Microsoft just got in the CRM market recently, which had PeopleSoft really pissed. I believed they made a statement concerning pushing other platforms or something.
To be honest, I have to say, I'm with Microsoft on this one. CRM/ERP companies have been charging whatever they feel like for software and training for a while now. Companies like Microsoft and Salesforce are now commoditizing that market, and maybe we will start getting CRMs with price under $300/user soon.
Oracle is using its cash on hand to cannibalize another company, steal its customer list, terminate development of its products, lay off 8000 tech workers, and turn Silicon Valley into even more of a smoking crater than they have already by outsourcing so much of their own development work to the Third World.
...But in doing so Oracle manages to dominate the global multi-billion dollar CRM/ERP/Business Services market and increases in size, unseating the German company SAP and brings in millions to its American shareholders and creating new American jobs.
We should not protect 'weaker' players in this competitive market. Doing so benefits neither them or the consumer. If PeopleSoft can not fend of Oracle, it would be beneficial for their stockholders to take the money.
Here's something to think about, the Oracle offer may be a cheap move by Oracle, it may also be a symptom of PeopleSoft's vulnerability.
Instead of looking at this acquisition from a purely rational, coldly analytical perspective, we should and must begin to look at the quality of the lives of the employees. I would prefer to work for an organization like PeopleSoft. It is an organization that cares.
Oracle is cut from the same cloth as Sun, Siebel, and Cisco. Brutal, cut-throat, survival of the fittest. Increasingly, with the influx of H-1B's and "free" trade, American companies are becoming the ruthless of ogres of the early part of the 20th century....
Why does it always have to be "us versus them"?
How does one take a story about Oracle's CEO pushing to increase his company's market share and make it a war cry against "foreigners" and the assult on American values?
Truth is capitalism, is based on competition. And America was built on capitalism, in large part.
Globally, the US is one of the more agressive trading partners. Vigorously defending its National interest ( eg. Steel ) while pushing for open trade, trade with smaller countries that couldn't possibly compete due to economies of scale. But that's fine because business is not pretty.
If Oracle treats it's salesforce badly, over the long run, with competition, they will lose their good sales people and faulter.
Since when did ASP.NET have anything to do with MAPI?
MAPI is used both on the server side to access exchange, etc. and also as a means to provide the ASP app messaging services. Web applications using ASP are going to be built around MAPI and it *may* be a task to convert it something else. MAPI was just an example. These ASP apps are going to use ADSI, and other MS hooks. There are lots of them.
Mono isn't the first to take a swipe at porting MS development platform over to UNIX. And the others didn't do much either because of MS "integration" with the OS, but hey, maybe Mono will be different. But between microsoft's moving api's, and a skeptical market, it won't be easy I'm saying.
Class Library and Win32 dependencies.
There are a few spots where the Win32 foundation is exposed to the class library (for example, the HDC and HWND properties in the GDI+). Casual inspection suggests that these can be safely mapped to Gdk's GC and GdkWindow pointers without breaking anything.
The only drawback is that support for PInvoke of Win32 code won't be available. An alternate solution would be to use portions of Wine, or even to use Wine as our toolkit.
...make you wonder wether this is suppose to be a commercially viable product?
I'm not trying to hate. But frankly, mono seems like a huge hack.
You do realise that they aren't just writing a compiler right? Do you think they're idiots?Sheesh.. they've even got a working version of ASP.NET.
Yeah, working if you don't count the windows specific APIs like MAPI, etc.
What I'm saying is that I doubt that users are going to be able to quickly migrate their applications between MONO.NET and ASP.NET like you can between Websphere and JBoss for instance.
What about microsoft's past makes you think they'll let that happen?
First, Mono applications can easily use existing C-based GNOME components and take advantage of all the hard work that's gone into them. So as Mono matures, people will begin to use it to write desktop components that take advantage of all the hard work that's gone into some of the meatier GNOME libraries, as well as the nifty language features of C#. Gtk# is a good example of this, but I think we'll start to see things like GNOME-VFS, GConf and the Camel messaging library being used from Mono more often.
.NET and JAVA aren't just windowing/widget libraries. GTK/Glib are nice but don't provide a fraction of what those frameworks provide. Are GConf, Camel, and the other supporting GNOME technologies ready to take on.NET and Java?
Miguel et. al. will have to understand that if they provide the C# language, that's a nice start. But they need to produce all the.NET libraries that come with the language to be doing anything useful.
Pick up a book on J2EE or ASP.NET, and look at the services/APIs/technologies they provide. These are full environment complete with component models, eg. Enterprise Java Beans. Messaging API, eg. JMS. HTML presentation provided by JSP. JMX for managing components. And a solid set of core libraries that the typical developer would vouch for, ie. assume is ok to "sell" to management. In other words they have a huge marketing problem ahead of them as well.
What happens after they produce a working C# compiler? Is there suppose to be a mass migration to GTK#? Ximian must have a hell of a marketing plan up their sleeve.
Neither Ximian or Gnome team have been able to produce solid APIs at a reason speed to the market in the past. I'm not saying this to be mean, but that's my honest opinion. Really, I wish them well though.
I'd love to see Ximian compete with Sun and Microsoft in that arena. But coming out with a compiler and nothing much in the area of support libraries is a sad attempt.
Developers are using C# and JAVA because of the vendor supplied libraries and accountibility. If we ( open source ) has to compete we must provide those features before any technical features.
Seems to me this is very similar to the nuclear situation with north korea. At the same time the pentagon is pressing for
new research in nuclear weopons they're pressing Iran and North Korea to cease they efforts.
Then the mail admin was on vacation for a week,...
Um..., that could happen to any mail server.
An exim exploit could come out and only the untrained admins are in.
I use sendmail in a pretty complex setup. ISP-type virtual domain setup, LDAP datastore, and I have about 2, yes 2 exploits for the last year or so for which I was vulnerable.
PS. Configuring sendmail takes some reading, but upgrading sendmail is is simple as running the build script, doing a Build install, and then restart. The hard part was coming up with a decent sendmail.mc and Site.config.m4, both of which you would have had already. So your story sounds a little fishy to me.
Re:Ximian Connector ?
on
Ximian's Back
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The underlying transport for MAPI and DCOM is DCE RPC -- an "open systems" protocol from Sun and other UNIX vendors that Microsoft also adopted.
Problem is there's no complete DCE RPC implementation for Linux. Fix that and some smart person will get MAPI working.
Probably the most insightful think said in this thread, including the original +5 parent. Too bad no one pays attention to ACs:)
Anyway you're partly wrong, there is a free implementation of DCE RPC at http://sourceforge.net/projects/freedce . I don't know how complete it is, but I think it's useable.
Re:I'll care when native compilers become the norm
on
Preview of Java 1.5
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If you are running a J2EE app as middleware for a huge ecomerce or CRM system, etc then sure recompile to native code,...
I don't see any performance issues in my J2EE apps.
Java is slow largely becuase of JVM startup and GUI framework. But J2EE Apps don't have to worry about either of these. The J2EE Server's JVM is started only on Application startup, which only happens when you need to restart your J2EE Server. And there's no GUI layer ( JSP for presentation ).
Truth is in large server-side apps, I'd expect J2EE with JSP to kick the crap out of PHP, PERL and others.
NEWSFLASH: Java not solution for all code projects
on
Preview of Java 1.5
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Java is not the fix for all code projects. No language is.
I don't like the idea of C# but at least MS handed it over to ECMA.
Microsoft has handed C# to the ECMA, not.NET.
The language is insignificant compared the the framework, that is the large set of APIs, libraries, documenation, and endorsements that come with the language.
C# being offered to the ECMA is a marketing ploy.
Look at ECMAScript. It's a standard isn't it? Now how come we still have to be careful which browser we're in when we write JavaScript/JScript for the web?
It does not matter what ECMA says. Microsoft will always have the de-facto standard on C#, because they produce the environment Visual Studio.NET used by most professionals, they distribute the most runtimes/CLR, they produce the documenation, they have the marketing muscle ( $40B in the bank ).
The fact that Microsoft controls the Win32 APIs doesn't matter to me when programming in C++--I just write my code in Gtk+ or wxWindows. Likewise, the fact that Microsoft controls the.NET APIs doesn't matter to me when programming in C#--I can just use Gtk#.
I think you're argument is a little naive.
Gtk+, wxWindows, would only be a small subset of the.NET libraries or JAVA core libraries. There is a very large amount of APIs in those frameworks, from Messaging APIs, to binary component standards, object serialization, goes on and on and on. It's also very hard to get an entire team of developers on the same page concerning all these issues, so having them all in a single framework is very cost effect. Cuts training costs, etc. Think of what it would take to cover the ground needed to reimplement.NET. This is not a trivial task.
Furthermore, you don't need Sun-style central control over everything in order to get good cross-platform toolkits, as toolkits like Qt, FLTK, and wxWindows show. C# will have good cross platform support, either by successfully cloning.NET, or by binding to an existing cross-platform toolkit, or by creating a new cross-platform toolkit just for C#.
Yes we do need Sun's control. Because this was the only thing that prevented Microsoft from trashing Java last time they tried, and Sun has effectively handed much of it's control to the Java community process. Browse that site a bit if you would like to know what true community development/standardization is ( ie. compared to the patent/ip riddled shared source nonsense ).
You see, the fact that C# doesn't come with philosophical baggage like WORA and "100% purity" is an advantage as far as I'm concerned. What WORA and "100% purity" has brought us is lousy implementations of Java on Linux, and APIs that don't even let me access environment variables.
That's your biggest gripe with Java:)
"100% Java" means that "this product wasn't written my a company hostile to the java effort, eg. microsoft, who has included apis that are specific to their platform instead of using core apis which work on all platforms"
What I mean is the following: If you create for example an ArrayList of ints, the most efficient way to store these ints internally would obviously be an int[] and not an Object[]. But even though java uses templates, it still stores primitive types such as int in an Object[], so there is a huge temporary object creation overhead. Whenever you store an int in your IntArrayList, a new Integer object is created on the heap and an old Integer object has to be garbage collected. In.NET you just store a 32bit value in an array, which is a single operation on most processors.
This is not a good comparison. You are faulting Java for your bad decision in choosing a collection class.
'ArrayList' is a list of 'Class Object' objects. In.NET you probably have an array of 'Class Object' objects as well, ie. An array of the lowest common denominator object in the language libraries. Previous Microsoft developed libraries have the same thing, eg. MFC has 'Class CObjectArray'.
This is not a language specific issue, this is how object orient collection classes are usually done, as far as I've seen. There is good reason. You can iterate through the resulting collection assuming each item has the member functions of your base object class. And that's a very useful assumption.
There is nothing stopping you in Java or.NET to write a list class for type int. Not because it's not found in java.util or where does it mean that it can't be done. In fact this is so trivial, I can't figure a reason why it would be included in the core Java libraries.
Forbes discussed the problem of affordable mobile phone service in Africa where incomes are similar.
The Forbes article is about beaming media to isolated villages. And it's only one person's attempt.
Do we know anything about the guys business model? How did the poster immediately conclude income was the problem when we know nothing else of the scenario.
Satellite data service companies are failing here in the US. Is it because people can't afford it?
How does a country where the per capita annual income is $390-$420 (depending on whose number you use) expect people other than the elite to afford mobile phone service, even if the handsets and service charges are heavily subsidized?
Sigh, we've gone over this so many times...
Micro-payments for hardware. Community equipment. Phones from cheaper sources.
The poor don't have to have the latest nokias. Basic, knockoff cell phones are dirt cheap. Plus families can have one phone for the entire family unit. That's the cost of one knock-off cell phone shared between , lets say, 5 or so adults. And that phone would be expected to last a while.
Cell service would also be a lot cheaper. The newtork is subsidized. Labour, a large part of the phone company's expense, and hence their bill is priced at a rate their economy can bear, I'm assuming most of the labour will be done by nationals.
I like TV when I'm frustrated; it can reset my mind when I'm spinning on some issue. I like TV when I'm ill; it takes my mind off the suffering. I like TV when I have 30 minutes to kill and there happens to be an episode of The Simpsons on.
I agree with that sentiment. TV is a lot like a mild drug in the sense that it's a habit with small psychological payoffs.
Enjoy the occason round of drinks, but know why you drink. There's an old saying "drink because you're happy not because you're sad".
In other words, the problem is a lot of people haven't figured out "why" they spend so much time watching television. And often they really want to be doing something else, but don't feel motivated enough to do it, or fine what it is.
Pick your lifestyle and enjoy it, but certainly don't flaunt it. There are no angels. Claiming the high ground makes one look niave.
I think "progressive" is a more accurate description, that is compared to "naive".
Nobody's perfect, but that's no excuse not to try.
I think the original poster of this thread, in describing his life without television, is on to something that few people ever stop to think about. True he may possibly be failing badly on other things but that doesn't void his right to make, what I think are, very insightful comments.
Don't use NIS, unless you have absolutely no other option.
Other options like LDAPS and Kerberos offer at least some form of security.
ypcat, then brute force attack on the resulting passwd file is as old as dirt, and sadly still works. I was a bit dissappointed when I saw NIS as a required service on the Redhat cert syllabus.
This may sound harsh, but I don't think there is much excuse for run NIS in this day and age. Anyone who does this in an environment where security is a concerns deserves what they get.
Surely there are adacemic researchers out there probing the frontier of human-computer interaction that could use Linux as the basis for their work?
There is innovation in open source, but funding and leadership are issues with innovative open source projects.
I've been seeing more and more researchers working with commercial products/platforms due to funding issues, at least at the university that I'm at. Here alone microsoft provides millions to fund research.
It's not about profit really, but about survival. If you're a research professor and you're not bringing in funding, you get fired, or at least put to use by teaching those annoying freshman courses that no one else want's to teach.
The open source projects that I've seen have mostly been funded by the government. NSF grants, etc. But those are usually smaller and heavilly contested.
It's my opinion that Open source innovators have a huge funding problem.
Leadership also plays a factor. Innovative ideas often come with huge risks. A design built by democratic consensus will assume the risk of its most risk adverse members. The conservatives slow down the pace of innovation, but also stabilize the project.
This gives open source the stability and reliability it is well known for, but holds back innovation.
Initially I thought that it makes sence that given an infiniately large universe, there has to be a planet like Earth, but this is not true. The example given to me was the set of odd numbers. This set is infinite, but no matter how hard you look in that set you'll never find the number 2.
I'm not a math wiz, but I think your two examples mixes apples and oranges.
Think of Set theory. You have a 'universe', and I don't mean the universe in your example, but the 'universe' as in the set of all possible values that can exist. Your number example *by definition* excluded the number '2' from the universe, which was the set of odd numbers. The probability of an event not in the universe occuring is always 0.
On the other hand, Earth is a planet, therefore we know that it is in the universal set of planets.
Well, a professional database like Oracle manages its own cache, but MySQL really only relies only on the OS-level cache.
That is plain not true. MySQL does have it's own query caching. Even the most entry level databases have that.
The problem with that approach is that the database knows a lot more about what you're doing, so it can make much smarter decisions about what to cache, what to age out, what to prefetch, etc.
You're right. Accept MySQL does have query caching.
Further, if he is thinking in terms of a few Gb of data, then he is a little out of touch with modern database usage.
I like to call this number "software snobbery". Many people compare software applications feature for feature, paying no attention to what their requirements are. The fact is, a very large percent of the database market not need more than a single GB database for their current task. Why have a bunch of databases around our organization that are all a few megabytes large. For the large databases ( ERP ) we use Oracle. The fact is our MySQL deploys outnumber the Oracle deployments, and over time as MySQL and Postressql get better I'm expecting that MySQL will creep into Oracle space as well.
Slashdot Mirror
They do http://microsoft.com/BusinessSolutions/
Microsoft just got in the CRM market recently, which had PeopleSoft really pissed. I believed they made a statement concerning pushing other platforms or something.
To be honest, I have to say, I'm with Microsoft on this one. CRM/ERP companies have been charging whatever they feel like for software and training for a while now. Companies like Microsoft and Salesforce are now commoditizing that market, and maybe we will start getting CRMs with price under $300/user soon.
...But in doing so Oracle manages to dominate the global multi-billion dollar CRM/ERP/Business Services market and increases in size, unseating the German company SAP and brings in millions to its American shareholders and creating new American jobs.
We should not protect 'weaker' players in this competitive market. Doing so benefits neither them or the consumer. If PeopleSoft can not fend of Oracle, it would be beneficial for their stockholders to take the money.
Here's something to think about, the Oracle offer may be a cheap move by Oracle, it may also be a symptom of PeopleSoft's vulnerability.
Oracle is cut from the same cloth as Sun, Siebel, and Cisco. Brutal, cut-throat, survival of the fittest. Increasingly, with the influx of H-1B's and "free" trade, American companies are becoming the ruthless of ogres of the early part of the 20th century....
Why does it always have to be "us versus them"?
How does one take a story about Oracle's CEO pushing to increase his company's market share and make it a war cry against "foreigners" and the assult on American values?
Truth is capitalism, is based on competition. And America was built on capitalism, in large part.
Globally, the US is one of the more agressive trading partners. Vigorously defending its National interest ( eg. Steel ) while pushing for open trade, trade with smaller countries that couldn't possibly compete due to economies of scale. But that's fine because business is not pretty.
If Oracle treats it's salesforce badly, over the long run, with competition, they will lose their good sales people and faulter.
MAPI is used both on the server side to access exchange, etc. and also as a means to provide the ASP app messaging services. Web applications using ASP are going to be built around MAPI and it *may* be a task to convert it something else. MAPI was just an example. These ASP apps are going to use ADSI, and other MS hooks. There are lots of them.
Mono isn't the first to take a swipe at porting MS development platform over to UNIX. And the others didn't do much either because of MS "integration" with the OS, but hey, maybe Mono will be different. But between microsoft's moving api's, and a skeptical market, it won't be easy I'm saying.
Yes I have. Have you? If so, what did you think of it?
I see a lot of handing waving on this page http://go-mono.com/class-library.html
Is it just me or thing's like
Class Library and Win32 dependencies. There are a few spots where the Win32 foundation is exposed to the class library (for example, the HDC and HWND properties in the GDI+). Casual inspection suggests that these can be safely mapped to Gdk's GC and GdkWindow pointers without breaking anything.
The only drawback is that support for PInvoke of Win32 code won't be available. An alternate solution would be to use portions of Wine, or even to use Wine as our toolkit.
...make you wonder wether this is suppose to be a commercially viable product?
I'm not trying to hate. But frankly, mono seems like a huge hack.
Yeah, working if you don't count the windows specific APIs like MAPI, etc.
What I'm saying is that I doubt that users are going to be able to quickly migrate their applications between MONO.NET and ASP.NET like you can between Websphere and JBoss for instance.
What about microsoft's past makes you think they'll let that happen?
.NET and JAVA aren't just windowing/widget libraries. GTK/Glib are nice but don't provide a fraction of what those frameworks provide. Are GConf, Camel, and the other supporting GNOME technologies ready to take on .NET and Java?
Miguel et. al. will have to understand that if they provide the C# language, that's a nice start. But they need to produce all the .NET libraries that come with the language to be doing anything useful.
Pick up a book on J2EE or ASP.NET, and look at the services/APIs/technologies they provide. These are full environment complete with component models, eg. Enterprise Java Beans. Messaging API, eg. JMS. HTML presentation provided by JSP. JMX for managing components. And a solid set of core libraries that the typical developer would vouch for, ie. assume is ok to "sell" to management. In other words they have a huge marketing problem ahead of them as well.
What happens after they produce a working C# compiler? Is there suppose to be a mass migration to GTK#? Ximian must have a hell of a marketing plan up their sleeve.
Neither Ximian or Gnome team have been able to produce solid APIs at a reason speed to the market in the past. I'm not saying this to be mean, but that's my honest opinion. Really, I wish them well though.
I'd love to see Ximian compete with Sun and Microsoft in that arena. But coming out with a compiler and nothing much in the area of support libraries is a sad attempt.
Developers are using C# and JAVA because of the vendor supplied libraries and accountibility. If we ( open source ) has to compete we must provide those features before any technical features.
http://www.ageofconsent.com/
So before you go clubbing in a strange town or country, for your own sake, consult this website.
It can save your ass...
literally.
Seems to me this is very similar to the nuclear situation with north korea. At the same time the pentagon is pressing for new research in nuclear weopons they're pressing Iran and North Korea to cease they efforts.
Um..., that could happen to any mail server.
An exim exploit could come out and only the untrained admins are in.
I use sendmail in a pretty complex setup. ISP-type virtual domain setup, LDAP datastore, and I have about 2, yes 2 exploits for the last year or so for which I was vulnerable.
PS. Configuring sendmail takes some reading, but upgrading sendmail is is simple as running the build script, doing a Build install, and then restart. The hard part was coming up with a decent sendmail.mc and Site.config.m4, both of which you would have had already. So your story sounds a little fishy to me.
Probably the most insightful think said in this thread, including the original +5 parent. Too bad no one pays attention to ACs :)
Anyway you're partly wrong, there is a free implementation of DCE RPC at http://sourceforge.net/projects/freedce . I don't know how complete it is, but I think it's useable.
Walmart accounts for almost 2.5% of the US GDP.
I don't see any performance issues in my J2EE apps.
Java is slow largely becuase of JVM startup and GUI framework. But J2EE Apps don't have to worry about either of these. The J2EE Server's JVM is started only on Application startup, which only happens when you need to restart your J2EE Server. And there's no GUI layer ( JSP for presentation ).
Truth is in large server-side apps, I'd expect J2EE with JSP to kick the crap out of PHP, PERL and others.
I don't like the idea of C# but at least MS handed it over to ECMA.
Microsoft has handed C# to the ECMA, not .NET.
The language is insignificant compared the the framework, that is the large set of APIs, libraries, documenation, and endorsements that come with the language.
C# being offered to the ECMA is a marketing ploy.
Look at ECMAScript. It's a standard isn't it? Now how come we still have to be careful which browser we're in when we write JavaScript/JScript for the web?
It does not matter what ECMA says. Microsoft will always have the de-facto standard on C#, because they produce the environment Visual Studio .NET used by most professionals, they distribute the most runtimes/CLR, they produce the documenation, they have the marketing muscle ( $40B in the bank ).
Don't fall for this cheap trick.
I think you're argument is a little naive.
Gtk+, wxWindows, would only be a small subset of the .NET libraries or JAVA core libraries. There is a very large amount of APIs in those frameworks, from Messaging APIs, to binary component standards, object serialization, goes on and on and on. It's also very hard to get an entire team of developers on the same page concerning all these issues, so having them all in a single framework is very cost effect. Cuts training costs, etc. Think of what it would take to cover the ground needed to reimplement .NET. This is not a trivial task.
Furthermore, you don't need Sun-style central control over everything in order to get good cross-platform toolkits, as toolkits like Qt, FLTK, and wxWindows show. C# will have good cross platform support, either by successfully cloning .NET, or by binding to an existing cross-platform toolkit, or by creating a new cross-platform toolkit just for C#.
Yes we do need Sun's control. Because this was the only thing that prevented Microsoft from trashing Java last time they tried, and Sun has effectively handed much of it's control to the Java community process. Browse that site a bit if you would like to know what true community development/standardization is ( ie. compared to the patent/ip riddled shared source nonsense ).
You see, the fact that C# doesn't come with philosophical baggage like WORA and "100% purity" is an advantage as far as I'm concerned. What WORA and "100% purity" has brought us is lousy implementations of Java on Linux, and APIs that don't even let me access environment variables.
That's your biggest gripe with Java :)
"100% Java" means that "this product wasn't written my a company hostile to the java effort, eg. microsoft, who has included apis that are specific to their platform instead of using core apis which work on all platforms"
It is sad that this is needed, but it is.
This is not a good comparison. You are faulting Java for your bad decision in choosing a collection class.
'ArrayList' is a list of 'Class Object' objects. In .NET you probably have an array of 'Class Object' objects as well, ie. An array of the lowest common denominator object in the language libraries. Previous Microsoft developed libraries have the same thing, eg. MFC has 'Class CObjectArray'.
This is not a language specific issue, this is how object orient collection classes are usually done, as far as I've seen. There is good reason. You can iterate through the resulting collection assuming each item has the member functions of your base object class. And that's a very useful assumption.
There is nothing stopping you in Java or .NET to write a list class for type int. Not because it's not found in java.util or where does it mean that it can't be done. In fact this is so trivial, I can't figure a reason why it would be included in the core Java libraries.
The Forbes article is about beaming media to isolated villages. And it's only one person's attempt.
Do we know anything about the guys business model? How did the poster immediately conclude income was the problem when we know nothing else of the scenario.
Satellite data service companies are failing here in the US. Is it because people can't afford it?
How does a country where the per capita annual income is $390-$420 (depending on whose number you use) expect people other than the elite to afford mobile phone service, even if the handsets and service charges are heavily subsidized?
Sigh, we've gone over this so many times...
Micro-payments for hardware. Community equipment. Phones from cheaper sources.
The poor don't have to have the latest nokias. Basic, knockoff cell phones are dirt cheap. Plus families can have one phone for the entire family unit. That's the cost of one knock-off cell phone shared between , lets say, 5 or so adults. And that phone would be expected to last a while.
Cell service would also be a lot cheaper. The newtork is subsidized. Labour, a large part of the phone company's expense, and hence their bill is priced at a rate their economy can bear, I'm assuming most of the labour will be done by nationals.
And my wallet can't take a graphics package with a $1000 price tag seriously. In fact it's cracking up, laughing at the thought.
Really people, coders are busting their ass working on this.
I agree with that sentiment. TV is a lot like a mild drug in the sense that it's a habit with small psychological payoffs.
Enjoy the occason round of drinks, but know why you drink. There's an old saying "drink because you're happy not because you're sad".
In other words, the problem is a lot of people haven't figured out "why" they spend so much time watching television. And often they really want to be doing something else, but don't feel motivated enough to do it, or fine what it is.
I think "progressive" is a more accurate description, that is compared to "naive".
Nobody's perfect, but that's no excuse not to try.
I think the original poster of this thread, in describing his life without television, is on to something that few people ever stop to think about. True he may possibly be failing badly on other things but that doesn't void his right to make, what I think are, very insightful comments.
Other options like LDAPS and Kerberos offer at least some form of security.
ypcat, then brute force attack on the resulting passwd file is as old as dirt, and sadly still works. I was a bit dissappointed when I saw NIS as a required service on the Redhat cert syllabus.
This may sound harsh, but I don't think there is much excuse for run NIS in this day and age. Anyone who does this in an environment where security is a concerns deserves what they get.
There is innovation in open source, but funding and leadership are issues with innovative open source projects.
I've been seeing more and more researchers working with commercial products/platforms due to funding issues, at least at the university that I'm at. Here alone microsoft provides millions to fund research.
It's not about profit really, but about survival. If you're a research professor and you're not bringing in funding, you get fired, or at least put to use by teaching those annoying freshman courses that no one else want's to teach.
The open source projects that I've seen have mostly been funded by the government. NSF grants, etc. But those are usually smaller and heavilly contested.
It's my opinion that Open source innovators have a huge funding problem.
Leadership also plays a factor. Innovative ideas often come with huge risks. A design built by democratic consensus will assume the risk of its most risk adverse members. The conservatives slow down the pace of innovation, but also stabilize the project.
This gives open source the stability and reliability it is well known for, but holds back innovation.
Then you must live under a rock.
(Lighten up).
Initially I thought that it makes sence that given an infiniately large universe, there has to be a planet like Earth, but this is not true. The example given to me was the set of odd numbers. This set is infinite, but no matter how hard you look in that set you'll never find the number 2.
I'm not a math wiz, but I think your two examples mixes apples and oranges.
Think of Set theory. You have a 'universe', and I don't mean the universe in your example, but the 'universe' as in the set of all possible values that can exist. Your number example *by definition* excluded the number '2' from the universe, which was the set of odd numbers. The probability of an event not in the universe occuring is always 0.
On the other hand, Earth is a planet, therefore we know that it is in the universal set of planets.
That is plain not true. MySQL does have it's own query caching. Even the most entry level databases have that.
The problem with that approach is that the database knows a lot more about what you're doing, so it can make much smarter decisions about what to cache, what to age out, what to prefetch, etc.
You're right. Accept MySQL does have query caching.
Further, if he is thinking in terms of a few Gb of data, then he is a little out of touch with modern database usage.
I like to call this number "software snobbery". Many people compare software applications feature for feature, paying no attention to what their requirements are. The fact is, a very large percent of the database market not need more than a single GB database for their current task. Why have a bunch of databases around our organization that are all a few megabytes large. For the large databases ( ERP ) we use Oracle. The fact is our MySQL deploys outnumber the Oracle deployments, and over time as MySQL and Postressql get better I'm expecting that MySQL will creep into Oracle space as well.