Where did you get your facts from? You are way off champ or should I say troll?
While FreeBSD is a great OS/kernel, it doesn't scale as well as Linux, end of story.
Until you start talking about double that amount of procs, which is what Windows Server does these days
Huh? What smoke are you craking? Here is the comparison of MS's latest and greatest Windows 2003 server editions
Web Edition supports up to 2-way.
Standard Edition supports up to 4-way.
Enterprise Edition supports up to 8-way.
Datacenter Edition supports up to 64-way.
So, umm where is this double of what Linux supports? Plain vanilla Linux 2.6 can do 64-way no problem. Actually, SGI has had single image 128-way Linux system out for a while. They should have 256-way, single image Linux system out soon. That is more then MS can even touch. Maybe do some research before you just shoot off FUD.
I'll let you know when I start browsing the web with Picasa 2.0.
And what does that have to do with an IE exploit? Picasa just needs to have one of the sites it hits with its "integrated" IE to be exploited and Picasa comes down or becomes an entry point to your system.
You can keep your MS Windows expoited OS and I will be happy with my Mac OS X OS without all the worries.
Yeh, because removing some IE dependent program is really rash.
Why are you even running windows if you have such a hatred for an integrated system program?
Where did you dream up my "hatred for integrated systems"? I only have a few programs I need MS Windows for. Integrated systems for the most part are nice. I have my Max OS X systems that are much more integrated than MS Windows and I don't have the same problems with Max OS X.
Beyond which, adjusting your security settings absolves you of most problems anyway.
Most is the keyword there. Even with WinXP SP2, there are still new exploits coming out. Adjusting your Internet "zone" settings doesn't really help much, it certainly didn't stop the latest SP 2 exploits.
But more simply, your immune system kills the (if it works right). If it is killed, then it dies, and if it dies then it had to be alive first.
The human immune system "kills" many things that enter our bodies. However, I certainly wouldn't consider all of them to be "alive". I had a bad splinter once. My immune system attacked it as a foreign object. However, I wouldn't consider a piece of wood "alive". There has been many things that entered my body that my immune system "killed", that doesn't mean that what my immune system killed was "alive".
You must have Internet Explorer installed for Picasa to install and run smoothly
Which means that Picasa is using IE internally. Which means that any new IE exploit now becomes a new Picasa exploit. No, thanks. I just removed Picasa from my dual boot system.
But that still doesn't mean that Picasa doesn't need IE internally. So once again, any IE exploit, becomes a new Picasa exploit. No thanks, I'll pass. By making Picasa dependent on IE, that just limits any possible ports to Mac or Linux.
You would think with all the great geeks at Google and their whole infrastructure based on Linux servers, that Google would have their free-as-in-beer tools be more cross-platform. Sadly, that is not the case. Look at all the tools Google is offering. They are all MS-only.
Google is beginning to lose the luster it once had with me. It looks like Google is losing their focus and Google is thinking that the only way to compete with MS is to offer similar products as MS on MS-Only platforms. How sad for Google to waste all that talent, when that talent could be delivering excellent cross-platform tools. With Google locking their customers into MS-only desktop tools, it is actually _HELPING_ MS. It is opening the door for more MS domination, not only on the desktop, but in desktop tools.
The DMCA is a reflex response to rampant copyright infringement. It's akin to kicking a nice fluffy dog which will eventually turn around and bite you. You can bitch about the vicious dog but you kicked it in the first place.
Yes, and in this case, we the consumers are the "vicious dog", and the **AA/MS/etc has kicked us far too many times. They have paid congress to extend copyright for far too long. There is only so much until consumers "kick back". That is what is happeing now and I feel no sorrow for the "IP" rights of the very people that have bribed congress to strip away our fair-use rights.
Sorry, but if you want to trample on my rights, don't cry when I trample on yours.
Hmm, do you think MS made more money from a few hollywood studios or from the _millions_ of home computer users? I am willing to bet that MS made a lot more from home users than hollywood. However, MS has a business relationship with hollywood, so they say screw the home user and give hollywood what they want.
How in the world did you come up with that? Do you think Dell would honor my warranty if I tried to do something myself and had no clue what I was doing? Nope, Dell would tell me tough luck.
If I tried to put memory into my new Dell and _forced_ the DIMM in the wrong way, I am sure Dell would say take a hike. What Apple is doing is no different. They are saying that if you _don't_ know what you are doing, take it into a service center. I doubt Dell would send me a new Mobo if I poured water on it to "cool" the processor.
Apple wants $75 to upgrade to 512MB. You can get 512MB for around $50 bucks or so on-line. Most people who get this Mac Mini will probably have another system. They can get 512MB for about $50 and use the 256MB that came with the Mac Mini in their other system. At least this is what I am planning on doing. My other system (running Linux/WinXP) has 512MB of 333MHz DDR memory and I can stick that extra Mac Mini 256MB in it. So for only $50, I can turn my Mac Mini into a _very_ nice little system.
What you are looking for is SSI SMP (Single System Image) SMP. Your not going to get that on Mac OS X and Xgrid. You will get that on Linux though.
Just out of curiosity, why would you spend $1,500+ on 3 or 4 Mac Mini's when you can get a Dual 1.8GHz G5 from Apple for $1,999.00? If you are going to spend that much, just get the Dual Apple and be happy ; P
There are many types of clustering technologies which serve different types of needs. Normally when you stick a few computers together, you have a master unit that sends work "objects" to the other slave units. The slave units do the processing and send it back to the master that assembles the results. This type of setup works _very_ well for scientific processing.
If you want to do rendering, then a Mac Mini may work well. Most rendering software allows you to setup other "nodes" that the main computer can off-load processing to. What application are you using for rendering?
P.S. Creating ISO images is really just disk intensive and not CPU intensive. A 32 processor system is not going to create an ISO any faster than a 1 processor system. Creating an ISO image just comes down to how fast your disks are. If you want to create an ISO faster, get faster hard disks.
Well, I can tell you never used an Apple. The Apple _is_ a media center in and-of-itself. There is no need for a "special" media center edition like MS is trying to pull off.
Do you really thin I would waste my money on a "media" center edition of WinXP from MS that locks down _all_ the content? Do you think I would spend my money on a "media" edition of WinXP when MS couldn't even deliver a working version for their big show in LV?
What do you think Apple is all about? Apple is all about bringing media to the masses. You have obviously never tried it, so you have no clue what you are talking about _or_ missing.
My wife is _real_ big in to photos/scrap-booking. When I showed her iPhoto with their "books", she just went nuts. Since then, my wife has built some of the best photo albums I have ever seen of our family. There were no tools/software on MS that even came close.
Stop being jealous of Mac and just go out an buy one. You will thank yourself the day you do.
I am not trolling here. You can look at my posting history to see that I was never Apple's biggest fan....Until I actually used Mac OS. Once I used it, I understood what all the other "mac-heads" were talking about. There is just no comparison with WinXP/Win2k3 vs. MaoOSX. I am a senior programmer for a fortune 500 and do 95%+ of my development on WinXP/Win2k/Win2k3 and Mac just kicks MS's ass! I really wish I could make the money I do as a MS Windows developer to develop Mac software. Maybe enough time can change that.
I think the Firefox extension site was overloaded, so they created the new version. I agree with you that it is hard to find all the diffrent extionsion with the new version. I like the old verions of the extension site much better. You were just given the whole list of 150+ extentions and you were able to read all the descriptions of what they did.
Well, I am now pushing my wife to let me get a new Mac Mini (she says I have too many computers). I wasn't an Apple fan till I watch the Mac Expo last night (though I never hated Apple, I just never used their products).
I do 95% of my programming at work on MS Windows systems, and after watching the Mac Expo, I think it would be a real joy to come home and use a Mac. While I am not a Steve groupie, I have to say that the guy is 1,000x more "cool" then Bill G was during the CES show MS did. Bill was so stiff and dry, now I know why MS brought in that late night talk show host, to try to bring some life to the show. Bill G. made the keynote as exiting to watch as paint drying.
In contrast, Steve was cracking jokes and made watching actually fun. Steve had a small systems glitch, just like Bill/MS did. However, Steve paused for a moment, and then said, "this is why we have backups", flipped a KVM switch and had another Mac ready to roll in on second, and the show went on smooth-as-silk.
The demos were actually very good, and I was surprised to see Steve do them all, well except for the Pages demo. Bill's demo of the new media center was _very_ boring, and when the remote didn't work, they had no backup system and just "moved along", the same thing happened when their XBox blue-screened. Come on MS, get a little style and maybe next time take a tip from Apple and have a backup system.
I am looking forward to the Mac Mini and iLife 05. The only thing I wish the Mac Mini had was more video memory. 32MB is a little low for todays standards and it doesn't look like you can upgrade the video. Other then that, it looks like a great system. Maybe the Mac Mini can hook my wife on Apple and she won't complain when I try to buy a G5 box. ; P
Why? A company that is building and selling a Linux-based DVR/PVR can just license the DRM just like any other company can. Heck, Red Hat could license the MS media formats today and deliver them to their customers if Red Hat thought it would increase sales.
Why would a company selling a Linux based device not be allowed to license DRM while a company basing their DVR/PVR on some other OS be allowed to license the DRM? It doesn't work that way. If DRM ever becomes big in devices, a Linux based device will be able to license the same DRM as any other device. Heck, a Linux based device could actually have an advantage. Every device maker will be required to license the DRM technology, but the ones that build around Linux can save OS license fees and have an extra cost advantage.
What will be Wall Street's reaction when they learn IBM has basically given away most of its IP portfolio?
Huh? IBM has 40,000+ patents, they are letting open source software use 500 of them. Do the math. I wouldn't call 500 out-of 40,000 "most of its IP portfolio".
How is this going to make IBM any more profitable?
Well, it helps create mind-share. It will help get some more open source software created that can now use these patents without having to worry about paying a license fee. The Open Source world is huge. If IBM rubs that world the right way, they can get some of that world to buy their other products or (even better for IBM), to use the massive IBM Global services division.
IBM Global services is a HUGE world-wide network of IBM consultants that go into companies and sets up technology, custom programming, just about anything your company will need. Now imagine your a company looking to bring Linux into your infrastructure. Who would you call for help? IBM is trying to cement their name with Linux deployments. And being that Linux has about 25% of the server market and has been the fastest growing server OS for the past few years, it seems like a smart thing for IBM to attach their name to.
Also, if you RTFA, you would have seen that IBM didn't give away these patents. They are just letting people use them in Open Source without charge. If you want to use them in a proprietary application, you will still have to pay IBM a license fee for that right.
This move by IBM helps in creating a massive Open Source pool. Companies will need help working with that massive pool of technology and will need help implementing things from that pool. And who do you think will get a call? IBM.
We didn't find Oracle to be lacking. Re-read what I wrote. Basically we only want to use Oracle for our mission critical data. For small projects and web applications we use MS SQL Server or MySQL.
The enterprise version of Oracle is expensive so we use other DB's for less important data. I don't make the purchasing choices. I personally don't know why we only use the Enterprise version Oracle. Oracle offers a standard version that, last time I checked, was a little less then MS' standard version of SQL Server.
For a smaller company like where you work, I think the Open Source Compiere would be perfect. Compiere is ERP & CRM for the small-medium Enterprise and works with Oracle. Since it is Open Source, there are no costs involved with Compiere itself. So you can try it out and see if it will meet your needs. Take a few weeks to play with it. ERP/CRM can be very complex software and can take a long time to set up/learn. Our PeopleSoft HR/Portal system was a good years worth of work.
However, based on MS's past behaviours, I think we can look forward to a "good enough" replacement for PeopleSoft to be built into the next version of Windows.
Huh? There is no way that MS would include a CRM solution in the next version of MS Windows. Good CRM solutions take a long time to build with a lot of customer feedback. MS' CRM solution cost them a lot of cash, MS is not just going to throw that into their next server release.
The MS CRM offering doesn't come close to PeopleSoft or SAP. I am a senior programmer for a fortune 500 with 140,000 employees. We recently finished a _very_ long deployment of PeopleSoft HR and PeopleSoft Portal. We looked at what MS had to offer and it didn't even come close. We looked at SAP and we looked at Oracle. All of our mission critical data is in Oracle and the not-to-important-data is in SQL Server or a few MySQL databases. We were actually leaning toward Oracle's product (because we use it as our critical DB), however they didn't have a few _very_ important functionalities that we need for our HR processes, so that left PeopleSoft and SAP.
Converting your whole HR/payroll process (especially when you pay 140,000+ employees every week) to any other system takes a ton of time and a ton of cash. We spent tens of millions on these two systems. There is no way in the world we would redo everything in an MS product.
Our systems are running great. We are about 2 versions behind on the latest PeopleSoft releases. We will probably just upgrade to the last PeopleSoft release and leave it alone. Every upgrade costs tons of money and time.
There is also the fact that were I work, all of our financial data and warehouse is _only_ in Oracle. Will the MS product allow you to work with a non-SQL Server DB (I doubt it)? There is no chance in H-E-L-L that we would take our critical data out of Oracle and put it in MS SQL Server. Then there is the issue of what technology MS built their system on. It has been out for a while, so I will assume it is in old ASP? No thank, we don't want that crap on our network. Java or ASP.Net/C# only please.
gPhoto is an image _viewer_ not an editor. In WinXP the default image viewer is "Windows Picture and Fax Viewer" and it doesn't allow you to copy an image from it and paste it into paint or photoShop, so it is no different than gPhoto. Have you ever tried to drag an image into Gimp? It works quit well.
One of the really cool, yet rarely used, features of the selection mechanism is that it can negotiate what data formats to use. It's not just about text. When one application asks another for the selection, part of their communication involves the requester asking the owner for the list of types in which they are capable of delivering the selection data; then the requester picks the format they like best, and asks for it that way.
As a simple example, suppose there is a program displaying text in multiple fonts. When pasting that into a text-only program, you'd want to paste only the text. But when pasting that into a word processor, you'd want to keep the font information: if both applications spoke HTML, they could use that as the intermediate format by which they transferred the data.
More complex things are possible, too: for example, when an image is selected on a web page, the web page displayer could offer to serve that up as raw image bits; or as JPEG data; or as the original URL of the image. When trying to copy and paste an image into a text editor that can't do images, the text editor might decide that the next best thing would be to paste the filename of the image, or the URL.
Sure, and I would agree. However, it really changes the way one should look at the situation when one considers that the USA is producing more then twice the daily output of oil than Iran. It kind-of throws a wrench into the whole "war for oil"/"exploited for oil" mentality. Especially when one realizes that there are plenty of places to get oil around the world other than Iran.
Iran is _believed_ to be one of the top 20 nations for oil _reserves_. The USA, as of 2002, produces more than twice the oil of Iran.
As of 2002, here are the top 20:
Production (millions of barrels per day): Top 20 Countries
Saudi Arabia: 8.528 United States: 8.091
Russia: 7.014
Iran: 3.775
Mexico: 3.560
Norway: 3.408
China: 3.297
Venezuela: 3.137
Canada: 2.749
United Arab Emirates: 2.550
United Kingdom: 2.540
Iraq: 2.377
Nigeria: 2.223
Kuwait: 1.838
Brazil: 1.589
Algeria: 1.486
Libya: 1.427
Indonesia: 1.384
Oman:.964
Argentina: 825
As of 2002, the USA imports the majority of its oil from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. Facts from Third World Traveler
Slashdot Mirror
While FreeBSD is a great OS/kernel, it doesn't scale as well as Linux, end of story.
Huh? What smoke are you craking? Here is the comparison of MS's latest and greatest Windows 2003 server editions So, umm where is this double of what Linux supports? Plain vanilla Linux 2.6 can do 64-way no problem. Actually, SGI has had single image 128-way Linux system out for a while. They should have 256-way, single image Linux system out soon. That is more then MS can even touch. Maybe do some research before you just shoot off FUD.You can keep your MS Windows expoited OS and I will be happy with my Mac OS X OS without all the worries.
You would think with all the great geeks at Google and their whole infrastructure based on Linux servers, that Google would have their free-as-in-beer tools be more cross-platform. Sadly, that is not the case. Look at all the tools Google is offering. They are all MS-only.
Google is beginning to lose the luster it once had with me. It looks like Google is losing their focus and Google is thinking that the only way to compete with MS is to offer similar products as MS on MS-Only platforms. How sad for Google to waste all that talent, when that talent could be delivering excellent cross-platform tools. With Google locking their customers into MS-only desktop tools, it is actually _HELPING_ MS. It is opening the door for more MS domination, not only on the desktop, but in desktop tools.
Sorry, but if you want to trample on my rights, don't cry when I trample on yours.
Hmm, do you think MS made more money from a few hollywood studios or from the _millions_ of home computer users? I am willing to bet that MS made a lot more from home users than hollywood. However, MS has a business relationship with hollywood, so they say screw the home user and give hollywood what they want.
If I tried to put memory into my new Dell and _forced_ the DIMM in the wrong way, I am sure Dell would say take a hike. What Apple is doing is no different. They are saying that if you _don't_ know what you are doing, take it into a service center. I doubt Dell would send me a new Mobo if I poured water on it to "cool" the processor.
Apple wants $75 to upgrade to 512MB. You can get 512MB for around $50 bucks or so on-line. Most people who get this Mac Mini will probably have another system. They can get 512MB for about $50 and use the 256MB that came with the Mac Mini in their other system. At least this is what I am planning on doing. My other system (running Linux/WinXP) has 512MB of 333MHz DDR memory and I can stick that extra Mac Mini 256MB in it. So for only $50, I can turn my Mac Mini into a _very_ nice little system.
Just out of curiosity, why would you spend $1,500+ on 3 or 4 Mac Mini's when you can get a Dual 1.8GHz G5 from Apple for $1,999.00? If you are going to spend that much, just get the Dual Apple and be happy ; P
There are many types of clustering technologies which serve different types of needs. Normally when you stick a few computers together, you have a master unit that sends work "objects" to the other slave units. The slave units do the processing and send it back to the master that assembles the results. This type of setup works _very_ well for scientific processing.
If you want to do rendering, then a Mac Mini may work well. Most rendering software allows you to setup other "nodes" that the main computer can off-load processing to. What application are you using for rendering?
P.S. Creating ISO images is really just disk intensive and not CPU intensive. A 32 processor system is not going to create an ISO any faster than a 1 processor system. Creating an ISO image just comes down to how fast your disks are. If you want to create an ISO faster, get faster hard disks.
Do you really thin I would waste my money on a "media" center edition of WinXP from MS that locks down _all_ the content? Do you think I would spend my money on a "media" edition of WinXP when MS couldn't even deliver a working version for their big show in LV?
What do you think Apple is all about? Apple is all about bringing media to the masses. You have obviously never tried it, so you have no clue what you are talking about _or_ missing.
My wife is _real_ big in to photos/scrap-booking. When I showed her iPhoto with their "books", she just went nuts. Since then, my wife has built some of the best photo albums I have ever seen of our family. There were no tools/software on MS that even came close.
Stop being jealous of Mac and just go out an buy one. You will thank yourself the day you do.
I am not trolling here. You can look at my posting history to see that I was never Apple's biggest fan....Until I actually used Mac OS. Once I used it, I understood what all the other "mac-heads" were talking about. There is just no comparison with WinXP/Win2k3 vs. MaoOSX. I am a senior programmer for a fortune 500 and do 95%+ of my development on WinXP/Win2k/Win2k3 and Mac just kicks MS's ass! I really wish I could make the money I do as a MS Windows developer to develop Mac software. Maybe enough time can change that.
I think the Firefox extension site was overloaded, so they created the new version. I agree with you that it is hard to find all the diffrent extionsion with the new version. I like the old verions of the extension site much better. You were just given the whole list of 150+ extentions and you were able to read all the descriptions of what they did.
I do 95% of my programming at work on MS Windows systems, and after watching the Mac Expo, I think it would be a real joy to come home and use a Mac. While I am not a Steve groupie, I have to say that the guy is 1,000x more "cool" then Bill G was during the CES show MS did. Bill was so stiff and dry, now I know why MS brought in that late night talk show host, to try to bring some life to the show. Bill G. made the keynote as exiting to watch as paint drying.
In contrast, Steve was cracking jokes and made watching actually fun. Steve had a small systems glitch, just like Bill/MS did. However, Steve paused for a moment, and then said, "this is why we have backups", flipped a KVM switch and had another Mac ready to roll in on second, and the show went on smooth-as-silk.
The demos were actually very good, and I was surprised to see Steve do them all, well except for the Pages demo. Bill's demo of the new media center was _very_ boring, and when the remote didn't work, they had no backup system and just "moved along", the same thing happened when their XBox blue-screened. Come on MS, get a little style and maybe next time take a tip from Apple and have a backup system.
I am looking forward to the Mac Mini and iLife 05. The only thing I wish the Mac Mini had was more video memory. 32MB is a little low for todays standards and it doesn't look like you can upgrade the video. Other then that, it looks like a great system. Maybe the Mac Mini can hook my wife on Apple and she won't complain when I try to buy a G5 box. ; P
Why would a company selling a Linux based device not be allowed to license DRM while a company basing their DVR/PVR on some other OS be allowed to license the DRM? It doesn't work that way. If DRM ever becomes big in devices, a Linux based device will be able to license the same DRM as any other device. Heck, a Linux based device could actually have an advantage. Every device maker will be required to license the DRM technology, but the ones that build around Linux can save OS license fees and have an extra cost advantage.
IBM Global services is a HUGE world-wide network of IBM consultants that go into companies and sets up technology, custom programming, just about anything your company will need. Now imagine your a company looking to bring Linux into your infrastructure. Who would you call for help? IBM is trying to cement their name with Linux deployments. And being that Linux has about 25% of the server market and has been the fastest growing server OS for the past few years, it seems like a smart thing for IBM to attach their name to.
Also, if you RTFA, you would have seen that IBM didn't give away these patents. They are just letting people use them in Open Source without charge. If you want to use them in a proprietary application, you will still have to pay IBM a license fee for that right.
This move by IBM helps in creating a massive Open Source pool. Companies will need help working with that massive pool of technology and will need help implementing things from that pool. And who do you think will get a call? IBM.
The enterprise version of Oracle is expensive so we use other DB's for less important data. I don't make the purchasing choices. I personally don't know why we only use the Enterprise version Oracle. Oracle offers a standard version that, last time I checked, was a little less then MS' standard version of SQL Server.
For a smaller company like where you work, I think the Open Source Compiere would be perfect. Compiere is ERP & CRM for the small-medium Enterprise and works with Oracle. Since it is Open Source, there are no costs involved with Compiere itself. So you can try it out and see if it will meet your needs. Take a few weeks to play with it. ERP/CRM can be very complex software and can take a long time to set up/learn. Our PeopleSoft HR/Portal system was a good years worth of work.
The MS CRM offering doesn't come close to PeopleSoft or SAP. I am a senior programmer for a fortune 500 with 140,000 employees. We recently finished a _very_ long deployment of PeopleSoft HR and PeopleSoft Portal. We looked at what MS had to offer and it didn't even come close. We looked at SAP and we looked at Oracle. All of our mission critical data is in Oracle and the not-to-important-data is in SQL Server or a few MySQL databases. We were actually leaning toward Oracle's product (because we use it as our critical DB), however they didn't have a few _very_ important functionalities that we need for our HR processes, so that left PeopleSoft and SAP.
Converting your whole HR/payroll process (especially when you pay 140,000+ employees every week) to any other system takes a ton of time and a ton of cash. We spent tens of millions on these two systems. There is no way in the world we would redo everything in an MS product.
Our systems are running great. We are about 2 versions behind on the latest PeopleSoft releases. We will probably just upgrade to the last PeopleSoft release and leave it alone. Every upgrade costs tons of money and time.
There is also the fact that were I work, all of our financial data and warehouse is _only_ in Oracle. Will the MS product allow you to work with a non-SQL Server DB (I doubt it)? There is no chance in H-E-L-L that we would take our critical data out of Oracle and put it in MS SQL Server. Then there is the issue of what technology MS built their system on. It has been out for a while, so I will assume it is in old ASP? No thank, we don't want that crap on our network. Java or ASP.Net/C# only please.
Oh, and X supports many formats on the clipboard
I would like to know if there was any testing done? I didn't think the remote not working was a big deal, remotes break, batteries die, etc.
What I thought looked bad was the big BSOD on the XBox in the middle of a game.
Sure, and I would agree. However, it really changes the way one should look at the situation when one considers that the USA is producing more then twice the daily output of oil than Iran. It kind-of throws a wrench into the whole "war for oil"/"exploited for oil" mentality. Especially when one realizes that there are plenty of places to get oil around the world other than Iran.
As of 2002, here are the top 20:
As of 2002, the USA imports the majority of its oil from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. Facts from Third World Traveler