Thumbs up on HDFS. The next question to ask your groups how they will be analyzing it. HDFS (and Hadoop/Spark/Whatever) will hopefully fit in nicely there. Not only will your data be redundantly copied across multiple systems, but as your data needs (and cluster) grows, so does your computational power.
Getting data in & out can be done via Java API, Rest API, FUSE or NFS Mounts. The only issue is that HDFS doesn't play well with small files, but hopefully your groups will be using large files instead.
Now administration is another story, but then there's Cloudera's Manager that's supposed to greatly simplify management. I'm currently using it to store about.25 PB right now for random analysis, but growing it's capacity is a straightforward task.
As far as backing up, HDFS provides snapshots, 3x replication (or more) across nodes in the cluster. Of course there's always the big hammer of just getting a second cluster. As an old HW sage once told me, "If you can't afford to buy two, don't buy one"
Never ever ever do development on your workstation, unless it's close enough to your production environment. If his company had enough $$ for a Macbook, I'm sure they can shell out another $400 or whatever for a Dell workstation that runs the same distro as the server.
No I didn't RTFA, but give me a break. It sounds almost as bad as developing an application using MS Access.
(Yes I have a MBP, and I develop on Linux servers all day)
Maybe I'm the only one, but I'd certainly buy a copy of windows XP Starter if it was $3, or $10. I know I'm not in the majority, but for crying out loud. I build my own systems, I install Linux, and I have to make due without Windows for my gaming.
God, if they had any sort of soul, they would give XP away once it was discontinued. Hell, give Windows 2000 away!
Yeah, it's not OSS, but they're not making any money off of it, and if Vista were any good, it would stand and sell on it's own, without resorting to making Windows XP unbuyable... </rant>
Maybe a step back (or at least standing still) for Microsoft. You could argue that MS not acknowledging Linux interest further validates Linux's threat, while MS is playing it's usual tricks.
Someday, MS will have to realize that they are losing the desktop game, and the only way they can stay relevant is to go online (which they are) and embrace all OS's* (which they aren't).
* - Yes there are a bazillion OS's, and they have limited resources. But the obvious ones to support are Windows, MacOS & Linux. Sorry Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, *BSD & VMS Users.
Big point is that Vista has been under development for how many years again? They delayed it numerous times to make it more stable, and have it cover all of the bases as far as security & hardware?
What happened?
Big name Hardware is broken (ATI, NVidia, SoundBlaster). Security may be there, but it's unstable.
XP Built on top of 2000, which built on top of NT 4, etc. They were more or less business ready, stable OS's. Yes, Vista had to dump all that for security, but the constant delays for "security" purposes now just sound like a lot of bullshit.
At the very least, MS should've waited until NVidia & ATI had their drivers polished & perfected before pushing this mess out onto the masses, rather than meeting the "2006" deadline, and letting Allchin finally retire.
With regards to the larger screen, I guess you have to ask yourself, how much time are you going to be spending watching movies, vs. listening to music. I find the screen on the iPod is adequate for album art, navigation, and seeing the current song playing. I haven't really watched videos on it so I can't compare.
As far as the FM receiver, I think that may be one of the largest drawbacks to the iPod, and it's not really that much of a drawback.
I guess with regards to buying the Zune over the iPod, sit down and ask yourself what you're going to be using it for? Listening to music, or watching movies. Listening to your music randomized, or listening to the radio.
Interface-wise, I love the click-wheel. It feels so natural, and I think that's almost a reason to buy the iPod itself.
Just my.02$
Re:How does it perform on Linux?
on
Skype 2.0 Adds Video
·
· Score: 4, Informative
It works ok, but has some oddities:
1) Only uses OSS, not Alsa. So it's not always happy sharing the sound device. (You can use OSS emulation, but still, not quite that happy) 2) Occaisionally forgets my configuration and won't let me log in. I've seen posts, that say the solution is to whack your.skype config directory. Kind of annoying, but once I do that, it's happy and lets me reconnect.
I'd love to see Skype 2.0 working under Linux, but even more importantly, I'd love to see an Alsa version and see if my experience is better.
My biggest gripe is that I use it to talk to my brother when gaming (instead of Teamspeak). For the whole once a week we game, it's fine. But under Linux, I can't run my game & talk on Skype. So I've got to boot into Windows to game.
But if you want to use skype to only talk, and not game, it's certainly fine for that.
Maybe I can't build a Star Destroyer out of them, but I could certainly build a big enough block of P2P storage to destroy the Enemies of the Empire -- the **AA's.
Also, they say 65 million downloads of Firefox have been made... how many of those were repeats? I've downloaded the program quite a few times, and considering that each upgrade just requires you to download the full install again, there's no way that 65 million downloads translates into 65 million users.
Well, the follow on question to this, is how many installs aren't documented? ie: The NT Admin downloads it once, and pushes out the changes to 500 desktops.
I'd say, just like the article, it's intended to be a replacement for MS-Paint. It doesn't appear to have anywhere near all of the advanced features of Gimp.
It has layers, and an effects API, but that seems to be where the similarity ends.
The interface appears to be simple like MS Paint's, but I think it's seriously overstating that it's a Gimp competitor. Heck, sounds like the project has only been around for 2 semesters. How mature could it be compared to Gimp or Photoshop?
The question is, though, do we need such things in our cars? Do we really need cars equipped with "home entertainment systems," if these cars will only be used for trips to the nearest shop or driving to work?
Obviously, you don't have young kids. As the parent of an 18 month old, I have to say emphatically YES! My god, I pop a Wiggles DVD in, and he's happy as all can be...
Lets call this Zealot lie #212. Nothing forces people to upgrade. Some people CHOSE to upgrade. If what you claim was true I wouldn't have to keep supporting all these users running Windows 95 and (lord help me) 3.1. They have not upgraded because they have no need of the new features.
If that were true, I would be able to run Win 95 on my Athlon 64 (for example). But since the source is closed (ie: not free), I can't make necessary changes to allow the kernel to boot on my new system.
As for MS being able to "shut you down anytime they wanted to if they felt like it", do you have ANYTHING to back that up? What can Microsoft do to make my Windows install stop working?
In Windows XP, there's that little Product Activation number you have to contact MS for to let you run on a brand new system, or if you change enough HW components to require recertification. MS could simply say "Sorry, XP is no longer supported, we can't give you a new Producet Activation #" or "It looks as if you are running illegally, we refuse to give you a new Serial #". Getting Warez to fix this is of course illegal, and the only legal way to get a serial number is to contact MS. MS has the right to refuse to give you that serial number at any time. This means that you don't own the OS since you can't install it on a new machine if MS denies you the SN. You are denied future installs
As far as making current installs stop working, I seem to recall that Service Pack 1disabled a block of SNs that were supposed to be pirated. There is nothing to prevent them from doing that again. This denies you of current installs.
A solution might be "Well don't install that patch". Again, future security patches might require the install of this "serial number" patch. Boom, you're broken. So MS wraps you around to install the SN patch, or risk having a vulnerable machine.
A car breaking down implies that it is *unusable* until you shell out $$$ to fix it. Not that I'm necessarily advocating Windows, but a BSOD-victimized computer can be rendered usable again in what, 1-2 minutes? And for free? The 'car breaking down' analogy doesn't work here. A closer analogy would be a car that likes to stall.
Perhaps, but I've had BSOD's wreck partitions, and the registry. Remember, BSOD's generally mean something bad happened in the kernel. If something bad happens at that low of a level, then you might need to repair. Oftentimes, yes it does come back on it's own. Sometimes it requires a reinstall.
Not sure why this is hard for people to understand given that they buy cars rather then walk for free
But what if that $40,000 car broke down everyday, or required a bi-yearly upgrade to keep working (especially with it's hood welded shut). Or it was only available in hideous Yellow, and you can't change the color?
And that I think is the crux of the argument. It's not so much about being free (as in beer), it's about being free (as in speech). That's why IBM is doing well with consulting. Once IBM is done customizing your software, you get to keep your software forever.
With MS, you give them a check every other year, and that's it. With XP (and likely later), you don't even own the OS. MS can shut you down anytime they wanted to if they felt like it.
The argument becomes less about Free (as in beer) software is better. It is for some, but the freedom (as in speech) is where the benefit is. And the freedom is what companies like. The huge benefit to companies is that they keep the SW. If they make no changes, and it works forever, they can port it to the new systems a lot easier. That means in the long run, lower TCO since you don't need to retrain and lower TCO since you aren't paying upgrade fees.
Since we know that XBOX++ will not contain an Nvidia GPU (they're going with ATI instead), it is pretty safe to say that using binaries compiled for the current XBOX will not work.
Not necessarily. What if the underlying design is to link against a library, rather than build against the HW directly. Think the NVidia OpenGL Drivers. All you do is drop in the NV Drivers on a Linux box, and your OpenGL Apps simply make library calls. It could be resolved with a similar situation.
What seems to be in question is the shaders used. If the shader calls can be abstracted out to a library call of some fashion, then ATI (or whoever) could re-implement the function calls to provide a similar capability.
What seems to be the really big sticking point is the basic difference of using a PowerPC chip rather than an Intel chip...
> 1. Look for NTFS partitions and mount them with the R/O driver > 2. Scan those folders for the dll and copy it into the ramdisk
mount -t ntfs/dev/hda1/ntfs if (-e/ntfs/winnt/system32/drivers/ntfs.sys) {
cp/ntfs/winnt/system32/drivers/ntfs.sys/ramdisk } umount/ntfs if (-e/ramdisk/ntfs.sys) {
# Do Wrapper voodoo here. }
Doesn't seem to conceptually hard (or tricky) to me.
...Losing them would be like losing a part of one's body. I'm glad to hear they will still be with us.
And which part of one's body would that be, that genital wart, or that superfluous nipple? I was thinking maybe herpes too, but that's just a disease...
True, Linux is a disease. But I seem to recall that during the Middle-Ages, with plague outbreaks and what-not, Siegers would hurl the bodies of their dead who died from the plague into the cities of their foes. The first biological weapons.
But on the same note, while Linux is a disease to Sun, they could certainly spread the pain to Microsoft as well.
It certainly seems to be IBM's approach. They embraced Linux, even though it was eating their AIX sales for lunch. Now IBM is seen as one of the largest Linux supporters out there.
Sun's only solution is to let Linux eat up Solaris at the low end. Embrace that, sell that, push Linux at the low-end. Especially on the x86.
Oh you want real Iron? Use Linux on our UltraSparc systems. Need more reliability than Linux, then use Solaris on our UltraSparcs.
These seems to be the strategy IBM has taken. Push it on their low-end, and even on their big mainframes. But still keep AIX and their MainFrame OS around as a solution.
So Sun should almost mimic IBM's direction. Their HW is good, solid & dependable for the most part. But they should push Linux, instead of hide from it.
Let the disease kill their weak products at the low-end. For the time being, where Solaris & Sparc matters most is at the very-high end.
And when Linux is ready to take over Solaris, Sun will be there with the experience to get it done.
The beauty is, IBM & Sun can let Linux eat their low-end sales because they have a beautiful migration path to their high-end OS's. Microsoft does not. Throwing this disease into the Microsoft camp will kill nearly all of MS's products from the low-end, to the high-end. Why? The low-end sales to SBE's will go to Linux. The high-end sales can't leverage off the low-end SBE sales they used to enjoy. Going from Linux to Microsoft will be seen as too difficult.
Wonder if this is how it will play out in the end?
Think about it. If the code hits the net, and hackers find the various exploits in HL2 (buffer overflows, hijacked network streams, etc.), then Valve can see where their holes and possible exploits are at and fix them before it goes gold.
Not to mention, all of the free debugging, and reviews too. Heck, how many mods will be available when HL2 gets released because developers have access to the new API. Maybe it wasn't leaked, maybe it really was freed...
Considering China's respect of Intellectual Property, and their desire to create a custom version of Linux to break the Microsoft monopoly, What is to prevent China from looking at the Windows Source, and then taking the good parts out and inserting them into Linux (or derivative utilities). What if they saw how the whole Active Directory authentication stuff worked, and enhanced Samba?
I mean that could really be interesting. Genuine MS protocols in the Linux kernel. Microsoft would be pissed because of IP theft (ala SCO). But what could Microsoft do? Sue China?
Slashdot Mirror
I thought data was Oreos!?
I thought Data was the new Bacon! Crunchy, Tasty, Slightly bad for you.
Just wish I had the T-shirt to prove it.
Thumbs up on HDFS. The next question to ask your groups how they will be analyzing it. HDFS (and Hadoop/Spark/Whatever) will hopefully fit in nicely there. Not only will your data be redundantly copied across multiple systems, but as your data needs (and cluster) grows, so does your computational power.
Getting data in & out can be done via Java API, Rest API, FUSE or NFS Mounts. The only issue is that HDFS doesn't play well with small files, but hopefully your groups will be using large files instead.
Now administration is another story, but then there's Cloudera's Manager that's supposed to greatly simplify management. I'm currently using it to store about .25 PB right now for random analysis, but growing it's capacity is a straightforward task.
As far as backing up, HDFS provides snapshots, 3x replication (or more) across nodes in the cluster. Of course there's always the big hammer of just getting a second cluster. As an old HW sage once told me, "If you can't afford to buy two, don't buy one"
Never ever ever do development on your workstation, unless it's close enough to your production environment. If his company had enough $$ for a Macbook, I'm sure they can shell out another $400 or whatever for a Dell workstation that runs the same distro as the server.
No I didn't RTFA, but give me a break. It sounds almost as bad as developing an application using MS Access.
(Yes I have a MBP, and I develop on Linux servers all day)
Maybe I'm the only one, but I'd certainly buy a copy of windows XP Starter if it was $3, or $10. I know I'm not in the majority, but for crying out loud. I build my own systems, I install Linux, and I have to make due without Windows for my gaming.
God, if they had any sort of soul, they would give XP away once it was discontinued. Hell, give Windows 2000 away!
Yeah, it's not OSS, but they're not making any money off of it, and if Vista were any good, it would stand and sell on it's own, without resorting to making Windows XP unbuyable...
</rant>
Maybe a step back (or at least standing still) for Microsoft. You could argue that MS not acknowledging Linux interest further validates Linux's threat, while MS is playing it's usual tricks.
Someday, MS will have to realize that they are losing the desktop game, and the only way they can stay relevant is to go online (which they are) and embrace all OS's* (which they aren't).
* - Yes there are a bazillion OS's, and they have limited resources. But the obvious ones to support are Windows, MacOS & Linux. Sorry Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, *BSD & VMS Users.
Big point is that Vista has been under development for how many years again? They delayed it numerous times to make it more stable, and have it cover all of the bases as far as security & hardware?
What happened?
Big name Hardware is broken (ATI, NVidia, SoundBlaster). Security may be there, but it's unstable.
XP Built on top of 2000, which built on top of NT 4, etc. They were more or less business ready, stable OS's. Yes, Vista had to dump all that for security, but the constant delays for "security" purposes now just sound like a lot of bullshit.
At the very least, MS should've waited until NVidia & ATI had their drivers polished & perfected before pushing this mess out onto the masses, rather than meeting the "2006" deadline, and letting Allchin finally retire.
With regards to the larger screen, I guess you have to ask yourself, how much time are you going to be spending watching movies, vs. listening to music. I find the screen on the iPod is adequate for album art, navigation, and seeing the current song playing. I haven't really watched videos on it so I can't compare.
.02$
As far as the FM receiver, I think that may be one of the largest drawbacks to the iPod, and it's not really that much of a drawback.
I guess with regards to buying the Zune over the iPod, sit down and ask yourself what you're going to be using it for? Listening to music, or watching movies. Listening to your music randomized, or listening to the radio.
Interface-wise, I love the click-wheel. It feels so natural, and I think that's almost a reason to buy the iPod itself.
Just my
It works ok, but has some oddities:
.skype config directory. Kind of annoying, but once I do that, it's happy and lets me reconnect.
1) Only uses OSS, not Alsa. So it's not always happy sharing the sound device. (You can use OSS emulation, but still, not quite that happy)
2) Occaisionally forgets my configuration and won't let me log in. I've seen posts, that say the solution is to whack your
I'd love to see Skype 2.0 working under Linux, but even more importantly, I'd love to see an Alsa version and see if my experience is better.
My biggest gripe is that I use it to talk to my brother when gaming (instead of Teamspeak). For the whole once a week we game, it's fine. But under Linux, I can't run my game & talk on Skype. So I've got to boot into Windows to game.
But if you want to use skype to only talk, and not game, it's certainly fine for that.
Maybe I can't build a Star Destroyer out of them, but I could certainly build a big enough block of P2P storage to destroy the Enemies of the Empire -- the **AA's.
Dude, I think the **AA is the Empire....
Surprised noone mentioned this before. But in the Highlander series, if you were immortal, you could no longer have children.
Think about it, the Immortals cannot have children, they can heal from any wound, and they can only be killed by being beheaded.
Maybe the lines between fact & fiction might be getting a little blurrier...
Also, they say 65 million downloads of Firefox have been made... how many of those were repeats? I've downloaded the program quite a few times, and considering that each upgrade just requires you to download the full install again, there's no way that 65 million downloads translates into 65 million users.
Well, the follow on question to this, is how many installs aren't documented? ie: The NT Admin downloads it once, and pushes out the changes to 500 desktops.
...and the Doctor said, if this is my thermometer, where's my pen?
And then a muffled scream of horror. "Get me out of here!!!"
I'd say, just like the article, it's intended to be a replacement for MS-Paint. It doesn't appear to have anywhere near all of the advanced features of Gimp.
It has layers, and an effects API, but that seems to be where the similarity ends.
The interface appears to be simple like MS Paint's, but I think it's seriously overstating that it's a Gimp competitor. Heck, sounds like the project has only been around for 2 semesters. How mature could it be compared to Gimp or Photoshop?
Anybody notice that the sixth result is Microsoft itself?
So Microsoft is more evil than Satan, but not as evil as Google. Interesting...
The question is, though, do we need such things in our cars? Do we really need cars equipped with "home entertainment systems," if these cars will only be used for trips to the nearest shop or driving to work?
Obviously, you don't have young kids. As the parent of an 18 month old, I have to say emphatically YES! My god, I pop a Wiggles DVD in, and he's happy as all can be...
Lets call this Zealot lie #212. Nothing forces people to upgrade. Some people CHOSE to upgrade. If what you claim was true I wouldn't have to keep supporting all these users running Windows 95 and (lord help me) 3.1. They have not upgraded because they have no need of the new features.
If that were true, I would be able to run Win 95 on my Athlon 64 (for example). But since the source is closed (ie: not free), I can't make necessary changes to allow the kernel to boot on my new system.
As for MS being able to "shut you down anytime they wanted to if they felt like it", do you have ANYTHING to back that up? What can Microsoft do to make my Windows install stop working?
In Windows XP, there's that little Product Activation number you have to contact MS for to let you run on a brand new system, or if you change enough HW components to require recertification. MS could simply say "Sorry, XP is no longer supported, we can't give you a new Producet Activation #" or "It looks as if you are running illegally, we refuse to give you a new Serial #". Getting Warez to fix this is of course illegal, and the only legal way to get a serial number is to contact MS. MS has the right to refuse to give you that serial number at any time. This means that you don't own the OS since you can't install it on a new machine if MS denies you the SN. You are denied future installs
As far as making current installs stop working, I seem to recall that Service Pack 1disabled a block of SNs that were supposed to be pirated. There is nothing to prevent them from doing that again. This denies you of current installs.
A solution might be "Well don't install that patch". Again, future security patches might require the install of this "serial number" patch. Boom, you're broken. So MS wraps you around to install the SN patch, or risk having a vulnerable machine.
A car breaking down implies that it is *unusable* until you shell out $$$ to fix it. Not that I'm necessarily advocating Windows, but a BSOD-victimized computer can be rendered usable again in what, 1-2 minutes? And for free? The 'car breaking down' analogy doesn't work here. A closer analogy would be a car that likes to stall.
Perhaps, but I've had BSOD's wreck partitions, and the registry. Remember, BSOD's generally mean something bad happened in the kernel. If something bad happens at that low of a level, then you might need to repair. Oftentimes, yes it does come back on it's own. Sometimes it requires a reinstall.
Not sure why this is hard for people to understand given that they buy cars rather then walk for free
But what if that $40,000 car broke down everyday, or required a bi-yearly upgrade to keep working (especially with it's hood welded shut). Or it was only available in hideous Yellow, and you can't change the color?
And that I think is the crux of the argument. It's not so much about being free (as in beer), it's about being free (as in speech). That's why IBM is doing well with consulting. Once IBM is done customizing your software, you get to keep your software forever.
With MS, you give them a check every other year, and that's it. With XP (and likely later), you don't even own the OS. MS can shut you down anytime they wanted to if they felt like it.
The argument becomes less about Free (as in beer) software is better. It is for some, but the freedom (as in speech) is where the benefit is. And the freedom is what companies like. The huge benefit to companies is that they keep the SW. If they make no changes, and it works forever, they can port it to the new systems a lot easier. That means in the long run, lower TCO since you don't need to retrain and lower TCO since you aren't paying upgrade fees.
Not necessarily. What if the underlying design is to link against a library, rather than build against the HW directly. Think the NVidia OpenGL Drivers. All you do is drop in the NV Drivers on a Linux box, and your OpenGL Apps simply make library calls. It could be resolved with a similar situation.
What seems to be in question is the shaders used. If the shader calls can be abstracted out to a library call of some fashion, then ATI (or whoever) could re-implement the function calls to provide a similar capability.
What seems to be the really big sticking point is the basic difference of using a PowerPC chip rather than an Intel chip...
> 1. Look for NTFS partitions and mount them with the R/O driver
> 2. Scan those folders for the dll and copy it into the ramdisk
mount -t ntfs
if (-e
{
cp
}
umount
if (-e
{
# Do Wrapper voodoo here.
}
Doesn't seem to conceptually hard (or tricky) to me.
No no, he was in the Hercules series... Err, that was "Iolaus"... Hmmm.
...Losing them would be like losing a part of one's body. I'm glad to hear they will still be with us.
And which part of one's body would that be, that genital wart, or that superfluous nipple? I was thinking maybe herpes too, but that's just a disease...
True, Linux is a disease. But I seem to recall that during the Middle-Ages, with plague outbreaks and what-not, Siegers would hurl the bodies of their dead who died from the plague into the cities of their foes. The first biological weapons.
But on the same note, while Linux is a disease to Sun, they could certainly spread the pain to Microsoft as well.
It certainly seems to be IBM's approach. They embraced Linux, even though it was eating their AIX sales for lunch. Now IBM is seen as one of the largest Linux supporters out there.
Sun's only solution is to let Linux eat up Solaris at the low end. Embrace that, sell that, push Linux at the low-end. Especially on the x86.
Oh you want real Iron? Use Linux on our UltraSparc systems. Need more reliability than Linux, then use Solaris on our UltraSparcs.
These seems to be the strategy IBM has taken. Push it on their low-end, and even on their big mainframes. But still keep AIX and their MainFrame OS around as a solution.
So Sun should almost mimic IBM's direction. Their HW is good, solid & dependable for the most part. But they should push Linux, instead of hide from it.
Let the disease kill their weak products at the low-end. For the time being, where Solaris & Sparc matters most is at the very-high end.
And when Linux is ready to take over Solaris, Sun will be there with the experience to get it done.
The beauty is, IBM & Sun can let Linux eat their low-end sales because they have a beautiful migration path to their high-end OS's. Microsoft does not. Throwing this disease into the Microsoft camp will kill nearly all of MS's products from the low-end, to the high-end. Why? The low-end sales to SBE's will go to Linux. The high-end sales can't leverage off the low-end SBE sales they used to enjoy. Going from Linux to Microsoft will be seen as too difficult.
Wonder if this is how it will play out in the end?
Think about it. If the code hits the net, and hackers find the various exploits in HL2 (buffer overflows, hijacked network streams, etc.), then Valve can see where their holes and possible exploits are at and fix them before it goes gold.
Not to mention, all of the free debugging, and reviews too. Heck, how many mods will be available when HL2 gets released because developers have access to the new API. Maybe it wasn't leaked, maybe it really was freed...
Considering China's respect of Intellectual Property, and their desire to create a custom version of Linux to break the Microsoft monopoly, What is to prevent China from looking at the Windows Source, and then taking the good parts out and inserting them into Linux (or derivative utilities). What if they saw how the whole Active Directory authentication stuff worked, and enhanced Samba?
I mean that could really be interesting. Genuine MS protocols in the Linux kernel. Microsoft would be pissed because of IP theft (ala SCO). But what could Microsoft do? Sue China?