In other words, the "web 2.0 people" wants a database that can be altered in any conceivable way that is convenient to the application programmer as he/she is yet unsure about the needed data model; of course, this can be only work if nothing else is using or will use that database (typically, pet projects.)
And yes, the ALTER TABLE commands are not very flexible; yet are very understandable for all the IT actors, and reasonably unobtrusive for the production SQL-applications.
That kind of confusing summaries are too frequent that sometimes I go to RTFA!
Seriously, the summaries should be subject to moderation too (I don't know if the firehose thing lets do that.)
Re:Android just won't catch up with iPhone
on
Unlocking Android
·
· Score: 1
To be fair, I find Eclipse acceptably fast for loading and doing standard Java apps. The problem is the Android plugins and the emulator... that mix is really slow even for current machines.
I tend to appreciate the books that say more in less space. The best Linux resource I've found in the last times is "Ubuntu Linux Toolbox: 1000+ Commands for Ubuntu and Debian Power Users" http://www.amazon.com/Ubuntu-Linux-Toolbox-Commands-Debian/dp/0470082933/ref=cm_cr-mr-title : Just 360 pages, command line oriented, almost nothing of those GUI admin tools that get reinvented every 6 months.
Well, people rants because of the slow startup time, and sorry, that will not improve significantly by adding more RAM (maybe with Solid State disks and a bit of quantum computing, but of course didn't test:)
Sadly, for people grown with cc/gcc, the startup time feels really unacceptable (it yet annoys me after using Eclipse and Netbeans for several years.) The subconscious ideas or conclusions are 1) working with the IDE will be slow (which is not true, if you have a decent quantity of RAM) and 2) the resulting application will be bloated (as of course happens with the Microsoft tools, but not for C/C++, and even Java if you're careful.)
Please, are you trolling?..... do you think that standard gamers read and understand the video card specs in the box and those requirements??? and you believe they also understand the specs (i.e. Operating system) of their own hardware?
We're discussing about mainstream usage. People just buy a current system to play current games. Period.
> I asked in what scenario it would be a superior option (to the well-informed application architect, of course).
Of course because MySQL's root password comes empty so the Agile developers avoid losing their costly time waiting for the local database nerd configuring the permissions and bothering the team with more passwords to remember....
> The company I worked for used to sell 200,000 computers with linux per year, two or three years ago.
Are you in China?
Seriously, it would be interesting if you elaborate more about your stats... what kind of computers? are you resellers from a top brand? do you sell via internet?
> Lots of people are angry and looking to jump ship, at a time when the competition is beating down the door.
That's true. Now, for people jumping the ship, what's needed is not another improved kernel scheduler or that sort of thing. What's needed are commercial software developers porting and seelling top applications for Ubuntu (no, Linux in all distros is too expensive to support for typical software shops, sorry.)...games like GTA, applications like autocad or photoshop... things that lets standard people do their work or use for entertainment.
Actually, how many people did buy XP or Vista as a software box?
Now, Vista is by no way a failure (albeit technically can be just trash) because it actually got shipped inside millions of brand new computers.
And in top of that, Microsoft is in a position of getting more revenue from its "failure": those people with the "ruinous Vista" will buy (again) their "solution" named 7.
So, from the M$ POV, Vista is a total commercial success, and that's what really matters for them, despite all the complains from angry slashdotters.
> I was disappointed in the brevity of the text, and the lack of downloadable materials to use to follow the examples in the book.
Being of 144 pages I think is a good size. Most of the books of > 200 pages are just filled with material that fits better in web references.
CSS is not a complex topic, so a hundred of pages should be more than enough for a good explanation. BTW, I agree with your other complain.
Now, a bit OT, but every time I see a diminishing necessity of using or learning the CSS details, as the authoring products and even web-widget programming libraries are doing a good work. It's a bit like learning the format/encodings of the JPG or GIF files.
Not to disagree with you, but... did you ever see any "standard user" answering "NO" when a popup appears implying that a "YES" is just needed to do the intended work? "What the hell could be that f**k javascript thing? I just want to read the damn document"....
I disagree. For example, the Pentium IV could be overclocked to 8Ghz but that fact was of little practical use, so Intel dumped the architecture at all.
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4 : BEGIN EXCERPT -- Overclockers did not break the 8 GHz barrier until the end of the Pentium 4 line on 3.0-3.6 GHz CPUs, which by then had a dwindling enthusiast user base. END --
Good point. The Oracle issue may become a non issue in the long term.
In that scenario, the only remaining stopper for the Ubuntu Server case will be the corporate support from Canonical as compared with the Red Hat's long experience; not saying that Canonical is bad on that, I just don't have references about.
BTW, other offerings of Red Hat like clustering and vendor JBoss support, don't have yet a good equivalent on Ubuntu.
I'm insisting on Oracle because (at least) in my experience and environment, most medium to big enterprises that adopted some variant of Unix, use it to run Oracle (from the business point of view), and in second place for the rest of networking tools you mention, including Apache.
Believe me or not, some time ago I tried to introduce Ubuntu Server at some companies, and the first question I got was: "Can run Oracle?". You can guess the rest of the conversation.
> Because CentOS/RedHat is the old-school way of doing things, and Ubuntu is for the new generation.
Mmmmmmmmm sounds like Ubuntu is better 'cause it's cool! Can you elaborate more on that? Servers are normally targeted for mission critical operations where is largely irrelevant the "generation" of the people doing the administration.
Note that I appreciate a lot the Canonical efforts, but I'd like to see (and promote) some solid reasons for their products.
> It's been rock-solid since the day I installed it.
This also doesn't mean anything. What kind of application/workload are you running on your rock-solid servers that make you prefer Ubuntu?
> We use Ubuntu servers for the large software repositories available via apt
I agree regarding the big repository, but failed to see why that can be so useful to most Servers (can you elaborate a bit more?.)
On servers I expect support for enterprise applications. As told before, Oracle is -sadly- the top mission critical product running on most Uniexes (AFIK.) I think that's a large blocker for Ubuntu Server adoption (in the enterprise.)
Do you have experience with the Canonical server support? I'm really interested.
Also, I expect other "enterprise-type" features like clustering as provided by Red Hat. Again, do you have some Ubuntu experiences to share on that?
At least in my country and LATAM in general, I think the Server Edition only could thrive if Oracle Server can be certified at some time. As each day pass on, this looks more difficult.
In general, I fail to understand the Canonical offering of Ubuntu Server compared to CentOS/RedHat Servers (or even Suse).
We didn't need fast computers for everyday use and then we started using heavy weight javascript libraries that made the browser to crawl...
Ok, from other side... provided we wouldn't get those fast and cheap computing power, I'm pretty sure that good programmers could find some better algorithms and solutions to most of the problems the parent listed. Since throwing cpu is cheaper that good/optimizing programming, the brute-force solutions will prevail...
Yes... Oracle is a business, and at the end they will be looking for the best $$ alternative. It's problematic to invest in two competing products... the best option is to kill one of them, or retarget the markets for them. Now, the last alternative is a bit difficult given that both OS are currently targeted to high end enterprise.
Now, what's the best alternative??? I think Linux, because in the long people will like to uniformize and standarize the OS, the same way other low level details were done (like TCP/IP). Just my bet.
> I've never understood the online storage appeal for just about any commercial entity, but for a law firm, that just ain't gonna happen.
I have the theory that lawyers get seduced by the seals stamped on papers -and like gamers, the have a special appeal for the more 3d ones- (obviously, digital firms are not understandable nor artistic, so any kind of digital storage is secondary.) That "seduction" is so strong that they yet carry the idea that more seals = more authentic.
I don't want to start a thread about correlation vs cause-effect, and I agree with your argument; despite that, Facebook is a very silly distraction and is logical to expect a correlation with its users qualifications.
I'd expect a stronger correlation with twitter hardcore users.
There are other ways/games to lose time, but have a correlation in opposite direction because you actually have to use your brain.
Of course, all of these things are subjective, like most of the treats we use to assess people.
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, the "web 2.0 people" wants a database that can be altered in any conceivable way that is convenient to the application programmer as he/she is yet unsure about the needed data model; of course, this can be only work if nothing else is using or will use that database (typically, pet projects.)
And yes, the ALTER TABLE commands are not very flexible; yet are very understandable for all the IT actors, and reasonably unobtrusive for the production SQL-applications.
That kind of confusing summaries are too frequent that sometimes I go to RTFA!
Seriously, the summaries should be subject to moderation too (I don't know if the firehose thing lets do that.)
To be fair, I find Eclipse acceptably fast for loading and doing standard Java apps. The problem is the Android plugins and the emulator... that mix is really slow even for current machines.
I tend to appreciate the books that say more in less space. The best Linux resource I've found in the last times is "Ubuntu Linux Toolbox: 1000+ Commands for Ubuntu and Debian Power Users" http://www.amazon.com/Ubuntu-Linux-Toolbox-Commands-Debian/dp/0470082933/ref=cm_cr-mr-title : Just 360 pages, command line oriented, almost nothing of those GUI admin tools that get reinvented every 6 months.
Well, people rants because of the slow startup time, and sorry, that will not improve significantly by adding more RAM (maybe with Solid State disks and a bit of quantum computing, but of course didn't test:)
Sadly, for people grown with cc/gcc, the startup time feels really unacceptable (it yet annoys me after using Eclipse and Netbeans for several years.) The subconscious ideas or conclusions are 1) working with the IDE will be slow (which is not true, if you have a decent quantity of RAM) and 2) the resulting application will be bloated (as of course happens with the Microsoft tools, but not for C/C++, and even Java if you're careful.)
Please, are you trolling?..... do you think that standard gamers read and understand the video card specs in the box and those requirements??? and you believe they also understand the specs (i.e. Operating system) of their own hardware?
We're discussing about mainstream usage. People just buy a current system to play current games. Period.
What will do Canonical Ltd. support with an angry user that can't install Call of Duty XXX or Autocad on Ubuntu???
> I asked in what scenario it would be a superior option (to the well-informed application architect, of course).
Of course because MySQL's root password comes empty so the Agile developers avoid losing their costly time waiting for the local database nerd configuring the permissions and bothering the team with more passwords to remember....
> The company I worked for used to sell 200,000 computers with linux per year, two or three years ago.
Are you in China?
Seriously, it would be interesting if you elaborate more about your stats... what kind of computers? are you resellers from a top brand? do you sell via internet?
Thanks!
> Lots of people are angry and looking to jump ship, at a time when the competition is beating down the door.
That's true. Now, for people jumping the ship, what's needed is not another improved kernel scheduler or that sort of thing. What's needed are commercial software developers porting and seelling top applications for Ubuntu (no, Linux in all distros is too expensive to support for typical software shops, sorry.) ...games like GTA, applications like autocad or photoshop... things that lets standard people do their work or use for entertainment.
My case too. I bought my Vostro 1500 with Vista last year, and after two months I formated the hard disk w/Ubuntu (I'm using it right now!)
But *all* my friends are using some app/game that only is available in Win, and nobody is have been offering them an alternative.
Actually, how many people did buy XP or Vista as a software box?
Now, Vista is by no way a failure (albeit technically can be just trash) because it actually got shipped inside millions of brand new computers.
And in top of that, Microsoft is in a position of getting more revenue from its "failure": those people with the "ruinous Vista" will buy (again) their "solution" named 7.
So, from the M$ POV, Vista is a total commercial success, and that's what really matters for them, despite all the complains from angry slashdotters.
> I was disappointed in the brevity of the text, and the lack of downloadable materials to use to follow the examples in the book.
Being of 144 pages I think is a good size. Most of the books of > 200 pages are just filled with material that fits better in web references.
CSS is not a complex topic, so a hundred of pages should be more than enough for a good explanation. BTW, I agree with your other complain.
Now, a bit OT, but every time I see a diminishing necessity of using or learning the CSS details, as the authoring products and even web-widget programming libraries are doing a good work. It's a bit like learning the format/encodings of the JPG or GIF files.
> and if you breeze by with a "yes"
Not to disagree with you, but ... did you ever see any "standard user" answering "NO" when a popup appears implying that a "YES" is just needed to do the intended work? "What the hell could be that f**k javascript thing? I just want to read the damn document"....
I disagree. For example, the Pentium IV could be overclocked to 8Ghz but that fact was of little practical use, so Intel dumped the architecture at all.
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4 :
BEGIN EXCERPT --
Overclockers did not break the 8 GHz barrier until the end of the Pentium 4 line on 3.0-3.6 GHz CPUs, which by then had a dwindling enthusiast user base.
END --
Honestly, GP was insightful.
Good point. The Oracle issue may become a non issue in the long term.
In that scenario, the only remaining stopper for the Ubuntu Server case will be the corporate support from Canonical as compared with the Red Hat's long experience; not saying that Canonical is bad on that, I just don't have references about.
BTW, other offerings of Red Hat like clustering and vendor JBoss support, don't have yet a good equivalent on Ubuntu.
> Apache is clearly the #1 use.
Yes, you're right on that.
I'm insisting on Oracle because (at least) in my experience and environment, most medium to big enterprises that adopted some variant of Unix, use it to run Oracle (from the business point of view), and in second place for the rest of networking tools you mention, including Apache.
Believe me or not, some time ago I tried to introduce Ubuntu Server at some companies, and the first question I got was: "Can run Oracle?". You can guess the rest of the conversation.
> Because CentOS/RedHat is the old-school way of doing things, and Ubuntu is for the new generation.
Mmmmmmmmm sounds like Ubuntu is better 'cause it's cool! Can you elaborate more on that? Servers are normally targeted for mission critical operations where is largely irrelevant the "generation" of the people doing the administration.
Note that I appreciate a lot the Canonical efforts, but I'd like to see (and promote) some solid reasons for their products.
> It's been rock-solid since the day I installed it.
This also doesn't mean anything. What kind of application/workload are you running on your rock-solid servers that make you prefer Ubuntu?
regards,
> We use Ubuntu servers for the large software repositories available via apt
I agree regarding the big repository, but failed to see why that can be so useful to most Servers (can you elaborate a bit more?.)
On servers I expect support for enterprise applications. As told before, Oracle is -sadly- the top mission critical product running on most Uniexes (AFIK.) I think that's a large blocker for Ubuntu Server adoption (in the enterprise.)
Do you have experience with the Canonical server support? I'm really interested.
Also, I expect other "enterprise-type" features like clustering as provided by Red Hat. Again, do you have some Ubuntu experiences to share on that?
Kind regards
At least in my country and LATAM in general, I think the Server Edition only could thrive if Oracle Server can be certified at some time. As each day pass on, this looks more difficult.
In general, I fail to understand the Canonical offering of Ubuntu Server compared to CentOS/RedHat Servers (or even Suse).
We didn't need fast computers for everyday use and then we started using heavy weight javascript libraries that made the browser to crawl...
Ok, from other side... provided we wouldn't get those fast and cheap computing power, I'm pretty sure that good programmers could find some better algorithms and solutions to most of the problems the parent listed. Since throwing cpu is cheaper that good/optimizing programming, the brute-force solutions will prevail...
Yes... Oracle is a business, and at the end they will be looking for the best $$ alternative. It's problematic to invest in two competing products... the best option is to kill one of them, or retarget the markets for them. Now, the last alternative is a bit difficult given that both OS are currently targeted to high end enterprise.
Now, what's the best alternative??? I think Linux, because in the long people will like to uniformize and standarize the OS, the same way other low level details were done (like TCP/IP). Just my bet.
Yeah... the past discussed article about languages and religions ( http://www.aegisub.net/2008/12/if-programming-languages-were-religions.html ) was more comprehensive and insightful.
> I've never understood the online storage appeal for just about any commercial entity, but for a law firm, that just ain't gonna happen.
I have the theory that lawyers get seduced by the seals stamped on papers -and like gamers, the have a special appeal for the more 3d ones- (obviously, digital firms are not understandable nor artistic, so any kind of digital storage is secondary.) That "seduction" is so strong that they yet carry the idea that more seals = more authentic.
I don't want to start a thread about correlation vs cause-effect, and I agree with your argument; despite that, Facebook is a very silly distraction and is logical to expect a correlation with its users qualifications.
I'd expect a stronger correlation with twitter hardcore users.
There are other ways/games to lose time, but have a correlation in opposite direction because you actually have to use your brain.
Of course, all of these things are subjective, like most of the treats we use to assess people.