I admin a 7000 node network with 35000 email accounts, we have a 4 server cluster for email (postfix, courier imap) it easily supports the 35000 customers, when we were building the network we looked at everyone, to do a MS solution with exchange we would have needed between 100 and 150 dual proc xeon 2.4 procs (because exchange only supports between 200 and 300 accounts per box).. Not to mention the fact that we would then need 100-150 copies of Advanced Server at 1500 a pop... instead we have a very comparable email system for less than 8 grand... Oh yeah and we don't spend 8-10 hours a day rebuilding corrupted exchange databases.
I agree with you there... The problem is that MS has successfully sold to the masses that computers are easy, that they should just work (like electricity), and that they don't really require that much expertise to operate. There is no going back on that front. People believe computers should be easy like flipping a light switch, because MS told them thats how it is, and nothing short of that will be good enough now. So MS has raised the bar, and if we want to really compete on the desktop or in homes we have to live up to that standard.
well, then MS will always rule the world. This is why everyone runs MS, because they pay 250-500/system for software and then they don't have to pay someone a salary to maintain their network. Yeah there are the occasional virus, or system outage that requires that they pay someone a few hundred dollars to come out and fix it, but when my dad's network was based on a netware server, every time he wanted to add a computer, or add a printer, or add a network share, it cost him $750-$1000 for some $200/hr tech to come out and do it. This went away with MS, and my dad likes it that way (and so do millions of other small/medium business owners) and people aren't going to downgrade to something that doesn't work as well. None of these people expect the computer to get fixed for free, but they expect to be able to do menial tasks (adding network shares, adding printers and scanners) without having to pay someone $500 for what should be (and is through MS) a very simple task.
All in all a pretty decent article. I agree with many of his points, if there is one thing I dislike in the *nix culture it is the elitism, and holier than thou attitude that many people in said culture have towards users. This is just one more sign of that elitism, we spend hours and hours making very good stable, well designed software, and then we demand that you read a 1500 page book to be able to use it... That's stupid, now you can say "if they don't want to learn they shouldn't be using this software" but that's dumb too... my dad is an attorney, he wants to work on cases, and do legal research and the like, thats what he's interested in, he doesn't want to spend an hour a day figuring out how to share printers/files and send emails, and he doesn't want to have to pay someone $150/hr every time he needs to add a printer to his network. My wife is a psychologist, she wants to care for her patients, and work on her book, she doesn't want to be bothered with figuring out how to configure her computer, and she shouldn't have to be... That said, the author shouldn't have been bashing the CUPS guys, the configurator in question is an inhouse product by redhat/fedora, no other distribution uses it, and the default setting of having the broadcast turned off was also a decision by redhat/fedora not the CUPS programmers (well it might have been made by the CUPS devs, but redhat/fedora had every opportunity to change that default behavior). I appreciate the article though because he is right on in critisizing the community for their lack of vision in this regard. (btw, I admin a 7000 node network, and the entire thing is controlled by linux and unix servers, there are windows nodes, but I would never run windows on the server side, and I rarely use it on the desktop either so don't count me as some MS apologist)
This will substantially dent Mcafee/Norton's revenues. Alot of people buy these programs, and even more people get them default from their computer vendors (Dell, HP, and Gateway all include one of them) and I'm sure the computer manufacturers are paying for that. With this development, no one will feel they "need" to pay for virus protection even though the dumb masses will never update their virus defs and will still get infected with the latest viruses. Unless this update gives MS the power to actually update the virus defs remotely for everyone... well thats just scary in and of itself.
This piece completely forgets that SCO just removed all of the Unix is in Linux parts of their case, and now it is only that AIX and Dynix are in Linux, which SCO has no reason to believe they actually own, and if a judge finds that code developed by IBM and Sequent is actually owned by SCO well, I'll have to move to a different country, based on that ruling code developed using Microsofts MFC is owned by microsoft, code developed using Qt is owned by trolltech, and so on and so on...
I guess this writer forgot to find out that you still can't purchase these licenses from SCO, their sales people still can't sell them, or know how to sell them to people
They very well might... the most common reason why programs need to be run as admin is because they need read or write access to the registry in a place that normal users don't have it. In my experience, this has almost always been the case that things want to create a new key in the registry (for a saved game, or for a recent document or something) and they can't write to the registry as a normal user.
There are lots of things in windows that require admin access, MS office 97 requires it, AutoCAD does as well, you can't fix these problems without a source license, if you install them, users must have admin rights on their machines to run them.
I have lots of times. Once when developing a VB frontend to SQL server the server crashed and erased a bunch of data (we had backups) I called MS to talk about the crash and figure out what had caused it, I told them what I was trying to do and they said "Oh, you shouldn't be using SQL server in a critical environment, its not designed for that"
The only problem with your analogy is that apache (Like most OSS) has at least 2 versions and normally many more, which are currently in widespread usage. Also the fact that different vendors patch at different times, and have varying configs. If an exploit is found in apach 2.0.48, great but maybe I'm still running 2.0.47 and the bug was just introduced, maybe I'm running version 1 still, this diversity of versions creates alot of diversity in the unix world (not to mention each vendor has their own version slightly altered of the software, and different libraries are installed on almost every system as well) therefore, you can't as a virus writer rely on some windows dll, and make calls against it, because there is no gaurantee the library you need will be there in the linux world and you will have to write a much larger virus to gaurantee you have the functionality you need on the system once you infect it.
More importantly however (sorry for replying to myself) is the fact that installing a program in linux is not like windows its much more like in mac OS, you don't have to write to the registry, you don't have to depend on a bunch of system DLLs, can just zip up a bunch of stuff in a disk image, and then have the user drop the unzipped stuff onto their hard drive and it will just run. this is how mac has always worked, and it is the *easiest* way to install things ever. For normal programs (games, office programs, IM clients, media players) this paradigm works fine on mac os, and it works fine in linux too. for larger more complex server type programs its reasonable to expect someone to compile from source.
I disagree, there is already a good deal of standardization as far as directory structure is concerned, and most comercial apps I've installed on Linux (they do exist you know) have their own binary installers, they don't rely on rpm or deb or anything else, so I don't think its necessary to standardize on one type of package management. having a good directory layout is key though and that what LSB is all about.
Well, thats just a bunch of bullshit FUD... I just installed win2k sp4 on a server 2 weeks ago, installed just fine, asks for a reboot, I reboot it, and poop.. bsod. So where the hell is all this damned testing you're talking about? Had the same problem with 4 machines about 5 months ago... MS doesn't test crap, they are lazy idiot coders who can't even make their own software work on their own OS (The latest release of MSN software has crashed at least 6 computers that I know of).
I agree that installing things is easy in linux... but not if you don't have root privs. apt-get install mytrojan as a normal user on any system I configure gets you "You need root privs to do that"
I know that stuff, just the wording of that paragraph in the ammended complaint seems to imply that without IBMs contributions linux somehow wouldn't be free.. that they (IBM) made it free the way MS made Internet Explorer free. just to destroy a market.
I have worked in both windows and unix shops (Solaris, FreeBSD and Linux). Yeah, you can crack down on users in windows, but then they can't do anything. So many programs in windows *require* admin privileges just to run that it is impossible to do any work with non-admin users. Unix on the other hand allows the user to run most anything without admin privs, and they can install things into a bin directory in their home folder, and that (granted) is a security issue because they could install a trojan there and run it, however, they still have to jump through some hoops, and any decent virus tries to change system properties... IE in linux if the trojan wants to start every time the computer boots up, then it has to write a shell script to/etc/init.d, and it can't do that without root privs (in the enterprise environments I've worked in the users don't have the root password, they don't need it so they can't give the trojan root access), so the only time it would run is if that user logs on (and it creates an entry in like the xsession file in the home directory) these windows viruses have full access to every file on the system (IE in a multi user environment, the trojan can read and find email addresses to spam from all users on the entire system, in linux it wouldn't be able to see other users address books). The virus can change and modify system behavior in windows (registry settings, append itself to other executables, whatever its wants) because users must be admin, and therefore the trojan has admin privs. In linux, it could do this in the users home directory, but it won't be able to say, reformat the hard drive (need root privs to run that program), it won't be able to start itself at system start up automatically, it won't be able to change every user on the machines home page to some porn site, only the one who installed the virus. This helps greatly with finding out who was the stupid one, and training them in proper computer usage, or firing them... whichever your enterprise desires. Under windows you can never find out who broke company policy and opened a.exe attachment from someone they didn't know, because the trojan is suddenly spread across the entire network and tracing exactly where it started is impossible. These are all problems created by the fact that in windows because admin is the default too many programs used that fact and now can't run without admin priviliges, thus locking down windows boxes is not cost effective, as you have to have 2-3 people for every 50 users just running around granting admin privs and then revoking them every time someone needs one of these programs.
Wrong, By simply clicking on an attachment in any mail client in linux it will not execute... The user would have to save the attachment to disk, chmod it +x, and then execute it, and then, if the trojan wanted to write anything to disk outside of the users home directory, it would have to ask for the root password, and then if the user was that stupid, ok they really deserve to be infected with a virus. However, in a decently admined system the users don't know the root password, they don't need it ever, and they should never be installing programs. The amount of work it would take to install the trojan on linux would be a deterrent, it is also the deterrent to wide scale adoption by home users of linux.. because installing programs is just as difficult as installing trojans.
Good news. I mean I'm all for competition in the software market, but I have always hated Real's players... I hate windows media player as well, and I still never use it, quicktime for me... But I've had tons of problems with real, the way they hide the opt out checks way down in a list, so unless you know where to look for them, you sign up for loads of spam, I hate any program that runs a program at system start up and leaves an icon in the system tray... besides these small nagging issues, I've always had many more stability problems on systems running real software (granted MS probably does that on purpose.. but quicktime never crashes the way real does on my systems). Anyway, maybe with helix opened up, we can write a good player that actually has some chance of fighting against windows media player...
My only issue with the outsourcing is that generally in my experience the quality is not better over there. I know my local ISP had nearly 500k in equipment fried because an Indian tech gave them an incorrect upgrade procedure. I have fixed many peoples HP and Compaq computers recently after they spent hours on the phone trying to understand an Indian tech who had them do such strange things as disable the network card, and then tell them to download new drivers for said card and when the internet wasn't working (the network card was disabled) told them they'd have to reinstall the OS, that the registry was corrupted. Or one who had the user disable all services on a windows xp machine, and then couldn't figure out why it couldn't read from the cdrom drive. Or the other one where the Indian tech repeatedly told them they didn't have to dial up to the internet to download the drivers they needed, that they should just be able to open internet explorer and go to the site... (these people didn't have broadband, and said so, but the tech insisted that the internet should just work). These are reasons why Dell brought one of their call centers back. I won't talk to an Indian tech if I have any problem at all understanding or explaining my problem to them. I ask for an American and if I can't get one, I hang up. The company I work for will not do business with any company that does not have US support (they can have some support outsourced to India, but if we can't call 24x7 and talk to someone where we don't have to translate/listen really hard to decipher what is being said, we don't buy products from them, that is why we are terminating a 3 million/year contract with Cisco cause they recently sent the rest of their TAC over there, and we won't deal with translation issues when we're trying to explain/fix a problem at 3am). Anyway, that is my only beef with outsourcing, I don't feel the quality is the same (contrary to what this article claims) I have many real life experiences where this is the case, and I have yet to have a really good experience with an Indian tech whereas I have really good experiences quite often with US tech support.
This is true. India does not allow any foreigners to work in India, so it is a complete one way street, the jobs go and there is no way we can get them back, except by being better/more productive/smarter than the Indians
A very good point. I have 3 years of CS (and about 6 years of experience) under my belt and I've changed jobs twice since the bust, both times of my own accord, and both times to higher wages. I haven't graduated yet (May), but there are lots of companies that need good quality IT work whether it be programming, or systems engineering or network management, I've worked in all three areas in the last 3 years and I haven't gone more than 2 weeks without a paycheck yet. If you are worth your beans you can still find lots of jobs/opportunity in America doing what you love. I have friends that have their paper MCSE that whine and complain constantly about the lack of jobs, a few of them worked in a call center that got shipped to India, and they just sit around and bitch all day... stupid really if they'd get out and learn stuff and get educated they'd be fine. I really feel it is mostly these people who don't really have the drive that polluted our industry in the late 90s that are the biggest complainers.
Ok, those are the quarterly net numbers for sun for the last 4 quarters... the numbers are in millions, so 286.00 is a loss of 286,000,000. So, that is a total loss over 4 quarters of 3.6 billion dollars, thats pretty close to an average loss of 1 billion per quarter.
I don't know what kind of creative accounting you are using but those are the real numbers...
Sun seems to be making money off of "reasonably priced."
LOL, Sun, the company that hasn't had a profitable quarter in 3 years, that is showing billion dollar losses every quarter for the last year? They are "making money" no, my friend they are losing and losing badly.
Slashdot Mirror
I admin a 7000 node network with 35000 email accounts, we have a 4 server cluster for email (postfix, courier imap) it easily supports the 35000 customers, when we were building the network we looked at everyone, to do a MS solution with exchange we would have needed between 100 and 150 dual proc xeon 2.4 procs (because exchange only supports between 200 and 300 accounts per box).. Not to mention the fact that we would then need 100-150 copies of Advanced Server at 1500 a pop... instead we have a very comparable email system for less than 8 grand... Oh yeah and we don't spend 8-10 hours a day rebuilding corrupted exchange databases.
I agree with you there...
The problem is that MS has successfully sold to the masses that computers are easy, that they should just work (like electricity), and that they don't really require that much expertise to operate. There is no going back on that front. People believe computers should be easy like flipping a light switch, because MS told them thats how it is, and nothing short of that will be good enough now. So MS has raised the bar, and if we want to really compete on the desktop or in homes we have to live up to that standard.
well, then MS will always rule the world. This is why everyone runs MS, because they pay 250-500/system for software and then they don't have to pay someone a salary to maintain their network. Yeah there are the occasional virus, or system outage that requires that they pay someone a few hundred dollars to come out and fix it, but when my dad's network was based on a netware server, every time he wanted to add a computer, or add a printer, or add a network share, it cost him $750-$1000 for some $200/hr tech to come out and do it. This went away with MS, and my dad likes it that way (and so do millions of other small/medium business owners) and people aren't going to downgrade to something that doesn't work as well. None of these people expect the computer to get fixed for free, but they expect to be able to do menial tasks (adding network shares, adding printers and scanners) without having to pay someone $500 for what should be (and is through MS) a very simple task.
All in all a pretty decent article.
I agree with many of his points, if there is one thing I dislike in the *nix culture it is the elitism, and holier than thou attitude that many people in said culture have towards users. This is just one more sign of that elitism, we spend hours and hours making very good stable, well designed software, and then we demand that you read a 1500 page book to be able to use it... That's stupid, now you can say "if they don't want to learn they shouldn't be using this software" but that's dumb too... my dad is an attorney, he wants to work on cases, and do legal research and the like, thats what he's interested in, he doesn't want to spend an hour a day figuring out how to share printers/files and send emails, and he doesn't want to have to pay someone $150/hr every time he needs to add a printer to his network. My wife is a psychologist, she wants to care for her patients, and work on her book, she doesn't want to be bothered with figuring out how to configure her computer, and she shouldn't have to be... That said, the author shouldn't have been bashing the CUPS guys, the configurator in question is an inhouse product by redhat/fedora, no other distribution uses it, and the default setting of having the broadcast turned off was also a decision by redhat/fedora not the CUPS programmers (well it might have been made by the CUPS devs, but redhat/fedora had every opportunity to change that default behavior). I appreciate the article though because he is right on in critisizing the community for their lack of vision in this regard. (btw, I admin a 7000 node network, and the entire thing is controlled by linux and unix servers, there are windows nodes, but I would never run windows on the server side, and I rarely use it on the desktop either so don't count me as some MS apologist)
This will substantially dent Mcafee/Norton's revenues. Alot of people buy these programs, and even more people get them default from their computer vendors (Dell, HP, and Gateway all include one of them) and I'm sure the computer manufacturers are paying for that. With this development, no one will feel they "need" to pay for virus protection even though the dumb masses will never update their virus defs and will still get infected with the latest viruses. Unless this update gives MS the power to actually update the virus defs remotely for everyone... well thats just scary in and of itself.
This piece completely forgets that SCO just removed all of the Unix is in Linux parts of their case, and now it is only that AIX and Dynix are in Linux, which SCO has no reason to believe they actually own, and if a judge finds that code developed by IBM and Sequent is actually owned by SCO well, I'll have to move to a different country, based on that ruling code developed using Microsofts MFC is owned by microsoft, code developed using Qt is owned by trolltech, and so on and so on...
I guess this writer forgot to find out that you still can't purchase these licenses from SCO, their sales people still can't sell them, or know how to sell them to people
They very well might...
the most common reason why programs need to be run as admin is because they need read or write access to the registry in a place that normal users don't have it. In my experience, this has almost always been the case that things want to create a new key in the registry (for a saved game, or for a recent document or something) and they can't write to the registry as a normal user.
There are lots of things in windows that require admin access, MS office 97 requires it, AutoCAD does as well, you can't fix these problems without a source license, if you install them, users must have admin rights on their machines to run them.
I have lots of times.
Once when developing a VB frontend to SQL server the server crashed and erased a bunch of data (we had backups) I called MS to talk about the crash and figure out what had caused it, I told them what I was trying to do and they said "Oh, you shouldn't be using SQL server in a critical environment, its not designed for that"
The only problem with your analogy is that apache (Like most OSS) has at least 2 versions and normally many more, which are currently in widespread usage. Also the fact that different vendors patch at different times, and have varying configs. If an exploit is found in apach 2.0.48, great but maybe I'm still running 2.0.47 and the bug was just introduced, maybe I'm running version 1 still, this diversity of versions creates alot of diversity in the unix world (not to mention each vendor has their own version slightly altered of the software, and different libraries are installed on almost every system as well) therefore, you can't as a virus writer rely on some windows dll, and make calls against it, because there is no gaurantee the library you need will be there in the linux world and you will have to write a much larger virus to gaurantee you have the functionality you need on the system once you infect it.
More importantly however (sorry for replying to myself) is the fact that installing a program in linux is not like windows its much more like in mac OS, you don't have to write to the registry, you don't have to depend on a bunch of system DLLs, can just zip up a bunch of stuff in a disk image, and then have the user drop the unzipped stuff onto their hard drive and it will just run. this is how mac has always worked, and it is the *easiest* way to install things ever. For normal programs (games, office programs, IM clients, media players) this paradigm works fine on mac os, and it works fine in linux too. for larger more complex server type programs its reasonable to expect someone to compile from source.
I disagree,
there is already a good deal of standardization as far as directory structure is concerned, and most comercial apps I've installed on Linux (they do exist you know) have their own binary installers, they don't rely on rpm or deb or anything else, so I don't think its necessary to standardize on one type of package management. having a good directory layout is key though and that what LSB is all about.
Well, thats just a bunch of bullshit FUD...
I just installed win2k sp4 on a server 2 weeks ago, installed just fine, asks for a reboot, I reboot it, and poop.. bsod. So where the hell is all this damned testing you're talking about? Had the same problem with 4 machines about 5 months ago... MS doesn't test crap, they are lazy idiot coders who can't even make their own software work on their own OS (The latest release of MSN software has crashed at least 6 computers that I know of).
I agree that installing things is easy in linux...
but not if you don't have root privs.
apt-get install mytrojan as a normal user on any system I configure gets you "You need root privs to do that"
I know that stuff, just the wording of that paragraph in the ammended complaint seems to imply that without IBMs contributions linux somehow wouldn't be free.. that they (IBM) made it free the way MS made Internet Explorer free. just to destroy a market.
By making the Linux operating system free to end users
How exactly does SCO claim that IBM made linux free to end users? I thought that was Linus and the GPL? Maybe I'm an idiot though.
I have worked in both windows and unix shops (Solaris, FreeBSD and Linux). Yeah, you can crack down on users in windows, but then they can't do anything. So many programs in windows *require* admin privileges just to run that it is impossible to do any work with non-admin users. Unix on the other hand allows the user to run most anything without admin privs, and they can install things into a bin directory in their home folder, and that (granted) is a security issue because they could install a trojan there and run it, however, they still have to jump through some hoops, and any decent virus tries to change system properties... IE in linux if the trojan wants to start every time the computer boots up, then it has to write a shell script to /etc/init.d, and it can't do that without root privs (in the enterprise environments I've worked in the users don't have the root password, they don't need it so they can't give the trojan root access), so the only time it would run is if that user logs on (and it creates an entry in like the xsession file in the home directory) these windows viruses have full access to every file on the system (IE in a multi user environment, the trojan can read and find email addresses to spam from all users on the entire system, in linux it wouldn't be able to see other users address books). The virus can change and modify system behavior in windows (registry settings, append itself to other executables, whatever its wants) because users must be admin, and therefore the trojan has admin privs. In linux, it could do this in the users home directory, but it won't be able to say, reformat the hard drive (need root privs to run that program), it won't be able to start itself at system start up automatically, it won't be able to change every user on the machines home page to some porn site, only the one who installed the virus. This helps greatly with finding out who was the stupid one, and training them in proper computer usage, or firing them... whichever your enterprise desires. Under windows you can never find out who broke company policy and opened a .exe attachment from someone they didn't know, because the trojan is suddenly spread across the entire network and tracing exactly where it started is impossible. These are all problems created by the fact that in windows because admin is the default too many programs used that fact and now can't run without admin priviliges, thus locking down windows boxes is not cost effective, as you have to have 2-3 people for every 50 users just running around granting admin privs and then revoking them every time someone needs one of these programs.
Wrong,
By simply clicking on an attachment in any mail client in linux it will not execute... The user would have to save the attachment to disk, chmod it +x, and then execute it, and then, if the trojan wanted to write anything to disk outside of the users home directory, it would have to ask for the root password, and then if the user was that stupid, ok they really deserve to be infected with a virus. However, in a decently admined system the users don't know the root password, they don't need it ever, and they should never be installing programs. The amount of work it would take to install the trojan on linux would be a deterrent, it is also the deterrent to wide scale adoption by home users of linux.. because installing programs is just as difficult as installing trojans.
Good news. I mean I'm all for competition in the software market, but I have always hated Real's players... I hate windows media player as well, and I still never use it, quicktime for me... But I've had tons of problems with real, the way they hide the opt out checks way down in a list, so unless you know where to look for them, you sign up for loads of spam, I hate any program that runs a program at system start up and leaves an icon in the system tray... besides these small nagging issues, I've always had many more stability problems on systems running real software (granted MS probably does that on purpose.. but quicktime never crashes the way real does on my systems). Anyway, maybe with helix opened up, we can write a good player that actually has some chance of fighting against windows media player...
My only issue with the outsourcing is that generally in my experience the quality is not better over there. I know my local ISP had nearly 500k in equipment fried because an Indian tech gave them an incorrect upgrade procedure. I have fixed many peoples HP and Compaq computers recently after they spent hours on the phone trying to understand an Indian tech who had them do such strange things as disable the network card, and then tell them to download new drivers for said card and when the internet wasn't working (the network card was disabled) told them they'd have to reinstall the OS, that the registry was corrupted. Or one who had the user disable all services on a windows xp machine, and then couldn't figure out why it couldn't read from the cdrom drive. Or the other one where the Indian tech repeatedly told them they didn't have to dial up to the internet to download the drivers they needed, that they should just be able to open internet explorer and go to the site... (these people didn't have broadband, and said so, but the tech insisted that the internet should just work). These are reasons why Dell brought one of their call centers back. I won't talk to an Indian tech if I have any problem at all understanding or explaining my problem to them. I ask for an American and if I can't get one, I hang up. The company I work for will not do business with any company that does not have US support (they can have some support outsourced to India, but if we can't call 24x7 and talk to someone where we don't have to translate/listen really hard to decipher what is being said, we don't buy products from them, that is why we are terminating a 3 million/year contract with Cisco cause they recently sent the rest of their TAC over there, and we won't deal with translation issues when we're trying to explain/fix a problem at 3am). Anyway, that is my only beef with outsourcing, I don't feel the quality is the same (contrary to what this article claims) I have many real life experiences where this is the case, and I have yet to have a really good experience with an Indian tech whereas I have really good experiences quite often with US tech support.
This is true.
India does not allow any foreigners to work in India, so it is a complete one way street, the jobs go and there is no way we can get them back, except by being better/more productive/smarter than the Indians
A very good point.
I have 3 years of CS (and about 6 years of experience) under my belt and I've changed jobs twice since the bust, both times of my own accord, and both times to higher wages. I haven't graduated yet (May), but there are lots of companies that need good quality IT work whether it be programming, or systems engineering or network management, I've worked in all three areas in the last 3 years and I haven't gone more than 2 weeks without a paycheck yet. If you are worth your beans you can still find lots of jobs/opportunity in America doing what you love. I have friends that have their paper MCSE that whine and complain constantly about the lack of jobs, a few of them worked in a call center that got shipped to India, and they just sit around and bitch all day... stupid really if they'd get out and learn stuff and get educated they'd be fine. I really feel it is mostly these people who don't really have the drive that polluted our industry in the late 90s that are the biggest complainers.
Net Income (286.00) (1,039.00) 4.00 (2,283.00)
Ok, those are the quarterly net numbers for sun for the last 4 quarters... the numbers are in millions, so 286.00 is a loss of 286,000,000. So, that is a total loss over 4 quarters of 3.6 billion dollars, thats pretty close to an average loss of 1 billion per quarter.
I don't know what kind of creative accounting you are using but those are the real numbers...
Sun seems to be making money off of "reasonably priced."
LOL, Sun, the company that hasn't had a profitable quarter in 3 years, that is showing billion dollar losses every quarter for the last year? They are "making money" no, my friend they are losing and losing badly.