Yes, but doing queries with joins is on the test, so the people with an MCDBA should know how to do it. However, the tests are multiple choice. Many people can pick the right answer when presented with the options, yet if you game them a problem and asked them to write a query that worked, they would be completely lost.
Like the wonderful standard for DBA's that MS sets with it's MCDBA qualifications? I've met MCDBAs who couldn't even write a simple SQL query with a couple joins. And don't even get me started on DBAs who couldn't give you a table schema based on a list of requirements of the data you'd like to store.
Well, they aren't providing it for free, you're monthly subscription funds that. I can't believe somebody would play an online game for a subscription fee and not expect tons of upgrades for no additional cost. What else would the money go towards? Servers and bandwidth only cost so much.
Well, you only need to play around 8 hours a day to bring your rate down to 6 cents an hour. Even just playing 15 hours a month brings your rate to $1 an hour. That's pretty cheap if you ask me. Way cheaper than going to a movie. I realize it ends up costing quite a bit more than your average $60 pay-once game, but it seems to offer a lot more playability. Then again, I've never played the game, so what do I know.
No wonder the gold farms are so profitable. Actually, what you said doesn't make any sense. If the subscription fee is $15 a month, and there are 720 hours (24x30) in a month, then, if you play 24 hours a day, using people in shifts, then it only costs you $0.02 an hour to play. Is there any limit on how much you can use a single account?
I didn't say I'd sue, I'd send the lawyers over to Apple to make sure this gets resolved in a timely fashion so we don't have to resort to going to court. If they refuse to fix it, then well, maybe we'd have to go to court.
While that may be true, I haven't seen a lot of computers for sale that have 64 bit windows. Almost all the new computers support 64 bit computing, but only a very small percentage are sold with 64 bit Vista.
They all use IE6 now. In 5 years, people will probably still be using that intranet application. Will they all still using IE6? It's a lot easier to code to standards and work around the bugs than it is to code to one specific version of one specific browser, and hope that nobody will ever want to use a different browser for your application.
Movies were being traded on the internet since at least 1999. That's 9 years. There's a couple video offers online, but as far as I know, none of them actually let you watch the movies on your TV set, short up setting up a computer specifically for your TV. Let me burn a DVD.
Using tables works until you want to change the layout a little bit. Then you have to completely rework your page. If you just want to do a design, and then never change it, or throw it away completely when you are done, then tables are fine for you. But if you want a design you can easily change and add to over time, tables will be more trouble than they are worth.
That's actually not a bad idea. Although it doesn't seem like something that MS would do. Let's remember that MS is the one who won't drop a single piece of backwards compatibility even if it means their OS will be a steaming pile of crap. They would be better off if they just dropped all the backwards compatibility, and just ran all the old stuff in an emulated version of the old OS.
You shouldn't have to add a tag just to get the browser to work correct in the first place. Let's all remember that there's already a doctype tag. If you have a doctype tag, and your document doesn't comply to that spec, then that's your own fault. Be it XHTML Strict, HTML 4 Strict, or whatever other doc type you've specified, that is how it should be rendered. If MS has now come up with a more correct way to render properly formatted documents, then they should render all the documents that say they are standards compliant.
So, you mean like when I drag with right click in windows, and it shows me a little menu once I drop allowing me to copy, move, or create shortcut? Isn't there tons of prior art for this?
Yes, but with wires, you can always upgrade to more wires, or wires that can carry more data (eg. copper to fibre optic). With wireless, once you fill up the spectrum, there's very little you can do to get more bandwidth.
Exactly. I don't think that any ISP could really offer unlimited service for too much longer. Once video on the internet goes more mainstream, and more users start to discover it, then they are going to have to limit it some how, or really start to support multicasting. It's working OK for now, because there's a large number of users who only use a very small fraction of what they could. Also, I don't see how wireless services are going to change any of this. There's way less bandwidth in the air than what can be offered on wired networks.
Even if you have a retail copy of Windows, you can't call MS for service without paying through the nose. I think there's some limited time, limited number of calls you can make (like 2 calls, and only in the first 90 days), and after that, you go without service or pay $35 per incident.
What do they consider "the same computer"? If I upgrade my RAM, is my software no longer licensed? What about my hard drive, Network card, video Card, motherboard, or everything except the case? It seems like regardless of whether or not it's OEM, that you'd have to call up for re-activation if you upgrade too much from the original configuration, so I still don't really see the difference.
I also find it annoying that gMail tries to make everything into a conversation, even if it isn't If I get status emails from some process I'm running, they all look mostly the same, gMail tends to group them all together into one conversation, and tries to figure out what parts are the same, and mark them as from the previous message.
Does anybody find it a little annoying that they sell "OEM" versions of Windows which are, in every way, identical to the "Retail" version of Windows, and charge double for the "Retail" version? I find this quite confusing to the buyer. Can you only get OEM versions if you buy a new computer. Is the OEM license only usable on the initial computer you buy it for? Who benefits when somebody buys a retail copy? MS? The Reseller? The Distributor? Why can't I go down to Best Buy and get an OEM copy?
To get an OS comparable to what you get with MAC OSX, you need ultimate. Home basic works for some people, but the feature set is quite limited. It doesn't even have the Aero desktop, which is the most touted feature of Vista.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but doing queries with joins is on the test, so the people with an MCDBA should know how to do it. However, the tests are multiple choice. Many people can pick the right answer when presented with the options, yet if you game them a problem and asked them to write a query that worked, they would be completely lost.
Like the wonderful standard for DBA's that MS sets with it's MCDBA qualifications? I've met MCDBAs who couldn't even write a simple SQL query with a couple joins. And don't even get me started on DBAs who couldn't give you a table schema based on a list of requirements of the data you'd like to store.
Well, they aren't providing it for free, you're monthly subscription funds that. I can't believe somebody would play an online game for a subscription fee and not expect tons of upgrades for no additional cost. What else would the money go towards? Servers and bandwidth only cost so much.
Well, you only need to play around 8 hours a day to bring your rate down to 6 cents an hour. Even just playing 15 hours a month brings your rate to $1 an hour. That's pretty cheap if you ask me. Way cheaper than going to a movie. I realize it ends up costing quite a bit more than your average $60 pay-once game, but it seems to offer a lot more playability. Then again, I've never played the game, so what do I know.
No wonder the gold farms are so profitable. Actually, what you said doesn't make any sense. If the subscription fee is $15 a month, and there are 720 hours (24x30) in a month, then, if you play 24 hours a day, using people in shifts, then it only costs you $0.02 an hour to play. Is there any limit on how much you can use a single account?
I didn't say I'd sue, I'd send the lawyers over to Apple to make sure this gets resolved in a timely fashion so we don't have to resort to going to court. If they refuse to fix it, then well, maybe we'd have to go to court.
Well, you could probably only expect so much out of a single game. Probably time for them to start on WoW II.
Seriously. If I were Adobe, I'd be sending over my legal team.
While that may be true, I haven't seen a lot of computers for sale that have 64 bit windows. Almost all the new computers support 64 bit computing, but only a very small percentage are sold with 64 bit Vista.
They all use IE6 now. In 5 years, people will probably still be using that intranet application. Will they all still using IE6? It's a lot easier to code to standards and work around the bugs than it is to code to one specific version of one specific browser, and hope that nobody will ever want to use a different browser for your application.
Movies were being traded on the internet since at least 1999. That's 9 years. There's a couple video offers online, but as far as I know, none of them actually let you watch the movies on your TV set, short up setting up a computer specifically for your TV. Let me burn a DVD.
Using tables works until you want to change the layout a little bit. Then you have to completely rework your page. If you just want to do a design, and then never change it, or throw it away completely when you are done, then tables are fine for you. But if you want a design you can easily change and add to over time, tables will be more trouble than they are worth.
That's actually not a bad idea. Although it doesn't seem like something that MS would do. Let's remember that MS is the one who won't drop a single piece of backwards compatibility even if it means their OS will be a steaming pile of crap. They would be better off if they just dropped all the backwards compatibility, and just ran all the old stuff in an emulated version of the old OS.
You shouldn't have to add a tag just to get the browser to work correct in the first place. Let's all remember that there's already a doctype tag. If you have a doctype tag, and your document doesn't comply to that spec, then that's your own fault. Be it XHTML Strict, HTML 4 Strict, or whatever other doc type you've specified, that is how it should be rendered. If MS has now come up with a more correct way to render properly formatted documents, then they should render all the documents that say they are standards compliant.
So, you mean like when I drag with right click in windows, and it shows me a little menu once I drop allowing me to copy, move, or create shortcut? Isn't there tons of prior art for this?
That still assumes there's unlimited bandwidth at some place. What happens to packets that need to travel over the ocean?
Yes, but with wires, you can always upgrade to more wires, or wires that can carry more data (eg. copper to fibre optic). With wireless, once you fill up the spectrum, there's very little you can do to get more bandwidth.
Exactly. I don't think that any ISP could really offer unlimited service for too much longer. Once video on the internet goes more mainstream, and more users start to discover it, then they are going to have to limit it some how, or really start to support multicasting. It's working OK for now, because there's a large number of users who only use a very small fraction of what they could. Also, I don't see how wireless services are going to change any of this. There's way less bandwidth in the air than what can be offered on wired networks.
Even if you have a retail copy of Windows, you can't call MS for service without paying through the nose. I think there's some limited time, limited number of calls you can make (like 2 calls, and only in the first 90 days), and after that, you go without service or pay $35 per incident.
What do they consider "the same computer"? If I upgrade my RAM, is my software no longer licensed? What about my hard drive, Network card, video Card, motherboard, or everything except the case? It seems like regardless of whether or not it's OEM, that you'd have to call up for re-activation if you upgrade too much from the original configuration, so I still don't really see the difference.
It's also really easy to look it up in your IM history files.
I also find it annoying that gMail tries to make everything into a conversation, even if it isn't If I get status emails from some process I'm running, they all look mostly the same, gMail tends to group them all together into one conversation, and tries to figure out what parts are the same, and mark them as from the previous message.
Exactly my point. Even if you can't detonate it in the desired way, just having the big chunk of refined uranium is dangerous enough.
Does anybody find it a little annoying that they sell "OEM" versions of Windows which are, in every way, identical to the "Retail" version of Windows, and charge double for the "Retail" version? I find this quite confusing to the buyer. Can you only get OEM versions if you buy a new computer. Is the OEM license only usable on the initial computer you buy it for? Who benefits when somebody buys a retail copy? MS? The Reseller? The Distributor? Why can't I go down to Best Buy and get an OEM copy?
To get an OS comparable to what you get with MAC OSX, you need ultimate. Home basic works for some people, but the feature set is quite limited. It doesn't even have the Aero desktop, which is the most touted feature of Vista.