In general his editorials (which is what this article is) lack intellectual rigor and reek of fanboyism. IT is a shame that slate can't find a better technology writer.
I regularly read slate and I have yet to read an article by Farhad that was truly insightful.
"On Wednesday, Microsoft for the first time divulged specific information about what the Starter Editions will contain. For instance, the bare-bones operating system's screen resolution maxes out at 800-by-600, it lacks support for home networking and shared printers, and only allows three programs to be running simultaneously."
I believe he didn't spend much time on the UltraSparc IV because, quote:
"To get the "hyperthreading" effect of two processors on one chip, Sun stuck two full-blown UltraSparc III cores on a single chip, which is chip-pin compatible with the UltraSparc III."
He assumes the interested reader will already know something about the UltraSparc III. Sun didn't fundamentally change the chip architecture. Also the Itanium architecture is already discussed ad-nauseum in other articles. It wasn't meant to be a balanced overview of all new CPU architectures.
"Bill Gates has a good argument, but it just doesn't hold up when you examine it." - No. No he doesn't. He has an argument that "sounds" good. If you were in marketing you could say he had a good argument. I think you more than adequately prove his argument is rubbish.
"High volume software is attacked when somebody wants just visibility and glory, and the fact is that the hardening is part of the process of having the level of reliability guarantee that we need to make."
I like the fact that he thinks people attack M$SFT software just for glory. Not because: 1) It's easy. 2) A valuable exploit is one that can be used. More machnes - more opportunities to use the exploit.
I also like the fact that M$FT should make a "guarantee" according to Gates. I haven't heard of M$FT giving a "level of reliability guarantee". Nor do I think they will.
Don't waste my time. Quote the relevant and/or interesting parts of the letter then give the URL for those of us who want to read M$FT's latest pile of marketing *&$!.
We all knew they were going to sue. Sun's lawyers just wanted to know what they were up against from a legal standpoint. Sun should be careful. Legal disclosure can harm both parties.
Otherwise my webbrowser wouldn't be able to display it.
Sarcasm aside, I believe you are getting your semantics all jumbled up. What they took was an average. It is as "real" as any statistical measurement. They did correct for the relative velocity of the objects producing the light which may or may not have been a good idea.
On another note. They are actually taking a measurement that is spanning time. An interesting followup to this research would be a project where one takes the light from objects within a certain radius and averaged that. In effect this gives you an average light during a specific age of the universe.
I want to know: Is the universe getting more beige with time?
When you are an admin trying to convince your boss to not waste his money on a micro$oft license and instead use freebsd or linux the more proof that you can show that it will work the better.
I agree that a website certification shouldn't be given much weight but I've seen managers make decisions based on much less.
Slashdot Mirror
In general his editorials (which is what this article is) lack intellectual rigor and reek of fanboyism. IT is a shame that slate can't find a better technology writer. I regularly read slate and I have yet to read an article by Farhad that was truly insightful.
You are thinking of a windows bug. Specifically the bug that hit the FAA when they were trying to use windows for their new ATC system.
You are a tool and an idiot.
From this InformationWeek article:
"On Wednesday, Microsoft for the first time divulged specific information about what the Starter Editions will contain. For instance, the bare-bones operating system's screen resolution maxes out at 800-by-600, it lacks support for home networking and shared printers, and only allows three programs to be running simultaneously."
I believe he didn't spend much time on the UltraSparc IV because, quote:
"To get the "hyperthreading" effect of two processors on one chip, Sun stuck two full-blown UltraSparc III cores on a single chip, which is chip-pin compatible with the UltraSparc III."
He assumes the interested reader will already know something about the UltraSparc III. Sun didn't fundamentally change the chip architecture. Also the Itanium architecture is already discussed ad-nauseum in other articles. It wasn't meant to be a balanced overview of all new CPU architectures.
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." Napoleon Bonaparte (1769 - 1821)
ssshhhh - Let's make sure they pull out enough rope to hang themselves.
Oh wait, they've already done that.
"Bill Gates has a good argument, but it just doesn't hold up when you examine it."
- No. No he doesn't. He has an argument that "sounds" good. If you were in marketing you could say he had a good argument. I think you more than adequately prove his argument is rubbish.
"High volume software is attacked when somebody wants just visibility and glory, and the fact is that the hardening is part of the process of having the level of reliability guarantee that we need to make."
I like the fact that he thinks people attack M$SFT software just for glory. Not because:
1) It's easy.
2) A valuable exploit is one that can be used. More machnes - more opportunities to use the exploit.
I also like the fact that M$FT should make a "guarantee" according to Gates. I haven't heard of M$FT giving a "level of reliability guarantee". Nor do I think they will.
I could be wrong.
Fresh Air
Matt has a few other in the archives.
Don't waste my time. Quote the relevant and/or interesting parts of the letter then give the URL for those of us who want to read M$FT's latest pile of marketing *&$!.
We all knew they were going to sue. Sun's lawyers just wanted to know what they were up against from a legal standpoint. Sun should be careful. Legal disclosure can harm both parties.
Otherwise my webbrowser wouldn't be able to display it.
Sarcasm aside, I believe you are getting your semantics all jumbled up. What they took was an average. It is as "real" as any statistical measurement. They did correct for the relative velocity of the objects producing the light which may or may not have been a good idea.
On another note. They are actually taking a measurement that is spanning time. An interesting followup to this research would be a project where one takes the light from objects within a certain radius and averaged that. In effect this gives you an average light during a specific age of the universe.
I want to know: Is the universe getting more beige with time?
When you are an admin trying to convince your boss to not waste his money on a micro$oft license and instead use freebsd or linux the more proof that you can show that it will work the better.
I agree that a website certification shouldn't be given much weight but I've seen managers make decisions based on much less.