I can't find good links about Apple, but they have been developing both software and hardware in India and other Asian countries for quite some time. Asia, after all, has some of the best technical minds in the world.
Who was the einstein that said 'yes' to switching an entire corporate plan from one provider to another without getting a realistic estimate as to how long it would take to roll the numbers from the old provider to the new?
And in the first week of local number portability when most industry pundits have been opining that it would take some time for the kinks to get worked out of the system?
IBM's OS/2 v3.0 (released in Q4 1994) allowed long filenames (as well as other extended file attributes) to be stored on a FAT partition. Previous releases may also have had that capability.
If your hearing aid has a T-Coil, get a Hatis adaptor. The Producer model works with ITE (in the ear) hearing aids. The director model works with BTE (behind the ear) hearing aids. It plugs into any standard 3.5mm audio jack.
I have trouble believing that it would be that difficult to restructure US networks to block all outside originated email that doesn't have a "postage paid" bit flipped.
Microsoft wants to dominate the living room and is probably planning to have the media player client in future Xboxes be able to access their music service. This in turn sells more Xboxes which in turn sells more Xbox games which is where Microsoft makes their money because game vendors have to pay a per title license fee to Microsoft.
I had a friend that wanted to burn a cd of folk songs to play at the funeral of dear old friend that had recently passed away. He tried using two different download services (this is before iTunes was available) and the software kept choking during burning the music to disc.
His comment to me was how much sucked to try to do things the legal way and be frustrated at every turn. IMO, this is why iTunes took off like a rocket. For the most part, it just worked. Any competitor that doesn't make it as easier or easier will be doomed to failure.
If Intel's VLIW architecture is as wicked fast as they claim, then running a 32 bit program on a software x86 emulator in 64 bit mode on Itanium should be much faster than running that same 32 bit program in the Itanium's x86 compatibility mode. The 32 bit compatibility mode is notable for its pokeyness.
The architecture of VMWare and VirtualPC are entirely different. VMWare will never run on any platform other than x86 because of the way it is designed to "virtualize" x86 op codes. VirtualPC, on the other hand, emulates an entire PC in a platform agnostic way which is why you can get it for Mac OS.
So, it does not surprise me that VMWare is performs better. I would be surprised if it didn't. But VMWare is also much more limited, it can't run on non-x86 platforms.
Personally, this is why I think MS bought Connectix and not VMWare. The rumor mill has it that the next generation of the XBox will use a PowerPC processor from IBM. If so, the inclusion of Virtual PC would allow for backwards compatibility with the games of the previous generation.
I also suspect that portions of Virtual PC will end up integrated into 64 bit Windows for Itanium so that Microsoft can run 32 bit x86 code on Itanium without the performance penalty of using Itanium's 32 bit compatibility mode.
If nothing else, Big Blue has learned from its OS/2 days that other hardware vendors are unwilling to buy an OS from a company that competes with them in hardware sales. If IBM bought a Linux distro, it would quickly become the only hardware vendor to preload that distro.
As IBM wants Linux to take over the world, the need to keep it somewhat at arms length. Big Blue will continue to dance with the penguin, but no one should expect IBM to invite Tux home to bed.
Objectives are over-rated. Most hiring managers ignore them at best. Consider what Christopher M. Russo of USENIX had to say on the question.
I have started cutting these "Objectives" out and hanging them on my wall so I can look up occasionally and get a chuckle on an otherwise tense day. All job objectives tend to boil down to the following statement: "Seeking a position where I can work insanely long hours and use my godlike skills to solve impossibly complicated problems while working hand in hand with people who love me dearly because I'm such an amazing person."
Oh please. These types of statements are neither honest nor objective. More often than not, they are just plain silly.
For the most part, I personally feel that objectives and goals are a waste of space unless you really know what you want, and it is fairly specific. If you genuinely know, for example, that you are "seeking a management position in the technology field, preferably in IT, secondarily in development" or something like it, then great! Those people who have the job that you are looking for may call you. Those people who are looking for a peanut vendor will not. Perfection.
Additionally, most current resume books advise leaving off the objective. Some will suggest replacing it with a summary.
The article cleary states that HP did not license Linux from SCO.
"We will provide full indemnity across the entire suite for any SCO-related action," said Martin Fink, HP's vice president of Linux. "If (customers) were to get sued by SCO, we would take over their defense and assume liability on their behalf."
The indemnification program is limited to customers who receive a Linux distribution from HP, run it on HP hardware and have a support contract with HP. There's no additional charge for the protection.
Fink said HP is not paying any Linux-related licensing fees to SCO.
"HP is not acknowledging anything related to SCO's actions," he said. "The validity of that is for the courts to decide."
Sounds like one big race condition waiting to happen to me. Even with the entire data base in RAM, transactions take time. If the number of transactions goes high enough, sooner or later a race condition will apply.
I doubt very many people are buying it for the hack value given the low price of comparable hardware that doesn't need to be hacked.
It is neither here nor there to Microsoft if they make money on their first generation effort. They're in this game for market share going into the next generation.
Chapter 5 of the federal food, drug, and cosmetic act gives jurisdiction over enforcing regulations concerning medical devices to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The Secretary of Health and Human Services originally decided to combine enforcement of these regulations with the FDA. This decision was cemented in the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 which define the mission of the FDA in part as (emphasis is mine):
With respect to such products, protect the public health by ensuring that foods are safe, wholesome, sanitary, and properly labeled; human and veterinary drugs are safe and effective;
there is reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of devices intended for human use; cosmetics are safe and properly labeled, and; public health and safety are protected from electronic product radiation.
Perhaps the real question should be: why is the agency named the FDA instead of being given a broader name that more accurately reflects its mission?
Among other criticisms, I thought the rebuttal had an excellent point that the original study counted "no support" as a strike against Linux and then averaged the cost of commercial embedded Linux distributions in the section on cost. Most embedded Linux toolkits that cost money come with support.
According to an article in Utah County's Daily Herald Noorda had completely divested his Novell shares by the year 2000. Apparently he sold the last of his shares while Novell was still at $42 per share.
I never claimed that NT ran anything other than 16 bit OS/2 apps. I'm not certain what you're attempting to correct on that point.
As for Windows NT 3.0, the time line at Sagegis states that in 1991, "Microsoft changes the name of the operating system shared with IBM called OS/2 v3.0 to Windows NT 3.0." Windows NT 3.0 was exhibited to the general public in August of 1991 at the Windows Developers Conference.
So there actually was a good reason for Microsoft to have started Windows NT versioning at 3.0.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft China Technology Center
I can't find good links about Apple, but they have been developing both software and hardware in India and other Asian countries for quite some time. Asia, after all, has some of the best technical minds in the world.
And in the first week of local number portability when most industry pundits have been opining that it would take some time for the kinks to get worked out of the system?
Back when I ran a dual boot OS/2, DOS/Win3.1 machine I installed DOS on top of an HPFS formatted drive.
IBM's OS/2 v3.0 (released in Q4 1994) allowed long filenames (as well as other extended file attributes) to be stored on a FAT partition. Previous releases may also have had that capability.
View their product line at hatis.
I'm fairly certain that Where have all the flowers gone? was written by Pete Seeger.
Exactly how does earning USD 27,600 per year qualify one as being rich?
Doesn't your statement depend on whether the term "right wing" is referring to the "consipiracy" or the "theory"?
I have trouble believing that it would be that difficult to restructure US networks to block all outside originated email that doesn't have a "postage paid" bit flipped.
Microsoft wants to dominate the living room and is probably planning to have the media player client in future Xboxes be able to access their music service. This in turn sells more Xboxes which in turn sells more Xbox games which is where Microsoft makes their money because game vendors have to pay a per title license fee to Microsoft.
His comment to me was how much sucked to try to do things the legal way and be frustrated at every turn. IMO, this is why iTunes took off like a rocket. For the most part, it just worked. Any competitor that doesn't make it as easier or easier will be doomed to failure.
If Intel's VLIW architecture is as wicked fast as they claim, then running a 32 bit program on a software x86 emulator in 64 bit mode on Itanium should be much faster than running that same 32 bit program in the Itanium's x86 compatibility mode. The 32 bit compatibility mode is notable for its pokeyness.
So, it does not surprise me that VMWare is performs better. I would be surprised if it didn't. But VMWare is also much more limited, it can't run on non-x86 platforms.
Personally, this is why I think MS bought Connectix and not VMWare. The rumor mill has it that the next generation of the XBox will use a PowerPC processor from IBM. If so, the inclusion of Virtual PC would allow for backwards compatibility with the games of the previous generation.
I also suspect that portions of Virtual PC will end up integrated into 64 bit Windows for Itanium so that Microsoft can run 32 bit x86 code on Itanium without the performance penalty of using Itanium's 32 bit compatibility mode.
As IBM wants Linux to take over the world, the need to keep it somewhat at arms length. Big Blue will continue to dance with the penguin, but no one should expect IBM to invite Tux home to bed.
I pretty certain that both OTEC and magnetohydrodynamics are less than 150 years old.
Sounds like one big race condition waiting to happen to me. Even with the entire data base in RAM, transactions take time. If the number of transactions goes high enough, sooner or later a race condition will apply.
If I had purchased new copies of all of the books for my Economics class this semester, the total would have been well over $200.
Perhaps the real question should be: why is the agency named the FDA instead of being given a broader name that more accurately reflects its mission?
Among other criticisms, I thought the rebuttal had an excellent point that the original study counted "no support" as a strike against Linux and then averaged the cost of commercial embedded Linux distributions in the section on cost. Most embedded Linux toolkits that cost money come with support.
According to an article in Utah County's Daily Herald Noorda had completely divested his Novell shares by the year 2000. Apparently he sold the last of his shares while Novell was still at $42 per share.
As for Windows NT 3.0, the time line at Sagegis states that in 1991, "Microsoft changes the name of the operating system shared with IBM called OS/2 v3.0 to Windows NT 3.0." Windows NT 3.0 was exhibited to the general public in August of 1991 at the Windows Developers Conference.
So there actually was a good reason for Microsoft to have started Windows NT versioning at 3.0.