Full headers of the e-mail in question would indemnify you, as the originating IP is added by the first SMTP server to deal with the message and can't be spoofed by the client.
Companies are going to see this and they will realize that these machines will be quick and easy for IBM to repair.
Yeah, right... At the Dept. of Agriculture, we had an IBM Netvista all-in-one (PC and LCD monitor in one) with a broken plastic latch on the drop-down CD-rom drive. You'd think that since it's government and massive numbers of machines are purchased, they'd be on it chop-chop. You'd be wrong. It took a freaking month of e-mails and phone calls reminding IBM to warranty their product before someone finally showed up to replace the entire CD drive holder (The latch that holds the drive up in the hidden position is fragile, and is actually part of the plastic holder. How stupid is that design?)
Correct. By linking statically and then distributing your work, you are also distributing the LGPL'ed work as a part of it. By linking dynamically you're simply interfacing with existing libraries on the end-user's system, which is permitted by the LGPL without invoking section 6.
You missed out the bit of your post where you explain why you don't believe that.NET can scale.
Did you read the story? The guy has already said that the.NET app doesn't handle the desired number of users on the available hardware. He's looking here on slashdot for some kind of magical fairy dust that would force that same app to handle all the concurrent users he needs.
This is after the other options are rejected, and meeting the client's requirements are not possible.
"Take the money, write a kick-ass application that would scale on appropriate hardware, then tell the company that when they run into connection / speed / scaling prolems, they should throw in some extra hardware."
Then you get sued for failing to deliver the system as specified, and your reputation suffers due to your work being a failure. My wants are completely irrelevent. My clients get what they want if at all possible, otherwise I work with them to find a feasible solution that is acceptable. If not, I move on. I have no shortage of work, which I'd like to believe is at least partially attributable to my business ethic.
Don't take jobs that simply aren't worth the risk or bad relations. That's bad business sense.
Re:Why are they running Windows then?
on
Can .NET Really Scale?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Right, and those specifications sometimes push a project outside the realm of possibility, as seems to have happened here. Either work with the client to get the specs changed to something feasible (which consumes time you can't bill for), or pass on the job and look for another client. Them's the breaks.
It's a damn simple question: can.NET really scale?
That really isn't the question being asked at all.
This person doesn't want to know if.NET will provide a relatively non-diminishing gain in performance as more capacity is added, which would be scaling. They actually want to know if it will handle a large number of concurrent connections to services on small hardware.
The real question is: Will it handle a lot of clients at once on very little hardware?
The answer is: No.
If you don't have enough capital to invest in the infrastructure you need, you have to either find something that will do what you want with less, or give up on the whole idea.
I still have yet to see Windows install and have everything work 100% out of the box, either. It's a little much to expect from any OS, so it's kind of funny to see people preclude "grandma" as a Linux user and then suggest she use an OS with install and hardware management that's no closer to perfect.
"Where's my office? What do you mean I need drivers for my main board? This isn't a car! What the hell is an AGP bridge and why does it want a driver too?" "I plugged my new webcam in and put the CD in like it asked, so why is it telling me 'Windows could not find any information about your hardware?' I paid good money for this thing and it doesn't even work!"
Grandma's going to call for her tech-savvy progeny's help no matter what she's running.
Correction: Bought QDOS (Quick 'n Dirty Operating System) and rebranded it. An opportunity he would have never had if it weren't for the arrogance of CPM's author driving IBM to look for alternate OSes.
Monarchs did all those things as well, that doesn't make monarchies a desirable form of government.
Pretty much. A few handouts to appease people do not make the wrongs right.
In a free market economy, winning itself is against the rules
Indeed- he also did not play by the rules as is evidenced by court action against his company.
Summaries? I must've missed that bit for the abuse directed at the other poster.
It really did look like your first post (I assume it's yours, anyway) was talking about the average user posting comments. As another poster wrote, the editors are, strangely enough, not that big a part of the slashdot community. The commentary tacked on to many articles is so pithy that I just skip over anything after the italics.
They don't seem to even read the articles or check them over given the frequency of dupes & broken links. It's like they're scripts that post based on keyword hits and attach a randomly generated quip.
In short, I tend not to care what they have to say. I'm here for the gems scattered throughout the comments. Hell, even the lumps of coal are good if they're funny.
You can review every story submitted to Slashdot, and in 99.9999% of any comment in the story summary dealing with MS, it is always of a bashing nature.
You're just making that shit up. I just checked a few and there are plenty of pro-MS or just plain neutral posts. The loud zealots on either side are really visible, but it's really not a significant portion of the posts.
Brand names are trademarks, not copyrights. Microsoft doesn't have a trademark for "Smartphone."
A quick search on the Trademark Electronic Search System shows that the only live "Smartphone" trademark is owned by ART Advanced Recognition Technologies, Inc... and it's for a logo only. Microsoft has WINDOWS POWERED SMARTPHONE, but that's not the single word "Smartphone" with a capital S.
I'm afraid that the reviewer there was just wrong.
That's not the same result at all. I should have been more specific for the people who have never seen what I'm talking about.
The menu I'm referring to has been in many X window managers for literally decades now and contains commands and programs. You could compare it to the Windows start menu.
The right-click context menu you're thinking of in windows is something else entirely, and has also been around in other OSes since long before Windows 95. The context menu on my Fluxbox install is bound to the middle mouse button, while the cmd/app menu is bound to the right.
Also, the shortcut keystrokes I'm talking about are used to manipulate just about every aspect of the WM as well as navigate within it, so I don't have to reach for the mouse while typing. I have my most frequently-used applications bound to shortcuts, too.
Installing Windows XP on that old hardware would have caused many of the same problems, along with many of its own. Is that a red flag signifying that Windows XP is inadequate as a desktop OS? XP would have just as easily prevented her from doing those perfectly normal things she was doing on her 8-year old Windows 95.
The point is: She's between a rock and a hard place. There is no painless migration path for her. All she can really do is pick one and hope it doesn't put her in the same spot a few years down the road.
Quite. It tells us much about her mindset and reveals how the rest of the article is going to go. She has unreasonable expectations, and she'll be damned if anyone or any software written years ago is going to deviate from them.
the various installation routines and setup programs would either not work the way they were supposed to at all, or work sometimes and not others.
How they were supposed to work? Or how they were expected to work by someone who is unfamiliar with Linux? The problem is further compounded by the fact that she's familiar with Windows. She approached the installation of Linux with many expectations; some of which do not apply and set her up for disappointment.
I can expect Windows XP to not blow away grub and install overtop of my Gentoo install if I try creating a dual-boot system following the installer's prompts. Unfortunately for me, it's going to do quite the opposite of what I expect.
I'm thinking specifically of her redhat 8.0 problems, where didn't see her soundcard at boot until she ran snconfig
And this is worse than when Windows XP doesn't recognize your old hardware? How about when drivers for it aren't even available? This problem is especially bad with printers and scanners in XP.
knopix random segfaulting
This is to be expected from Knopix. It performs a lot of trial-and-error while booting in order to determine what hardware you have. If something it tries segfaults, then it knows your system doesn't support it and moves on.
Inconsistent detection of hardware like the mouse between boots is strange, though. I have yet to experience such varying behaviour on any machines I boot from a Knoppix disc.
To be honest, I find the inconsistent behaviour within most distros she tried very strange. I've installed and used countless Linux distros and even BSDs, and such here-again-gone-again behaviour is exceedingly rare. Even then it's usually a result of things like ESD damage to the hardware. In fact, the only place I've ever found such behaviour common is in Windows 95, 98 and ME (especially ME). Not in DOS, not in NT-based Windows, not in Netware, and not in various flavours of UNIX. Either she has far worse luck than I do, or I suspect someone forgot to wear an antistatic strap when handling parts.
the Linux GUI is just as unstable and crappy as those listed.
Fluxbox and I would have to disagree with you.:) Point in case: I like my right-click menus and keyboard shortcuts. I find them superior to an icon-cluttered backdrop and start menu. My GUI is reliable and works great.
"What do you mean I have to drag the mouse all the way down to that 'start' button just to get at my apps? And where are my other workspaces?"
Those would be false expectations, similar to what someone with a Windows background will have when approaching an X environment like mine.
I wish the windows look-a-likes the best, but I can't really comment on them as I don't use them. I simply don't like that style of interface.
But pretending that the general state of the GUI in linux is that of stable, reliable, user-friendly, and intuitive programs would be self-deluding
It's definitely far from perfect (even Fluxbox), and benefits from every improvement we can help create. I don't find it any worse than the Windows alternatives, though. I can't complain about the price, either.
One student, who was supposedly sharing 652,000 songs. At maybe 3 megabytes each, that's around 2 terabytes of data.
I'd like to know how the RIAA expects anyone to believe one college student had that much storage, much less convince anyone that 98 billion is a credible loss figure.
Yes, stealing certainly is stealing....but what does that have to do with swapping mp3s?
Surely they aren't lying to increase the apparent severity in the eyes of the public and the court by calling copyright infringement "stealing" (which by definition is not the same thing), are they?
Slashdot Mirror
Full headers of the e-mail in question would indemnify you, as the originating IP is added by the first SMTP server to deal with the message and can't be spoofed by the client.
The acronym is apt, but User Friendly is not funny.
And why does no-one do make install?
make install assumes you're using LILO and doesn't work on grub.
It was a director's machine. Said director wanted it fixed. Need I say more?
Companies are going to see this and they will realize that these machines will be quick and easy for IBM to repair.
Yeah, right... At the Dept. of Agriculture, we had an IBM Netvista all-in-one (PC and LCD monitor in one) with a broken plastic latch on the drop-down CD-rom drive.
You'd think that since it's government and massive numbers of machines are purchased, they'd be on it chop-chop. You'd be wrong. It took a freaking month of e-mails and phone calls reminding IBM to warranty their product before someone finally showed up to replace the entire CD drive holder (The latch that holds the drive up in the hidden position is fragile, and is actually part of the plastic holder. How stupid is that design?)
Correct. By linking statically and then distributing your work, you are also distributing the LGPL'ed work as a part of it.
By linking dynamically you're simply interfacing with existing libraries on the end-user's system, which is permitted by the LGPL without invoking section 6.
You missed out the bit of your post where you explain why you don't believe that .NET can scale.
.NET app doesn't handle the desired number of users on the available hardware. He's looking here on slashdot for some kind of magical fairy dust that would force that same app to handle all the concurrent users he needs.
Did you read the story? The guy has already said that the
This is after the other options are rejected, and meeting the client's requirements are not possible.
"Take the money, write a kick-ass application that would scale on appropriate hardware, then tell the company that when they run into connection / speed / scaling prolems, they should throw in some extra hardware."
Then you get sued for failing to deliver the system as specified, and your reputation suffers due to your work being a failure.
My wants are completely irrelevent. My clients get what they want if at all possible, otherwise I work with them to find a feasible solution that is acceptable. If not, I move on. I have no shortage of work, which I'd like to believe is at least partially attributable to my business ethic.
Don't take jobs that simply aren't worth the risk or bad relations. That's bad business sense.
Right, and those specifications sometimes push a project outside the realm of possibility, as seems to have happened here.
Either work with the client to get the specs changed to something feasible (which consumes time you can't bill for), or pass on the job and look for another client. Them's the breaks.
It's a damn simple question: can .NET really scale?
.NET will provide a relatively non-diminishing gain in performance as more capacity is added, which would be scaling.
That really isn't the question being asked at all.
This person doesn't want to know if
They actually want to know if it will handle a large number of concurrent connections to services on small hardware.
The real question is:
Will it handle a lot of clients at once on very little hardware?
The answer is: No.
If you don't have enough capital to invest in the infrastructure you need, you have to either find something that will do what you want with less, or give up on the whole idea.
Video games don't induce people to rampage.
The real culprit is this colour scheme.
DynDNS
HammerNode
WhyI
No-IP
FreeDNS
CJB.net
DDT
DDNS
Continuum
dnsQ
dyn.ee
dyndsl
Just a few... There are lots more, both free and not.
I still have yet to see Windows install and have everything work 100% out of the box, either. It's a little much to expect from any OS, so it's kind of funny to see people preclude "grandma" as a Linux user and then suggest she use an OS with install and hardware management that's no closer to perfect.
"Where's my office? What do you mean I need drivers for my main board? This isn't a car! What the hell is an AGP bridge and why does it want a driver too?"
"I plugged my new webcam in and put the CD in like it asked, so why is it telling me 'Windows could not find any information about your hardware?' I paid good money for this thing and it doesn't even work!"
Grandma's going to call for her tech-savvy progeny's help no matter what she's running.
When Gates came out with MS-DOS
Correction: Bought QDOS (Quick 'n Dirty Operating System) and rebranded it. An opportunity he would have never had if it weren't for the arrogance of CPM's author driving IBM to look for alternate OSes.
Monarchs did all those things as well, that doesn't make monarchies a desirable form of government.
Pretty much. A few handouts to appease people do not make the wrongs right.
In a free market economy, winning itself is against the rules
Indeed- he also did not play by the rules as is evidenced by court action against his company.
Summaries? I must've missed that bit for the abuse directed at the other poster.
It really did look like your first post (I assume it's yours, anyway) was talking about the average user posting comments. As another poster wrote, the editors are, strangely enough, not that big a part of the slashdot community. The commentary tacked on to many articles is so pithy that I just skip over anything after the italics.
They don't seem to even read the articles or check them over given the frequency of dupes & broken links. It's like they're scripts that post based on keyword hits and attach a randomly generated quip.
In short, I tend not to care what they have to say. I'm here for the gems scattered throughout the comments. Hell, even the lumps of coal are good if they're funny.
You can review every story submitted to Slashdot, and in 99.9999% of any comment in the story summary dealing with MS, it is always of a bashing nature.
You're just making that shit up. I just checked a few and there are plenty of pro-MS or just plain neutral posts. The loud zealots on either side are really visible, but it's really not a significant portion of the posts.
Brand names are trademarks, not copyrights. Microsoft doesn't have a trademark for "Smartphone."
A quick search on the Trademark Electronic Search System shows that the only live "Smartphone" trademark is owned by ART Advanced Recognition Technologies, Inc... and it's for a logo only.
Microsoft has WINDOWS POWERED SMARTPHONE, but that's not the single word "Smartphone" with a capital S.
I'm afraid that the reviewer there was just wrong.
Not anymore it's not!
That's not the same result at all. I should have been more specific for the people who have never seen what I'm talking about.
The menu I'm referring to has been in many X window managers for literally decades now and contains commands and programs. You could compare it to the Windows start menu.
The right-click context menu you're thinking of in windows is something else entirely, and has also been around in other OSes since long before Windows 95. The context menu on my Fluxbox install is bound to the middle mouse button, while the cmd/app menu is bound to the right.
Also, the shortcut keystrokes I'm talking about are used to manipulate just about every aspect of the WM as well as navigate within it, so I don't have to reach for the mouse while typing. I have my most frequently-used applications bound to shortcuts, too.
Installing Windows XP on that old hardware would have caused many of the same problems, along with many of its own. Is that a red flag signifying that Windows XP is inadequate as a desktop OS? XP would have just as easily prevented her from doing those perfectly normal things she was doing on her 8-year old Windows 95.
The point is: She's between a rock and a hard place. There is no painless migration path for her. All she can really do is pick one and hope it doesn't put her in the same spot a few years down the road.
the screaming pricks that make up slashdot deserve that
:D
So, what site are you reading and posting this on?
Whatever. I'm tired of reading posts by pricks that can't take one whiff of honest criticism.
Yeah, me too!
Quite. It tells us much about her mindset and reveals how the rest of the article is going to go.
She has unreasonable expectations, and she'll be damned if anyone or any software written years ago is going to deviate from them.
the various installation routines and setup programs would either not work the way they were supposed to at all, or work sometimes and not others.
:)
How they were supposed to work? Or how they were expected to work by someone who is unfamiliar with Linux? The problem is further compounded by the fact that she's familiar with Windows. She approached the installation of Linux with many expectations; some of which do not apply and set her up for disappointment.
I can expect Windows XP to not blow away grub and install overtop of my Gentoo install if I try creating a dual-boot system following the installer's prompts. Unfortunately for me, it's going to do quite the opposite of what I expect.
I'm thinking specifically of her redhat 8.0 problems, where didn't see her soundcard at boot until she ran snconfig
And this is worse than when Windows XP doesn't recognize your old hardware? How about when drivers for it aren't even available? This problem is especially bad with printers and scanners in XP.
knopix random segfaulting
This is to be expected from Knopix. It performs a lot of trial-and-error while booting in order to determine what hardware you have. If something it tries segfaults, then it knows your system doesn't support it and moves on.
Inconsistent detection of hardware like the mouse between boots is strange, though. I have yet to experience such varying behaviour on any machines I boot from a Knoppix disc.
To be honest, I find the inconsistent behaviour within most distros she tried very strange. I've installed and used countless Linux distros and even BSDs, and such here-again-gone-again behaviour is exceedingly rare. Even then it's usually a result of things like ESD damage to the hardware. In fact, the only place I've ever found such behaviour common is in Windows 95, 98 and ME (especially ME). Not in DOS, not in NT-based Windows, not in Netware, and not in various flavours of UNIX. Either she has far worse luck than I do, or I suspect someone forgot to wear an antistatic strap when handling parts.
the Linux GUI is just as unstable and crappy as those listed.
Fluxbox and I would have to disagree with you.
Point in case: I like my right-click menus and keyboard shortcuts. I find them superior to an icon-cluttered backdrop and start menu. My GUI is reliable and works great.
"What do you mean I have to drag the mouse all the way down to that 'start' button just to get at my apps? And where are my other workspaces?"
Those would be false expectations, similar to what someone with a Windows background will have when approaching an X environment like mine.
I wish the windows look-a-likes the best, but I can't really comment on them as I don't use them. I simply don't like that style of interface.
But pretending that the general state of the GUI in linux is that of stable, reliable, user-friendly, and intuitive programs would be self-deluding
It's definitely far from perfect (even Fluxbox), and benefits from every improvement we can help create. I don't find it any worse than the Windows alternatives, though. I can't complain about the price, either.
One student, who was supposedly sharing 652,000 songs. At maybe 3 megabytes each, that's around 2 terabytes of data.
I'd like to know how the RIAA expects anyone to believe one college student had that much storage, much less convince anyone that 98 billion is a credible loss figure.
Yes, stealing certainly is stealing. ...but what does that have to do with swapping mp3s?
Surely they aren't lying to increase the apparent severity in the eyes of the public and the court by calling copyright infringement "stealing" (which by definition is not the same thing), are they?