The only way I have found to convince Microsoft biggots is cost. That is why I have been able to get a lot of Linux/Open Source in places. It's kinda funny that security, speed, and reliability hardly ever come up. Now, understand that I have to do all the work setting the stuff up!
Once a "Free" alternative is in and works well (or at least as well as Microsoft) then they "see the light" and start rolling it out.
Microsoft cannot compete with Linux/ Open Source on cost. Even their argument of TCO is being shot down.
While I would love to agree with you, I know a bunch of "sheep" that just follow whatever Microsoft does. When those companies need 64 bit "power" they will move to Windows + Intel 64. They MIGHT give the AMD processor a try, but that is a HUGE might.
So will it sell well? Yes. Because the sheep that only buy Microsoft will say get the SQL server and the latest verison of Windows and run it. Microsoft will have a version of most of their software that will run on it.
Personally I hope that AMD gets their chip out soon and has some competition.
First. I think games are big for Linux. It is another one of those applications that some people "must have". If almost every application that was for Windows ran well on Linux, AND people had to choose to pay the microsoft tax (new machines), then I believe that quite a few people would be running linux on the desktop. I have found that most people use Microsoft products only because they are free (pirated) AND that is what other people use. (Catch 22 problem). However when they have to fork over say, $500 for Office, then somehow they "decide" to try OpenOffice or something else.
I agree that OSX looks great. Why don't people use OSX? It only runs on Mac hardware. I am not saying that Mac hardware is bad, but there are a LOT of people who won't buy it AND it is more expensive than other X86 platforms. One last point is that it says Macintosh. A ton of people hate Apple, or bought an X86 box and want to "justify" their decision by puting down other systems.
Using your analogy about AOL or Symantec, then they should just use Java. It runs on ALL platforms that I can think of. However those companies generally don't care much about that ~5% of desktop users.
Now as a developer, I would agree that I would want to try and develop for the least common denominator (old.net over new.net) HOWEVER, if you told me that 95% of the worlds market has the new.net AND I can save a significant amount of time by using new API's then I will use those new API's. Look at what people are doing with Websites and internet explorer... A ton of them don't care at all how it looks in any other browser.
Would Steve Balmer care about fragmenting developers? Well, if it meant that Microsoft stock went up, or that they cemented their place in a new market... YES, YES, YES! He would argue that the other vendors (LINUX/MONO) just needs to keep up with the changes. That of course will be impossible, because those developers will be trying to hit a moving target.
Answer me this. Why doesn't Microsoft work with the SAMBA team? Why haven't they released any of their code for Active Directory to the SAMBA team?
If by helping you it would kill many others then I would say that it is a bad idea.
I am glad that it will help you. But by helping you it will probably hurt Linux+Java growth. Most I.T. shops that have committed to dotNet are generally not the shops that would consider anything else but Microsoft. I do realize that there are exceptions to this, but I can't think of any place in town (Indy) that is the exception to this. I know a few places that are working with.Net and they are 100% Microsoft.
Now I know a LOT of places that use 99% Microsoft and use Java. So it is my belief, as stated above, that Microsoft will first try everything to kill off Java and then make sure that C#/.net will not work well on anything but Windows. So enjoy the brief good news that you can develop C# code on Linux. It is my belief that if.Net takes off, then you won't be enjoying it long...
Look at what they did for Office on the Macintosh. It is a similar story. When Win95 came out they produced a crappy version of Office for the Mac, (took 1 min to load on a IICI) and if you said how slow it was they said "You should run this on a PC". Then when they needed to win the browser war they agreed to produce a good version of office for the Mac IF Steve Jobs agreed to use I.E. as the default browser. He agreed and POOF office now launched and worked much better!
This is the same story all over again. Dance with the Devil and you will get burned.
Actually it is my belief and the courts that Microsoft was required to ship a "Sun compatible JVM".
The core issue is "Compatible". Sun use to have only a handfull of JVM test. Now they have TONS of test for a JVM to pass. So Microsoft just kept the old 1.14 JVM and then they dropped it altogether. That was their big mistake.
It is my belief that they could just keep shipping the 1.14 JVM, but Sun apparently won in court to force Microsoft to ship a later JVM that passes their compatibility. I believe that the argument is that the 1.14 JVM no longer passes their tests, and since Microsoft agreed to pass any compatibility test they are in breach of contract.
The damage has already been done to Microsoft. A ton of developers use Java 2 now and most people don't care about Applets anymore. Sun uses Web Start as an alternative, and 50% of the U.S Internet population is now on broadband. So getting a 5MB JVM deployed isn't such an issue anymore.
This is a double edge sword for the Linux community. If this project continues and is good then people like you will try out Linux and probably use it.
However, there is a serious risk that Microsoft will help in this development only to crush out their primary competition (JAVA). Once that appears to be done then they will do everything in their power to make sure that Mono dies. Specificaly they would change their software to break Mono.
Now Linux people appear not to care about politics:-), and they just develop Linux to work with about anything. So you WILL get your wish.
I personally think that it is a bad idea to develop Mono, and think that in the long run it will only help Microsoft. I don't think it will hurt Linux though. But I guess that the same could have been said about SAMBA. Don't you just wonder why Microsoft wants to help Mono development so much and yet they HATE SAMBA?
but IF Linus signed a contract with Sun saying that he will include a "Sun compatable and certified" JVM with every Linux kernel for the next 5 YEARS; then he would have to do so.
We wouldn't have to worry about that though, because unlike some companies Linus doesn't appear to be so stupid as to sign anything like that.
Man, you hit the nail on the head. That is the ONLY way I can beat the game in a custom mission.
The guy has a valid point though. They could have made it a lot easier to control.
Another complaint is about Blizzard. Why do they come out with stats for characters and then pimp them in a patch. WCIII isn't too bad, because all you have to do is change your strategy, but games like Diablo II, it sucked bad. You would think that as much beta testing as they do this wouldn't be a problem. Now my last gripe is that they don't release Linux versions of their game.
I just pray that the next verison of WINE will work well with the ATI Radeon driver...
Mabe it was the version that I used, but can you replace a single file of a package with a newer one? With WinInstall the package gets copied to a server "as is" and you could do just about anything with it. This assumes that you are not compressing it though... My experience with Zenworks is that it was a pain to "modify" a package once it was done. However, I will trust you that they have improved it.
Also, I believe that they got rid of the requirement of a Novell Client to be installed, but I am not sure about this one either. If that is not the case then he will have to deal with all the Novell client issues as well.
My main point is that for this guy to implement NDS and Zenworks would be no small task, and the benifit would be small. Now if he had 200+ desktops and some control over the staging process then it would make sense.
You may be correct about not needing an NT or Novell server, but in my experience you will have to end up having one. The NDS stuff on Linux lags behind the others, and I wouldn't be supprised if a "new" version of Zenworks required a "new" DS.nlm.
Just my experience with Novell. Again you are probably correct, and I agree with your comment about DS.
I agree with you, and am a HUGE fan of WinInstall, but there is a couple of issues.
1. WinInstall handles win9x and winnt/2k/XP clients differently.
2. All the systems you mentioned cost money. A significant amount of money.
3. SMS will only work with Microsoft stuff and it kinda sucks, although I heard the new version is ok. Just expect vendor lock-in.
4. Novell Zenworks will require an NT server or a Novell server, and the version that I used put all the files in NDS. You couldn't edit them or do much with them after you did a scan. WinInstall blew them out of the water.
The core reason you use an unatended install is the EXCACT reason this guy wants one and WinInstall isn't such a good option. He has 50 desktops probably all different. Some have multiple drives some don't. If you made a WinInstall or SMS or ZenWorks package to do this type of install, you better be great a building those packages, because you will be using your "test" machine as a template for all the desktops in the organization. If for some reason that test machine had a DLL that the other 40 didn't have...
Yes it is true that 4 years later some of the code was still not native PPC code. But a HUGE part of it was. The parts that needed to be were done.
Apple is doing ok now. They are not doing great. I believe that they are trying to get non graphics people to "switch" to their system.
I don't argue that their hardware is good, not the best, but good. My argument is that their competition has a significant leg up on them with regards to processing power and looks like that it will continue. It will probably get worse. If the competition gets the bugs worked out of their OS/Software then Apple could be in for a world of hurt; AND their competition is spending BILLIONS trying to get their issues corrected.
If everything is equal and the Mac cost more and is significantly slower, then why would you buy it?
Your last point about me not needing OS X. I somewhat agree with you. For what I do I don't need a Mac and if Dreamweaver had a Linux version, then I could use Linux as apposed to Windows. Also the games I like to play don't run well on Linux... That is why the Mac looked good. It has a good OS and a lot of games are being written for it now, but if the processor is slower for games and the hardware cost more then I guess I will put my money elsewhere. Personaly I don't care about paying ~10% more for a Mac either. I will just have to see where both companies are in 8-12 months.
I would still argue that the current Mac fans would still buy a Mac given ANY processor if the quality remained the same and the performance didn't suffer too bad. Now IF IBM/Motorolla can produce a processor that is equal to or better than the competiton at the time, AND maintain it, then I will be proven wrong. Time will tell.
Ok, the other guy who responded was not me. (obvious)
I did own a PowerMac in 1992 and it had a 601 at 100MHZ and it ran a LOT of software slower than my 66MHZ 68040 Mac. However, ALL my software did run on it. It ran non native software like a 33-50MHZ 68040 Mac. However, it didn't take Apple and others long to move to the PPC architecture. In less than a year and a half, most of my stuff could be gotten for PPC, and it ran great.
Would the switch be painfull for Apple, yes. Would it be good in the long run? It depends. If Motorolla keeps getting its butt kicked, AND the difference in processing power continues to grow; then it will be bad. Just imagine if Windows finally gets its color mapping issues fixed, and it runs 3-5 times as fast AND it cost less. Now if Motorolla/IBM with its smaller R&D budget can keep up or exceed Intel/AMD, then it will pay off bigtime.
And I agree with you. Thank God I am not Apple! To have to compete with Microsoft with the current republican administration AND having to compete with Linux on their server front would keep me up at night. I hope that they make it!
I still hope to own a powerbook late this year or next year! But if they don't have that new chip ready and AMD has their new 64bit in a laptop, then it will probably be some other laptop with Linux on it.
Lets assume that all your old software ran under emmulation like it did with the jump from 68xxx code to ppc jump.
I hope that the PPC 970 will be great, but my experience in dealing with IBM is that it will take a year or so longer to get things out than they say it will... Can you imagine comparing a ppc 604 1.3GH to a new 64bit chip from Intel or AMD running at 3GH, with software optimized for 64Bits?
My issue is that Intel puts over 1 Billion in R&D every year. I don't see Motorolla doing that. They just cut a huge part of their R&D! If I were Apple I would not want to bet the future of my company on Motorolla.
Again I am an Apple fan; but if I was Apple I would be working hard on getting their OS + emmulation to work with IA-64 and AMD's 64BIT technology.
Now if people could buy a new Mac and it ran most old Mac software at a good speed, and any new software at speeds equal to a Windows+Intel speed then I believe most current Mac owners would still buy another Mac, and those considering jumping because of the processor difference wouldn't. This argument would go away.
First, let me say that I like Apple. I would LOVE to have one of the new powerbooks.
Now to use your comparison of cars, lets assume that 95% of the driving that you do is raceing, and the Dodge actually had around 100 more HP and a lot more torque.
This is what the article was expressing. It did not say that the Mac sucks. It just said that image processing was a lot faster on a SINGLE P4 than the fastest dual G4 Mac.
Now, Apple should take this and take a long hard look at their relationship with Motorolla.
I will ask you a question. Would you still buy a Macintosh if it had an Intel/AMD chip in it? This assumes that it had all the currently quality and functionality of a current Macintosh? Now what if it was faster and cheaper? I would!!!!
Good point, but as mentioned it is only 2048BIT encryption. That is 2k not 2MB.
Just rememeber how long it took to crack the DVD code? Wow that was done by a 15 year old...
It won't take long.
Also, in the news today it was found legal in the U.S. for that kid to crack the DVD code for his OWN use!
The motion picture association had no comment...
Please understand that I don't believe that someone should steal software, movies or songs. That is a different discussion than modifiying something you own.
Lets see. I buy the product. I own the product. It is not even a service. So it would be hard to compare it to a Direct TV device. This would be similar to me buying a chair from a company and turning it into a couch. I am sure that any waranty that I would have would be void, but I have the right to do it. I am NOT going in to their ROM and taking all their code to create a competitor to XBOX.
Enjoy your laugh now. I have a strong feeling that the code will be broken soon, and the customers will be laughing last...
Granted I don't want to see anyone buy an Xbox for any reason. I don't care if Microsoft looses money on every one sold! It still helps their marketshare; so in a weird way I kinda like that it has been taken down.
You take the best 4cyl Japanese car and I will take the top 8, 10 and 12 cyl cars and we will see who wins on 99.999% of the race tracks in the world. I don't mean to put down the likes of Honda or Nissan, I own a Nissan and love it, but to say that it would stand a chance against a Mustang or Camaro (comparable cars) is a joke. The only thing it would win on is gas milage.
I don't see too many people using 4cyl cars in Top Fule. Even the 6cyl gets beat in 1/8 mile races now....
I use Jdeveloper 9i and have found it a good IDE for JSP and standard java applications. I don't use any of their wizards to create stuff though. You say that you know several development teams who bought it and then switched to something else. Can you give specific reasons? What didn't they like, or what couldn't they do that the other IDE could?
I have used Jdeveloper to work with a few MySQL databases also, so I don't agree that it is just for Oracle DB. Now if you want to use their wizards to do stuff and you buy in to the whole OC4J stuff then I would agree. But you don't have to do that stuff. I don't.
I have not tried Together or Eclips, so I cannot comment on them, but I am seriously interested in what all those development teams needed to do that Jdeveloper couldn't do well.
First let me say that I use Resin for our production systems and LOVE it. But you seem to be missing the point that Tomcat is FREE. Resin is only free if you do NOT use it to make money. Granted Resin is cheap (under 1k), but not free.
Also I would say that getting Resin hooked in to Apache 1.3.x and configured is far easier than Tomcat 3.x. I know 4.x is out, but I haven't had a chance to play with it.
I believe another difference is that Resin will support some J2EE stuff out and Tomcat won't. Not that I use CMP beans and stuff, but a version of Resin does support it.
I kinda would like a good book on JBOSS and Apache. Does anyone know if JBOSS has an easy way to deploy your EJB's yet, or do you have to write XML code?
Slashdot Mirror
The only way I have found to convince Microsoft biggots is cost. That is why I have been able to get a lot of Linux/Open Source in places. It's kinda funny that security, speed, and reliability hardly ever come up. Now, understand that I have to do all the work setting the stuff up!
Once a "Free" alternative is in and works well (or at least as well as Microsoft) then they "see the light" and start rolling it out.
Microsoft cannot compete with Linux/ Open Source on cost. Even their argument of TCO is being shot down.
While I would love to agree with you, I know a bunch of "sheep" that just follow whatever Microsoft does. When those companies need 64 bit "power" they will move to Windows + Intel 64. They MIGHT give the AMD processor a try, but that is a HUGE might.
So will it sell well? Yes. Because the sheep that only buy Microsoft will say get the SQL server and the latest verison of Windows and run it. Microsoft will have a version of most of their software that will run on it.
Personally I hope that AMD gets their chip out soon and has some competition.
Do you consider Steve Jobbs a "good person".
:-)
Seems kinda evil to me.
How about you give me your Macintosh
Also, could you point to any information about the Sears statement.
First. I think games are big for Linux. It is another one of those applications that some people "must have". If almost every application that was for Windows ran well on Linux, AND people had to choose to pay the microsoft tax (new machines), then I believe that quite a few people would be running linux on the desktop. I have found that most people use Microsoft products only because they are free (pirated) AND that is what other people use. (Catch 22 problem). However when they have to fork over say, $500 for Office, then somehow they "decide" to try OpenOffice or something else.
I agree that OSX looks great.
Why don't people use OSX? It only runs on Mac hardware. I am not saying that Mac hardware is bad, but there are a LOT of people who won't buy it AND it is more expensive than other X86 platforms. One last point is that it says Macintosh. A ton of people hate Apple, or bought an X86 box and want to "justify" their decision by puting down other systems.
Using your analogy about AOL or Symantec, then they should just use Java. It runs on ALL platforms that I can think of. However those companies generally don't care much about that ~5% of desktop users.
.net over new .net) HOWEVER, if you told me that 95% of the worlds market has the new .net AND I can save a significant amount of time by using new API's then I will use those new API's. Look at what people are doing with Websites and internet explorer... A ton of them don't care at all how it looks in any other browser.
Now as a developer, I would agree that I would want to try and develop for the least common denominator (old
Would Steve Balmer care about fragmenting developers? Well, if it meant that Microsoft stock went up, or that they cemented their place in a new market... YES, YES, YES! He would argue that the other vendors (LINUX/MONO) just needs to keep up with the changes. That of course will be impossible, because those developers will be trying to hit a moving target.
Answer me this. Why doesn't Microsoft work with the SAMBA team? Why haven't they released any of their code for Active Directory to the SAMBA team?
Ummmmm yeah..... I am going to need you to come in and work on Saturday..... say around 9:00am... Um.... yeah and Sunday too. :-)
The thing is Bob it's not that I am lazy, its that I just don't care...
If by helping you it would kill many others then I would say that it is a bad idea.
.Net and they are 100% Microsoft.
.Net takes off, then you won't be enjoying it long...
I am glad that it will help you. But by helping you it will probably hurt Linux+Java growth. Most I.T. shops that have committed to dotNet are generally not the shops that would consider anything else but Microsoft. I do realize that there are exceptions to this, but I can't think of any place in town (Indy) that is the exception to this. I know a few places that are working with
Now I know a LOT of places that use 99% Microsoft and use Java. So it is my belief, as stated above, that Microsoft will first try everything to kill off Java and then make sure that C#/.net will not work well on anything but Windows. So enjoy the brief good news that you can develop C# code on Linux. It is my belief that if
Look at what they did for Office on the Macintosh. It is a similar story. When Win95 came out they produced a crappy version of Office for the Mac, (took 1 min to load on a IICI) and if you said how slow it was they said "You should run this on a PC". Then when they needed to win the browser war they agreed to produce a good version of office for the Mac IF Steve Jobs agreed to use I.E. as the default browser. He agreed and POOF office now launched and worked much better!
This is the same story all over again. Dance with the Devil and you will get burned.
Actually it is my belief and the courts that Microsoft was required to ship a "Sun compatible JVM".
The core issue is "Compatible". Sun use to have only a handfull of JVM test. Now they have TONS of test for a JVM to pass. So Microsoft just kept the old 1.14 JVM and then they dropped it altogether. That was their big mistake.
It is my belief that they could just keep shipping the 1.14 JVM, but Sun apparently won in court to force Microsoft to ship a later JVM that passes their compatibility. I believe that the argument is that the 1.14 JVM no longer passes their tests, and since Microsoft agreed to pass any compatibility test they are in breach of contract.
The damage has already been done to Microsoft. A ton of developers use Java 2 now and most people don't care about Applets anymore. Sun uses Web Start as an alternative, and 50% of the U.S Internet population is now on broadband. So getting a 5MB JVM deployed isn't such an issue anymore.
I realize that, but I was just commenting on the above post.
My point is that Microsoft signed a contract. It was a stupid contract on their part. Now they must live up to it.
In my opinion that contract was the beginning of the end for Microsoft. They gave up a HUGE developer base, AND OS lockin for those developers.
This is a double edge sword for the Linux community. If this project continues and is good then people like you will try out Linux and probably use it.
:-), and they just develop Linux to work with about anything. So you WILL get your wish.
However, there is a serious risk that Microsoft will help in this development only to crush out their primary competition (JAVA). Once that appears to be done then they will do everything in their power to make sure that Mono dies. Specificaly they would change their software to break Mono.
Now Linux people appear not to care about politics
I personally think that it is a bad idea to develop Mono, and think that in the long run it will only help Microsoft. I don't think it will hurt Linux though. But I guess that the same could have been said about SAMBA. Don't you just wonder why Microsoft wants to help Mono development so much and yet they HATE SAMBA?
They didn't use to hate SAMBA either...
Kinda funny,
but IF Linus signed a contract with Sun saying that he will include a "Sun compatable and certified" JVM with every Linux kernel for the next 5 YEARS; then he would have to do so.
We wouldn't have to worry about that though, because unlike some companies Linus doesn't appear to be so stupid as to sign anything like that.
Man, you hit the nail on the head. That is the ONLY way I can beat the game in a custom mission.
The guy has a valid point though. They could have made it a lot easier to control.
Another complaint is about Blizzard. Why do they come out with stats for characters and then pimp them in a patch. WCIII isn't too bad, because all you have to do is change your strategy, but games like Diablo II, it sucked bad. You would think that as much beta testing as they do this wouldn't be a problem. Now my last gripe is that they don't release Linux versions of their game.
I just pray that the next verison of WINE will work well with the ATI Radeon driver...
Mabe it was the version that I used, but can you replace a single file of a package with a newer one? With WinInstall the package gets copied to a server "as is" and you could do just about anything with it. This assumes that you are not compressing it though... My experience with Zenworks is that it was a pain to "modify" a package once it was done. However, I will trust you that they have improved it.
Also, I believe that they got rid of the requirement of a Novell Client to be installed, but I am not sure about this one either. If that is not the case then he will have to deal with all the Novell client issues as well.
My main point is that for this guy to implement NDS and Zenworks would be no small task, and the benifit would be small. Now if he had 200+ desktops and some control over the staging process then it would make sense.
You may be correct about not needing an NT or Novell server, but in my experience you will have to end up having one. The NDS stuff on Linux lags behind the others, and I wouldn't be supprised if a "new" version of Zenworks required a "new" DS.nlm.
Just my experience with Novell. Again you are probably correct, and I agree with your comment about DS.
I agree with you, and am a HUGE fan of WinInstall, but there is a couple of issues.
1. WinInstall handles win9x and winnt/2k/XP clients differently.
2. All the systems you mentioned cost money. A significant amount of money.
3. SMS will only work with Microsoft stuff and it kinda sucks, although I heard the new version is ok. Just expect vendor lock-in.
4. Novell Zenworks will require an NT server or a Novell server, and the version that I used put all the files in NDS. You couldn't edit them or do much with them after you did a scan. WinInstall blew them out of the water.
The core reason you use an unatended install is the EXCACT reason this guy wants one and WinInstall isn't such a good option. He has 50 desktops probably all different. Some have multiple drives some don't. If you made a WinInstall or SMS or ZenWorks package to do this type of install, you better be great a building those packages, because you will be using your "test" machine as a template for all the desktops in the organization. If for some reason that test machine had a DLL that the other 40 didn't have...
Yes it is true that 4 years later some of the code was still not native PPC code. But a HUGE part of it was. The parts that needed to be were done.
Apple is doing ok now. They are not doing great. I believe that they are trying to get non graphics people to "switch" to their system.
I don't argue that their hardware is good, not the best, but good. My argument is that their competition has a significant leg up on them with regards to processing power and looks like that it will continue. It will probably get worse. If the competition gets the bugs worked out of their OS/Software then Apple could be in for a world of hurt; AND their competition is spending BILLIONS trying to get their issues corrected.
If everything is equal and the Mac cost more and is significantly slower, then why would you buy it?
Your last point about me not needing OS X. I somewhat agree with you. For what I do I don't need a Mac and if Dreamweaver had a Linux version, then I could use Linux as apposed to Windows. Also the games I like to play don't run well on Linux...
That is why the Mac looked good. It has a good OS and a lot of games are being written for it now, but if the processor is slower for games and the hardware cost more then I guess I will put my money elsewhere. Personaly I don't care about paying ~10% more for a Mac either. I will just have to see where both companies are in 8-12 months.
I would still argue that the current Mac fans would still buy a Mac given ANY processor if the quality remained the same and the performance didn't suffer too bad. Now IF IBM/Motorolla can produce a processor that is equal to or better than the competiton at the time, AND maintain it, then I will be proven wrong. Time will tell.
Who wants to grow marketshare anyway...
Ok, the other guy who responded was not me. (obvious)
I did own a PowerMac in 1992 and it had a 601 at 100MHZ and it ran a LOT of software slower than my 66MHZ 68040 Mac. However, ALL my software did run on it. It ran non native software like a 33-50MHZ 68040 Mac. However, it didn't take Apple and others long to move to the PPC architecture. In less than a year and a half, most of my stuff could be gotten for PPC, and it ran great.
Would the switch be painfull for Apple, yes. Would it be good in the long run? It depends. If Motorolla keeps getting its butt kicked, AND the difference in processing power continues to grow; then it will be bad. Just imagine if Windows finally gets its color mapping issues fixed, and it runs 3-5 times as fast AND it cost less. Now if Motorolla/IBM with its smaller R&D budget can keep up or exceed Intel/AMD, then it will pay off bigtime.
And I agree with you. Thank God I am not Apple! To have to compete with Microsoft with the current republican administration AND having to compete with Linux on their server front would keep me up at night. I hope that they make it!
I still hope to own a powerbook late this year or next year! But if they don't have that new chip ready and AMD has their new 64bit in a laptop, then it will probably be some other laptop with Linux on it.
Lets assume that all your old software ran under emmulation like it did with the jump from 68xxx code to ppc jump.
I hope that the PPC 970 will be great, but my experience in dealing with IBM is that it will take a year or so longer to get things out than they say it will... Can you imagine comparing a ppc 604 1.3GH to a new 64bit chip from Intel or AMD running at 3GH, with software optimized for 64Bits?
My issue is that Intel puts over 1 Billion in R&D every year. I don't see Motorolla doing that. They just cut a huge part of their R&D! If I were Apple I would not want to bet the future of my company on Motorolla.
Again I am an Apple fan; but if I was Apple I would be working hard on getting their OS + emmulation to work with IA-64 and AMD's 64BIT technology.
Now if people could buy a new Mac and it ran most old Mac software at a good speed, and any new software at speeds equal to a Windows+Intel speed then I believe most current Mac owners would still buy another Mac, and those considering jumping because of the processor difference wouldn't. This argument would go away.
First, let me say that I like Apple. I would LOVE to have one of the new powerbooks.
Now to use your comparison of cars, lets assume that 95% of the driving that you do is raceing, and the Dodge actually had around 100 more HP and a lot more torque.
This is what the article was expressing. It did not say that the Mac sucks. It just said that image processing was a lot faster on a SINGLE P4 than the fastest dual G4 Mac.
Now, Apple should take this and take a long hard look at their relationship with Motorolla.
I will ask you a question. Would you still buy a Macintosh if it had an Intel/AMD chip in it? This assumes that it had all the currently quality and functionality of a current Macintosh? Now what if it was faster and cheaper? I would!!!!
Good point, but as mentioned it is only 2048BIT encryption. That is 2k not 2MB.
Just rememeber how long it took to crack the DVD code? Wow that was done by a 15 year old...
It won't take long.
Also, in the news today it was found legal in the U.S. for that kid to crack the DVD code for his OWN use!
The motion picture association had no comment...
Please understand that I don't believe that someone should steal software, movies or songs. That is a different discussion than modifiying something you own.
Lets see. I buy the product. I own the product. It is not even a service. So it would be hard to compare it to a Direct TV device. This would be similar to me buying a chair from a company and turning it into a couch. I am sure that any waranty that I would have would be void, but I have the right to do it. I am NOT going in to their ROM and taking all their code to create a competitor to XBOX.
Enjoy your laugh now. I have a strong feeling that the code will be broken soon, and the customers will be laughing last...
Granted I don't want to see anyone buy an Xbox for any reason. I don't care if Microsoft looses money on every one sold! It still helps their marketshare; so in a weird way I kinda like that it has been taken down.
Or Indiana.
Can you back this up with any data?
You take the best 4cyl Japanese car and I will take the top 8, 10 and 12 cyl cars and we will see who wins on 99.999% of the race tracks in the world. I don't mean to put down the likes of Honda or Nissan, I own a Nissan and love it, but to say that it would stand a chance against a Mustang or Camaro (comparable cars) is a joke. The only thing it would win on is gas milage.
I don't see too many people using 4cyl cars in Top Fule. Even the 6cyl gets beat in 1/8 mile races now....
I use Jdeveloper 9i and have found it a good IDE for JSP and standard java applications. I don't use any of their wizards to create stuff though. You say that you know several development teams who bought it and then switched to something else. Can you give specific reasons? What didn't they like, or what couldn't they do that the other IDE could?
I have used Jdeveloper to work with a few MySQL databases also, so I don't agree that it is just for Oracle DB. Now if you want to use their wizards to do stuff and you buy in to the whole OC4J stuff then I would agree. But you don't have to do that stuff. I don't.
I have not tried Together or Eclips, so I cannot comment on them, but I am seriously interested in what all those development teams needed to do that Jdeveloper couldn't do well.
Please elaborate.
First let me say that I use Resin for our production systems and LOVE it. But you seem to be missing the point that Tomcat is FREE. Resin is only free if you do NOT use it to make money. Granted Resin is cheap (under 1k), but not free.
Also I would say that getting Resin hooked in to Apache 1.3.x and configured is far easier than Tomcat 3.x. I know 4.x is out, but I haven't had a chance to play with it.
I believe another difference is that Resin will support some J2EE stuff out and Tomcat won't. Not that I use CMP beans and stuff, but a version of Resin does support it.
I kinda would like a good book on JBOSS and Apache. Does anyone know if JBOSS has an easy way to deploy your EJB's yet, or do you have to write XML code?