If a vendor is going to charge per CPU, then they should charge per CPU whether the multiple processors are bonded into the same die, or assembled in multi-die packages, or in multiple packages.
Having run between 6 and 20-way SMP for ten years, I find per-CPU licenses distasteful and eschew products under such licenses. Such are market forces.
If a technological leap makes putting multiple processors into a machine suddenly affordable by having multiple cores on a die, that is a good thing. It will just force users to apply their force to the market that much sooner.
Get them working on producing a GM human-female that thinks that stanky basementgeeks are supersexy. They can come in several variants -- the scrawny goth, the buxom blond, the dominatrix redhead... They'd make a billion....
If we posit that Firefox is a more difficult environment for malware, and I believe this to be true; then malware authors will continue to go after the low-hanging fruit of IE, even as its marketshare falls.
Infecting 60% of the population with a small amount of work, is far easier than infecting 40% of the population with an enormous outlay of effort.
Of course I'm living in a fantasy world, because I think that FF will reach 40% market penetration.
You laugh, but there is still a community of Mod100 freaks out there who love them. Why? Because they work. It has a keyboard that is actually nice to use, and will run a week off of a handful of AA batteries.
Speaking as someone who was lectured in Nigeria on technology issues, all I can say is you are not seeing the big picture.
Every one of your laundry list of things that people need, are either predicated on, or at the very least made much more efficient by: The efficient and timely flow of information. In other words, IT.
I am sure most of these programs are small and maintained by a few people.
Actually, most production FORTRAN systems are beheamoth systems for modeling very complex behaviors. Although the community that keeps these systems up-to-date is probably relatively small.
But not always: My friend Carl was writing CGI in FORTRAN to run on the XKL TD-1
While I take issue with his blantant anti-FORTRANism, he makes the excellent point: Write good code in whatever language you write. Just because you can write Perl that looks like line noise does not meen you must.
Be very cautious when tormenting a power-structure that has few
qualms with making you vanish in the dead of night.
The Chinese government is not going to send you a polite subpoena
and meet you in a clean courtroom some months down the road like the
*AA where you will be given access to effective counsel and a
more-or-less fair shake.
Instead, if they catch you
circumventing the Great Firewall of China they may descend
upon you in the night and drag you off to a dank prison for
reeducation.
What the parent said, without the flying spittle
on
Sun Opens OpenSolaris.Org
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
There is a big world out there, and not one solution is always right for everything.
Outside of the knee-jerk reactions on/. , the whole world should not switch overnight to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP. Sometimes, other systems are the right answer, for many complex reasons.
I happen to have a particular fondness for Solaris, having been a fan of their hardware for the last 15 years. It's the Devil I know, and I'm comfortable dancing with him.
I think it's amusingly disingenuous of the slashdot Linux-script-kiddie mentality to ignore that for ten years, SunOS Ruled The Roost in open software, for many good reasons. It is not without its warts (Solaris 2.0 through 2.4 being oozing pustules of lossage), but for an entire generation of sysadmins, Sun was the one system you had to know... You could add on some of the other big players like Digital, AIX and HP-UX, and maybe one or two of the smaller also-rans like the BSD 4.4 cousins or Linux, but the 800 lb. gorilla was Sun.
Finally: any monoculture is a bad thing, whether it is BSD 4.3 on VAXen, SunOS 5.9 on US-IV , or Linux on Wintel hardware -- and it behooves anyone who wants to be taken seriously to study the differences between systems rather than put all of their energy into denegrating that which isn't their pet.
I think that last part really sums up what I find disheartening with the slashdot collective consciousness. It's that the slashborg will put an infinite amount of energy into defending their point of view, without investing any into analyzing the competition. And, sadly, that more than anything is the sign of ignorant zealotry.
I was working on a project some years ago
tracking the location of public transit vehicles, using a subrate data service called CDPD (Cellular Digital Packetized Data or some such...)
We squawked to the vendor of the hardware (Trimble Navigation) that the units had absolutely no access control - allowing any user who knew the IP address of the device to connect to it, and change its stream-of-consciousness reporting, or merely poll it for its current location.
They told us this was not a great concern.
A little human engineering later, we had the IP block used by one of their largest customers (The California Highway Patrol), and showed up at a meeting, not with a map of our transit system, but a display showing the current position, direction and speed of every CHP patrol car in northern California. They finally decided that maybe access control was a good idea.
So, what is the qualitative difference between using a piece of technology (surreptitiously placed location transponder) and a human (plainclothes cop)?
Both allow the police to track your whereabouts, and both require specificity of target. In fact, just because of the specificity - I would argue a police-placed tracking device would have a stronger case in court, than the police subpoenaing the logs of a snow-plow operator's tracking logs.
Placing a wiretap requires a court order, because there has been found to be an expectation of privacy when you use your telephone.
The recent court found, that there is no expectation of privacy when a person is driving around. Any person on the street can see your vehicle and, assuming they have sufficient visual acuity, see that you are operating it.
The brick of cocaine metaphor is a total red herring -- planting false evidence is not allowed in any country with a modicum of respect for rule of law. The analogy further breaks down: Your position, per se, is not evidence of the commission of a crime (although there are cases where it is and an appeals court could easily see that case differently.)
In other words, if you're like me, you got up this morning and said to yourself, "Gosh, I really need some solutions to help unify my development team members. And not only that, I need to more tightly link my business, development, and operations organizations."
When I got up this morning, I said to myself, "The only solution I need is the volatile oils of ground coffee beans in water." Which may not be a solution, but a suspension. Or just a mixture. I'm a codewriter, not a chemical engineer! Ask me after a cup or two...
Is it possible to have article summaries that at least clue intelligent people, who are ignorant to the latest brand name warm-fuzzy methodologies, into the gist of the article?
Something like, "atlantic, is a ______ that works with Eclipse, a ___________________________."
Reminded of that great Kids in the Hall Sketch,
Screw You, Taxpayer!, wherein they explain, that since KitH was funded, in part, by the CBC, You, The Canadian Taxpayer are in fact paying for a bunch of silliness and hijinks.
Slashdot Mirror
If a vendor is going to charge per CPU, then they should charge per CPU whether the multiple processors are bonded into the same die, or assembled in multi-die packages, or in multiple packages.
Having run between 6 and 20-way SMP for ten years, I find per-CPU licenses distasteful and eschew products under such licenses. Such are market forces.
If a technological leap makes putting multiple processors into a machine suddenly affordable by having multiple cores on a die, that is a good thing. It will just force users to apply their force to the market that much sooner.
Get them working on producing a GM human-female that thinks that stanky basementgeeks are supersexy. They can come in several variants -- the scrawny goth, the buxom blond, the dominatrix redhead ... They'd make a billion....
If we posit that Firefox is a more difficult environment for malware, and I believe this to be true; then malware authors will continue to go after the low-hanging fruit of IE, even as its marketshare falls.
Infecting 60% of the population with a small amount of work, is far easier than infecting 40% of the population with an enormous outlay of effort.
Of course I'm living in a fantasy world, because I think that FF will reach 40% market penetration.
You laugh, but there is still a community of Mod100 freaks out there who love them. Why? Because they work. It has a keyboard that is actually nice to use, and will run a week off of a handful of AA batteries.
It's called Channel Marketing/Pricing and it's been around for years.
If it takes me an hour of research to save $10 I have lost much more than I've gained.
An anonymous coward said:
Well, duhhhh. My sisters have six children and four grandchildren between them. I am sure in their day they were MILFs to someoneI have no joke here, I just like saying, I work as a penetration tester ...
Isn't divx a codec that might be contained within MPG files?
And I'm sure they will be rushing into court to assert those rights.
If they were so foolhardy, I'd love to see some civil court judge (or jury) find for the plaintiff and award one dollar damages.
Maybe they could use the dollar to buy a tube of K-Y for their trip to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.
Speaking as someone who was lectured in Nigeria on technology issues, all I can say is you are not seeing the big picture.
Every one of your laundry list of things that people need, are either predicated on, or at the very least made much more efficient by: The efficient and timely flow of information. In other words, IT.
But not always: My friend Carl was writing CGI in FORTRAN to run on the XKL TD-1
Let me add to that -- writing well in Human Languages is important too. Otherwise you're going to lose your audience of yore with loose usage.
While I take issue with his blantant anti-FORTRANism, he makes the excellent point: Write good code in whatever language you write. Just because you can write Perl that looks like line noise does not meen you must.
I wish you luck, but do keep one thing in mind.
Be very cautious when tormenting a power-structure that has few qualms with making you vanish in the dead of night.
The Chinese government is not going to send you a polite subpoena and meet you in a clean courtroom some months down the road like the *AA where you will be given access to effective counsel and a more-or-less fair shake.
Instead, if they catch you circumventing the Great Firewall of China they may descend upon you in the night and drag you off to a dank prison for reeducation.
There is a big world out there, and not one solution is always right for everything.
Outside of the knee-jerk reactions on /. , the whole world should not switch overnight to Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP. Sometimes, other systems are the right answer, for many complex reasons.
I happen to have a particular fondness for Solaris, having been a fan of their hardware for the last 15 years. It's the Devil I know, and I'm comfortable dancing with him.
I think it's amusingly disingenuous of the slashdot Linux-script-kiddie mentality to ignore that for ten years, SunOS Ruled The Roost in open software, for many good reasons. It is not without its warts (Solaris 2.0 through 2.4 being oozing pustules of lossage), but for an entire generation of sysadmins, Sun was the one system you had to know ... You could add on some of the other big players like Digital, AIX and HP-UX, and maybe one or two of the smaller also-rans like the BSD 4.4 cousins or Linux, but the 800 lb. gorilla was Sun.
Finally: any monoculture is a bad thing, whether it is BSD 4.3 on VAXen, SunOS 5.9 on US-IV , or Linux on Wintel hardware -- and it behooves anyone who wants to be taken seriously to study the differences between systems rather than put all of their energy into denegrating that which isn't their pet.
I think that last part really sums up what I find disheartening with the slashdot collective consciousness. It's that the slashborg will put an infinite amount of energy into defending their point of view, without investing any into analyzing the competition. And, sadly, that more than anything is the sign of ignorant zealotry.
I fear you're going to lose your audience of yore with loose use of the English language.
Wow -- it's dupe night here at /. Previous Article
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. Proverbs 16:18 KJV
I was working on a project some years ago tracking the location of public transit vehicles, using a subrate data service called CDPD (Cellular Digital Packetized Data or some such...)
We squawked to the vendor of the hardware (Trimble Navigation) that the units had absolutely no access control - allowing any user who knew the IP address of the device to connect to it, and change its stream-of-consciousness reporting, or merely poll it for its current location.
They told us this was not a great concern.
A little human engineering later, we had the IP block used by one of their largest customers (The California Highway Patrol), and showed up at a meeting, not with a map of our transit system, but a display showing the current position, direction and speed of every CHP patrol car in northern California. They finally decided that maybe access control was a good idea.
Now that would have been a moneymaking dot-com!
So, what is the qualitative difference between using a piece of technology (surreptitiously placed location transponder) and a human (plainclothes cop)?
Both allow the police to track your whereabouts, and both require specificity of target. In fact, just because of the specificity - I would argue a police-placed tracking device would have a stronger case in court, than the police subpoenaing the logs of a snow-plow operator's tracking logs.
Placing a wiretap requires a court order, because there has been found to be an expectation of privacy when you use your telephone.
The recent court found, that there is no expectation of privacy when a person is driving around. Any person on the street can see your vehicle and, assuming they have sufficient visual acuity, see that you are operating it.
The brick of cocaine metaphor is a total red herring -- planting false evidence is not allowed in any country with a modicum of respect for rule of law. The analogy further breaks down: Your position, per se, is not evidence of the commission of a crime (although there are cases where it is and an appeals court could easily see that case differently.)
I never cared for n-gauge but always was a fan of HO
Buzzz, buzz, buzz framework blah blah blah
BINGO!
Is it possible to have article summaries that at least clue intelligent people, who are ignorant to the latest brand name warm-fuzzy methodologies, into the gist of the article?
Something like, "atlantic, is a ______ that works with Eclipse, a ___________________________."
Reminded of that great Kids in the Hall Sketch, Screw You, Taxpayer!, wherein they explain, that since KitH was funded, in part, by the CBC, You, The Canadian Taxpayer are in fact paying for a bunch of silliness and hijinks.