You know what? My job (as if I had a choice to accept it) it so install this new kernel on IBM x445s and get the SOB working so we can get 16 CPUs and 64GB of RAM on a single machine (and we're planning on a farm of these - don't ask, it's a "unique" situation...). This is supposdly available only under RH Adv Server 3.0 (but not really)which uses "features" from the new 2.6 kernel.
Considering RH AS 3.0 isn't coming out until the 15th, this is going to be ugly. Ugly, as is become-a-drunk-and-heroin-addict ugly.
Playing with cutting/bleeding edge tech is one thing. Playing with bleeding edge tech on a deadline is quite another.
But as much as I bitch about it, it's still kinda cool...
Microsoft, however, has never been on the other side of the fence. They have only ever used patents in a defensive manner.
We'll see. If Mono ever comes to be, I'll be shocked if we don't see some patent legal action...
OTOH, this may be the end of software patents. And good riddance. It would be one thing if these were giving out in a logical manner by intelligent people.
But don't go slamming products when you've never actually admined them etc.
But I have to USE them! As a user I shouldn't have to know or care about the admin of them. But if it affects me in a negative fashion...
Granted, developers generally don't like much of any thing outside of coding, whether it be their source control system or the bug tracking system etc etc etc
I seriously disagree here. I came from a coding background (I've only been doing system work for about a year), we care intimately because it has such an affect on our lives. What we want is a tool that supports what we do without being a hinderance and distraction. That's where resistance to a CC comes in to play.
Even with training, we've found that CC has serious network dependencies that can cause problems when you have developers in seperate buildings. It is also seems very easy for the tool to get in a bad state that requires CC admin intervention.
It also sounds like your CM group doesn't like you
Nah, we get along fine, I've saved their ass a couple times when the boxes they were using (and which we under the control of a different company within our org) went belly-up. They're just caught up fighting fires...
Right now, we're stuck in bed with a big fat obnoxious broad named "Clear Quest". It's part of Rational and an absolute POS. It's heavy weight, doesn't integrate well with it's own products (web interface and Clear Case UML). Further, I was told they (our CM team) could get a CQ database for us set up in a day. That was in AUGUST.
Developer use and support of it is spotty, in general it's hated but has been named as a standard. Our *nix and system support group is a bunch of *nix and OSS snobs anyway, so bugzilla seems a no-brainer. Almost the entire team has implemented Bugzilla elsewhere (in previous lives) already.
I'm thinking we'll do that and I'll beg forgiveness later (if anyone really cares). But I would recommend against ClearQuest
How can they? The "cool" geek image is associated with Linux, BSD and other "renegade" technologies.
MS is looked upon as a corporate monster with the same "coolness" of Ford. Yeah, it's there, it's not going anywhere, but it's not cool. Nobody's going to wear a Micrsoft shirt and look "cool". In comparison, I can wear (certian) Linux, BSD, and (my personal fav) Atari shirts and have a look. So is my criteria for street "cool" being able to wear or show the sign? Yeah, it is. Look at the occasional Apple stickers you see on cars.
MS will NEVER have that. They may have a great corporate and Wall Street reputation, but trying to get this "image" won't happen...
Are you sure?!? Solaris / SPARC does, but I thought that Solaris x86 was as totally different beast.
When we did some speed tests on Solaris x86 vs the early 2.4.x kernels about 2 uears ago (a while granted), Solaris x86 was a DOG. They may be trying to clean it up now, but even then they admitted it was basically an afterthought.
I've seen a TON of different hardware / OS configs, but I know of only one shop who used Solaris x86. They used in dual CPU machines only.
Maybe I'm wrong, but my impressions of x86 Solaris were not positive...
Hold on, wait a sec, a bill allowing Copyright Holders to destroy and attack music traders wasn't driven by RIAA? I don't believe it. Multiple legislators who blindly support the media companies thought this on their own and did it. Yeah, I don't think so. RIAA itself investigated their ability to do this a couple years ago BEFORE the bill_S_ were introduced. They backed off as it was asserted that they had no legal right. (back in the Napster days)
Read the news: the labels are scrambling to offer legitimate alternatives
Read them indeed, the only "legit" one in Apple's. Even Fortune magazine came out blasting the labels a couple months ago for having no "internet strategy".
while I'm not in favor of copy protected CDs your comments demonstrate that you've swallowed the slashdot coolaid.
I beg your pardon, but I think you've swallowed a different kind of Kool-Aid.
Anyway, none of the things you list justify pirating someone's content.
I disagree. While you may not agree with my points, _IF_ they are valid (which I think they are), then we are dealing with organizations which have demonstrated contempt for the law and their consumer base. Two wrongs don't make a right, but it's the second "wrong" (copyright violation) which is driving the labels to have SOME online "product / service" (I use the term loosely) and more likely rally behind Apple's.
That being said, I don't like the idea of hurting others, but I'm not going to pay $16 / CD for 1 song. For small artists and those who have multiple songs, I will. Is that any better? I don't know - I don't care, until there's something different I still won't pay outrageous prices for 1-hit CDs...
I would agree with the no stealing thing except for a few small details:
RIAA and the major labels have 3xercised monopolistic powers by fixing prices and gouging the consumer for years
They have virutally no plans to offer a worthwhile alternative (Apple is the only one I see)
Their tactics are beyond abominable. They bully, threaten, and use bubious legal tactics against old women and children - and that's just this week.
They are the WORST threat to our privacy and security. They have tried multiple times to pass laws allowing them to destroy or attack a computer owned by someone who they think has traded music. Typically thses laws have provisions where the attacker is immune from any liability or even identification. Nice...
So before you get to self-righteous about stealing, I think they have crossed the line and in my mind, all's fair. And yes, I realize you're not pro-RIAA.
BTW, it is due to those damn music-sharing theives that the music industry is even looking at products like Apple's IPod or other online services. Until they found they could never stop sharing entirely, it wasn't even an option.
and I'm sure there are (ahem) dubious (at BEST) legal precedents here, but here it goes anyway.
These zombie machines are clearly insecure and already compromised, right? Well, the last legal briefing I heard (long ago, can't find link) there was no precedent regarding reacting to a "hacking" attack with a counter-hack in defense.
So these machines are compromised, run an nmap (or similar) and crash them or point them at SPAMMERS. Granted, up-front you'd have to respond to each attack but this could be scripted out. Any mapped attack (via a firewall or intrusion detection type analysis) causes the script to run which determines the source and launches a counter-attack. The number of zombie viruses / worms HAS to be limited, so you're scanning for, and acting on a limited set of vulns.
NO doubt innocent owners of these zombies will suffer until they patch, but I have limited sympathy here. Their ignorance is causing direct harm to others, not just RBLs but also Yahoo and other sites that have been targeted. They'll learn in the end.
There's a difference between flaming and correcting an idiot...
Which requires most real hardware support to be bottlenecked through Linus' selection process.
Bullshit. You can modprobe in just about any drivers you need. Further, distros can compile them in as they see fit. They only have to release the driver code, which, oh wait, YEAH! It's already out there. Linus approval is not needed to add drivers!
Zealots flame away...
Well, you didn't have much credibility before, now you have less / zero.
But Sun is the leading edge of three... that stand to lose out as their business becomes commoditized
I agree, but they don't seem to realize it yet. It's tough to have $11 billion in cash and be in trouble, but Sun seems to have managed. I think the database will be tougher only because of the complexity of implementing medium and large DBMSs. I still think you have a great point, but the effect of OSS here will be somewhat less.
Lastly, MS
You know, I think this would be the easiest to do were it not for fear of end-user revolt. OO is quite capable and the various desktops (KDE and Gnome) are fine. The issue (of course) is that end-users will resist ANY change even though I think it would be painless. The fear of the unknown...
But people are constantly asking questions about how much they're paying for what they actually get and they'll feel heat unless they can convince the buyer that they offer genuine true value-added
That's what will bring this to a head. Specifically the licensing AND the virus problem which I think will continue to get worse and these viruses become more agressive and damaging...
IBM is one that's figured out how integration services can be marketed
Well, and you said it perfectly here. IBM has had ot change their business model and are selling hardware and software through these services. If business models don't adapt to OSS, that company is sealing their own doom...
I think people will get over it. I volunteer with a Jr High youth group and there are 2 things I've noticed:
Almost ALL of these kids have cell phones. These are middle class kids mind you.
Almost ALL OF THEM message each other using that miserable little numeric pad.
The issue is that you're too old!;) Don't take it personally, I am to, I don't like using the number pad either. But the kids have it memorized. They can fly through messages almost without looking. They'll do a couple quick checks, but that's it.
Pretty impressive really. I'm trying to change my ways and try using my itty-bitty phone for e-mail and whatnot. I mean gimme a break, I'm 29 and already getting outpaced...
A little militant, aren't we? Sun may not be the biggest supporter of OSS, but your statements are more rant that fact. You're making some pretty broad statements without backing them up.
Things like OpenOffice and Gnome are worthy contributions as is NIS and NFS. Old and unused? I beg your pardon. ClearCase on UNIX uses NFS, and many of the NAS devices use it as well.
Finally, here are a couple points which you may not like:
Companies exist to MAKE MONEY. Even if they support OSS, they are doing it for some percieved monetary gain.
If OSS is to be a largely accepted and viable solution (i.e. something we can use at home and work and not just as a hobby) we need corporate contributions / support. This means companies like IBM, Red Hat, and *gasp* Sun being able to make money off these things. Otherwise they will eventually fade away or have little use.
half-witted Slashbot? I have done more for OpenOffice.org then you *ever* will.... I personally know the people who have... Oh, and yes, I know the Orion and Mad Hatter stuff *intimately* and I can tell you that it is *all* about lock in.
I think you make the parent poster's point much better than he ever could have hoped to do
How about Windows running Terminal Services client? Each instance requires at least 65MB of RAM just to get it fired up, not including apps (like Word, etc) that you may need to run. So if you combine that with the OS overhead to start with...
Secondly, who knows what kind of applications will be running? You're making a judgement with limited and sometimes incorrect information. Not a very strong starting point...
OK, done, I agree. However, there are ramifications beyond that. What we've done is go from SPAM is a nuisance to SPAM is illegal. Spammers _LOSE_ rights here. We won't have any of this nonsense of spammers suing ISPs preventing them from cutting off service or suing AOL for blocking their trash.
What if the law is expanded? Any company who gleans profits FROM spam forfeits that money?
Hello? Now we're hitting them right where it hurts, in the balls! No wait, that's where _I_ want to hit them, that would hit them in the pocketbook. Close enough for me.
So while this law won't solve the problem, it helps. The only thing if worried about is legislation that encourages gov't monitoring or other Big Brother type activities...
The whole POINT of XML is interoperability. So can this XML be used by someone else? Is it limited to Office?
If the namespaces can't be reused by another applicaiton, then NO, it isn't "cool" what MS did. It's the classic MS crap. They may as well have forgone the entire process and left it in a binary format.
"Proprietary" XML is marketing blather and not something that adds value to the end user...
OK, fair enough, I was not aware of that article. My thought was that why use Apache on Windows since it would seem to me that IIS on Windows would be the natural choice. This seems true to me since apache on Windows seems a bit of a hack as compared to *nix OSs / Apache...
I've not advocated switching from Windows to any *nix on a whim, the skill and background of the admin staff is important, no doubt.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do you think MS submitted C# as a ECMA standard?
marketing. i'm suprised you asked. What's the point of making it a standard if you have a ton of patents regarding the implmentaion of that standard?
I've NEVER heard of Ximian or Miguel (except by extremists) as being described as MS supporters!
You know what? My job (as if I had a choice to accept it) it so install this new kernel on IBM x445s and get the SOB working so we can get 16 CPUs and 64GB of RAM on a single machine (and we're planning on a farm of these - don't ask, it's a "unique" situation...). This is supposdly available only under RH Adv Server 3.0 (but not really)which uses "features" from the new 2.6 kernel.
Considering RH AS 3.0 isn't coming out until the 15th, this is going to be ugly. Ugly, as is become-a-drunk-and-heroin-addict ugly.
Playing with cutting/bleeding edge tech is one thing. Playing with bleeding edge tech on a deadline is quite another.
But as much as I bitch about it, it's still kinda cool...
We'll see. If Mono ever comes to be, I'll be shocked if we don't see some patent legal action...
OTOH, this may be the end of software patents. And good riddance. It would be one thing if these were giving out in a logical manner by intelligent people.
As it is...
Yes, I did - thanks.
But don't go slamming products when you've never actually admined them etc.
But I have to USE them! As a user I shouldn't have to know or care about the admin of them. But if it affects me in a negative fashion...
Granted, developers generally don't like much of any thing outside of coding, whether it be their source control system or the bug tracking system etc etc etc
I seriously disagree here. I came from a coding background (I've only been doing system work for about a year), we care intimately because it has such an affect on our lives. What we want is a tool that supports what we do without being a hinderance and distraction. That's where resistance to a CC comes in to play.
Even with training, we've found that CC has serious network dependencies that can cause problems when you have developers in seperate buildings. It is also seems very easy for the tool to get in a bad state that requires CC admin intervention.
It also sounds like your CM group doesn't like you
Nah, we get along fine, I've saved their ass a couple times when the boxes they were using (and which we under the control of a different company within our org) went belly-up. They're just caught up fighting fires...
Right now, we're stuck in bed with a big fat obnoxious broad named "Clear Quest". It's part of Rational and an absolute POS. It's heavy weight, doesn't integrate well with it's own products (web interface and Clear Case UML). Further, I was told they (our CM team) could get a CQ database for us set up in a day. That was in AUGUST.
Developer use and support of it is spotty, in general it's hated but has been named as a standard. Our *nix and system support group is a bunch of *nix and OSS snobs anyway, so bugzilla seems a no-brainer. Almost the entire team has implemented Bugzilla elsewhere (in previous lives) already.
I'm thinking we'll do that and I'll beg forgiveness later (if anyone really cares). But I would recommend against ClearQuest
MS is looked upon as a corporate monster with the same "coolness" of Ford. Yeah, it's there, it's not going anywhere, but it's not cool. Nobody's going to wear a Micrsoft shirt and look "cool". In comparison, I can wear (certian) Linux, BSD, and (my personal fav) Atari shirts and have a look. So is my criteria for street "cool" being able to wear or show the sign? Yeah, it is. Look at the occasional Apple stickers you see on cars.
MS will NEVER have that. They may have a great corporate and Wall Street reputation, but trying to get this "image" won't happen...
When did this SCO crap start? Seriously!
MS flew the CIOs of our parent as well as the subsidiaries to Redmond to talk up the SCO claims that Linux was DEAD...
That kind of low-life marketing certianly isn't beyond MS and could account for this!
When we did some speed tests on Solaris x86 vs the early 2.4.x kernels about 2 uears ago (a while granted), Solaris x86 was a DOG. They may be trying to clean it up now, but even then they admitted it was basically an afterthought.
I've seen a TON of different hardware / OS configs, but I know of only one shop who used Solaris x86. They used in dual CPU machines only.
Maybe I'm wrong, but my impressions of x86 Solaris were not positive...
Read the news: the labels are scrambling to offer legitimate alternatives
Read them indeed, the only "legit" one in Apple's. Even Fortune magazine came out blasting the labels a couple months ago for having no "internet strategy".
while I'm not in favor of copy protected CDs your comments demonstrate that you've swallowed the slashdot coolaid.
I beg your pardon, but I think you've swallowed a different kind of Kool-Aid.
Anyway, none of the things you list justify pirating someone's content.
I disagree. While you may not agree with my points, _IF_ they are valid (which I think they are), then we are dealing with organizations which have demonstrated contempt for the law and their consumer base. Two wrongs don't make a right, but it's the second "wrong" (copyright violation) which is driving the labels to have SOME online "product / service" (I use the term loosely) and more likely rally behind Apple's.
That being said, I don't like the idea of hurting others, but I'm not going to pay $16 / CD for 1 song. For small artists and those who have multiple songs, I will. Is that any better? I don't know - I don't care, until there's something different I still won't pay outrageous prices for 1-hit CDs...
I would agree with the no stealing thing except for a few small details:
- RIAA and the major labels have 3xercised monopolistic powers by fixing prices and gouging the consumer for years
- They have virutally no plans to offer a worthwhile alternative (Apple is the only one I see)
- Their tactics are beyond abominable. They bully, threaten, and use bubious legal tactics against old women and children - and that's just this week.
- They are the WORST threat to our privacy and security. They have tried multiple times to pass laws allowing them to destroy or attack a computer owned by someone who they think has traded music. Typically thses laws have provisions where the attacker is immune from any liability or even identification. Nice...
So before you get to self-righteous about stealing, I think they have crossed the line and in my mind, all's fair. And yes, I realize you're not pro-RIAA.BTW, it is due to those damn music-sharing theives that the music industry is even looking at products like Apple's IPod or other online services. Until they found they could never stop sharing entirely, it wasn't even an option.
These zombie machines are clearly insecure and already compromised, right? Well, the last legal briefing I heard (long ago, can't find link) there was no precedent regarding reacting to a "hacking" attack with a counter-hack in defense.
So these machines are compromised, run an nmap (or similar) and crash them or point them at SPAMMERS. Granted, up-front you'd have to respond to each attack but this could be scripted out. Any mapped attack (via a firewall or intrusion detection type analysis) causes the script to run which determines the source and launches a counter-attack. The number of zombie viruses / worms HAS to be limited, so you're scanning for, and acting on a limited set of vulns.
NO doubt innocent owners of these zombies will suffer until they patch, but I have limited sympathy here. Their ignorance is causing direct harm to others, not just RBLs but also Yahoo and other sites that have been targeted. They'll learn in the end.
Comments? Flames???
Which requires most real hardware support to be bottlenecked through Linus' selection process.
Bullshit. You can modprobe in just about any drivers you need. Further, distros can compile them in as they see fit. They only have to release the driver code, which, oh wait, YEAH! It's already out there. Linus approval is not needed to add drivers!
Zealots flame away...
Well, you didn't have much credibility before, now you have less / zero.
-1, Oxymoron
Sorry, couldn't help it... ;)
I agree, but they don't seem to realize it yet. It's tough to have $11 billion in cash and be in trouble, but Sun seems to have managed. I think the database will be tougher only because of the complexity of implementing medium and large DBMSs. I still think you have a great point, but the effect of OSS here will be somewhat less.
Lastly, MS
You know, I think this would be the easiest to do were it not for fear of end-user revolt. OO is quite capable and the various desktops (KDE and Gnome) are fine. The issue (of course) is that end-users will resist ANY change even though I think it would be painless. The fear of the unknown...
But people are constantly asking questions about how much they're paying for what they actually get and they'll feel heat unless they can convince the buyer that they offer genuine true value-added
That's what will bring this to a head. Specifically the licensing AND the virus problem which I think will continue to get worse and these viruses become more agressive and damaging...
IBM is one that's figured out how integration services can be marketed
Well, and you said it perfectly here. IBM has had ot change their business model and are selling hardware and software through these services. If business models don't adapt to OSS, that company is sealing their own doom...
- Almost ALL of these kids have cell phones. These are middle class kids mind you.
- Almost ALL OF THEM message each other using that miserable little numeric pad.
The issue is that you're too old!Pretty impressive really. I'm trying to change my ways and try using my itty-bitty phone for e-mail and whatnot. I mean gimme a break, I'm 29 and already getting outpaced...
Things like OpenOffice and Gnome are worthy contributions as is NIS and NFS. Old and unused? I beg your pardon. ClearCase on UNIX uses NFS, and many of the NAS devices use it as well.
Finally, here are a couple points which you may not like:
- Companies exist to MAKE MONEY. Even if they support OSS, they are doing it for some percieved monetary gain.
- If OSS is to be a largely accepted and viable solution (i.e. something we can use at home and work and not just as a hobby) we need corporate contributions / support. This means companies like IBM, Red Hat, and *gasp* Sun being able to make money off these things. Otherwise they will eventually fade away or have little use.
half-witted Slashbot? I have done more for OpenOffice.org then you *ever* will.I think you make the parent poster's point much better than he ever could have hoped to do
How about Windows running Terminal Services client? Each instance requires at least 65MB of RAM just to get it fired up, not including apps (like Word, etc) that you may need to run. So if you combine that with the OS overhead to start with...
Secondly, who knows what kind of applications will be running? You're making a judgement with limited and sometimes incorrect information. Not a very strong starting point...
It couldn't be - it shouldn't be?!? It - it - it is...
*sigh*
goes back to counting seconds to happy hour (~ 8100 at time of posting)
And your spelling was better as well! ;)
- This law won't solve the problem even in the UK
OK, done, I agree. However, there are ramifications beyond that. What we've done is go from SPAM is a nuisance to SPAM is illegal. Spammers _LOSE_ rights here. We won't have any of this nonsense of spammers suing ISPs preventing them from cutting off service or suing AOL for blocking their trash.
What if the law is expanded? Any company who gleans profits FROM spam forfeits that money?
Hello? Now we're hitting them right where it hurts, in the balls! No wait, that's where _I_ want to hit them, that would hit them in the pocketbook. Close enough for me.
So while this law won't solve the problem, it helps. The only thing if worried about is legislation that encourages gov't monitoring or other Big Brother type activities...
LOL, yeah I know. Typing a response while trying to run to a meeting...
The whole POINT of XML is interoperability. So can this XML be used by someone else? Is it limited to Office?
If the namespaces can't be reused by another applicaiton, then NO, it isn't "cool" what MS did. It's the classic MS crap. They may as well have forgone the entire process and left it in a binary format.
"Proprietary" XML is marketing blather and not something that adds value to the end user...
And I get Troll'ed into next week... ;)
I've not advocated switching from Windows to any *nix on a whim, the skill and background of the admin staff is important, no doubt.
Good points...
Check the security bullitens, I'm not going to argue with you