No, it isn't. ASP is designed to glue together COM objects with web pages. You can do page level scripting, and it performs fine, but lots of people build everything into objects, and just use ASP to instantiate the objects.
There are a lot more, but I'm getting tired. Oh yeah, and there are all of the companies making components for ASP. Right. No support. Good troll. Try harder next time. Oh, and ASP has nothing to do with CGI. But, good try.
Good troll. I send hundreds of emails a day with CDONTS, and have never had a problem. And, what, you can't keep your box running for 15 seconds? Dude, you need to fix your hardware.
Like the subject says, since when was ISA phased out? I still use it in all of my PC's. I really doubt that everybody out there upgrades their PC every year. I know I don't. The fastet PC I have is a P II 233. The assumption that nobody uses ISA anymore is a very naive, geek-oriented view that isn't too accurate.
I wish I had some mod points to mod this up. I have to agree. If there are so many fantastic Open Source developers hwo know so much about RDBMS', and could contribute to Oracle's codebase, why is MySQL so lacking?
And the other point.. what would Oracle gain? They already have market share. They're not interested in attracting customers who can't pay for their licenses, so what would the point be? This guy who wrote this article may be a good DBA, but he doesn't understand the first thing abot business.
They take 50% of the (non-porn only) market as it exists now. The market is still very young. It'll get there. Generally, a whole industry doesn't mature in a year or two. Some would say that the Net isn't even mainstream yet in many places outside of the US and Europe.
Well, I'd argue that Tv/radio systems aren't even that good. Neilsens take a very small sample, then extrapolate. On the Net, even if they don't click, you can definately say x number of people viewed an ad. Again, the comparisons aren't equivalent yet, and until the people who buy advertising understand that, Net advertising will be a bit behind.
Well, what about BIG advertisers, like Coca-Cola? Do you go into Wendy's and say, "I'd like a Coke because of the ad I saw last night."? No. That's simple brand recognition. The big advertisers don't see the Net (yet) as a valid medium for developing brands. When they do, the Net will advertise the same as TV/Radio/Print, and the researchers will target Net advertising in the same way they target more 'traditional' media. You've got to give it a while. This is a TOTALLY new medium that's only been largely popular for a year or two, and still isn't nearly as widespread as TV, although it will be soon.
No, I wouldn't say that they don't work. Look at the adult website industry. Obviously, banner ads DO work. There are adult webmasters who pull in millions a year. It's just that people in the more 'traditional' web industries haven't figured out how to make them work well (yet).
And Yahoo IS making some money on ads. It's true that they're hurting, but they're certainly not down and out yet. The key to banner advertising is to advertise useful products, and to have a very large user base. Just like a free newspaper with 1000 readers can't stay afloat, neither can a web site.
Well, how about Internet Radio? Sites like http://www.sonicnet.com offer a TON of free radio stations. They have banners along with a few traditional radio ads. Will they be smart enough to know that while the banners may not show much revenue, that they can still sell ads like traditional radio stations? The advertisers on traditional radio stations get NO statistics whatsoever. Ever the listening audience is just a rough estimate. Sonicnet can at least say for sure "we had x number of people here your ad today".
No, Internet ads ARE effective. To say that they're ineffective as compared to TV/Radio/Print is comparing apples and oranges. With Net ads, people are trying to track direct clickthroughs. There's virtually no consideration given to mindshare or branding. With TV/Radio/Print, it's ALL about mindshare and branding. There is NO clickthrough to measure. People buy those ads, and look at their sales, and see if they're going up after an ad campaign. Ad companies need to start to think the same way for the Net. Just because somebody doesn't click on an ad (I don't click on any TV ads) doesn't mean that they're not effective. Hell, or you can think the other way, and say that there is no direct way to measure traditional advertising at all (other than 'Tell us where you saw our ad when you come in to our store!'), so it's TV/Radio/Print advertising that's totally ineffective.
It's not so much apathy, as it is realism. There are millions of spammers out there, sending probably billions a day. Some of them make a lot of money doing this. It's very, very unlikely that you'll be able to stamp this out, any more than you can stamp out ANYthing else online (child porn, MP3 trading, warez, etc.). It's like trying to plug a dam with your finger. Plug one leak, and another one opens.
But this isn't something that the ordinary citizen can do to fight it. This system that you describe would have to rely on an army of zealots who did nothing but attack spammers. If you can work 10 hours a day to fight spam, and maybe get, I dunno, a few thousand other people to do the same, yeah, maybe you can stop spam. More power to you. But that's not realistic. A simple campaign of 'just delete' would be much more effective. On top of that, by attacking the ISP or the accounts, are you helping anything, or are you just tying up more bandwidth in this fight, which would continue, because spammers haven't lost their incentive to spam. As long as money can be made, they'll try. The easiest thing to do is to take away their ability to make money. "Just Press Delete!"
That's great. They can waste their time in a totally futile effort. I'm glad they have a hobby. I'm a big fan of the 'delete' button though. Why? Spam works because out of every x number of mails that go out, y will result in sales. If everybody just nuked their spam, there'd be no financial incentive for spammers to spam any more. As always, hit 'em in the pocketbook. That's where it hurts the most.
OK, so what if you do always compile your code first. So what? Unless you're an expert, you still won't find security problems. There's no benefit to compiling your own source code first if you can't read it.
Ooh. That's rough. I'm sorry (as in, I'm sorry for you, like as if somebody died). I'd fucking hate to be forced to use those things all of the time. Hopefully, your school has learned their lesson, and won't buy any more Iomega products.
One working product does not a good product line make. Just because your worked doesn't mean that there were millions more that din't. There wouldn't have been a class action lawsuit if those problems didn't really exist.
You're not too bright if you've been using a piece of shit for 5 years. Have you ever heard of 'returning' defective or poor products to the place where you buy them?
Removeable media bigger than floppies? Have you heard of CD's..? They come in a few flavors: CD-ROM, CD-R, and CD-RW. All much faster, more reliable, and with much more storage than a Zip drive. Why is anybody even still using a Zip drive? It's ancient technology.
Slashdot Mirror
It's true. Java development is slowing down. I'm looking for a job now, and that's what all of the recruiters are saying.
No, it isn't. ASP is designed to glue together COM objects with web pages. You can do page level scripting, and it performs fine, but lots of people build everything into objects, and just use ASP to instantiate the objects.
No support from the community, huh?
15 Seconds
Active Server Pages
4 Guys from Rolla
ASP 101
There are a lot more, but I'm getting tired. Oh yeah, and there are all of the companies making components for ASP. Right. No support. Good troll. Try harder next time. Oh, and ASP has nothing to do with CGI. But, good try.
Good troll. I send hundreds of emails a day with CDONTS, and have never had a problem. And, what, you can't keep your box running for 15 seconds? Dude, you need to fix your hardware.
Like the subject says, since when was ISA phased out? I still use it in all of my PC's. I really doubt that everybody out there upgrades their PC every year. I know I don't. The fastet PC I have is a P II 233. The assumption that nobody uses ISA anymore is a very naive, geek-oriented view that isn't too accurate.
I wish I had some mod points to mod this up. I have to agree. If there are so many fantastic Open Source developers hwo know so much about RDBMS', and could contribute to Oracle's codebase, why is MySQL so lacking?
And the other point.. what would Oracle gain? They already have market share. They're not interested in attracting customers who can't pay for their licenses, so what would the point be? This guy who wrote this article may be a good DBA, but he doesn't understand the first thing abot business.
They take 50% of the (non-porn only) market as it exists now. The market is still very young. It'll get there. Generally, a whole industry doesn't mature in a year or two. Some would say that the Net isn't even mainstream yet in many places outside of the US and Europe.
Well, I'd argue that Tv/radio systems aren't even that good. Neilsens take a very small sample, then extrapolate. On the Net, even if they don't click, you can definately say x number of people viewed an ad. Again, the comparisons aren't equivalent yet, and until the people who buy advertising understand that, Net advertising will be a bit behind.
Well, what about BIG advertisers, like Coca-Cola? Do you go into Wendy's and say, "I'd like a Coke because of the ad I saw last night."? No. That's simple brand recognition. The big advertisers don't see the Net (yet) as a valid medium for developing brands. When they do, the Net will advertise the same as TV/Radio/Print, and the researchers will target Net advertising in the same way they target more 'traditional' media. You've got to give it a while. This is a TOTALLY new medium that's only been largely popular for a year or two, and still isn't nearly as widespread as TV, although it will be soon.
No, I wouldn't say that they don't work. Look at the adult website industry. Obviously, banner ads DO work. There are adult webmasters who pull in millions a year. It's just that people in the more 'traditional' web industries haven't figured out how to make them work well (yet). And Yahoo IS making some money on ads. It's true that they're hurting, but they're certainly not down and out yet. The key to banner advertising is to advertise useful products, and to have a very large user base. Just like a free newspaper with 1000 readers can't stay afloat, neither can a web site.
Well, how about Internet Radio? Sites like http://www.sonicnet.com offer a TON of free radio stations. They have banners along with a few traditional radio ads. Will they be smart enough to know that while the banners may not show much revenue, that they can still sell ads like traditional radio stations? The advertisers on traditional radio stations get NO statistics whatsoever. Ever the listening audience is just a rough estimate. Sonicnet can at least say for sure "we had x number of people here your ad today".
No, Internet ads ARE effective. To say that they're ineffective as compared to TV/Radio/Print is comparing apples and oranges. With Net ads, people are trying to track direct clickthroughs. There's virtually no consideration given to mindshare or branding. With TV/Radio/Print, it's ALL about mindshare and branding. There is NO clickthrough to measure. People buy those ads, and look at their sales, and see if they're going up after an ad campaign. Ad companies need to start to think the same way for the Net. Just because somebody doesn't click on an ad (I don't click on any TV ads) doesn't mean that they're not effective. Hell, or you can think the other way, and say that there is no direct way to measure traditional advertising at all (other than 'Tell us where you saw our ad when you come in to our store!'), so it's TV/Radio/Print advertising that's totally ineffective.
It's not so much apathy, as it is realism. There are millions of spammers out there, sending probably billions a day. Some of them make a lot of money doing this. It's very, very unlikely that you'll be able to stamp this out, any more than you can stamp out ANYthing else online (child porn, MP3 trading, warez, etc.). It's like trying to plug a dam with your finger. Plug one leak, and another one opens.
But this isn't something that the ordinary citizen can do to fight it. This system that you describe would have to rely on an army of zealots who did nothing but attack spammers. If you can work 10 hours a day to fight spam, and maybe get, I dunno, a few thousand other people to do the same, yeah, maybe you can stop spam. More power to you. But that's not realistic. A simple campaign of 'just delete' would be much more effective. On top of that, by attacking the ISP or the accounts, are you helping anything, or are you just tying up more bandwidth in this fight, which would continue, because spammers haven't lost their incentive to spam. As long as money can be made, they'll try. The easiest thing to do is to take away their ability to make money. "Just Press Delete!"
That's great. They can waste their time in a totally futile effort. I'm glad they have a hobby. I'm a big fan of the 'delete' button though. Why? Spam works because out of every x number of mails that go out, y will result in sales. If everybody just nuked their spam, there'd be no financial incentive for spammers to spam any more. As always, hit 'em in the pocketbook. That's where it hurts the most.
Yeah, that'll eliminate spam. It'll also eliminate email from anybody you know that isn't an uber-geek.
Wasn't there something that was a lot like this in the movie 'Sneakers' that came out 10+ years ago...?
OK, so what if you do always compile your code first. So what? Unless you're an expert, you still won't find security problems. There's no benefit to compiling your own source code first if you can't read it.
Ooh. That's rough. I'm sorry (as in, I'm sorry for you, like as if somebody died). I'd fucking hate to be forced to use those things all of the time. Hopefully, your school has learned their lesson, and won't buy any more Iomega products.
One working product does not a good product line make. Just because your worked doesn't mean that there were millions more that din't. There wouldn't have been a class action lawsuit if those problems didn't really exist.
So why are you still using it? Why not return the piece of shit?
Your 'salvation'? Why not just return the thing? Why would you continue to own a broken product?
You're not too bright if you've been using a piece of shit for 5 years. Have you ever heard of 'returning' defective or poor products to the place where you buy them?
Removeable media bigger than floppies? Have you heard of CD's..? They come in a few flavors: CD-ROM, CD-R, and CD-RW. All much faster, more reliable, and with much more storage than a Zip drive. Why is anybody even still using a Zip drive? It's ancient technology.
It's not a software problem, but a hardware problem. No patch will fix the 'click of death'.