VMWare is more than just the basic virtualization function.
It's an ecosystem of management tools and fault tolerance solutions. I was happy to pay for a full, supported, mature set of tools that runs on a wide range of hardware to do this with without having to be all-one-OS (ala Virtuozzo) or a "not quite there yet" Linux only solution like Xen. We dev and test and QA on a range of OS's and environments and so far VMWare has been the only solution to meet all of our needs.
If you think VMware's lifeline and product strategy is dangling from a speed comparison using hardware virtualization and may be in danger of being eclipsed by Xen, you're missing the point of why VMWare is and continues to be so successful.
I don't know where you're getting your Dell pricing. I just did a survey of the Mac pricing.
I will get 2 similiarly configured Dell Dual Core workstations with Office and Adobe Acrobat for the price of 1 Mac Pro just using my small business premier pricing.
Caveat: I don't need an Nvidia GeForce 7300 or a Superdrive for every employee. A DVDROM and a midrange card (6600) would do just fine.
Caveat: They won't run Mac OS X. Not a huge loss for me.
Not to say I don't think the new Apples are neat. They are. They're still not competitively priced, and personally I'm going to wait a bit for the price to drop and for Apple to work any kinks out before I even remotely consider purchasing one.
This is standard boilerplate required for press releases by public companies. Look at any press release from a public company like SCO and you will see very similar variations on this format at the bottom of their release with verbiage tailored to their particular industry and message.
And I only got that instead of a 40MB because the salesman in the electronics section took pity on me and told me that if I waited a week the new 60MB model would be in.
Same here - first computer at our house was an Apple ][+ in 1982 or 1983.
I was hooked - my first PC was the Packard Bell 286-12Mhz with a 60GB hard disk and 1MB of RAM. I picked it up at FedCo for $1,850.00. The salesman absentmindedly asked me cash or charge and I paid for it in cash (lawnmowing money). It was earlier than 1988 though, I think 1985...
And, I choose to criticize knowing full well. I actually did go visit the website.
It's alpha quality by the admission of the website in the link listed. One of many. Yawn.
Exchange is the holy grail windmill that opensource teams tilt at, but never knock over. Proof of concepts aren't alternatives.
It IS the "talent"'s decision to release code, and the "talent" gets judged by those of us ("consumers") who are intended to use the project. Certainly an Exchange replacement with it's own URL is intended to be used by IT people? Or do you think your target is home users? Do you think that just because it's OSS'd that it can't stink?
Releasing code into the public space is either ego masturbation or intent for it to be adopted. If the link gets posted on slashdot then I'm sorry I didn't meet your expectation of fawning adoration for your "generous contribution of proof of concepts that work" when I splashed you with a cold bucket of consumer reality.
Those of us pushing OSS against Windows/Exchange/IIS in the Enterprise and SMB space DON'T need yet another proof of concept, or another failed project. We need well thought out, well coded working systems. I have a great proof of concept that my management has bought into called Exchange 2003. I hate it, but you guys (the aforementioned "talent") can't seem to match it, let alone beat it.
If a developer can't handle having their code and projects judged by their target audience then maybe they should keep it to themselves after all.
Certainly I judge what corporations put out, just because you're doing it for ego/karma instead of dollars doesn't exempt you from evaluation.
Lastly, you are correct the inability of Linux to penetrate the desktop has nothing to do with you directly. You're only a symptom of the problem that is holding it back.
Nobody owes me anything, nor do I owe you a fawning adoration or even a "pass" if your project doesn't rate it.
And hey, if you manage to climb out of the "alpha proof of concept hole" I'll be the first to apologize.
Join the long list of alpha quality Exchange replacements that will be around Real Soon Now.
(sigh)
Sorry I'm one of the people that project competition in the OSS space is WAY overblown and just spreads the talent thin. The lack of an open source Exchange alternative and the lack of Linux penetration on the desktop are direct results of this.
Personally, I'm not interested in Linux on the desktop surviving. It's never been viable, and there are other Unix based solutions (i.e. OS X) out there. It's a great embedded/server OS. It's just not a desktop OS.
There is zero sign of the Linux community stepping up to challenge the issue, why keep it on life support instead of embracing the superior solution?
I'm getting real close to ordering a Mac Mini myself.
There is a lot of skepticism about the performance and practicality of object-relational mappings, but usually from people who have never used a modern product. They really do work, they are simple and effective. There may be the occasional need to drop down to DB-specific SQL or to call legacy SQL stored procedures, but almost all of your code can be portable, and that is a huge business advantage, as it saves both on current development time and the inevitable future migration costs.
Java is slow. Recreating existing functionality outside of the database is even slower. It doesn't matter how "modern" it is.
Congratulations on making the transition from programmer to pointy haired buzz word compliant salesman:)
And that's a fine argument as long as you don't care about performance.
If on the other hand you have real work to be done, a project that has to be delivered, revenue at stake, and a defined environment then things may not be quite so simple neat and clean.
I buy systems (desktop and server) for a typical small/medium business corporate environment running a mix of Linux and Windows.
I don't need anything unusual (NUMA, 128 bit, 64x CPU). I need single/dual/quad CPU systems with reliable disk and fast network.
Oddly enough the systems they make match my needs (as well as many many many other people's needs).
Dell's reps come out, they replace/repair the broken parts and leave me with a working system with minimal/no phone hassle so I can focus on other things. That's pretty good in my book.
My bosses are happy when broken systems get fixed fast.
The prices are reasonable.
What specific awful omission of do they make that you happen to need that you're so down on them?
It sounds more like you're repeating a meme than giving any sort of real justification.
People love to trash Dell, but I have NEVER had a problem with Dell in 5 years honoring their extended warranty service, and have had them ship a newer replacement model for me twice.
There IS a reason they've had such success and enjoyed a high customer satisfaction rating.
...AND, the dragon in Dragonslayer (1981) was 50x better than the dragon in Dragonheart (1996). The Dragonslayer monster was really scary for the time (I was 12) whereas Dragonheart was kind of cartoonish.
Normally I'm not inclined to put down newer special effects technology, but Dragonheart just wasn't very good compared to Jurassic Park (1993) or even (later) Komodo (2003).
I think a better "dragon" comparison would be 2002's "Reign of Fire".
Slashdot Mirror
VMWare is more than just the basic virtualization function.
It's an ecosystem of management tools and fault tolerance solutions. I was happy to pay for a full, supported, mature set of tools that runs on a wide range of hardware to do this with without having to be all-one-OS (ala Virtuozzo) or a "not quite there yet" Linux only solution like Xen. We dev and test and QA on a range of OS's and environments and so far VMWare has been the only solution to meet all of our needs.
If you think VMware's lifeline and product strategy is dangling from a speed comparison using hardware virtualization and may be in danger of being eclipsed by Xen, you're missing the point of why VMWare is and continues to be so successful.
I don't know where you're getting your Dell pricing. I just did a survey of the Mac pricing.
I will get 2 similiarly configured Dell Dual Core workstations with Office and Adobe Acrobat for the price of 1 Mac Pro just using my small business premier pricing.
Caveat: I don't need an Nvidia GeForce 7300 or a Superdrive for every employee. A DVDROM and a midrange card (6600) would do just fine.
Caveat: They won't run Mac OS X. Not a huge loss for me.
Not to say I don't think the new Apples are neat. They are. They're still not competitively priced, and personally I'm going to wait a bit for the price to drop and for Apple to work any kinks out before I even remotely consider purchasing one.
Absolutely, but nothing too exciting.
This is standard boilerplate required for press releases by public companies. Look at any press release from a public company like SCO and you will see very similar variations on this format at the bottom of their release with verbiage tailored to their particular industry and message.
Fair Enough :)
It wasn't Microsoft that killed SGI, it was Linux.
I think you're describing a summary, not an excerpt.
It's still a derived work of the original material.
Sorry - you are exactly right (sigh)
60MB.
And I only got that instead of a 40MB because the salesman in the electronics section took pity on me and told me that if I waited a week the new 60MB model would be in.
- Dave
ACK!
Same here - first computer at our house was an Apple ][+ in 1982 or 1983.
I was hooked - my first PC was the Packard Bell 286-12Mhz with a 60GB hard disk and 1MB of RAM. I picked it up at FedCo for $1,850.00. The salesman absentmindedly asked me cash or charge and I paid for it in cash (lawnmowing money). It was earlier than 1988 though, I think 1985...
Benito Mussolini makes the trains run on time. :)
I'm not so sure. I love PostgreSQL and it's my DB of choice.
On the flip side the mountain of open source code is covered with poorly written non-standard SQL to MySQL.
It's an uphill battle to undo the damage, and most people aren't clued enough to the benefits to make any effort.
It's not unlike windows. MySQL is pretty, friendly, crashes under load, and isn't really that free but the masses still flock to it.
PostgreSQL is the "Linux" in the equation. Solid, truly free (BSD License), but it doesn't kill itself to be accessible for lazy programmers.
Haveing done an ERP, most ERP systems are already highly customizable.
I highly doubt any serious closed source ERP cannot be modified to support the hypothetical new business process.
And, I choose to criticize knowing full well. I actually did go visit the website.
It's alpha quality by the admission of the website in the link listed. One of many. Yawn.
Exchange is the holy grail windmill that opensource teams tilt at, but never knock over. Proof of concepts aren't alternatives.
It IS the "talent"'s decision to release code, and the "talent" gets judged by those of us ("consumers") who are intended to use the project. Certainly an Exchange replacement with it's own URL is intended to be used by IT people? Or do you think your target is home users? Do you think that just because it's OSS'd that it can't stink?
Releasing code into the public space is either ego masturbation or intent for it to be adopted. If the link gets posted on slashdot then I'm sorry I didn't meet your expectation of fawning adoration for your "generous contribution of proof of concepts that work" when I splashed you with a cold bucket of consumer reality.
Those of us pushing OSS against Windows/Exchange/IIS in the Enterprise and SMB space DON'T need yet another proof of concept, or another failed project. We need well thought out, well coded working systems. I have a great proof of concept that my management has bought into called Exchange 2003. I hate it, but you guys (the aforementioned "talent") can't seem to match it, let alone beat it.
If a developer can't handle having their code and projects judged by their target audience then maybe they should keep it to themselves after all.
Certainly I judge what corporations put out, just because you're doing it for ego/karma instead of dollars doesn't exempt you from evaluation.
Lastly, you are correct the inability of Linux to penetrate the desktop has nothing to do with you directly. You're only a symptom of the problem that is holding it back.
Nobody owes me anything, nor do I owe you a fawning adoration or even a "pass" if your project doesn't rate it.
And hey, if you manage to climb out of the "alpha proof of concept hole" I'll be the first to apologize.
Best regards,
Dave
Join the long list of alpha quality Exchange replacements that will be around Real Soon Now.
(sigh)
Sorry I'm one of the people that project competition in the OSS space is WAY overblown and just spreads the talent thin. The lack of an open source Exchange alternative and the lack of Linux penetration on the desktop are direct results of this.
You may have a better chance to escape the predator behind you.
As opposed to that many digits of PI which is essentially worthless at any scale humans deal with.
Personally, I'm not interested in Linux on the desktop surviving. It's never been viable, and there are other Unix based solutions (i.e. OS X) out there. It's a great embedded/server OS. It's just not a desktop OS.
There is zero sign of the Linux community stepping up to challenge the issue, why keep it on life support instead of embracing the superior solution?
I'm getting real close to ordering a Mac Mini myself.
Maybe we want big set pieces with lots of action, good special effects and scifi plots.
You can denigrate it all you want, but that's what I want.
If I change my mind for some reason I can come over and watch the "Romance" and "Lifetime" channels with you.
I don't have a nubile teenage daughter, just two sons. So this exploit won't affect me.
There is a lot of skepticism about the performance and practicality of object-relational mappings, but usually from people who have never used a modern product. They really do work, they are simple and effective. There may be the occasional need to drop down to DB-specific SQL or to call legacy SQL stored procedures, but almost all of your code can be portable, and that is a huge business advantage, as it saves both on current development time and the inevitable future migration costs.
:)
Java is slow. Recreating existing functionality outside of the database is even slower. It doesn't matter how "modern" it is.
Congratulations on making the transition from programmer to pointy haired buzz word compliant salesman
Your people call it a replicator.
Our people call it a xerox copier.
And that's a fine argument as long as you don't care about performance.
If on the other hand you have real work to be done, a project that has to be delivered, revenue at stake, and a defined environment then things may not be quite so simple neat and clean.
Nice backpedal :)
That's disingenuous
I buy systems (desktop and server) for a typical small/medium business corporate environment running a mix of Linux and Windows.
I don't need anything unusual (NUMA, 128 bit, 64x CPU). I need single/dual/quad CPU systems with reliable disk and fast network.
Oddly enough the systems they make match my needs (as well as many many many other people's needs).
Dell's reps come out, they replace/repair the broken parts and leave me with a working system with minimal/no phone hassle so I can focus on other things. That's pretty good in my book.
My bosses are happy when broken systems get fixed fast.
The prices are reasonable.
What specific awful omission of do they make that you happen to need that you're so down on them?
It sounds more like you're repeating a meme than giving any sort of real justification.
That's fair, although they were done so recently I didn't think it was fair.
People love to trash Dell, but I have NEVER had a problem with Dell in 5 years honoring their extended warranty service, and have had them ship a newer replacement model for me twice.
There IS a reason they've had such success and enjoyed a high customer satisfaction rating.
...AND, the dragon in Dragonslayer (1981) was 50x better than the dragon in Dragonheart (1996). The Dragonslayer monster was really scary for the time (I was 12) whereas Dragonheart was kind of cartoonish.
Normally I'm not inclined to put down newer special effects technology, but Dragonheart just wasn't very good compared to Jurassic Park (1993) or even (later) Komodo (2003).
I think a better "dragon" comparison would be 2002's "Reign of Fire".