One thing that I didn't notice in the article, and that I didn't notice in people's posts (Yes I am slightly wandering off topic here, I understand but bear with me) is the possibility of people turning to Solaris for a common environment between server and desktop based on one thing. Other proprietry apps.
IF Sun do get the backing of others on this, such as Veritas for Volume Manager (Apparently only available through NCR), and they DO get all the management tools, all the backup agents and everything else that is already running on Solaris for SPARC now, THEN they might stand a chance too from coming in on another angle of running the same platform on multiple hardwares. This is one of the reasons that IBM came after Linux in the first place if memory serves me correctly.
The other thing to consider, is that while this is going on, it's completely possible for the developers who are currently concentrating on Linux (And *BSD, and AIX and Solaris for SPARC and SCO OpenServer etc and all different hardware platforms that go with these other versions) to turn around and just stonewall Solaris x86 and not make changes for it simply as they are already having too many considerations because of too many platforms. The GCC group had this problem recently. This would kill it too, as the desktop applications won't be tested and running on this platform. Now, it's entirely possible for Sun to pay for the development cost of making sure that these apps work on Solaris x86 but then they are going to be continually behind the 8 ball playing catch up, and having to sort through code they didn't write. The only alternative is to hire these developers themselves, but I just don't think they would have the money to do so.
At the end of the day though, these things are cheap home systems, not business machines. Yeah they were crap, they were cheap too. I haven't seen the new pressarios etc being any better on having the ability to put a standard power supply in them or anything else (the biggest repair fault I have seen with the older units)
I still much prefer the business machines from Compaq when they were around to the current stuff being pushed out by HP / Compaq....
My first comment would have to be an adjustment on the ultimate linus quote of "I think he is smoking crack". After thinking about it a little more, I would have to say that if you were buying the old HP stuff, and now you are landed with Compaq kit, then I could understand your point.
From a user of Compaq kit over the past 7 years, I would have to say that I think the quality of Compaq kit has gone downhill, and the quality of service in particular is now crap. All the outsourced helpdesks and everything else drives me bananas. The only reason why I am still buying it is that at least Compaq / HP is still more responsive than Dell, and are more flexible towards our business.
Two of them are monopolies, but they will not enforce each other like they do now.
Why not?
At the end of the day, if they can partner with eachother and keep eachother in business why wouldn't they? You would need to put something in between them, or come up with a court ruling to keep them apart.
I use the guy I report to and a project manager to whinge at me when my brain doesn't keep up with what's going on.
If I don't remember a few things in a row, then they usually start thinking "He forgot, probably has too much on his plate, can I get someone else to handle this, or is this a Berny only thing?" If they can pass it off they do.
Better than ANY computer, something that can make a decision!
I am really in no position to comment regarding how things are in the states (Given that I am not there) but in Australia, the incumbant telco (Part Govt. owned) Telstra has setup a EVDO network. I am using a Sierra Wireless 580 Aircard for access, now the cards here are F@#$@%^$# expensive. Telstra charge *way* to much for them, anyway, I digress.
The service that I get here in Aus, I get about 100KB/sec downstream when my signal on an EVDO base is good. Latency isn't too bad, when I have a VPN tunnel up I can get 30-40ms pings to our internal network no hassles. I get occasional drop outs as it wanders between the old 1xRTT and EVDO access (but I am usually using it while mobile) overall though, this access is still relatively seamless, even when wandering between base stations.
You can get signal boosters (External high gain antennaes) and you could easily drop one of these cards into a PCI based PCMCIA slot and it would work. If the access is there (Even if it's 1xRTT) it's still going to be a hell of a lot better than what the poster is getting currently and with a signal booster even at 1xRTT that's going to be 144Kb/s. The above post has some links to the antennaes available.
No, not quite, 60 Minutes doesn't turn around and say at 110 something street, you will find this. That's the boundary that got crossed, if they said "In this apartment block in downtown Missouri" or whatever it was, that wouldn't be going to far. To publish the information on the internet of someone who obviously wanted to keep their personal life out of what they do professionaly, that's the step too far.
Also the information was unverified. The whole thing to me sounds like a smear story, no matter which way you look at it.
Actually it was the Windows 95 IP stack if memory serves me correctly...
Re:But why would you buy an HD-DVD player...
on
Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD
·
· Score: 1
HD-DVD will win as it's an easier migration process.
Blu-Ray which I believe could be the better format, probably won't win as the legacy of DVD will hang around and the push to the consumer will be easier.
OK, As I pull the crystal ball out. I predict two players, a standard HD-DVD player. This will win the marketing wars, but in every geeks house will be a PS3 so that they can play Blu-Ray discs.
Umm, haven't we been here before with the Intel PRO cards?
They at one point used to do just the PRO/100 cards, then they dropped them and started doing PRO/100 cards that did IPSEC hand off? If I remember correctly the S was security and they had a few other models? I was thinking back then that they would be looking at IP hand off at some point.
The problem that I have is that we are querying the entire AD and there are a number of OUs. The problem that we have is how many queries we are throwing at it. Basically it's not standing up as well as it should. Apparently the only way to fix it is to flatten out the AD to get the speed back.
We are querying it quite a bit (a couple of hundred requests per minute returning quite a bit of data) namely getting lists of usernames (but by requesting lists of groups and enumerating those groups), but the requests are taking 200 - 500 ms. Really we want them about a tenth of that speed.
Apparently the only way to do that with the JET database that it runs out of is to flatten the structure.
From an administration point of view yes, I will agree with you, but to a certain extent, I sorta agree with the parent in that on the back end side (Within a DC) it does feel like a flat system. I have a relatively small AD that I help manage (With a couple of other people) its about 1500 hosts. We are having reasonably major speed issues at the moment with LDAP queries and are now looking at collapsing down / flattening the domain to speed it up because of it.
I think this is brillant, couldn't have come from a more knowledgable person at a better time. Especially given that in the past day or two a nice little article got published up on Groklaw about the SMB / CIFS protocol and what legnths they have to go to, to reverse engineer / pull it apart on the wire. It's essentially a slightly intelligent brute force method.
Take a look. I couldn't have made the timing for this article any better if I tried.
I second Tridge's motion that when Microsoft really wants to come to the party on interoperability, let me know. I want to be there.
Personally, I think the major reason why they are going through what they are doing for interoperability now, it's all because of market pressure with the rise of open source, and the open standards which it follows. See what's happening with all the governments demanding open standards for documents etc?
Lots of people on a server are going to produce lag/queue issues.
No, bad internal queueing and bad back end application design are going to product lag / queuing issues. Simple example, you write a web app the wrong way and it's going to stuff up when you put 10,000 people onto it full time. Same goes for this.
A lawyer wrote a will for an elderly lady. She asked the price and he said, "One hundred dollars, please." She gave him a crisp new $100 bill without noticing that a second $100 bill was stuck to it. Immediately, the lawyer faced an ethical dilemma: "Do I have to report this on my taxes?"
One more thing is this. Microsoft came out with the signed driver model in Win2k for the main reason that stuff is going to be loading into kernel memory; a shared memory space. They already had MAJOR problems in NT4 with drivers not doing memory handling correctly; hence the signed driver model to try to steer users away from non-signed drivers and to try to give the hardware manufacturers some guidelines on drivers and some incentive for going through the process (One that I am led to believe costs a fair bit of money).
Slashdot Mirror
One thing that I didn't notice in the article, and that I didn't notice in people's posts (Yes I am slightly wandering off topic here, I understand but bear with me) is the possibility of people turning to Solaris for a common environment between server and desktop based on one thing. Other proprietry apps.
IF Sun do get the backing of others on this, such as Veritas for Volume Manager (Apparently only available through NCR), and they DO get all the management tools, all the backup agents and everything else that is already running on Solaris for SPARC now, THEN they might stand a chance too from coming in on another angle of running the same platform on multiple hardwares. This is one of the reasons that IBM came after Linux in the first place if memory serves me correctly.
The other thing to consider, is that while this is going on, it's completely possible for the developers who are currently concentrating on Linux (And *BSD, and AIX and Solaris for SPARC and SCO OpenServer etc and all different hardware platforms that go with these other versions) to turn around and just stonewall Solaris x86 and not make changes for it simply as they are already having too many considerations because of too many platforms. The GCC group had this problem recently. This would kill it too, as the desktop applications won't be tested and running on this platform. Now, it's entirely possible for Sun to pay for the development cost of making sure that these apps work on Solaris x86 but then they are going to be continually behind the 8 ball playing catch up, and having to sort through code they didn't write. The only alternative is to hire these developers themselves, but I just don't think they would have the money to do so.
Your thoughts?
Not going to happen, where Telstra does peer with ISPs, Telstra's BGP setup makes their data flow within it's own network.
Unless they change this policy, then peering with peer points such as WAIX it's not going to matter.
I have the V1200B as it stands, great case mind you but not the point of this post...
The Lian Li F1 desk
I am normally not a man to go gaga over furniture, but come on you have to agree, this would have to be the best tech desk I have seen in AGES!
At 3000 pound it's a little steep...
At the end of the day though, these things are cheap home systems, not business machines. Yeah they were crap, they were cheap too. I haven't seen the new pressarios etc being any better on having the ability to put a standard power supply in them or anything else (the biggest repair fault I have seen with the older units)
I still much prefer the business machines from Compaq when they were around to the current stuff being pushed out by HP / Compaq....
My first comment would have to be an adjustment on the ultimate linus quote of "I think he is smoking crack". After thinking about it a little more, I would have to say that if you were buying the old HP stuff, and now you are landed with Compaq kit, then I could understand your point.
From a user of Compaq kit over the past 7 years, I would have to say that I think the quality of Compaq kit has gone downhill, and the quality of service in particular is now crap. All the outsourced helpdesks and everything else drives me bananas. The only reason why I am still buying it is that at least Compaq / HP is still more responsive than Dell, and are more flexible towards our business.
Two of them are monopolies, but they will not enforce each other like they do now.
Why not?
At the end of the day, if they can partner with eachother and keep eachother in business why wouldn't they? You would need to put something in between them, or come up with a court ruling to keep them apart.
I use the guy I report to and a project manager to whinge at me when my brain doesn't keep up with what's going on.
If I don't remember a few things in a row, then they usually start thinking "He forgot, probably has too much on his plate, can I get someone else to handle this, or is this a Berny only thing?" If they can pass it off they do.
Better than ANY computer, something that can make a decision!
Every woman will have not one G-spot but four
Then we will have to have 4 penis' to be able to pleasure each at the same time.
Just wait for menopause, no periods gives them plenty of time to tend to their new moustaches.....
*For everyone who can't tell this is a joke*
I am really in no position to comment regarding how things are in the states (Given that I am not there) but in Australia, the incumbant telco (Part Govt. owned) Telstra has setup a EVDO network. I am using a Sierra Wireless 580 Aircard for access, now the cards here are F@#$@%^$# expensive. Telstra charge *way* to much for them, anyway, I digress.
The service that I get here in Aus, I get about 100KB/sec downstream when my signal on an EVDO base is good. Latency isn't too bad, when I have a VPN tunnel up I can get 30-40ms pings to our internal network no hassles. I get occasional drop outs as it wanders between the old 1xRTT and EVDO access (but I am usually using it while mobile) overall though, this access is still relatively seamless, even when wandering between base stations.
You can get signal boosters (External high gain antennaes) and you could easily drop one of these cards into a PCI based PCMCIA slot and it would work. If the access is there (Even if it's 1xRTT) it's still going to be a hell of a lot better than what the poster is getting currently and with a signal booster even at 1xRTT that's going to be 144Kb/s. The above post has some links to the antennaes available.
From TFA:
single-authentication, user-identity management and multimaster replication. Also, centralized phone book, employee locator and org-chart tool.
I would also suggest that the speed complaints that people have with OpenLDAP wouldn't be there.
No, not quite, 60 Minutes doesn't turn around and say at 110 something street, you will find this. That's the boundary that got crossed, if they said "In this apartment block in downtown Missouri" or whatever it was, that wouldn't be going to far. To publish the information on the internet of someone who obviously wanted to keep their personal life out of what they do professionaly, that's the step too far.
Also the information was unverified. The whole thing to me sounds like a smear story, no matter which way you look at it.
I think we are going to need a couple of mirrors of this file or get a torrent setup....
I am trying, I have 26 meg of the file down now, but the speed of my download is definately slowing.
This wouldn't have anything to do with Intel owning a bit of RedHat given that they were one of the original VCs of RedHat by any chance would it?
And we all know how close Dell is with Intel. They are the last manufacturer to not have adopted AMD aren't they?
Actually it was the Windows 95 IP stack if memory serves me correctly...
HD-DVD will win as it's an easier migration process.
Blu-Ray which I believe could be the better format, probably won't win as the legacy of DVD will hang around and the push to the consumer will be easier.
OK, As I pull the crystal ball out. I predict two players, a standard HD-DVD player. This will win the marketing wars, but in every geeks house will be a PS3 so that they can play Blu-Ray discs.
Umm, haven't we been here before with the Intel PRO cards?
They at one point used to do just the PRO/100 cards, then they dropped them and started doing PRO/100 cards that did IPSEC hand off? If I remember correctly the S was security and they had a few other models? I was thinking back then that they would be looking at IP hand off at some point.
The problem that I have is that we are querying the entire AD and there are a number of OUs. The problem that we have is how many queries we are throwing at it. Basically it's not standing up as well as it should. Apparently the only way to fix it is to flatten out the AD to get the speed back.
We are querying it quite a bit (a couple of hundred requests per minute returning quite a bit of data) namely getting lists of usernames (but by requesting lists of groups and enumerating those groups), but the requests are taking 200 - 500 ms. Really we want them about a tenth of that speed.
Apparently the only way to do that with the JET database that it runs out of is to flatten the structure.
From an administration point of view yes, I will agree with you, but to a certain extent, I sorta agree with the parent in that on the back end side (Within a DC) it does feel like a flat system. I have a relatively small AD that I help manage (With a couple of other people) its about 1500 hosts. We are having reasonably major speed issues at the moment with LDAP queries and are now looking at collapsing down / flattening the domain to speed it up because of it.
I think this is brillant, couldn't have come from a more knowledgable person at a better time. Especially given that in the past day or two a nice little article got published up on Groklaw about the SMB / CIFS protocol and what legnths they have to go to, to reverse engineer / pull it apart on the wire. It's essentially a slightly intelligent brute force method.
0 10415933
Take a look. I couldn't have made the timing for this article any better if I tried.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050205
I second Tridge's motion that when Microsoft really wants to come to the party on interoperability, let me know. I want to be there.
Personally, I think the major reason why they are going through what they are doing for interoperability now, it's all because of market pressure with the rise of open source, and the open standards which it follows. See what's happening with all the governments demanding open standards for documents etc?
*sigh* when will they learn?
One problem with this, writing it to the disk that fast.
Lots of people on a server are going to produce lag/queue issues.
No, bad internal queueing and bad back end application design are going to product lag / queuing issues. Simple example, you write a web app the wrong way and it's going to stuff up when you put 10,000 people onto it full time. Same goes for this.
A lawyer wrote a will for an elderly lady. She asked the price and he said, "One hundred dollars, please." She gave him a crisp new $100 bill without noticing that a second $100 bill was stuck to it. Immediately, the lawyer faced an ethical dilemma: "Do I have to report this on my taxes?"
One more thing is this. Microsoft came out with the signed driver model in Win2k for the main reason that stuff is going to be loading into kernel memory; a shared memory space. They already had MAJOR problems in NT4 with drivers not doing memory handling correctly; hence the signed driver model to try to steer users away from non-signed drivers and to try to give the hardware manufacturers some guidelines on drivers and some incentive for going through the process (One that I am led to believe costs a fair bit of money).