Sorry but if you don't mention IBM here then clearly you haven't done your homework.
I downloaded the PDF of this work and found one instance of IBM anywhere in the text. One. How lame.
InfoWorld loses on this one, incomplete research. I can virtualize the hell out of my IBM Systems be it System i, System p etc. They all do it, and no InfoWorld it isn't just all about VMWare & Virtual Server, although I personally do like VMWare.
I once had another journalist tell me they didn't include IBM because it was just known that they do this stuff well. Ok so why not mention it? You present this like these are the only players in this game.
They simply aren't comparing the right products, which of course shows exactly how lame ZDNet is in reviewing this sort of thing.
First off what they are showing in SharePoint is much more closely tied to say Lotus QuickPlace or Workplace. Taking the stock Domino product, even with its strong collaborative backbone and putting it up against SharePoint as is simply is not a correct test.
Where is Exchange mentioned here? Despite all of the features that Domino has, the real competitor is Exchange, not SharePoint. Domino is just a starting point for the discussion.
They are clearly making the same mistake that so many other MS shills make when trying to act independant and compare products, in that they don't compare the right ones.
Add Workplace or QuickPlace to the mix and then make a comparison.
Complete crap. Doesn't matter. You still have to execute, and out on the course you don't have your big expensive machine there to help you. Tiger screwed himself at Augusta this year, and some young dude that's (I think) never won a tourney came back and won at Harbour Town the next week. with one of the game's quality vets at his heels.
The name of the game is being consistent and having well rounded skills...and some luck thrown in there too. Anyone who has been playing at this thing for awhile can tell you that buying all the fancy practice gizmos won't help you if you can't replicate it out there on the tee.
Leave to/. to talk briefly about the content of the article and the solution and focus in on the syntax of the post itself...sheesh. Anyway, enough of that rant.
3Com was at the Spring COMMON user group conference (for System i) in Minneapolis last week showing this.While at the moment they're running it on an xSeries server, the System i port is forthcoming. I had some time to speak with them about it, and like what I see.
I have to say this was a really slick solution and as a System i, iSeries bigot, a great use of the platform.
You dump public IM services and use an in house only app. Being an IBM BP, we happen to have Lotus Sametime which integrates into Notes and has a standalone client as well. Secured/encrypted communications, and if we wanted to set up a SIP gateway with another partner we could so we could have secure conversations there too.
I believe LiveMeeting is supposed to do something similar...but I am not a fan...so...
Bottom line, skip the public crap if you want to limit your exposure to these things.
The thing for TiVo is that the satellite providers should be where they go...they already have DirecTV and they should have gone after DISH too.
Given the long standing rift between sat and cable, sat providers are largely willing to tell cable to go shove it. I think there is a clear benefit to a standalone or sat box TiVo integration as a media hub in the home than using the cableco's PVR.
My personal deal is that I do want the technology, am certainly a HT geek...but I also am very much into aesthetics of the solution too. I like elegant tech as much as I love the hardware. TiVo was a gift...and I cannot count the hours I have spent contemplating a home media strategy...it has to be easy to use and well integrated since afterall I am not the only person in the house.
The channel changing deal with TiVo is my only gripe...other than that, I love it. The issue of recording HD may come into play some day...just not immediately.
I am considering another cable box I could dedicate to TiVo...essentially giving me a "dual tuner" setup. Oh, this is also where the cable box PVRs (and sat integration of TiVo) are probably better than standalone....multiple tuners. You could use that Medusa deal that has 6 or so tuner cards for around $1200...that would be cool.
I am with an IBM BP...let me clear a few things up on their server lines here....
The xSeries and BladeCenter server lines would be the ones mostly affected by this change.
Fact is that those two (along with the Integrated xSeries Server {IXS} available on the iSeries/i5 line) are the only servers which use Intel chips, and support Microsoft OSes.
The iSeries/i5 runs i5/OS, Linux, AIX and Windows (on the IXS). The pSeries/p5 has AIX and Linux, and i5/OS on the very high end p5 systems. The zSeries has it's own set of operating environments including Linux.
On the processor side, IBM has the POWER architecture that runs the i5, p5 and some Blades. They also have supported AMD, Itanium etc. IBM hedges it's bets very well, but what it would prefer I am sure is for everything to run on POWER. This would be the best option for them. However there is a need for very low cost servers, which is where Intel comes in on the xSeries line.
Heck, if MS would port Windows to POWER, we would run Windows servers directly on the i5 processor instead of using the IXS card...just like we do with Linux and AIX. Oh, and BTW - Linux is also available on the xSeries side....
Fact is that IBM is including and integrating as many OS options as it can into it's server lines. It will not move entirely away from MS unless it's customer base has no desire for it.
As several folks have mentioned the POWER5 processor actually has two physical cores within it. As IBM licenses, each core is actually considered a processor.
On the newest i5 systems, say a 1/2 way box, we may have one of those two cores active at order time, and then later via Capacity on Demand, activate the second core, thus making it a 2-way box.
Now, there are some apps which have what is known as subcapacity licensing available. Meaning if I only use 2 CPUs of a 4 way for app x I only pay for 2. Yes this rounds up, so 2.5 = 3.
For i5/OS, the most common OS on the i5 - you pay for the number of cores (CPUs) which will run that OS. I could have a 2-way partitioned box, with one i5/OS partition and one Linux partition and only pay for 1 license of i5/OS. In fact that one license is included in the system cost.
The i5 systems (and p5 as well on the AIX side) have introduced the Dual Chip Module (DCM) for the 520, 550 (p5 only) and 570 systems. What was referred to on the p690 (and i890) with POWER4 is a Multi-Chip Module or MCM. The MCM could (can) hold 4 * POWER4(5) chips, and thus be an 8 way. For the 32 way systems, you place four of those guys.
The DCM idea is a bit different. For the 2/4 way 570, I have two modules in the box - and we activate whatever the customer wants. They could buy it as a 2-way today and then via CUoD upgrade the thing to a 3 way or 4 way later. Any use of i5/OS above the original 2 processors would incur an OS license charge.
Confused yet?
GlobalMind.
BTW - I don't work for IBM but am a part of the distribution channel, and spend my day designing i5 solutions, mostly with logical partitioning.
Tape backup isn't anywhere near dead. Sure, some folks archive to optical as well...but there's no way you beat the raw capacity of tape systems. While we certainly have customers who do mirrored systems replicating data...essentially failover systems...you still have to save that stuff somewhere.
In the IBM distribution space where I operate, LTO2 is the primary tape device of choice at the moment. We've got LTO2 based drive options that can span everything from small installs to high end enterprise boxen with terabytes of data on one system, or multiple systems via fibre switches.
We also see action on the low end systems with internal tapes, usually QIC 30/60GB units, and some VXA 80GB units.
Bottom line - tape will be here for a LOOOONG time to come. In my view the next step is lower priced tape units for home users. With all the gigs of data more savvy customers are implementing, this will become more & more of an issue going forward. However, for most home users, an online HDD based backup may be adequate.
Yes, meanwhile IBM is on their second generation dual core chip, POWER5 -- now available in eServer i5 systems -- shipping TODAY.
The way POWER4 was packaged for the higher end boxes, you have what they call a Multi-Chip Module (MCM) with 4 POWER4 processors on-board. This means each MCM was an 8-way.
Now, for POWER5, they have added the Dual-Chip Module or DCM. With the i5 model 570, you can get a 1/2 way or 2/4 way box. If you buy the 1/2 way, you have one DCM installed...and if you buy the 2/4 then you get two DCMs.
POWER5 has what IBM calls Simultaneous Multithreading -- SMT, which is the same type of idea as Hyperthreading. Essentially if the application supports multithreading, it will functionally see twice the processors...but this is a logical thing...a 4 way is still a 4 way...not an 8 way.
Now, having said all that....never underestimate IBM development labs. I hear POWER6, 7 and maybe 8 are already out in development.
Yep you sure could. As for this year, I believe you're gonna need SLES 9 with the 2.6 kernel to run on POWER5. Of course, p & i are effectively the same thing today anyway.
AND in 2004 with POWER5....well, stay tuned....cause they're just getting closer.
The iSeries has been supporting Linux for a couple of years now -- although frankly it's just really catching on in any significant numbers.
In fact it isn't just the POWER chips that will run it. Essentially the entire current iSeries line will run Linux.
In January 2002, IBM released V5R2 of OS/400 and the POWER4 processor on the platform on the model 890. Last year, they pushed the POWER4 chip down into a few other models.
>The concept of a trash folder is missing; delete >marks the message for deletion and it stays in >the mailbox view until cleared out, at which >point it is completely gone (barring backups).
Absolutely NOT true. There is a trash folder right there in both R5 and ND6. I can see it clear as day in my client right now.
Secondly, yes in R5 when you mark a message for deletion it stays in the VIEW until you exit Notes or refresh, i.e. hit F9. In Notes 6 it doesn't mark it, it just moves it into the trash folder.
As for the item being gone after deletion, this is a matter of whether your Admin is allowing soft deletions or not. If soft deletions are enabled, you can indeed get things back. Just did it the other day in a DB I mistakenly deleted a doc from.
The other thing in ND6 which helps with much of the "novice" items is the idea of policies. I can roll out one desktop policy to everyone that sets up everything, therefore making the solution more turnkey.
R5 clients can certainly remember that you want to come up viewing your mail database. I do that all the time.
On the far left-hand side of the Notes client, click on the icon for "Favorite Databases" -- what we're looking for is a bookmark for your mail database. Right click on that bookmark (icon), and select the option "Set bookmark as home page."
Close & reopen Notes and you should see the mail db automagically launched. In Notes 6.5 you can also drag bookmarks into the Setup folder to have the databases open automagically when Notes starts.
As for the "sticky" aspects of things...column widths, windows etc...pretty much all of that is changed in the Notes 6 client. Get ahold of a copy if you can and check it out. Of course if your mail db design is still R5 you won't see 100% of the benefits...but you'll get the idea.
One poster gets a bit irate below saying that Notes isn't a mail client. That is true to some extent. One thing that always needs to be kept in mind with Notes is that it does a heck of a lot more than mail -- and IMHO better than anyone else. For a collaborative enterprise environment, I wouldn't choose anything else...and heck, I run Notes 6.5 at home for mail too.
Remember that really where SuSE is coming from is in the business space. And from our experience, in that area, he's right. We rarely run into business servers running anything other than Red Hat or SuSE, or maybe Turbo.
On the personal, home user side the installs are far more varied.
The Indianapolis Motor Speedway has been operating low power radio and TV at the track for a few years now so you can listen in (or watch) the track's direct audio/video feed from the grandstands.
This isn't granted yet, so there's no saying it is a lock for MS to be awarded the patent.
I am sure my friends at IBM will be very interested in reviewing what MS has put down and whether they have already patented technology which does the same type of things through their products (Lotus Instant Messaging [ie. Sametime]).
IM and associated technologies certainly are not a "MS only zone" -- and IBM among others have already done a bunch with this type of thing, especially geared to the corporate space.
Yippie! Finally! I have found Win2K to be FAR more reliable than NT4, and more capable in terms of interoperability with newer hardware (can you say USB support?). All three of my home systems run Win2K, and I have no issues there at all. One of the best things I have seen is that I can run Win2K on smaller gear than NT4 ever would run on.
Compare that to my work system at NT4, and I am continually restarting this infernal machine all day...just great for productivity.
Win98 can just die too as far as I am concerned, oh and while we're there ME can go hasta la bye bye.
That's kinda my issue with this. Sorry but 300' is a very good ways in front of you.
I don't want this thing assuming I need to slow down just because I am within 300'. I also would have to assume that if you start brake before the 300' mark the system would understand that you are already slowing down...
Some driver aids are nice, but this type of thing I think would be a real pain in most cases.
The browser only renders what the HTML code states. The "site" (i.e. webcoder) decides what technologies to incorporate into the design of the page, not the browser.
Now, that isn't to say that they might not go after browser makers and call their products "frame based" just as Compuserve did with the GIF format for any image program who dared to be able to understand a GIF became "a GIF based app."
The bottom line is that this is another case like BT, where something which was written into the HTML spec is now suddenly "owned" by some company. This is nothing more than an attempt to generate revenue from supposedly valid IP claims.
And all the while the party line from SBC, just like BT will be that all these companies have been "using their technology for free" or been "stealing their IP" and that SBC will rigorously defend SBC's IP.
Again, another reason NOT to support Amazon in anything they do.
This is nothing more than "innovation by patent application". Perhaps more appropriately, "profits by patent" -- obviously Amazon doesn't have much of any other way to make a buck, so why not try to make it so that anyone who wants to do business online ends up paying Amazon some way or another.
Bezos really has some gall trying to insist that they came up with this. What a joke.
Amazon needs to learn, by having their patents overturned in court -- that just because your business employs a certain process does not mean that you are due a patent on that process.
How many companies are out there violating this right now? How many software packages are available out there which can enable this type of thing - and apparently now violate Amazon's "patent" on discussing an item for sale.
Absolute lunacy, and yet another fine example of why the USPTO is amazingly unable to properly handle these type of applications. This should never have been awarded, plain & simple.
The thing is that there are many self proclaimed pundits out there who essentially say if it isn't Windows or UNIX based then it falls into this "legacy systems" category.
Truth is if a system is in active use, contains mission critical applications, then I don't care how old the thing is -- it is NOT legacy hardware. If one claims a box is legacy hardware they better have something to back that up with. If the box is sitting in a corner and only gets accessed once a year...then yea I can see it.
Most every box that isn't Windows has this image problem from the popular media standpoint. UNIX is held in really high regard as not being legacy....and let's not forget just how damn old UNIX is!
I have this issue every day with the iSeries platform that I work with, and my collegues in the zSeries land have the same issues.
From my space, the iSeries is highly scalable, robust, fully 64-bit architecture and fast as hell -- running OS/400, Linux and Windows under the covers if you want to with Power CPUs...and supposedly its legacy...whatever. We do stuff that the Windows world can barely even dream of.
You look at this article and it kinda says, "Look bud, there's more to life than what you think!" Yea, the article is focused on IBM systems -- but I don't really see an issue with that. Sure, he could have covered more incarnations of the mainframe...but with far less detail than he even has now.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry but if you don't mention IBM here then clearly you haven't done your homework.
I downloaded the PDF of this work and found one instance of IBM anywhere in the text. One. How lame.
InfoWorld loses on this one, incomplete research. I can virtualize the hell out of my IBM Systems be it System i, System p etc. They all do it, and no InfoWorld it isn't just all about VMWare & Virtual Server, although I personally do like VMWare.
I once had another journalist tell me they didn't include IBM because it was just known that they do this stuff well. Ok so why not mention it? You present this like these are the only players in this game.
GM.
Sorry but the article is crap.
They simply aren't comparing the right products, which of course shows exactly how lame ZDNet is in reviewing this sort of thing.
First off what they are showing in SharePoint is much more closely tied to say Lotus QuickPlace or Workplace. Taking the stock Domino product, even with its strong collaborative backbone and putting it up against SharePoint as is simply is not a correct test.
Where is Exchange mentioned here? Despite all of the features that Domino has, the real competitor is Exchange, not SharePoint. Domino is just a starting point for the discussion.
They are clearly making the same mistake that so many other MS shills make when trying to act independant and compare products, in that they don't compare the right ones.
Add Workplace or QuickPlace to the mix and then make a comparison.
GM.
Complete crap. Doesn't matter. You still have to execute, and out on the course you don't have your big expensive machine there to help you. Tiger screwed himself at Augusta this year, and some young dude that's (I think) never won a tourney came back and won at Harbour Town the next week. with one of the game's quality vets at his heels.
The name of the game is being consistent and having well rounded skills...and some luck thrown in there too. Anyone who has been playing at this thing for awhile can tell you that buying all the fancy practice gizmos won't help you if you can't replicate it out there on the tee.
GM.
Leave to /. to talk briefly about the content of the article and the solution and focus in on the syntax of the post itself...sheesh. Anyway, enough of that rant.
3Com was at the Spring COMMON user group conference (for System i) in Minneapolis last week showing this.While at the moment they're running it on an xSeries server, the System i port is forthcoming. I had some time to speak with them about it, and like what I see.
I have to say this was a really slick solution and as a System i, iSeries bigot, a great use of the platform.
K.
Not true on the amateurs thing....there are NHL players on many of the olympic hockey teams.
There's a reason the NHL is on an olympic break. This is pretty widely known fact.
GM.
You dump public IM services and use an in house only app. Being an IBM BP, we happen to have Lotus Sametime which integrates into Notes and has a standalone client as well. Secured/encrypted communications, and if we wanted to set up a SIP gateway with another partner we could so we could have secure conversations there too.
I believe LiveMeeting is supposed to do something similar...but I am not a fan...so...
Bottom line, skip the public crap if you want to limit your exposure to these things.
GM.
The thing for TiVo is that the satellite providers should be where they go...they already have DirecTV and they should have gone after DISH too.
Given the long standing rift between sat and cable, sat providers are largely willing to tell cable to go shove it. I think there is a clear benefit to a standalone or sat box TiVo integration as a media hub in the home than using the cableco's PVR.
My personal deal is that I do want the technology, am certainly a HT geek...but I also am very much into aesthetics of the solution too. I like elegant tech as much as I love the hardware. TiVo was a gift...and I cannot count the hours I have spent contemplating a home media strategy...it has to be easy to use and well integrated since afterall I am not the only person in the house.
The channel changing deal with TiVo is my only gripe...other than that, I love it. The issue of recording HD may come into play some day...just not immediately.
I am considering another cable box I could dedicate to TiVo...essentially giving me a "dual tuner" setup. Oh, this is also where the cable box PVRs (and sat integration of TiVo) are probably better than standalone....multiple tuners. You could use that Medusa deal that has 6 or so tuner cards for around $1200...that would be cool.
K.
A fairly recent roundup of HDTV sets did indeed yield a CRT "big box" unit as the best....after calibration.
The thing is that those sets are on the way out. The technology is not being substantially developed for the future. They're a dead end...eventually.
Flat panel sets, either DLP or LCD (and others) may not be 100% there yet, but they will be.
K.
I am with an IBM BP...let me clear a few things up on their server lines here....
/i5 line) are the only servers which use Intel chips, and support Microsoft OSes.
The xSeries and BladeCenter server lines would be the ones mostly affected by this change.
Fact is that those two (along with the Integrated xSeries Server {IXS} available on the iSeries
The iSeries/i5 runs i5/OS, Linux, AIX and Windows (on the IXS). The pSeries/p5 has AIX and Linux, and i5/OS on the very high end p5 systems. The zSeries has it's own set of operating environments including Linux.
On the processor side, IBM has the POWER architecture that runs the i5, p5 and some Blades. They also have supported AMD, Itanium etc. IBM hedges it's bets very well, but what it would prefer I am sure is for everything to run on POWER. This would be the best option for them. However there is a need for very low cost servers, which is where Intel comes in on the xSeries line.
Heck, if MS would port Windows to POWER, we would run Windows servers directly on the i5 processor instead of using the IXS card...just like we do with Linux and AIX. Oh, and BTW - Linux is also available on the xSeries side....
Fact is that IBM is including and integrating as many OS options as it can into it's server lines. It will not move entirely away from MS unless it's customer base has no desire for it.
K.
http://www.frankenseries.com
K.
At least on the i5 side of things...
As several folks have mentioned the POWER5 processor actually has two physical cores within it. As IBM licenses, each core is actually considered a processor.
On the newest i5 systems, say a 1/2 way box, we may have one of those two cores active at order time, and then later via Capacity on Demand, activate the second core, thus making it a 2-way box.
Now, there are some apps which have what is known as subcapacity licensing available. Meaning if I only use 2 CPUs of a 4 way for app x I only pay for 2. Yes this rounds up, so 2.5 = 3.
For i5/OS, the most common OS on the i5 - you pay for the number of cores (CPUs) which will run that OS. I could have a 2-way partitioned box, with one i5/OS partition and one Linux partition and only pay for 1 license of i5/OS. In fact that one license is included in the system cost.
The i5 systems (and p5 as well on the AIX side) have introduced the Dual Chip Module (DCM) for the 520, 550 (p5 only) and 570 systems. What was referred to on the p690 (and i890) with POWER4 is a Multi-Chip Module or MCM. The MCM could (can) hold 4 * POWER4(5) chips, and thus be an 8 way. For the 32 way systems, you place four of those guys.
The DCM idea is a bit different. For the 2/4 way 570, I have two modules in the box - and we activate whatever the customer wants. They could buy it as a 2-way today and then via CUoD upgrade the thing to a 3 way or 4 way later. Any use of i5/OS above the original 2 processors would incur an OS license charge.
Confused yet?
GlobalMind.
BTW - I don't work for IBM but am a part of the distribution channel, and spend my day designing i5 solutions, mostly with logical partitioning.
Tape backup isn't anywhere near dead. Sure, some folks archive to optical as well...but there's no way you beat the raw capacity of tape systems. While we certainly have customers who do mirrored systems replicating data...essentially failover systems...you still have to save that stuff somewhere.
In the IBM distribution space where I operate, LTO2 is the primary tape device of choice at the moment. We've got LTO2 based drive options that can span everything from small installs to high end enterprise boxen with terabytes of data on one system, or multiple systems via fibre switches.
We also see action on the low end systems with internal tapes, usually QIC 30/60GB units, and some VXA 80GB units.
Bottom line - tape will be here for a LOOOONG time to come. In my view the next step is lower priced tape units for home users. With all the gigs of data more savvy customers are implementing, this will become more & more of an issue going forward. However, for most home users, an online HDD based backup may be adequate.
TGM.
Yes, meanwhile IBM is on their second generation dual core chip, POWER5 -- now available in eServer i5 systems -- shipping TODAY.
The way POWER4 was packaged for the higher end boxes, you have what they call a Multi-Chip Module (MCM) with 4 POWER4 processors on-board. This means each MCM was an 8-way.
Now, for POWER5, they have added the Dual-Chip Module or DCM. With the i5 model 570, you can get a 1/2 way or 2/4 way box. If you buy the 1/2 way, you have one DCM installed...and if you buy the 2/4 then you get two DCMs.
POWER5 has what IBM calls Simultaneous Multithreading -- SMT, which is the same type of idea as Hyperthreading. Essentially if the application supports multithreading, it will functionally see twice the processors...but this is a logical thing...a 4 way is still a 4 way...not an 8 way.
Now, having said all that....never underestimate IBM development labs. I hear POWER6, 7 and maybe 8 are already out in development.
TGM.
Yep you sure could. As for this year, I believe you're gonna need SLES 9 with the 2.6 kernel to run on POWER5. Of course, p & i are effectively the same thing today anyway.
AND in 2004 with POWER5....well, stay tuned....cause they're just getting closer.
K.
The iSeries has been supporting Linux for a couple of years now -- although frankly it's just really catching on in any significant numbers.
In fact it isn't just the POWER chips that will run it. Essentially the entire current iSeries line will run Linux.
In January 2002, IBM released V5R2 of OS/400 and the POWER4 processor on the platform on the model 890. Last year, they pushed the POWER4 chip down into a few other models.
Good stuff to come this year....stay tuned!!!
K.
>The concept of a trash folder is missing; delete >marks the message for deletion and it stays in >the mailbox view until cleared out, at which >point it is completely gone (barring backups).
Absolutely NOT true. There is a trash folder right there in both R5 and ND6. I can see it clear as day in my client right now.
Secondly, yes in R5 when you mark a message for deletion it stays in the VIEW until you exit Notes or refresh, i.e. hit F9. In Notes 6 it doesn't mark it, it just moves it into the trash folder.
As for the item being gone after deletion, this is a matter of whether your Admin is allowing soft deletions or not. If soft deletions are enabled, you can indeed get things back. Just did it the other day in a DB I mistakenly deleted a doc from.
The other thing in ND6 which helps with much of the "novice" items is the idea of policies. I can roll out one desktop policy to everyone that sets up everything, therefore making the solution more turnkey.
K.
Pete,
R5 clients can certainly remember that you want to come up viewing your mail database. I do that all the time.
On the far left-hand side of the Notes client, click on the icon for "Favorite Databases" -- what we're looking for is a bookmark for your mail database. Right click on that bookmark (icon), and select the option "Set bookmark as home page."
Close & reopen Notes and you should see the mail db automagically launched. In Notes 6.5 you can also drag bookmarks into the Setup folder to have the databases open automagically when Notes starts.
As for the "sticky" aspects of things...column widths, windows etc...pretty much all of that is changed in the Notes 6 client. Get ahold of a copy if you can and check it out. Of course if your mail db design is still R5 you won't see 100% of the benefits...but you'll get the idea.
One poster gets a bit irate below saying that Notes isn't a mail client. That is true to some extent. One thing that always needs to be kept in mind with Notes is that it does a heck of a lot more than mail -- and IMHO better than anyone else. For a collaborative enterprise environment, I wouldn't choose anything else...and heck, I run Notes 6.5 at home for mail too.
K.
Remember that really where SuSE is coming from is in the business space. And from our experience, in that area, he's right. We rarely run into business servers running anything other than Red Hat or SuSE, or maybe Turbo.
On the personal, home user side the installs are far more varied.
K.
The Indianapolis Motor Speedway has been operating low power radio and TV at the track for a few years now so you can listen in (or watch) the track's direct audio/video feed from the grandstands.
IMHO, a really cool thing.
K.
This isn't granted yet, so there's no saying it is a lock for MS to be awarded the patent.
I am sure my friends at IBM will be very interested in reviewing what MS has put down and whether they have already patented technology which does the same type of things through their products (Lotus Instant Messaging [ie. Sametime]).
IM and associated technologies certainly are not a "MS only zone" -- and IBM among others have already done a bunch with this type of thing, especially geared to the corporate space.
Should be interesting to see how it plays out.
TGM.
Yippie! Finally! I have found Win2K to be FAR more reliable than NT4, and more capable in terms of interoperability with newer hardware (can you say USB support?). All three of my home systems run Win2K, and I have no issues there at all. One of the best things I have seen is that I can run Win2K on smaller gear than NT4 ever would run on.
Compare that to my work system at NT4, and I am continually restarting this infernal machine all day...just great for productivity.
Win98 can just die too as far as I am concerned, oh and while we're there ME can go hasta la bye bye.
K.
That's kinda my issue with this. Sorry but 300' is a very good ways in front of you.
I don't want this thing assuming I need to slow down just because I am within 300'. I also would have to assume that if you start brake before the 300' mark the system would understand that you are already slowing down...
Some driver aids are nice, but this type of thing I think would be a real pain in most cases.
K.
Yea, don't agree with that.
The browser only renders what the HTML code states. The "site" (i.e. webcoder) decides what technologies to incorporate into the design of the page, not the browser.
Now, that isn't to say that they might not go after browser makers and call their products "frame based" just as Compuserve did with the GIF format for any image program who dared to be able to understand a GIF became "a GIF based app."
The bottom line is that this is another case like BT, where something which was written into the HTML spec is now suddenly "owned" by some company. This is nothing more than an attempt to generate revenue from supposedly valid IP claims.
And all the while the party line from SBC, just like BT will be that all these companies have been "using their technology for free" or been "stealing their IP" and that SBC will rigorously defend SBC's IP.
K.
Again, another reason NOT to support Amazon in anything they do.
This is nothing more than "innovation by patent application". Perhaps more appropriately, "profits by patent" -- obviously Amazon doesn't have much of any other way to make a buck, so why not try to make it so that anyone who wants to do business online ends up paying Amazon some way or another.
Bezos really has some gall trying to insist that they came up with this. What a joke.
Amazon needs to learn, by having their patents overturned in court -- that just because your business employs a certain process does not mean that you are due a patent on that process.
How many companies are out there violating this right now? How many software packages are available out there which can enable this type of thing - and apparently now violate Amazon's "patent" on discussing an item for sale.
Absolute lunacy, and yet another fine example of why the USPTO is amazingly unable to properly handle these type of applications. This should never have been awarded, plain & simple.
K.
Dinosaur is pretty relative if you ask me.
The thing is that there are many self proclaimed pundits out there who essentially say if it isn't Windows or UNIX based then it falls into this "legacy systems" category.
Truth is if a system is in active use, contains mission critical applications, then I don't care how old the thing is -- it is NOT legacy hardware.
If one claims a box is legacy hardware they better have something to back that up with. If the box is sitting in a corner and only gets accessed once a year...then yea I can see it.
Most every box that isn't Windows has this image problem from the popular media standpoint. UNIX is held in really high regard as not being legacy....and let's not forget just how damn old UNIX is!
I have this issue every day with the iSeries platform that I work with, and my collegues in the zSeries land have the same issues.
From my space, the iSeries is highly scalable, robust, fully 64-bit architecture and fast as hell -- running OS/400, Linux and Windows under the covers if you want to with Power CPUs...and supposedly its legacy...whatever. We do stuff that the Windows world can barely even dream of.
You look at this article and it kinda says, "Look bud, there's more to life than what you think!" Yea, the article is focused on IBM systems -- but I don't really see an issue with that. Sure, he could have covered more incarnations of the mainframe...but with far less detail than he even has now.
K.