You know, I bought a car a while back and then found out that some people got better prices than what was marked on the sticker because they took the time to bargain with the car dealer! And at a flea market last week I bought a book for $3, only to find out that people were buying two for $5! What a rip-off! And I could throw in some things about how the internet is a bit like a bazaar, but I hear prices aren't always fixed at those things either!
C'mon people -- why is anyone getting all worked up over this thing? Amazon is not ripping people off -- they're running a business. Searching around on the Amazon might have found you a better price, but everyone who paid the higher price agreed to that price -- no harm no foul. Maybe some customers are gonna be a bit upset at not having gotten the best deal, but that doesn't make Amazon "bastards" and "crooks"...
1. As a consultant I occasionally use Analyst reports to help in the initial selection process. Meta Group is not one of the more commonly trusted sources.
2. The concern that someone could modify source witout documenting it is a possible concern, but anyone with half a brain wouldn't dimiss the idea of using an OS for that reason.
3. Rene Zelweiger is swell. Had to add that.
4. While companies really don't care about the ability to change source (most consider it an advantage, although one they probably won't ever use), Linux does not have years of proven stability for multi-processor (4-16 processor) systems, and they do care about that. If the 2.4 kernel proves stable you'll see the more respected analyst reports talking a lot more about Linux vs. Solaris, and scalability and security will be their #1 comparisons. The issue of someone recompiling source probably won't even be mentioned.
Forgive my ignorance but I haven't been following this.net thing... does anyone actually have anything good to say about it? Granted, this is Slashdot, but I'd like to know what Microsoft might be doing that is at least worth following. Anyone have an objective list of pros and cons?
>But, anyways, if the situation was reversed, and eBay was running Microsoft, and experienced a >crash (due to not installing a patch), I am certain that 99.44% of Slashdot readers would >blame Microsoft, and Microsoft only [*]
Among IT professionals Windows NT has a reputation as being a much less robust OS than a UNIX OS. This reputation is well deserved due to problems which can not be patched, such as memory leaks (Microsoft recommends a regular reboot of NT servers to solve this problem) and the ability of individual applications to bring down the server -- with UNIX you simply kill the guilty process while the rest of the server chugs merrily along.
The point to make is that often problems with NT servers are not patchable, while problems with UNIX almost invariably are. The resulting thinking among IT folk is that if a UNIX system goes down it's because someone forgot to install the patch, while if an NT system goes down reboot and hope it doesn't happen again.
As to the anti-Microsoft sentiment among Slashdot users, of the 0.56% who wouldn't blame Microsoft, how many do you think are employed somewhere in the Redmond area;)
If this posting is redundant I'm sorry, I was reading earlier postings with a threshold of 3...
A couple of points:
1. The reason NT is so prevalent is that it is easy to learn and cheap. Why would a company with 10 employees pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for Oracle, Solaris, and training for an IT staff when they can get a site up on NT for $10,000 - $30,000 and a minimal investment in training? Large companies with dedicated IT staffs use UNIX. Small companies with inexperienced IT use NT.
2. SQL server is by no means a great product, but having a default account and password is not a security hole -- every database has to have some way to make an initial login, and this includes Oracle, DB2, whatever. After setup, it's the first job of the DBA to change that password. If it isn't done it's not a problem with the database, it's a problem with some brain-dead DBA who was too lazy to modify the administrative account.
Dynamo is just an app server, so you can say that the database and the web server is not Java. However, all page generation is done by the product using JavaBeans and JSP. A partial list of their customers is linked above, and it includes BMG, AT&T Customer Service, JCrew, and Sony Online Entertainment.
This is just one product that allows Java to be used for page generation -- take a look around, and you'll find that there are literally dozens. And before you say you meant a custom solution utilizing Java, no major company that I know of wants to build their own app server -- the investment would be huge with no real benefit. Yes, Yahoo and eBay do use custom solutions, but eBay is having all kinds of problems and many of Yahoo's services are now delivered via packaged solutions.
I'm under NDA, so I can't comment on specific sites I've worked on, but anyone using ATG Dynamo (Kodak, BMG I think) is running Java to generate their site. IBM WebSphere is moving to act as a JSP engine. And I thought I heard that BroadVision was moving to a Java model, although I could be wrong. Most B2B solutions are also Java applications (WebSphere, Extricity). I guess none of this would be end to end since there is always something in the pipeline that isn't Java, but the vast majority of these solutions utilize a mostly Java architecture.
I'm interested to hear what others are using, but I do almost all web related work, and at least 90% of the programming I've done in the past two years has been Java. It seems like every application server, engine, etc now has Java APIs, and to plug in it's just easier to use Java.
Granted, I still see a lot of application development being done using C/C++, but with things moving to the web Java provides platform independence and a ton of available libraries. Am I working in some weird micro-universe here or is Java basically taking over the web?
>He's just another media fraud that doesn't know a thing.
I suppose this posting is flame bait, but this comment has already been moderated UP so I felt like defending Dvorak...
Do you have any objective facts to back up your statement? Granted, Dvorak is an opinionated bastard who has been wrong a lot, but he's also one of the first to admit that. I've been reading his columns on and off for years, and one thing I've noticed is that he's a guy who has a sense of everything that's going on around him. He doesn't want to tell you what everyone else is saying, he wants to put himself on the line and say what he thinks -- isn't that the kind of attitude that Slashdot normally defends or am I missing something?
Granted, Dvorak is an inflammatory, highly opinionated, and highly visible target, but" a media fraud who doesn't know a thing"? Is Linux not full of hype right now? Is it not the current hope to knock down Microsoft? What is untrue there? He could have also said that it's a solid OS with great potential, but that's not his style. If you want to attack him, fine, but don't take the easy route of throwing assertions with no backing at him.
If 122 MB is accurate, keep in mind that the brain has been optimized by millions of years of evolution, so that 122 MB is a super-optimized 122 MB. Imagine an open source program that was optimized over a million years, and you get a sense of the magnitude of efficiency.
The other thing to consider is that the structure of the brain is such that synapses often have thousands of connections. Rather than the on/off model of computers, the brain has the ability to make thousands of connections using millions of pathways. Again, the 122 MB computer analogy can not possibly compare with this model.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, I bought a car a while back and then found out that some people got better prices than what was marked on the sticker because they took the time to bargain with the car dealer! And at a flea market last week I bought a book for $3, only to find out that people were buying two for $5! What a rip-off! And I could throw in some things about how the internet is a bit like a bazaar, but I hear prices aren't always fixed at those things either!
C'mon people -- why is anyone getting all worked up over this thing? Amazon is not ripping people off -- they're running a business. Searching around on the Amazon might have found you a better price, but everyone who paid the higher price agreed to that price -- no harm no foul. Maybe some customers are gonna be a bit upset at not having gotten the best deal, but that doesn't make Amazon "bastards" and "crooks"...
A couple of notes:
1. As a consultant I occasionally use Analyst reports to help in the initial selection process. Meta Group is not one of the more commonly trusted sources.
2. The concern that someone could modify source witout documenting it is a possible concern, but anyone with half a brain wouldn't dimiss the idea of using an OS for that reason.
3. Rene Zelweiger is swell. Had to add that.
4. While companies really don't care about the ability to change source (most consider it an advantage, although one they probably won't ever use), Linux does not have years of proven stability for multi-processor (4-16 processor) systems, and they do care about that. If the 2.4 kernel proves stable you'll see the more respected analyst reports talking a lot more about Linux vs. Solaris, and scalability and security will be their #1 comparisons. The issue of someone recompiling source probably won't even be mentioned.
Thanks... if that really is all there is to it methinks they shouldn't be promoting it so loudly...
Forgive my ignorance but I haven't been following this .net thing... does anyone actually have anything good to say about it? Granted, this is Slashdot, but I'd like to know what Microsoft might be doing that is at least worth following. Anyone have an objective list of pros and cons?
>But, anyways, if the situation was reversed, and eBay was running Microsoft, and experienced a
;)
>crash (due to not installing a patch), I am certain that 99.44% of Slashdot readers would
>blame Microsoft, and Microsoft only [*]
Among IT professionals Windows NT has a reputation as being a much less robust OS than a UNIX OS. This reputation is well deserved due to problems which can not be patched, such as memory leaks (Microsoft recommends a regular reboot of NT servers to solve this problem) and the ability of individual applications to bring down the server -- with UNIX you simply kill the guilty process while the rest of the server chugs merrily along.
The point to make is that often problems with NT servers are not patchable, while problems with UNIX almost invariably are. The resulting thinking among IT folk is that if a UNIX system goes down it's because someone forgot to install the patch, while if an NT system goes down reboot and hope it doesn't happen again.
As to the anti-Microsoft sentiment among Slashdot users, of the 0.56% who wouldn't blame Microsoft, how many do you think are employed somewhere in the Redmond area
If this posting is redundant I'm sorry, I was reading earlier postings with a threshold of 3...
A couple of points:
1. The reason NT is so prevalent is that it is easy to learn and cheap. Why would a company with 10 employees pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for Oracle, Solaris, and training for an IT staff when they can get a site up on NT for $10,000 - $30,000 and a minimal investment in training? Large companies with dedicated IT staffs use UNIX. Small companies with inexperienced IT use NT.
2. SQL server is by no means a great product, but having a default account and password is not a security hole -- every database has to have some way to make an initial login, and this includes Oracle, DB2, whatever. After setup, it's the first job of the DBA to change that password. If it isn't done it's not a problem with the database, it's a problem with some brain-dead DBA who was too lazy to modify the administrative account.
Just my two cents. Game on...
http://www.atg.com/c ustomers/driven_by_dynamo/driven_main.html
Dynamo is just an app server, so you can say that the database and the web server is not Java. However, all page generation is done by the product using JavaBeans and JSP. A partial list of their customers is linked above, and it includes BMG, AT&T Customer Service, JCrew, and Sony Online Entertainment.
This is just one product that allows Java to be used for page generation -- take a look around, and you'll find that there are literally dozens. And before you say you meant a custom solution utilizing Java, no major company that I know of wants to build their own app server -- the investment would be huge with no real benefit. Yes, Yahoo and eBay do use custom solutions, but eBay is having all kinds of problems and many of Yahoo's services are now delivered via packaged solutions.
I'm under NDA, so I can't comment on specific sites I've worked on, but anyone using ATG Dynamo (Kodak, BMG I think) is running Java to generate their site. IBM WebSphere is moving to act as a JSP engine. And I thought I heard that BroadVision was moving to a Java model, although I could be wrong. Most B2B solutions are also Java applications (WebSphere, Extricity). I guess none of this would be end to end since there is always something in the pipeline that isn't Java, but the vast majority of these solutions utilize a mostly Java architecture.
I'm interested to hear what others are using, but I do almost all web related work, and at least 90% of the programming I've done in the past two years has been Java. It seems like every application server, engine, etc now has Java APIs, and to plug in it's just easier to use Java.
Granted, I still see a lot of application development being done using C/C++, but with things moving to the web Java provides platform independence and a ton of available libraries. Am I working in some weird micro-universe here or is Java basically taking over the web?
>He's just another media fraud that doesn't know a thing.
I suppose this posting is flame bait, but this comment has already been moderated UP so I felt like defending Dvorak...
Do you have any objective facts to back up your statement? Granted, Dvorak is an opinionated bastard who has been wrong a lot, but he's also one of the first to admit that. I've been reading his columns on and off for years, and one thing I've noticed is that he's a guy who has a sense of everything that's going on around him. He doesn't want to tell you what everyone else is saying, he wants to put himself on the line and say what he thinks -- isn't that the kind of attitude that Slashdot normally defends or am I missing something?
Granted, Dvorak is an inflammatory, highly opinionated, and highly visible target, but" a media fraud who doesn't know a thing"? Is Linux not full of hype right now? Is it not the current hope to knock down Microsoft? What is untrue there? He could have also said that it's a solid OS with great potential, but that's not his style. If you want to attack him, fine, but don't take the easy route of throwing assertions with no backing at him.
My two cents...
If 122 MB is accurate, keep in mind that the brain has been optimized by millions of years of evolution, so that 122 MB is a super-optimized 122 MB. Imagine an open source program that was optimized over a million years, and you get a sense of the magnitude of efficiency.
The other thing to consider is that the structure of the brain is such that synapses often have thousands of connections. Rather than the on/off model of computers, the brain has the ability to make thousands of connections using millions of pathways. Again, the 122 MB computer analogy can not possibly compare with this model.