. The fact that anybody picked up on this story without any sort of critical thinking skills kicking in is highly disappointing.
Even more unfortunate is how it was moderated up, and the posts pointing out how it had already been discredited have been moderated down.
Let me basically summarize the article and the simple understanding one has to use to read it:
Basically the article talks about the Navy deploying a system to automate portions of their ship. The system was built to run atop Windows NT 4.0 server.
Somehow bad data was entered into the database. A zero was entered into some record by the system admin, says the article.
This caused the application to crash with a divide-by-zero error because of a lack of assertions on input parameters in the application.
The key point is that this was an application failure, it was not an OS failure.
What is surprising is the number of people who claim to be intelligent but cannot understand the distinction.
It appears a number of moderators are misusing their privilege to try to prevent the truth from appearing in discussions.
This article about the Navy cruiser was widely discredited as it relates to the problem being a fault with NT.
A divide-by-zero error is an application issue, not the operating system, unless it were to have occured in a device driver or in the kernel itself. Which seems highly unlikely given that the articles talk about the fault being caused by bad input data.
Slashdot.org is unfortunately home to more IT ignorance than just about any other site on the internet. Haven't figured out why I read it. I guess perhaps it makes me realize just how much I do know.:)
You've just explained about 3 of the reasons why the ASP model will never be accepted by corporations.
The ASP idea isn't exactly new. We've been leasing our Mainframe services for years now. However it's a bit different because it is not a tremendous effort to drop the service, take your tapes and restore them to a new Mainframe leasing company.
The difference was we were just leasing hardware space and ran our own applications and data. Call it a web service provider, I guess in the mainframe vintage.
After all the web is just mainframe with pretty graphics.
Re:Brilliance! [was I disagree...]
on
Is UNIX An OS?
·
· Score: 1
Actually it appears to me that it is the consumers who must educate the geeks.
Slashdot Mirror
They could just shut off their servers and go home.
Bandwidth costs money. The number of applications which support the CDDB concept has increased tremendously since it's initiation. Consider for instance Microsoft's media player which ships with Win98/Win2000 now includes CDDB access.
We're talking millions of users out there. Do you seriously think someone's home DSL can handle this?
There is no way that the service could ever be sustained without some sort of commercial venture.
Although it's certainly a service which the RIAA could take up as a free value-add to the music community. Not sure why they don't do it on their own since they already have access to this information without having to deal with people hand entering it and getting it wrong.
Hmm, I think history has passed you by while you are still driving a horse and buggy. :)
DEC never had a lead... they were trying to garner some of IBM's marketshare.
As far as prices... Office is still much cheaper than the alternatives cost when they entered the market. i.e. a $500 suite replaced a set of 3-4 software packages that each cost $500 individually. Office has not gone up in price by any signifigant degree since it first came out.
Hardware prices. Do you know how much a 486DX50, 16M of RAM, 17" monitor, would have cost you back in '93? About $5,000.
Today one can buy a PIII-550, 128M RAM, 20 gig harddrive, 19" color monitor and all the bells and whistles with a Windows 2000 license for under $1,000.
Windows 2000 is most certainly not expensive when it comes to hardware.
I certainly was not blaming myself, or any users.
I was simply pointing out in everything I had done I had yet to see Window 2000 crash, even though I have done some things purposefully to try to cause problems.
We have QC staff at work whose whole purpose in life is to try ot break software. I think I understand the difference.
You raise interesting issues, but just how much of this is FUD?
If a problem is large enough it is not uncommong to get in contact with the developers at a commercial company to help solve it. At work we've had this experience with Oracle, Microsoft and many other smaller companies.
I don't know about the licensing thing, I've never heard or encountered any real problems. Companies have lawyers that work for them to keep this stuff in check, if it becomes a problem it will be dealt with.
But going back to the article, the licensing agreements especially for say Oracle are rather steep and I do agree that long term the prices are going to have to go down in order for them to keep marketshare.
"Better to have a handful of nickels than no dimes."
I agree, but Microsoft certainly isn't sitting idle. I've been working with Windows 2000 since february at home and I have yet to cause it to fail in any way.
Daily reboots have never been an issue with NT to begin with. Microsoft is pushing in the direction of NT/2000, not win 9x, so your statement is doomed given time.
I think it's very dangerous to continue thinking things such as "the core OS has great stability that MS products lack"...
It was this same thinking "Of course linux is faster than NT" that led to the disappointment from the mindcraft benchmarking.
We don't hear that "faster" statement much anymore, and it's hard to test for stability. But, I still wouldn't be to smug about it.
The article said that they might have to move to an open source model...
Or they will have to lower their licensing costs.
It's far more likely that they'll simply lower the cost of their product, than start giving it away for free.
Besides I don't see any competition for either Oracle or Microsoft on the database side of things from Open Source. Well unless a miracle happens and IBM GPL's DB/2, but that's unlikely.
Ahh I remeber it now... The arguments on comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:
:)
"The Amiga is slow, old and obsolete. It's dead, time to move on."
"Oh yeah! They use the Amiga to render the scenes in Babylon 5. Yeah! And I heard they used an Amiga 2000 to prop the doors open when rendering Jurassic Park!"
Years from now in comp.os.linux.advocacy when people point out how pointless Linux is in the modern world, the advocates will now be able to say "Oh yeah! Well they used Linux machines to render Lord of the Rings!"
Kind of touching, really.
Hmm, there must be some hidden version of slashdot that you are reading, because that type of intelligent commentary is not what I've been finding here.
Can you give me the URL?
Maybe before saying the accusations are untrue you should go back and reread some of the slashdot articles. The support for Napster articles would be a good start.
If you want to use vi/gcc then you should learn how to write portable code which will compile in that environment and the CodeWarrior environment.
I don't understand what the big deal is. You seem to be accusing the TA of trying to lock you into the CodeWarrior environment, but on the other hand the only way you're going to have a problem is if you lock yourself into this gcc environment.
I know every time I read slashdot there is some new article telling me how copyrights are evil and they should be abolished.
:)
And slashdot does claim to be part of this so-called "Open Source" movement.
The article never says the OS crashed. It says the system crashed... Again you are reading into the article your own petty biases.
Here's a tip.
Take the article, replace every occurence of the word NT with Linux.
Perhaps then your biases won't get in the way.
Obviously if there was bad data in the database, and the application crashed upon initializing with this bad data, it would cause the whole application system to fail.
I've had this happen with some poorly written systems in the past, and usually it requires a DBA or someone to go in and correct the bad data element in a table.
It is definately a case of a bad system design, no application should be that intolerant of input parameters that it fails to work. Especially not on a war ship.
If they didn't have a DBA or developer or whatever on board to fix it, they would have had to tow it back to the docks.
I suspect it's reasonable to assume that a warship out at sea doesn't have an open radio network port handy to telnet into.
Somehow I don't think our military is going to make the same mistake as Khan did in Star Trek II.
Yes, you are correct.
I guess I just find it to be kind of a challenge to argue, er I mean beat my head against the wall.
Go back and reread the article. What possible facts do you have which supports the notion that it was an OS Failure?
Some inept journalist who says "The system crashed". What does that mean? We had our Oracle server crash the other day, yet at no point was it the fault of the OS(HPUX).
The Oracle server problem caused all the apps on the remote terminals to fail to function as well.
You can go right ahead and call names. You really aren't in a position to do so considering you appear to have very little understanding of system design or how an OS functions in relation to it's applications.
Where does it state this? The whole article is written by a technically inept journalist.
You're trying to read something into the article to prove your own personal biases.
Nobody is getting paid. I'm just sick and tired of reading misinformed idiots posting this bullshit as fact.
Good grief. Where does it say that?
You are trying to insert something in between the lines.
Nowhere does the article state it took out the LAN... It says it took out LAN consoles and remote terminals.
What does that mean? The article doesn't tell us, but one can imply that these were basically Network computers attached with maybe say a Java app, or a web page, or something.
Come on, you can't possibly be sitting there with a straight face and telling me that you actually think an NT Server going into BSOD would take out a LAN? Give me a break.
This again is a lack of critical thinking skills.
See, this is an example of that lack of critical thinking...
What do you think it means by LAN consoles and remote terminal units crashing?
They might have had a web app server, and the web pages don't come up.
Think about it... Have you ever dealt with endusers? When they say "My computer crashed." what does that mean?
You can tell by the tone of the whole article that it is not technically specific. They talk about a database overflow in one instance, and a divide by the number zero elsewhere...
Come on, put your thinking cap on!
Yesterday I read a post where someone commented on how unfortunately ignorant most slashdot posters are.
This is an example of one such person. The fact that anybody picked up on this story without any sort of critical thinking skills kicking in is highly disappointing.
Even more unfortunate is how it was moderated up, and the posts pointing out how it had already been discredited have been moderated down.
Let me basically summarize the article and the simple understanding one has to use to read it:
Basically the article talks about the Navy deploying a system to automate portions of their ship. The system was built to run atop Windows NT 4.0 server.
Somehow bad data was entered into the database. A zero was entered into some record by the system admin, says the article.
This caused the application to crash with a divide-by-zero error because of a lack of assertions on input parameters in the application.
The key point is that this was an application failure, it was not an OS failure.
What is surprising is the number of people who claim to be intelligent but cannot understand the distinction.
Sigh...
It appears a number of moderators are misusing their privilege to try to prevent the truth from appearing in discussions.
This article about the Navy cruiser was widely discredited as it relates to the problem being a fault with NT.
A divide-by-zero error is an application issue, not the operating system, unless it were to have occured in a device driver or in the kernel itself. Which seems highly unlikely given that the articles talk about the fault being caused by bad input data.
Too many cooks spoil the broth, but at least no one person is to blame.
:-)
It is amazing isn't it?
:)
Slashdot.org is unfortunately home to more IT ignorance than just about any other site on the internet. Haven't figured out why I read it. I guess perhaps it makes me realize just how much I do know.
You've just explained about 3 of the reasons why the ASP model will never be accepted by corporations.
The ASP idea isn't exactly new. We've been leasing our Mainframe services for years now. However it's a bit different because it is not a tremendous effort to drop the service, take your tapes and restore them to a new Mainframe leasing company.
The difference was we were just leasing hardware space and ran our own applications and data. Call it a web service provider, I guess in the mainframe vintage.
After all the web is just mainframe with pretty graphics.
Actually it appears to me that it is the consumers who must educate the geeks.
Amen brother!