There are plenty of languages you can teach any bum off the street in a matter of minutes, VB for instance.
Yes, same with COBOL (at least at the level of maintenance). Plus, they already have the licenses for the compiler and libraries and they already have the code. If the technology isn't busted, and you aren't planning major functionality updates, why break it? And, even if you are planning a major functionality update, is the cost of doing that in the currently existing technology greater than rewriting the application in the new technology while adding the new functionality?
I'll give you a hint - in most cases, buying new, non-existent code, hardware, and licenses costs more than enhancing old, existent code.
If Apple did this would there be the same waling, moaning and gnashing of teeth? Somehow I doubt it.
If another human steps on your foot, it's probably not a big issue. If an elephant steps on your foot, it's a big issue. How dare we humans treat the poor elephant so differently!
Save your thinly veiled accusations of hypocrisy for comparable circumstances...
P.S. You can't run Apple's OS on non-Apple hardware. At least in their case, that might be a justification for sending hardware. As far as I can see, there's no similar justification in this case.
Well, it may not be CS, but you'll be able to run Microsoft Vista on it...
OK. Now that the (semi-) joke is out of the way, a 100 processor core would have a ton of uses - large scale Monte-Carlo simulations (used in everything from AI, to biostatistics, to computational chemistry); verification of logic circuits, microcode and tests for both; large-scale optimization problems; high-speed rendering for scientific visualization and entertainment purposes; and the list goes on. Oh yeah, if you had more cores than processes, your computer might be a bit more responsive than it is now.
Of course, the problems mentioned above are some where computation speed is the bound and which are (relatively) easy to make parallel. Even so, the main obstacles to using this kind of circuitry would be optical memory size and ability to do enough I/O to keep the optical memory subsystem fed. This sort of I/O balancing is a problem, though, in all systems and should be easy enough to solve by balancing on-chip memory size against the number of cores.
OK. Because farming the writing out to writers who suck is cheaper than farming it out to writers who don't suck? Follow the money... follow the money... the answers will appear.
There are three discrete steps separated by reboots. There are about twenty pieces of information that the system could either (a) guess defaults, (b) probe for hardware during setup, or (c) leave for a built-in configuration tool run ex post installo. If this is what passes for easy, I'd hate to see hard... Never mind, I've seen hard on Linux before.
The bottom line is if Linux folks (and make no mistake, I am one myself) keep deluding themselves about what's "easy", we're not going to gain acceptance for a long time. This process is not easy. It may be "easier" than taking a standard Linux installation and installing MythTV on it, but it's not easy.
I think you've got the wrong attitude there. Don't see it as a "competition" - see it as a chance to have fun with your workmates. If you look at it as an opportunity rather than a drag then not only will you have a good time, but you might actually get a positive outcome.
Yes, I believe that every employee should be forced to participate in mandatory employer-sponsored Aussie-rules football games. And to use their own money to participate in mandatory employee-sponsored poker tournaments. And, while they're at it, lets have them participate in mandatory office maintenance (having folks clean their own toilets helps the old cash flow, too). After all, not being willing to do these things shows a lack of commitment and team spirit, don't you think? And, after all, "If you look at it as an opportunity rather than a drag then not only will you have a good time, but you might actually get a positive outcome."
I'm "that guy" who will be more inclined to buy something if the controls are in my face. The more knobs, buttons, meters, displays, and UI elements it has that are connected directly to particular functionality, the happier I am.
My first Vax, 22 years ago, had 1GB of disk, in the form of four washing-machine-sized drives which used removable 250MB disk packs.
That brings back memories. Our shop had a GB of disk, too - eight Fujitsu Eagles in a couple of racks. Of course, we were doing "big" things - IC design. Even at that, we were running about 20 or so users from that configuration. Things have definitely changed...
Ultimately, the biggest mistake Kim made was to leave the car.
No, ultimately, his biggest mistake was to try to get across the Coast Range on Forest Service roads in November. This is stupid whether you have GPS or not. In Oregon, you stick to main roads in winter unless (a) you know the area very well or (b) you have a very urgent reason to be on those roads. And you sure as hell don't drive them at night if you can avoid it.
Knowing about web architectures isn't evidence of tech knowledge either (other than knowledge about web architecture). The knowledge base for "tech" is wide and deep. I'd bet there are plenty of folks out there who know very well how the web and web applications work who know very little about MEMS design, polymer chemistry, RF circuit design, IC fabrication technologies, immunological assays, and a lot of the other things "tech" in this world. Just as computer geeks read Slashdot for information on areas of technology other than software, maybe there's a circuit geek or a chemistry geek that feels the same way about web apps.
I'll donate Microsoft. What are planning to use them for? Cannon fodder in one of your interminable little wars seems like a good idea. If you'd like, we can send you Oracle, as well, but you'll have to keep Larry and Bill in separate cages.
It's fine to question movitation, intent and commitment, but at the end of the day they've done something and you haven't.
Well, I could go to a random African village and buy a young child for $100. I can salve consciences (my own included) by saying that "I've done something to improve the village." Whether or not there is a net gain or not is irrelevant - it's probably not something that should be done regardless of benefit to me or the village. In the end, all that people can judge on is motivation, intent, commitment, and outcome. People are just questioning the outcome here: Are the resources spent in dealing with the deployment of the $100 laptop a net gain for those involved? And if they're worse than doing nothing, perhaps doing nothing is better than having "done something". In the end, morality and making decisions is a lot more complicated than either a simple cost-benefit ratio or a penchant for action. Is this a good thing? Who knows? In the end, we simply can't determine this prior to the act - there are too many variables and different valuations on them. So we do... Or do not... Do not believe you know the morality one way or another. That is for Esu to decide.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, same with COBOL (at least at the level of maintenance). Plus, they already have the licenses for the compiler and libraries and they already have the code. If the technology isn't busted, and you aren't planning major functionality updates, why break it? And, even if you are planning a major functionality update, is the cost of doing that in the currently existing technology greater than rewriting the application in the new technology while adding the new functionality?
I'll give you a hint - in most cases, buying new, non-existent code, hardware, and licenses costs more than enhancing old, existent code.
Yes! I read and post on Slashdot.
Balmer. Squirt. Gaaaahhhhhhh!!! My eyes!!!!!!
No. Because nobody else wanted it. By grilling them.
Tell your boss he should have hired someone experienced, rather than some "wet behind the ears" kid? :-)
If another human steps on your foot, it's probably not a big issue. If an elephant steps on your foot, it's a big issue. How dare we humans treat the poor elephant so differently!
Save your thinly veiled accusations of hypocrisy for comparable circumstances...
P.S. You can't run Apple's OS on non-Apple hardware. At least in their case, that might be a justification for sending hardware. As far as I can see, there's no similar justification in this case.
You've got your marching orders! New summer blockbuster: Snakes in the OR!
OK. Now that the (semi-) joke is out of the way, a 100 processor core would have a ton of uses - large scale Monte-Carlo simulations (used in everything from AI, to biostatistics, to computational chemistry); verification of logic circuits, microcode and tests for both; large-scale optimization problems; high-speed rendering for scientific visualization and entertainment purposes; and the list goes on. Oh yeah, if you had more cores than processes, your computer might be a bit more responsive than it is now.
Of course, the problems mentioned above are some where computation speed is the bound and which are (relatively) easy to make parallel. Even so, the main obstacles to using this kind of circuitry would be optical memory size and ability to do enough I/O to keep the optical memory subsystem fed. This sort of I/O balancing is a problem, though, in all systems and should be easy enough to solve by balancing on-chip memory size against the number of cores.
What a dork. Geez, don't take it out on the plant.
I rescued the plant and still have it after three years.
You will have good karma.
Nah... You're thinking of T. J. Stargate, where he jumps on the hood of a pyramid.
OK. Because farming the writing out to writers who suck is cheaper than farming it out to writers who don't suck? Follow the money... follow the money... the answers will appear.
Because farming out animation to China is cheaper than farming out SFX digital editing to China.
The bottom line is if Linux folks (and make no mistake, I am one myself) keep deluding themselves about what's "easy", we're not going to gain acceptance for a long time. This process is not easy. It may be "easier" than taking a standard Linux installation and installing MythTV on it, but it's not easy.
You mean it's not?
I hope they bring back the sing alongs from the IBM Song Book.
Yes, I believe that every employee should be forced to participate in mandatory employer-sponsored Aussie-rules football games. And to use their own money to participate in mandatory employee-sponsored poker tournaments. And, while they're at it, lets have them participate in mandatory office maintenance (having folks clean their own toilets helps the old cash flow, too). After all, not being willing to do these things shows a lack of commitment and team spirit, don't you think? And, after all, "If you look at it as an opportunity rather than a drag then not only will you have a good time, but you might actually get a positive outcome."
There are a lot of unrefined musicians with a global audience. Take Brittney Spears for example... oh hell, take her forever.
Don't tell me, you run Linux at home...
If you have to ask, you have too much of an agenda to believe the answer, anyhow... plus, you can't afford it.
That brings back memories. Our shop had a GB of disk, too - eight Fujitsu Eagles in a couple of racks. Of course, we were doing "big" things - IC design. Even at that, we were running about 20 or so users from that configuration. Things have definitely changed...
No, ultimately, his biggest mistake was to try to get across the Coast Range on Forest Service roads in November. This is stupid whether you have GPS or not. In Oregon, you stick to main roads in winter unless (a) you know the area very well or (b) you have a very urgent reason to be on those roads. And you sure as hell don't drive them at night if you can avoid it.
Nah! That's the argument for Beano, not LactAid. Sheesh. I hate it when people get their science all messed up.
Knowing about web architectures isn't evidence of tech knowledge either (other than knowledge about web architecture). The knowledge base for "tech" is wide and deep. I'd bet there are plenty of folks out there who know very well how the web and web applications work who know very little about MEMS design, polymer chemistry, RF circuit design, IC fabrication technologies, immunological assays, and a lot of the other things "tech" in this world. Just as computer geeks read Slashdot for information on areas of technology other than software, maybe there's a circuit geek or a chemistry geek that feels the same way about web apps.
I'll donate Microsoft. What are planning to use them for? Cannon fodder in one of your interminable little wars seems like a good idea. If you'd like, we can send you Oracle, as well, but you'll have to keep Larry and Bill in separate cages.
Well, I could go to a random African village and buy a young child for $100. I can salve consciences (my own included) by saying that "I've done something to improve the village." Whether or not there is a net gain or not is irrelevant - it's probably not something that should be done regardless of benefit to me or the village. In the end, all that people can judge on is motivation, intent, commitment, and outcome. People are just questioning the outcome here: Are the resources spent in dealing with the deployment of the $100 laptop a net gain for those involved? And if they're worse than doing nothing, perhaps doing nothing is better than having "done something". In the end, morality and making decisions is a lot more complicated than either a simple cost-benefit ratio or a penchant for action. Is this a good thing? Who knows? In the end, we simply can't determine this prior to the act - there are too many variables and different valuations on them. So we do... Or do not... Do not believe you know the morality one way or another. That is for Esu to decide.