Except in socialist countries, where people have grown to know that the government will always take care of them and they can't improve their life standard much by trying to do new and innovative things, so they stay at status quo.
What are these "socialist countries" you are referring to ?
If you play around with the tax statistics, you'll see that even if you taxed everyone making $1 million or more at 100% their income, it would only increase revenue by about $550 billion. That's right - you could've confiscated every dollar made by "evil rich people" in 2009 and it only would've reduced the 2010 deficit by half. If you taxed them at 50%, you'd increase revenue by only about $200 billion, which compared to our current deficits and debt is peanuts.
How about if you taxed every dollar they earned _over_ $1 million at 100% ? How many people in the US have a taxable income >$1 million ?
On the other hand, Apple does ship Safari with Mac OS X, but it couldn't be easier to uninstall. You just drag it to the trash, empty it and it is gone!
This is the same as deleting iexplore.exe in Windows.
The integration between Safari and the OS is nonexistent. Thereby giving the user the choice to at least get rid of it if they want to. There is no browser tight integration going on with Safari and Mac OS X.
The "integration" between Safari and OS X is identical to Windows and IE.
Please don't spread FUD, or at least inform yourself before talking about it.
If you want 12 core Opterons you are automatically required to get a 2U machine from dell. It does not matter than the 1U machines could use those parts, they do this to improve their margins.
Identically configured 1U and 2U machines cost essentially the same anyway (or at least they did the last time I priced them out - been nothing but blades for a while now).
When Windows 8 comes out Microsoft will still do well because of their "Tax". In fact until the "Tax" is abolished sales of PC's with a Microsoft OS will always dominate.
It's trivial for people to avoid the so-called "Microsoft Tax" if they want to. Most obviously by buying a Mac, but also by purchasing a PC from one of the zillion sellers who will be happy to sell one.
Now, if they did some of the things they talked about for 7 (which might have warranted it actually being version 7.0 instead of 6.1) like converting to a hybrid microkernel, or doing away with the registry, then I would certainly be interested in trying that out.
Windows NT has been a "hybrid microkernel" since the day it was released. The amount of "hybridness" has varied both ways over the years, but Vista (and by extension, 7) was a clear and definite step in the pure microkernel direction.
The entire purpose of a RAID? Hardly. The purpose of a RAID is to get better performance by increasing the number of drives that can send/receive data at the same.
The primary purpose of RAID is data availability. Higher levels of throughput are a nice side-effect.
Unfortunately, almost nobody does this, and thus, the vast majority of RAID arrays are absolutely not a good substitute for having offline backup hardware [...]
*No* RAID array is a substitute for having an offline backup, because the purpose of RAID is data availability, not data backup.
You don't get the two SAS ports that you get when buying it as a DS3500 from IBM but it is basically the same thing.
Not sure if something incapable of multiple paths classifies as enterprise.:)
We used to use Promise vTrak E610 and J610 (have since been superceded) for our "cheap" enterprise storage needs. 16 drives, two controllers, four FC4 ports, under $5k. Awesome value. We used them for bulk storage rather than SSDs, but had over 200TB spread across numerous controller and JBOD units.
Im not sure Ive ever seen a hard drive that costs $1,500; Newegg says [newegg.com] 450GB SAS 15k drives can be had for $300.
It's not just about bare drives. While it's been a while since I did any pricing, I seem to recall a FC-attached disk shelf full of 450GB 15k FC drives will run around the US$20k mark. Individual drives (eg: to keep on hand) were about $1,000ea.
Of course, that pricing captures a whole bunch of other things a NewEgg drive doesn't, like a 4hr response time in case of failures and guaranteed availability timeframes.
Short version is: $1500/drive as a total cost for an enterprise-level storage system is not at all unreasonable.
I only have one TV show on Blu-Ray, so I don't have a lot of data to go on, but... Serenity ran for only 14 episodes (basically a half season) and is spread across three dual-layer Blu-Ray discs, for a total of 150 GB. A full season of an hour-long TV show should be on the order of 250-300 GB unless you are recompressing it at a much lower quality setting.
25GB is a pretty standard size for a HDTV-ripped, x264-encoded, ~22-24 episode season on tvtorrents, et al.
Rips from full BR sources seem to come in more around the 45-50GB mark for 1080p.
The GP's premise is somewhat broken, however, because the fact there's years worth of watching time isn't really relevant. I have all the known episodes of Dr Who, for example, going back nearly 50 years, and that's ~260GB on its own. Sure, if I wanted to sit down and watch all of them end to end it'd take years, but I've already spent those years watching them since I was a child. My DVD Rips of ST:TNG are another ~360G. Etc, etc.
Wait...what? By your own figures the 15k enterprise drives cost at least half as much as the SSDs. That doesn't say "not all that much cheaper" to me.
There's a lot more to enterprise storage than the drives. Taking into account those additional costs, twice as much per drive doesn't add up to a lot more expensive in the big picture.
Back then, windows crashed on regular basis, and SE was just extremely solid and could run for days without rebooting, while 98 required restarts every few hours on most systems.
See, this sort of transparent bullshit is why no-one takes you folks seriously.
rm is a poor example since it seldom runs for more than a few seconds. Firefox is a better example. On Linux one can generally use Firefox while a batch of upgrades is being installed even if Firefox is one of the things being upgraded. (I say generally because occasionaly there will be a slight incompatibiity between the new and old Firefox which does not clear up until one restarts Firefox.)
Of course, you need to restart Firefox to take advantage of any updates, which puts you in exactly the same situation.
In many cases the only practical way to close them is to reboot.
And in Linux you would need to restart pretty much everything, which is essentially the same as rebooting.
I will also make my standard point that if a server reboot - scheduled or otherwise - impacts the SLA of any service, your architecture is broken.
Slashdot Mirror
Translation: "We're doing all the work, how do we prevent the freeloaders from benefitting ?"
What are these "socialist countries" you are referring to ?
How about if you taxed every dollar they earned _over_ $1 million at 100% ? How many people in the US have a taxable income >$1 million ?
This is the same as deleting iexplore.exe in Windows.
The "integration" between Safari and OS X is identical to Windows and IE.
Good advice. You should try following it.
Windows NT was designed by the same people who designed OpenVMS.
It is no way related to OS/2 other than originally being built as a replacement for it.
It's Slashdot reporting a Microsoft story.
Because I'm well-versed in the alternatives and prefer it.
Generally speaking, you run out of power (/cooling) long before you run out of rack space.
Very few places will let you put 42 1U servers in a single rack.
Assuming the EU survives another *one* year is starting to look like a shaky bet the way things are going at the moment.
Identically configured 1U and 2U machines cost essentially the same anyway (or at least they did the last time I priced them out - been nothing but blades for a while now).
It's trivial for people to avoid the so-called "Microsoft Tax" if they want to. Most obviously by buying a Mac, but also by purchasing a PC from one of the zillion sellers who will be happy to sell one.
Windows NT has been a "hybrid microkernel" since the day it was released. The amount of "hybridness" has varied both ways over the years, but Vista (and by extension, 7) was a clear and definite step in the pure microkernel direction.
"Massive tax cuts" have nothing to do with any definition of "Austerity".
The primary purpose of RAID is data availability. Higher levels of throughput are a nice side-effect.
*No* RAID array is a substitute for having an offline backup, because the purpose of RAID is data availability, not data backup.
Not sure if something incapable of multiple paths classifies as enterprise. :)
We used to use Promise vTrak E610 and J610 (have since been superceded) for our "cheap" enterprise storage needs. 16 drives, two controllers, four FC4 ports, under $5k. Awesome value. We used them for bulk storage rather than SSDs, but had over 200TB spread across numerous controller and JBOD units.
It's not just about bare drives. While it's been a while since I did any pricing, I seem to recall a FC-attached disk shelf full of 450GB 15k FC drives will run around the US$20k mark. Individual drives (eg: to keep on hand) were about $1,000ea.
Of course, that pricing captures a whole bunch of other things a NewEgg drive doesn't, like a 4hr response time in case of failures and guaranteed availability timeframes.
Short version is: $1500/drive as a total cost for an enterprise-level storage system is not at all unreasonable.
25GB is a pretty standard size for a HDTV-ripped, x264-encoded, ~22-24 episode season on tvtorrents, et al.
Rips from full BR sources seem to come in more around the 45-50GB mark for 1080p.
The GP's premise is somewhat broken, however, because the fact there's years worth of watching time isn't really relevant. I have all the known episodes of Dr Who, for example, going back nearly 50 years, and that's ~260GB on its own. Sure, if I wanted to sit down and watch all of them end to end it'd take years, but I've already spent those years watching them since I was a child. My DVD Rips of ST:TNG are another ~360G. Etc, etc.
There's a lot more to enterprise storage than the drives. Taking into account those additional costs, twice as much per drive doesn't add up to a lot more expensive in the big picture.
12T isn't a lot once you start putting 8-12GB per movie and ~25GB per season 1080p rips. Especially if you keep them for rewatching.
There's about as much "begatting" between OS/2 and NT as there is between Windows 98 and Windows 2000. Probably less, in fact.
Explorer is no more "integrated into the OS" than bash is.
See, this sort of transparent bullshit is why no-one takes you folks seriously.
Taxation is theft in the same way laws are oppression.
Of course, you need to restart Firefox to take advantage of any updates, which puts you in exactly the same situation.
And in Linux you would need to restart pretty much everything, which is essentially the same as rebooting.
I will also make my standard point that if a server reboot - scheduled or otherwise - impacts the SLA of any service, your architecture is broken.