millahtime said: 2 Steps to profit and less complaining from the gallery...
1. Come up with completely open standards that are not controlled or licensed by you. Come up with these standards along with your peers in the industry, working together.
Bad idea, and here's why. When this standards committee comes back and tells them that the new standard is XYZ, and this standards committe's recommendations, for lack of better word, suck, what recourse do they have? Can they say, "well, these standards no longer appeal to us, so off we go on our own again," or will they be somehow forced to follow the new standards?
Imagine for a moment that your company has been dictated, by a cabal of a few dozen other CEOs, how you should run your business and build your product. Your shareholders would run you out on a rail in a heartbeat.
Many of you are software developers, and have written software by committee. Sometimes, the committee does a great job, and all is happy, but sometimes, the committee is out of their ever-lovin' minds, and it takes one programmer with the vision and the drive to do something to steer it right. This is the case here. Microsoft will never go for this because they lose control. If the committee makes a bad decision, what can MS do about it? Very likely, they have a minority voice in said committee, so their vote becomes a fart in a hurricane.
2. Build software apps and services to smoke the competition in these areas using these standards.
If such standards are available, anybody can write these apps and services, and MS loses any competitive advantage they have. For better or worse, this is how it's got to be. If MS won't do it themselves, then they'll have to be forced by government to do it, and do we *really* want the gubmint designing our software?
And, on another note before I step off my soapbox, didn't I read a story a few months back about how Windows XP N (with no media player bundled) sold maybe a few hundred copies worldwide? What the hell's the point of unbundling if everybody wants the media player?
Listening to TWiT this morning (Episode 6) there are a lot of arenas where Google and MS are going to be intruding on each others space. Leo made mention of a GoogleFS with a focus on searching. Hey, MS couldn't do it in time, perhaps Google can.
So, will Google become the next monolithic organization that must be destroyed by the Slashdot jackboots?
The funny thing is, the whole employment contract thing was extortion. They forced me to sign after I had been in the job for a year. There was an unspoken understanding that those who did not sign would be summarily dismissed.
A friend who consulted a lawyer was told that since Texas was a work-at-will state (they can fire you for no reason whatsoever), he had no leg to stand on to contest the employment agreement.
Rollins is, because it makes good business sense. See, the more Dell pushes Linux, the more M$ trips over themselves when it comes time to renegotiate licensing.
You guys are missing the point. Not all DivX videos are encoded in hi-def. What Cowboy Neal said [ paraphasing ] was that at the same bit rate the Microsoft compression scheme produced a significantly higher quality video than MPEG-4 or DivX.
This is my number one complaint about Linux - VPN support. I can't believe the Linux developers think that what's out there is actually acceptable. It's unbelievable how stupidly complex vpnclient's config is compared to the windows (XP and 2000) equivalent.
That, and Samba pisses me off. How difficult is it to be able to right-click on a folder, select Share, type in a few details, AND YOU'RE DONE?! Sheesh, last time I tried to fuck with SWAT, my eyes crossed and I lapsed into a coma.
I think that there's a fundamental difference in the way Windows developers write software and the way Linux developers write software. A typical Windows developer writes code with a simpleton in mind for an end user. A typical Linux developer writes code with HIMSELF in mind as an end user. One will get you software that'll be very easy to use but not terribly customisable. The other will get you an absolutely customisable solution, but is only useful if you completely understand every option.
That's what keeps me in Windows. I'm a simpleton, and I have work to do.
...where the main character, in fear of his computer being Van Eck phreaked, redirects output from a decryption program to turn on-and-off his scroll-lock key in morse-code.
Depends on the clustering environment, but here's what we're doing...
We expect to expose our e-commerce objects as web services that will live behind a cluster. So, for example, we can have a Commerce class exposed on "http://commerce.dotnetservice.com/". That name resolves to a web cluster of n machines: machine1, machine2,..., machinen..NET can maintain state via the same old session objects as ASP, you can add garbage to the querystring, or you can maintain state in a database. The clustered machines don't care, as long as you use either the querystring method or databased session management.
Our initial (figureless) prototypes show clustering in.NET kicks major bootyack.
C++ is faster than C# so why would I use.NET? C++ is marginally faster than C#. However, C# is Hella easier to code in. No worries about pointer-math. No concerns about garbage collection. You don't have to write COM interfaces... I can write code that does the same job, in half the time that performs at 98% the speed it would if written in C++.
With the time saved, I can go home and download more pr0n.
I'm writing an application that will bring our e-commerce site for my company into.NET-land. One of our concerns was bringing COM objects through.NET's interop layer (a translation layer between.NET and COM). We ran some code in ASP that manipulated a large XML dom 1000 times, and execution time took a pathetic 21 seconds (21348 ms).
We, then took that code and re-wrote it in.NET. The exact same operation took 1.5 seconds (1511 ms).
Just to see if it was the JIT compilation that gave us our performance jump, we compiled the same logic into a COM object, and ran it through ASP and.NET. The same operation took just under 1.5 seconds (1487 ms).
The advantage here is clear - You get the same level of maintainability with.NET ASPX files as you do with ASP files, but you get the performance equivelant to compiled binaries.
You're absolutely right. What the business needs to do, then, is perform a risk assessment. Is the risk that Microsoft is going to screw me in licensing fees later worth shrinking the development cycle, and reducing my time-to-market?
For many companies, mine included, time-to-market is the magic number that must be kept low. Therefore, we're a Microsoft shop.
I know this'll never get read, but I HAVE to respond to this...
Let me get this straight - jamming a paperclip into the connections of your computer SHOULDN'T invalidate your warranty?! What planet are you from anyway?
Most warranties are built off the concept of normal use. By inserting an object that wasn't designed to go in there, you're effectively going beyond normal use. If a simple loopback device was needed to test a serial port, then fscking use a loopback device!
My dad, working as a Xerox repair man, ran out of gas on the highway. He happened to have many bottles of ethyl alcohol in the back for cleaning purposes. He poured them into his gas tank so that he could get to the gas station. Worked perfectly. WAS DUMB ENOUGH TO MENTION THIS TO HIS FLEET MANAGER, AND WAS REPRIMANDED FOR IT!
At least have some sense and keep your fool mouth shut.
Slashdot Mirror
millahtime said:
2 Steps to profit and less complaining from the gallery...
1. Come up with completely open standards that are not controlled or licensed by you. Come up with these standards along with your peers in the industry, working together.
Bad idea, and here's why. When this standards committee comes back and tells them that the new standard is XYZ, and this standards committe's recommendations, for lack of better word, suck, what recourse do they have? Can they say, "well, these standards no longer appeal to us, so off we go on our own again," or will they be somehow forced to follow the new standards?
Imagine for a moment that your company has been dictated, by a cabal of a few dozen other CEOs, how you should run your business and build your product. Your shareholders would run you out on a rail in a heartbeat.
Many of you are software developers, and have written software by committee. Sometimes, the committee does a great job, and all is happy, but sometimes, the committee is out of their ever-lovin' minds, and it takes one programmer with the vision and the drive to do something to steer it right. This is the case here. Microsoft will never go for this because they lose control. If the committee makes a bad decision, what can MS do about it? Very likely, they have a minority voice in said committee, so their vote becomes a fart in a hurricane.
2. Build software apps and services to smoke the competition in these areas using these standards.
If such standards are available, anybody can write these apps and services, and MS loses any competitive advantage they have. For better or worse, this is how it's got to be. If MS won't do it themselves, then they'll have to be forced by government to do it, and do we *really* want the gubmint designing our software?
And, on another note before I step off my soapbox, didn't I read a story a few months back about how Windows XP N (with no media player bundled) sold maybe a few hundred copies worldwide? What the hell's the point of unbundling if everybody wants the media player?
Right-click, Delete Group. Done.
Listening to TWiT this morning (Episode 6) there are a lot of arenas where Google and MS are going to be intruding on each others space. Leo made mention of a GoogleFS with a focus on searching. Hey, MS couldn't do it in time, perhaps Google can.
So, will Google become the next monolithic organization that must be destroyed by the Slashdot jackboots?
The funny thing is, the whole employment contract thing was extortion. They forced me to sign after I had been in the job for a year. There was an unspoken understanding that those who did not sign would be summarily dismissed.
A friend who consulted a lawyer was told that since Texas was a work-at-will state (they can fire you for no reason whatsoever), he had no leg to stand on to contest the employment agreement.
Because the company I work for owns everything I think and do, according to my employment agreement. Nothing is considered "side-work."
Who remembers that old coin up game Bad Dudes vs. Dragon Ninja, where the health power-ups were cans of Coke?
Rollins is, because it makes good business sense. See, the more Dell pushes Linux, the more M$ trips over themselves when it comes time to renegotiate licensing.
How 'bout 'cause IE has greater than 96% penetration at Dell?
Never in my life have I heard a better comparison of the two. If I had points, you'd get +1 Funny, my boy.
You guys are missing the point. Not all DivX videos are encoded in hi-def. What Cowboy Neal said [ paraphasing ] was that at the same bit rate the Microsoft compression scheme produced a significantly higher quality video than MPEG-4 or DivX.
Just playing devil's advocate here, but doesn't anybody think that 1,112 people is a pretty small sample size?
That wasn't you in the background, laughing yet with no sound coming out?
Perhaps they'll invite you to the premier of *this* one?
This is my number one complaint about Linux - VPN support. I can't believe the Linux developers think that what's out there is actually acceptable. It's unbelievable how stupidly complex vpnclient's config is compared to the windows (XP and 2000) equivalent.
That, and Samba pisses me off. How difficult is it to be able to right-click on a folder, select Share, type in a few details, AND YOU'RE DONE?! Sheesh, last time I tried to fuck with SWAT, my eyes crossed and I lapsed into a coma.
I think that there's a fundamental difference in the way Windows developers write software and the way Linux developers write software. A typical Windows developer writes code with a simpleton in mind for an end user. A typical Linux developer writes code with HIMSELF in mind as an end user. One will get you software that'll be very easy to use but not terribly customisable. The other will get you an absolutely customisable solution, but is only useful if you completely understand every option.
That's what keeps me in Windows. I'm a simpleton, and I have work to do.
...where the main character, in fear of his computer being Van Eck phreaked, redirects output from a decryption program to turn on-and-off his scroll-lock key in morse-code.
Can't you buy one at any adult toy store?
Thank you, thank you. I am here all the week.
Win-R, meaning Windows Key plus R. It opens the "run" dialog. The remaining would open the Internet Information Server MMC Snap-in.
Do you have to count the virtual domains? Yes. You have fingers, right?
If someone asked you how many Virtual Domains you were running at that time how would you count them?
would it take you longer than typing this :
grep -c "^<VirtualHost" httpd.conf | awk 'BEGIN {FS=":"} {cnt = cnt + $2} END {printf "%d Virtual Domain Entries\n", cnt}'
No, it'd be quicker. Type: Win-R, c:\winnt\system32\inetsrv\iis.msc, click two plus-signs, and count.
Holier-than thou *nix wonks piss me off.
Depends on the clustering environment, but here's what we're doing...
..., machinen. .NET can maintain state via the same old session objects as ASP, you can add garbage to the querystring, or you can maintain state in a database. The clustered machines don't care, as long as you use either the querystring method or databased session management.
.NET kicks major bootyack.
We expect to expose our e-commerce objects as web services that will live behind a cluster. So, for example, we can have a Commerce class exposed on "http://commerce.dotnetservice.com/". That name resolves to a web cluster of n machines: machine1, machine2,
Our initial (figureless) prototypes show clustering in
C++ is faster than C# so why would I use .NET?
C++ is marginally faster than C#. However, C# is Hella easier to code in. No worries about pointer-math. No concerns about garbage collection. You don't have to write COM interfaces... I can write code that does the same job, in half the time that performs at 98% the speed it would if written in C++.
With the time saved, I can go home and download more pr0n.
I'll give you some figures I compiled yesterday.
.NET-land. One of our concerns was bringing COM objects through .NET's interop layer (a translation layer between .NET and COM). We ran some code in ASP that manipulated a large XML dom 1000 times, and execution time took a pathetic 21 seconds (21348 ms).
.NET. The exact same operation took 1.5 seconds (1511 ms).
.NET. The same operation took just under 1.5 seconds (1487 ms).
.NET ASPX files as you do with ASP files, but you get the performance equivelant to compiled binaries.
I'm writing an application that will bring our e-commerce site for my company into
We, then took that code and re-wrote it in
Just to see if it was the JIT compilation that gave us our performance jump, we compiled the same logic into a COM object, and ran it through ASP and
The advantage here is clear - You get the same level of maintainability with
you then give the company the power to screw you
You're absolutely right. What the business needs to do, then, is perform a risk assessment. Is the risk that Microsoft is going to screw me in licensing fees later worth shrinking the development cycle, and reducing my time-to-market?
For many companies, mine included, time-to-market is the magic number that must be kept low. Therefore, we're a Microsoft shop.
...except for those java twinks down the hall. ;-)
I know this'll never get read, but I HAVE to respond to this...
Let me get this straight - jamming a paperclip into the connections of your computer SHOULDN'T invalidate your warranty?! What planet are you from anyway?
Most warranties are built off the concept of normal use. By inserting an object that wasn't designed to go in there, you're effectively going beyond normal use. If a simple loopback device was needed to test a serial port, then fscking use a loopback device!
My dad, working as a Xerox repair man, ran out of gas on the highway. He happened to have many bottles of ethyl alcohol in the back for cleaning purposes. He poured them into his gas tank so that he could get to the gas station. Worked perfectly. WAS DUMB ENOUGH TO MENTION THIS TO HIS FLEET MANAGER, AND WAS REPRIMANDED FOR IT!
At least have some sense and keep your fool mouth shut.
How old are you? MS was huge at trashing OS/2 and Netware back when they were threats.
Who here doesn't remember MS techs flooding discussion groups with "OS/2 SUX" nonsense?
Nowhere in the linked article does anybody mention that Microsoft wants to outlaw open-source.
I am right. I direct you to this graphic for the proof.
Don't challenge a guy who got a 99% on his Civic final! ;-)