Or you just run 1 server with 10 apps running on it. Which I'm pretty sure is how things used to be done before Vms became flavour of the month amongst lazy sysadmins.
No , that would be app/OS + VM + OS + hardware. The host OS doesn't just conveniently vanish, its still using up CPU cycles.
"If the hardware fails all you have to do is move the VM "image" to new hardware."
How many apps are hardware dependent these days? All OS's have hardware abstractions , eg unix/dev directory. So whats different between doing that and just moving the app over to another server?
A VM is just an app. It will have as many OS dependencies as any other app so you will still have OS upgrade issues especially if you upgrade the VM version as time goes by too.
"The only alternative is to install every application onto every server you have, and load balance everything - but that requires that every app is compatible with every other app, and that every app can operate as a cluster."
When did installing multiple apps on 1 server go out of fashion? I realise Windows can't handle many apps on the same box before things go awry but Unix has no issue with it, plus it can load balance between the CPUs , keep all the apps seperate in chrooted jails if necessary and if the server goes down you restore to another box using a tarball or similar.
I thinl you're missing my point - why have multiple OSes if they're all the same type of OS and the apps could all happily run on the same OS instance? As for deployment - have you never heard of a tarball? OS dies - take app tarball to new server , untar. Hows that different to copying a VM machine file over?
Sorry , that makes no sense. By definition you could do it on the same hardware without a VM unless your VM somehow magics processing power out of the ether.
I've never really understood the fuss around VMs. Sure , they're useful if you want to test run an OS install or run a different OS on top of another. But otherwise whats the point? Instead of having app + OS you end up with app + VM + OS so how exactly is that benefiting anyone other than the power company for the extra electricity used?
So respect = posting the story on Slashdot?
on
A Geek Funeral
·
· Score: 1
"As to the assholes who posted below me, SHAME ON YOU! You should be respectful to people in such an important time"
Get over yourself. Anyone who really wants to respect a dead family member wouldn't splat the story over a website known for its rather ribald viewpoints.
Isn't it because the CPU and ROM are together in an ASIC package and the ROM can't be accessed directly externally through the pins? I could be wrong. If the ROM is a seperate chip then I've no idea why you couldn't do this.
While the TI engineers would probably be happy to share the info, a bunch of management suits still living in the 1960s want to keep everything secret and in-house because they're sure They Know Best as to what everyone wants. Well we all know where this sort of blinkered thinking leads - users eventually just give you the finger and move elsewhere especially if a large part of your core market is the very type of hacker (in the old sense of the word) that they want to stop.
And who are they kidding anyway , these are just fscking calculators! They can't even argue that installing new stuff on them is going to lose them any income anyway. Its not like the average user upgrades his calculator OS every year!
Fair enough , but what if something has been encrypted twice? You've successfully decrypted the 2nd stage but the output is still statistically noise because its still encrypted by the 1st encryption stage. How would you solve this problem?
"While the British worked on code breaking, and some of what was discovered there applies to modern code breaking, they didn't work on modern coding techniques. Their concern was breaking the codes of the day, understandably."
Oh right, so conveniently the 1940s don't count as "modern" , but the 1950s do? What a crock of shit. Talk about modifiying meanings to suit your own ends. The german codes were created using a machine and on the british side were partly decoded using electronic computers. If that doesn't count as modern then I don't know what does.
A stupid question you might think , but unless you know what the output should be , how do you know when you've found it? Unless a computer knows every language on the planet and "reads" ever version of the potential output and decides if it makes sense how can it ever know when the decryption is finished? And what if its not plain text its decrypting but something else entirely such as a binary file? Perhaps I'm just dumb but this is something I've never understodd.
Heh funny. Though you might want to use an example of a workplace that generally doesn't have more rj45 sockets around the building than a branch of Maplins.
"They weren't ported -- they were completely rewritten from scratch for each new machine."
For some they were , for some they weren't. If the CPU is the same on different machines you don't need to rewrite the core logic, just the I/O sections and any memory address handling.
"Writing a program that fits into 8KB is a lot easier if you don't have to worry about anyone ever reading or modifying your code (games shipped once and were never patched / updated) or portability ('porting' back then meant 'writing the same game on a different architecture')"
Right , because 8 bits games were never ported to multiple types of machines.
Try and get the latest generation of coders out of uni to do something in 8K of memory and they'll probably just about manage "hello" before they complain that their favourite singleton class needs more memory to instantiate their modified string class I/O subsystem so they won't be able to print out "world" and expecting anyone to do that in 8K is clearly impossible.
I jest , but anyone who had to code a serious app in available memory measured in kilobytes knows just how bloated todays development enviroments and even compiled output is.
In the dark or in smoke it was a lot easier to keep your finger in a single digit on a rotary dial (once you'd found the right one obviously). The same probably applies to a lesser extent for touch tone phones. Its the american 911 system that I find odd , it just seems to be a number chosen at random or perhaps as a left over dial code.
Slashdot Mirror
Or you just run 1 server with 10 apps running on it. Which I'm pretty sure is how things used to be done before Vms became flavour of the month amongst lazy sysadmins.
No , that would be app/OS + VM + OS + hardware. The host OS doesn't just conveniently vanish, its still using up CPU cycles.
"If the hardware fails all you have to do is move the VM "image" to new hardware."
How many apps are hardware dependent these days? All OS's have hardware abstractions , eg unix /dev directory. So whats different between doing that and just moving the app over to another server?
A VM is just an app. It will have as many OS dependencies as any other app so you will still have OS upgrade issues especially if you upgrade the VM version as time goes by too.
"The only alternative is to install every application onto every server you have, and load balance everything - but that requires that every app is compatible with every other app, and that every app can operate as a cluster."
When did installing multiple apps on 1 server go out of fashion? I realise Windows can't handle many apps on the same box before things go awry but Unix has no issue with it, plus it can load balance between the CPUs , keep all the apps seperate in chrooted jails if necessary and if the server goes down you restore to another box using a tarball or similar.
So use 1 server and have 10 client logins on it FFS.
I thinl you're missing my point - why have multiple OSes if they're all the same type of OS and the apps could all happily run on the same OS instance? As for deployment - have you never heard of a tarball? OS dies - take app tarball to new server , untar. Hows that different to copying a VM machine file over?
Sorry , that makes no sense. By definition you could do it on the same hardware without a VM unless your VM somehow magics processing power out of the ether.
I've never really understood the fuss around VMs. Sure , they're useful if you want to test run an OS install or run a different OS on top of another. But otherwise whats the point? Instead of having app + OS you end up with app + VM + OS so how exactly is that benefiting anyone other than the power company for the extra electricity used?
"As to the assholes who posted below me, SHAME ON YOU! You should be respectful to people in such an important time"
Get over yourself. Anyone who really wants to respect a dead family member wouldn't splat the story over a website known for its rather ribald viewpoints.
Isn't it because the CPU and ROM are together in an ASIC package and the ROM can't be accessed directly externally through the pins? I could be wrong. If the ROM is a seperate chip then I've no idea why you couldn't do this.
"Now if only he had developed a microkernel instead..."
It would be bloated AND slow.
But hey, it would look pretty in a high level UML diagram.
While the TI engineers would probably be happy to share the info, a bunch of management suits still living in the 1960s want to keep everything secret and in-house because they're sure They Know Best as to what everyone wants. Well we all know where this sort of blinkered thinking leads - users eventually just give you the finger and move elsewhere especially if a large part of your core market is the very type of hacker (in the old sense of the word) that they want to stop.
And who are they kidding anyway , these are just fscking calculators! They can't even argue that installing new stuff on them is going to lose them any income anyway. Its not like the average user upgrades his calculator OS every year!
You could encrypt with one algorithm, then take the output from that and encrypt again with a completely different one.
Fair enough , but what if something has been encrypted twice? You've successfully decrypted the 2nd stage but the output is still statistically noise because its still encrypted by the 1st encryption stage. How would you solve this problem?
"While the British worked on code breaking, and some of what was discovered there applies to modern code breaking, they didn't work on modern coding techniques. Their concern was breaking the codes of the day, understandably."
Oh right, so conveniently the 1940s don't count as "modern" , but the 1950s do? What a crock of shit. Talk about modifiying meanings to suit your own ends. The german codes were created using a machine and on the british side were partly decoded using electronic computers. If that doesn't count as modern then I don't know what does.
A stupid question you might think , but unless you know what the output should be , how do you know when you've found it? Unless a computer knows every language on the planet and "reads" ever version of the potential output and decides if it makes sense how can it ever know when the decryption is finished? And what if its not plain text its decrypting but something else entirely such as a binary file? Perhaps I'm just dumb but this is something I've never understodd.
... the USA won't have the ability to put its own astronauts into orbit by choice (as opposed to by circumstance after shuttle accidents).
Way to go NASA.
*sigh*
Heh funny. Though you might want to use an example of a workplace that generally doesn't have more rj45 sockets around the building than a branch of Maplins.
Of course it could be argued that 19 years is a long time in the computer world and BeOS would be old enough to have accumulated its own cruft by now.
"but no WiFi support means I can't connect to the Internet"
Err, have you never heard of an ethernet cable?
"They weren't ported -- they were completely rewritten from scratch for each new machine."
For some they were , for some they weren't. If the CPU is the same on different machines you don't need to rewrite the core logic, just the I/O sections and any memory address handling.
"Writing a program that fits into 8KB is a lot easier if you don't have to worry about anyone ever reading or modifying your code (games shipped once and were never patched / updated) or portability ('porting' back then meant 'writing the same game on a different architecture')"
Right , because 8 bits games were never ported to multiple types of machines.
Oh , wait....
Try and get the latest generation of coders out of uni to do something in 8K of memory and they'll probably just about manage "hello" before they complain that their favourite singleton class needs more memory to instantiate their modified string class I/O subsystem so they won't be able to print out "world" and expecting anyone to
do that in 8K is clearly impossible.
I jest , but anyone who had to code a serious app in available memory measured in kilobytes knows just how bloated todays development enviroments and even compiled output is.
In the dark or in smoke it was a lot easier to keep your finger in a single digit on a rotary dial (once you'd found the right one obviously). The same probably applies to a lesser extent for touch tone phones. Its the american 911 system that I find odd , it just seems to be a number chosen at random or perhaps as a left over dial code.
It is if you don't want to come across as an arrogant ass who no one would want to work with.