On the short term, I'm pretty sure that what they are doing is creating an upgrade path, away from Linux. Look at it this way:
Imagine you are running a business that has built stuff upon Mono. Mission critical stuff. Then, as your business grows, you are stumbling into problems. Scaling maybe, maybe some other limitation of Mono because of the fact that Mono contains only a subset of the.Net functionality. As a possible solution for this, Microsoft offers their.Net, with some proprietary extensions, that will handle your problems. Of course, you could do the same thing with Python or Java, but as you have invested so much into.Net already, you make your choice: you migrate off Linux to Windows.
That is what they are looking for: a cheap entry level solution (Mono) with an upgrade path to Windows (proper.Net)
1. If you have a mixed server park (that is: host different applications too, other than Oracle's), migrating is *not* feasible. I'm not going to support yet another OS, just because it is *possibly* a tiny bit more convenient once it is set up. Because before it's set up, I'll need to have deployment mechanisms for another OS, management tools for another OS etc. Not worth it. 2. To extend my first point: Oracle's support might be a bit cheaper for the OS, my time is a lot more expensive than a thousand bucks worth of support on a years basis. That matters when having to support more OS'es. 3. Red Hat fixes the bugs, and then releases the src.rpm. Oracle has to Q&A that, port it, upload and release it. Updates for Oracle Linux will be (a lot) later than Red Hat's. See how much time it is costing CentOS to release 5u3. No offence, but for production systems, I want to have potential fixes *now* if the situation we're in is hurting us. 4. I'm just about to get RHCA certified. Can I get that level of Linux certification from Oracle? Don't start saying the OS'es are compatible, because they are not, see point 5 and 6. 5. The only thing Oracle can do on the long term, if fork RHEL. The amount of support, the changes they make and the fact they want to support until the end of time in the own way, might not be called a fork, but it will be just that in the end. So much for compatibility. 6. They ported yast. Need I say more? 7. Not really a business reason but check this out. Oracle announced Oracle Linux just a couple of months after RH scooped JBoss from underneath Larry's nose. One of the previous posts is right: Oracle is not trying to compete with RH. It's trying to get revenge.;-)
Mostly that the information it presents is not always consistent with what you find on the service console of you individual ESX servers and that it misses some functionality (like batch-creating VM's). Apart from that, VC is an extremely slow application (just *selecting* a couple dozen ESX hosts slows it to a crawl) and written in.Net, binding me to a platform I would rather not be bound to. I'm pretty sure I am not the only one complaining about this.
My parent post was meant as a poke in the ribs. VC is not unusable for every task, but it is also a long way from being a polished, complete product, which would eliminate the necessity of the service console.
And *that* is what really scares me: the road VMWare is apparently taking with 3i (removing the SC) and not having management tools available which can do the job as good as the SC. Really, the new scripting interface in 3i is a joke. VMWare should not remove the SC until we do not need it anymore.
Anyone know about the beta status of that product? Has it been RTM yet?
I hear some great things about it's stability! Hope the Warship Edition is as great as the JetFighter Edition!
Obviously, the hackers would have to sign a non-disclosure agreement with MS before being allowed a quick glance at Vista's innards. So, what would this result in? Some kid getting sued when the he first hacks Vista (which will happen on Vista's release day minus a fortnight or so). That's not novel you say? It is, because he'll not only get sued for the usual bunch of crap, but also for violating the non-disclosure agreement, because MS will have the lawyers to cover that.
And if that doesn't happen, how's this: Vista gets hacked and MS blames the hackers by saying something like: 'hey, we let you look at it, you didn't see it, then how could we have?'.
Just another stick to beat around with, this is, nothing more, nothing less.
FF uptake in the Netherlands wasn't very big in the first place, so this doesn't mean anything to me. I though about making the 'lies, damn' lies and statistics' comments here, but decided against it.
Was it Heinrich Boll or Heinrich Heine who said: "When the world ends, be sure to be in the Netherlands, where everything happens fifty years later..." I'm sure FF uptake in the Netherlands will reach 10% in or around the year 2056.
In regard to your signature:
"There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now."
You forgot one box. A Linux box.
But you probably get that remark all the time;)
Excuse me for using the f-word in my title, but since I got you attention, I'ld like to try and make a point.
A lot of institutions worldwide have tried to force MS into a less monopolistic role. People have tried to get refunds for unused copies of Windows which they had forcedly bought. People have tried taking MS to court. The EU has tried to make MS behave nicely by forcing them to make a Mediaplayer-free version of Windows and there are several other examples, but they all failed to catch the main issue.
Microsoft's monopoly is not built on forcefully sold, pre-installed copies of Windows, nor on some Mediaplayer application, nor on Internet Explorer or even Windows.
Microsoft's monopoly leans on Office, and almost exclusively that. The Office file formats are secret. MS has - in a very clever way, namely by letting people pirate Office in the beginning without shouting bloody murder all too hard - made half the world use Office, on way or another. And now loads and loads of documents are in the MS Office format, people can't switch.
By forcing MS to adopt the OpenDocument format (MS _is_ a member of oasis, by the way) Microsoft monopoly is broken. Boom. With one computer batch-converting old MS Office documents to the OpenDocument format and all other computers running {$anyOS} with {$anyOfficeSuite} you can both choose your own software, save money and be free. Or not, your choice.
If the politicians want to break the MS monopoly, let them break it where it counts: in the MS Office document format area. That's where it matters, hardly anywhere else.
So, this leads me to draw 2 conclusions:
1) Politicians do NOT want to break the monopoly, sadly and ununderstandable.
2) Bill will have nightmares for the rest of his life if the Mass. idea catches on in the rest of the US and the world. I hope it will, though - in the light of the vast marketing budget of MS - I doubt it...
if I would connect a whole bunch of Blackdogs to my computer? Would it result in a dogfight? Would it be called a 'Blackdog kennel'? Can I build a cluster of Blackdogs like that? And most importantly: do they bark, if an unauthorized person tries to use it?
Because THAT, with some documentation, would be helpfull. Still, as long as it doesn't create *nix r00tkits on the fly on my box, I'm on the safeside:)
It will, as soon as SCO vs. IBM is finally going to be ruled in. But then again, that trial is going to take slightly longer than oblivion. Beter make another cup of coffee if you want to sit that one out.
Okay, well I'm calling your ass right the hell now:) Here you can find a Slashdot story about a German court ruling upholding an older injunction in a similar matter. Now I'm not an expert on German law, but this sure sounds like a proper upholding in a trial to me.
Mind you, this is - as I understand it at Groklaw - merely an opening to make GPL-applications able to read (not write!) government made (nothing else) documents, without interfering with MS patents. 'Open' might not be the best word for this...
Ok, google might validate like shit. And though two wrongs (or four for this matter) don't make a right, compared to yahoo, askjeeves and altavista, the amount of errors google receives is actually relatively low. Even a geek-spot like the main Slashdot page doesn't validate flawlessly (pity you can't use w3c for this), and gets it's share of errors.
Let him who is without sin cast the first stone...
Slashdot Mirror
On the short term, I'm pretty sure that what they are doing is creating an upgrade path, away from Linux. Look at it this way:
Imagine you are running a business that has built stuff upon Mono. Mission critical stuff. Then, as your business grows, you are stumbling into problems. Scaling maybe, maybe some other limitation of Mono because of the fact that Mono contains only a subset of the .Net functionality. As a possible solution for this, Microsoft offers their .Net, with some proprietary extensions, that will handle your problems. Of course, you could do the same thing with Python or Java, but as you have invested so much into .Net already, you make your choice: you migrate off Linux to Windows.
That is what they are looking for: a cheap entry level solution (Mono) with an upgrade path to Windows (proper .Net)
Can we finally get that thing over here in Europe, please? ffs!
1. If you have a mixed server park (that is: host different applications too, other than Oracle's), migrating is *not* feasible. I'm not going to support yet another OS, just because it is *possibly* a tiny bit more convenient once it is set up. Because before it's set up, I'll need to have deployment mechanisms for another OS, management tools for another OS etc. Not worth it. ;-)
2. To extend my first point: Oracle's support might be a bit cheaper for the OS, my time is a lot more expensive than a thousand bucks worth of support on a years basis. That matters when having to support more OS'es.
3. Red Hat fixes the bugs, and then releases the src.rpm. Oracle has to Q&A that, port it, upload and release it. Updates for Oracle Linux will be (a lot) later than Red Hat's. See how much time it is costing CentOS to release 5u3. No offence, but for production systems, I want to have potential fixes *now* if the situation we're in is hurting us.
4. I'm just about to get RHCA certified. Can I get that level of Linux certification from Oracle? Don't start saying the OS'es are compatible, because they are not, see point 5 and 6.
5. The only thing Oracle can do on the long term, if fork RHEL. The amount of support, the changes they make and the fact they want to support until the end of time in the own way, might not be called a fork, but it will be just that in the end. So much for compatibility.
6. They ported yast. Need I say more?
7. Not really a business reason but check this out. Oracle announced Oracle Linux just a couple of months after RH scooped JBoss from underneath Larry's nose. One of the previous posts is right: Oracle is not trying to compete with RH. It's trying to get revenge.
Nice story on the Dell :)
And about Linux on a hardheld: you might wanna try a Nokia N8x0. They'll rock your balls off.
Mostly that the information it presents is not always consistent with what you find on the service console of you individual ESX servers and that it misses some functionality (like batch-creating VM's). Apart from that, VC is an extremely slow application (just *selecting* a couple dozen ESX hosts slows it to a crawl) and written in .Net, binding me to a platform I would rather not be bound to. I'm pretty sure I am not the only one complaining about this.
My parent post was meant as a poke in the ribs. VC is not unusable for every task, but it is also a long way from being a polished, complete product, which would eliminate the necessity of the service console.
And *that* is what really scares me: the road VMWare is apparently taking with 3i (removing the SC) and not having management tools available which can do the job as good as the SC. Really, the new scripting interface in 3i is a joke. VMWare should not remove the SC until we do not need it anymore.
With this you are implying Virtual Center is a usable product (as in non-breaking, stable, etc.)? That, sir, I find offensive.
Anyone know about the beta status of that product? Has it been RTM yet? I hear some great things about it's stability! Hope the Warship Edition is as great as the JetFighter Edition!
Obviously, the hackers would have to sign a non-disclosure agreement with MS before being allowed a quick glance at Vista's innards. So, what would this result in? Some kid getting sued when the he first hacks Vista (which will happen on Vista's release day minus a fortnight or so). That's not novel you say? It is, because he'll not only get sued for the usual bunch of crap, but also for violating the non-disclosure agreement, because MS will have the lawyers to cover that.
And if that doesn't happen, how's this: Vista gets hacked and MS blames the hackers by saying something like: 'hey, we let you look at it, you didn't see it, then how could we have?'.
Just another stick to beat around with, this is, nothing more, nothing less.
FF uptake in the Netherlands wasn't very big in the first place, so this doesn't mean anything to me. I though about making the 'lies, damn' lies and statistics' comments here, but decided against it.
Was it Heinrich Boll or Heinrich Heine who said: "When the world ends, be sure to be in the Netherlands, where everything happens fifty years later..." I'm sure FF uptake in the Netherlands will reach 10% in or around the year 2056.
In regard to your signature: "There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now." You forgot one box. A Linux box. But you probably get that remark all the time ;)
So where exactly am I locked in, again?
.doc. That's why. Not because of some API. The main locking-in MS is doing, it does with .doc. And yes, that sucks.
'cause you use
In the immortal words of Will Smith in Indepedence Day:
"I've got to get me one of these!"
Excuse me for using the f-word in my title, but since I got you attention, I'ld like to try and make a point.
A lot of institutions worldwide have tried to force MS into a less monopolistic role. People have tried to get refunds for unused copies of Windows which they had forcedly bought. People have tried taking MS to court. The EU has tried to make MS behave nicely by forcing them to make a Mediaplayer-free version of Windows and there are several other examples, but they all failed to catch the main issue.
Microsoft's monopoly is not built on forcefully sold, pre-installed copies of Windows, nor on some Mediaplayer application, nor on Internet Explorer or even Windows.
Microsoft's monopoly leans on Office, and almost exclusively that. The Office file formats are secret. MS has - in a very clever way, namely by letting people pirate Office in the beginning without shouting bloody murder all too hard - made half the world use Office, on way or another. And now loads and loads of documents are in the MS Office format, people can't switch.
By forcing MS to adopt the OpenDocument format (MS _is_ a member of oasis, by the way) Microsoft monopoly is broken. Boom. With one computer batch-converting old MS Office documents to the OpenDocument format and all other computers running {$anyOS} with {$anyOfficeSuite} you can both choose your own software, save money and be free. Or not, your choice.
If the politicians want to break the MS monopoly, let them break it where it counts: in the MS Office document format area. That's where it matters, hardly anywhere else.
So, this leads me to draw 2 conclusions:
1) Politicians do NOT want to break the monopoly, sadly and ununderstandable. 2) Bill will have nightmares for the rest of his life if the Mass. idea catches on in the rest of the US and the world. I hope it will, though - in the light of the vast marketing budget of MS - I doubt it...
if I would connect a whole bunch of Blackdogs to my computer? Would it result in a dogfight? Would it be called a 'Blackdog kennel'? Can I build a cluster of Blackdogs like that? And most importantly: do they bark, if an unauthorized person tries to use it?
The above comment is rated 'A'-certified FUD (tm)
Because THAT, with some documentation, would be helpfull. Still, as long as it doesn't create *nix r00tkits on the fly on my box, I'm on the safeside :)
It will, as soon as SCO vs. IBM is finally going to be ruled in. But then again, that trial is going to take slightly longer than oblivion. Beter make another cup of coffee if you want to sit that one out.
Okay, well I'm calling your ass right the hell now :)
Here you can find a Slashdot story about a German court ruling upholding an older injunction in a similar matter.
Now I'm not an expert on German law, but this sure sounds like a proper upholding in a trial to me.
Mind you, this is - as I understand it at Groklaw - merely an opening to make GPL-applications able to read (not write!) government made (nothing else) documents, without interfering with MS patents. 'Open' might not be the best word for this...
Ok, google might validate like shit. And though two wrongs (or four for this matter) don't make a right, compared to yahoo, askjeeves and altavista, the amount of errors google receives is actually relatively low. Even a geek-spot like the main Slashdot page doesn't validate flawlessly (pity you can't use w3c for this), and gets it's share of errors. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone...
The ~HSV portage tree!
Can someone give a +5 (thousand) to the MS guy who wrote the part about viruses!? Rolling on the floor from hysterical laughter!
Why are we (the Netherlands) always mentioned in the same sentence as pr0n, when most adult videos are actually made in the US?
Or does Purdue has to cough that up herself?