Couple that with Microsoft's heavy-handed treatment of developers of late (C# only for Windows Phone 7)
i love to demonize microsoft as much as the next guy, but... C# is not the only development environment for WP7, there is also SilverLight, opening up development to a much broader developer audience.
not to mention that Android development tends to be Java based, and iOS development until very recently was ObjC only.
I have read that an Apple TV won't stream content on a NAS that can otherwise host an iTunes library; the library actually needs to be on a computer.
correct. the appletv uses the home sharing system instead of shared itunes libraries or a NAS. not optimal, but you can import other media into itunes as long as it is tagged correctly. (you can use lostify for this).
Re:Based on what I saw in the article
on
Apple vs. Google TVs
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
i'm curious what you're using for netflix on the device. i've tried understudy and boxee, and was sorely disappointed with the issues of both. i purchased the appletv solely for netflix support, but would still be happy to go back to just my mac mini (which is used for playing audio/video off the local network, hulu, boxee, sapphire, etc via front row).
Do you honestly think that if the Chinese get a toe-hold on the moon after spending tons of money that they're going to share it with everybody else
yeah, because the chinese are the only ones going to space? come on.
Have you ever read a history book?
and do you realize that russia is already launching hardware to ISS? and that the europeans have a thriving space program? you know, those people that we already work with on so many other things?
If we're not going to move forward up there, other nations will. And we will have ceded the high frontier.
we will have ceded the high frontier to other... humans? why must there still be a space race? we've already run that sprint. why not a more of a space marathon where we work together as a team, not direct competition?
why not build an app for it, and sell it on the itunes store?
there's no reason to tie this to a single product. if they are making money off of one advertisement per half hour per user, then it should hold that raising the number of users significantly would also raise their profits.
who cares if it's from microsoft or apple? if the service is good, and can attract enough users to survive, then it could be a good product.
Ditto for MMS. What would be special about iPhone MMS, other than that all of a sudden millions of iPhone users are suddenly going to start using the service. Here's to hoping its simply a capacity problem and not a "how can we rape our customers even more" problem.
if it were a capacity problem, wouldn't we have already have seen it for the razr? it supported MMS from day one, and there were plenty more of those than iphones out there.
You were elected as a Republican, for better or for worse. You should either finish your term as one, or if you can no longer consider yourself a Republican, resign.
funny. i thought that he was elected as a senator, based on his values and the things he's done for his constituents. i didn't realize that once someone became a republican, or a democrat, or a libertarian, or a communist, that they lost all ability to do anything but the party line.
what a nice black and white world you must live in.
Everything else will require at least a medium rewrite at some point when you switch over to a real database. You could of course extend everything upon a glorified flatfile until your reinvented wheels strangles all your progress.
not really. i think that you (and, unfortunately, the FA) are missing the point that the map and reduce functionality, while powerful, have one major advantage: scalability. simply put, a query can be, by definition of the map function, broken up into several discrete operations and performed simultaneously on the data.
while this can be done in Oracle, using RAC, to some extent, the cost and complication is a major barrier to entry. Cache-Fusion, while typically good, can also end up being a liability when the cost based optimizer attempts to split up the query into atomic tasks in order to correctly parallelize the query. for instance, on one application of RAC (multiple multi-core servers, fibrechannel disks, and oracle clustered filesystem), across 100,000,000+ rows, when heavy writes were occurring, it was cheaper computationally to force a full disk scan, using hints, than to rely on Cache-Fusion to figure out what data was stale and what data was fresh. this was discovered after several days spent neck deep in tkprof output.
Linking to Wikipedia doesn't really make you authoritative, as an aside.
no, its puts things in context, and helps to make sure that we are using common terminology via definition.
anyways, your attempts at flamebait won't draw me in - you've already shown in this, and previous comments that you're just out looking for a fight.
if you were willing to learn about something, and not just make inflammatory comments, that would be something else entirely. i feel kind of sorry for you.
first some context. i architect data warehouses for a living. i also live in a world of building fairly specialized frameworks to deal with data warehouses architected as star and snowflake schemas. i tend spend quite a lot of time in pseudo-relationaldatabases that don't fully implement codd's rules.
for fun, i like to spend some time toying with couchdb, using it for loose data warehousing, extending it, and generally enjoying the application development freedom it gives me.
that said, let me respond to some of your points:
Slacker DBs like CouchDB and SimpleDB, have taken off for the simple reason that most developers have absolutely mediocre database knowledge or skills, and rather than learning it's just as easy to just wave it all off as obsolete.
map/reduce solves a specific problem in data warehousing - column based lookups given specific rules, able to be broken down into atomics and performed in massive parallel. this allows for very cheap horizontal scaling over a large dataset.
It's no surprise that the creator of CouchDB, for instance, hadn't a clue about databases when he began his project.
this just shows ignorance. even just a cursory scan of damien's resume says otherwise.
what if i want to take a picture of something in front of me, on my desk, while i am sitting down. i've actually done this a few times, so it's not too much to ask.
hopefully there will be an easy override button i can press?
sometimes gadgets try too hard to be "smart", and end up infuriating the end users.
google for star schema - or snowflake schema, or denormalizing data.
but if you have so much data that 80 queries/second mysql 3 may not be the best tool for the job.
modern rdbms's rely on several nice tricks to make things a little bit easier, ranging from partitioning of data to join collapses, to materialized views, and partial indexes. none of which you will get from mysql 3.
The relational database is not going anywhere and nothing in that article is based on any firm understanding of managing data.
no, the relational database is not going anywhere, you are correct. but, that does not mean that there aren't instances where a non-relational database, with the addition of map/reduce, aren't extremely useful.
non-relational databases have been around for decades, and are in use for quite a number of applications involving rapid development and storage of very large records. couple this with map/reduce, and you have the ability to scale quickly with very large datasets.
scaling quickly is a very difficult problem to solve with an RDBMS - you either need to continue to throw more hardware at the problem, to the point of diminishing returns, or re-architect your data at the cost of possible significant downtime, while still attempting to serve up the data in a timely manner. i've been deep in the bowels of oracle RAC, fighting to get just 5% more speed out of a query over a billion rows and realizing that i have to start over with a new schema, just to squeeze more data out. compare that to simply adding another machine and letting the map functionality run across one more cpu before returning it for the reduce.
Is the notion of a "join" obsolete? No, but it is typically impractical in a high volume system. You would probably use denormalization as a strategy.
once again, correct, but having to denormalize to a snowflake or a star isn't always the best solution. you're taking the best parts of the relational database model, and throwing them out - normalization, referential integrity, just to squeeze more out of something that may not be the best tool for the job.
do you hammer with a wrench? i have before, and i managed to hurt my thumb.
Slashdot Mirror
you know, there was a great post about how badly twitter went downhill with some simple scrolling issues.
ah, here it is: http://ejohn.org/blog/learning-from-twitter/
please, slashdot, learn from twitter. please?
i love to demonize microsoft as much as the next guy, but ... C# is not the only development environment for WP7, there is also SilverLight, opening up development to a much broader developer audience.
not to mention that Android development tends to be Java based, and iOS development until very recently was ObjC only.
wondering how quickly these speed increments will "trickle down" to projects like node.js.
i'd love to see speed increases as the javascript engine matures.
[un]fortunately, i was only able to actually view one page, as when i went to click on a second link i received a "Database Error".
the most interesting thing was that more recent articles have a password. that makes me wonder:
is there only one password? is it: ' and 1 = 1 ---?
do users "share" passwords?
what happens when someone clicks the "share" link? does having multiple people visit from your "share" cause additional copyright infringement?
correct. the appletv uses the home sharing system instead of shared itunes libraries or a NAS. not optimal, but you can import other media into itunes as long as it is tagged correctly. (you can use lostify for this).
i'm curious what you're using for netflix on the device. i've tried understudy and boxee, and was sorely disappointed with the issues of both. i purchased the appletv solely for netflix support, but would still be happy to go back to just my mac mini (which is used for playing audio/video off the local network, hulu, boxee, sapphire, etc via front row).
personally i use a mac mini with front row. i map my fileserver via smb, play content using sapphire, the hulu plugin for front row, boxee, etc.
it works reasonably well.
we've done something similar: we've converted rarely used phone booths into thriving restrooms.
... is that they wanted to diddle while rome burned?
why not just use the existing coax cable as pull lines and replace them with cat5e?
should end up being cheaper than building out some weird hybrid solution.
how about linking to the original article instead of a blog entry attempting to get page views by copying chunks of the article?
yeah, because the chinese are the only ones going to space? come on.
and do you realize that russia is already launching hardware to ISS? and that the europeans have a thriving space program? you know, those people that we already work with on so many other things?
get real.
we will have ceded the high frontier to other ... humans? why must there still be a space race? we've already run that sprint. why not a more of a space marathon where we work together as a team, not direct competition?
always back up. use time machine.
try an in-place update. the installer should inform you if it is able to do an in-place update (it should be able to).
if that fails, a clean install should be just fine, with your time machine backup used for applications, user files, and settings.
why not build an app for it, and sell it on the itunes store?
there's no reason to tie this to a single product. if they are making money off of one advertisement per half hour per user, then it should hold that raising the number of users significantly would also raise their profits.
who cares if it's from microsoft or apple? if the service is good, and can attract enough users to survive, then it could be a good product.
go to help & preferences, click on classic index - general, and check use classic index.
that got rid of it for me.
if it were a capacity problem, wouldn't we have already have seen it for the razr? it supported MMS from day one, and there were plenty more of those than iphones out there.
funny. i thought that he was elected as a senator, based on his values and the things he's done for his constituents. i didn't realize that once someone became a republican, or a democrat, or a libertarian, or a communist, that they lost all ability to do anything but the party line.
what a nice black and white world you must live in.
how about jump to top trying pause, then jump to top to pause view the pause, then jump to top page pause on an pause, jump to top iPhone?
is there any way to disable all of this behavior?
not really. i think that you (and, unfortunately, the FA) are missing the point that the map and reduce functionality, while powerful, have one major advantage: scalability. simply put, a query can be, by definition of the map function, broken up into several discrete operations and performed simultaneously on the data.
while this can be done in Oracle, using RAC, to some extent, the cost and complication is a major barrier to entry. Cache-Fusion, while typically good, can also end up being a liability when the cost based optimizer attempts to split up the query into atomic tasks in order to correctly parallelize the query. for instance, on one application of RAC (multiple multi-core servers, fibrechannel disks, and oracle clustered filesystem), across 100,000,000+ rows, when heavy writes were occurring, it was cheaper computationally to force a full disk scan, using hints, than to rely on Cache-Fusion to figure out what data was stale and what data was fresh. this was discovered after several days spent neck deep in tkprof output.
conversely, map, by design, already does this.
no, its puts things in context, and helps to make sure that we are using common terminology via definition.
anyways, your attempts at flamebait won't draw me in - you've already shown in this, and previous comments that you're just out looking for a fight.
if you were willing to learn about something, and not just make inflammatory comments, that would be something else entirely. i feel kind of sorry for you.
first some context. i architect data warehouses for a living. i also live in a world of building fairly specialized frameworks to deal with data warehouses architected as star and snowflake schemas. i tend spend quite a lot of time in pseudo-relational databases that don't fully implement codd's rules.
for fun, i like to spend some time toying with couchdb, using it for loose data warehousing, extending it, and generally enjoying the application development freedom it gives me.
that said, let me respond to some of your points:
map/reduce solves a specific problem in data warehousing - column based lookups given specific rules, able to be broken down into atomics and performed in massive parallel. this allows for very cheap horizontal scaling over a large dataset.
this just shows ignorance. even just a cursory scan of damien's resume says otherwise.
what if i want to take a picture of something in front of me, on my desk, while i am sitting down. i've actually done this a few times, so it's not too much to ask.
hopefully there will be an easy override button i can press?
sometimes gadgets try too hard to be "smart", and end up infuriating the end users.
google for star schema - or snowflake schema, or denormalizing data.
but if you have so much data that 80 queries/second mysql 3 may not be the best tool for the job.
modern rdbms's rely on several nice tricks to make things a little bit easier, ranging from partitioning of data to join collapses, to materialized views, and partial indexes. none of which you will get from mysql 3.
no, the relational database is not going anywhere, you are correct. but, that does not mean that there aren't instances where a non-relational database, with the addition of map/reduce, aren't extremely useful.
non-relational databases have been around for decades, and are in use for quite a number of applications involving rapid development and storage of very large records. couple this with map/reduce, and you have the ability to scale quickly with very large datasets.
scaling quickly is a very difficult problem to solve with an RDBMS - you either need to continue to throw more hardware at the problem, to the point of diminishing returns, or re-architect your data at the cost of possible significant downtime, while still attempting to serve up the data in a timely manner. i've been deep in the bowels of oracle RAC, fighting to get just 5% more speed out of a query over a billion rows and realizing that i have to start over with a new schema, just to squeeze more data out. compare that to simply adding another machine and letting the map functionality run across one more cpu before returning it for the reduce.
once again, correct, but having to denormalize to a snowflake or a star isn't always the best solution. you're taking the best parts of the relational database model, and throwing them out - normalization, referential integrity, just to squeeze more out of something that may not be the best tool for the job.
do you hammer with a wrench? i have before, and i managed to hurt my thumb.