Someone please mod down the parent, he is an MS shill. Look at his posting history.
Astroturfers should not be welcome here.
First of all, i'm not an Astroturfer. I work for Microsoft, yes, and all my posts make it pretty clear if you check my history. I am also an IT engineer. The post was talking about how to refresh an aging architecture. While many on this discussion are talking about virtualization, VMWare, moving from x86 -> UltraSPARC, how is showing the poster about a product that perfectly fits is need off topic? Bringing an old multi-server environment down to a automated and redundant 3-server solution is a great suggestion. This is a discussion forum, if I'm not following the rules, let me know, but don't hate just because I'm Microsoft. Here's a list of recent things we've done in the last year for the open-source community.
All PHP workloads supported under Windows Azure including Wordpress.com MySQL supported in “cloud” Expression Web supports PHP in for developers Platinum Sponsor of Apache Foundation - $100,000 ASP.NET AJAX Library – Apache 2.0 wrote OAuth WRAP 0.9 openly released XML Seach Suggesions Format openly released IE Web Slice Specification openly released OpenService Format Specification PHP Frameworks Treated as 1st Class Citizens on IIS 7 Free Eclipse support for Silverlight development Linux code contribution for virtualization Dedicated iPhone streaming support in IIS openly released Outlook PST spec released formed Microsoft - Red Hat form support partnership Gave Apache Qpid code contribution released PHP toolkit for ADO.NET Data Services Dropped CAL requirement for Linux in virtualized workloads on Windows Server released Live Services plug-in for Moodle released as GPLv2 C# and.NET CLI now under Community Promise released.NET Micro Framework 4.0 – Apache 2.0 supported and released SAMBA contributions OASIS approves nine WS* specifications
If you want to hate because the product sucks or its not an appropriate solution, argue the merits, don't flame me.
Someone please mod up the parent, i'm not off-topic and I happen have been a slashdot reader for over 10 years.
If you have heard of Small Business Server, Microsoft just released a 3 server solution for businesses of your size called EBS. It will do everything you just outlined including setting the foundation for branch office scenarios with redundancy. With EBS, you get SharePoint, Exchange, Fax serving, AD, DNS, DHCP, firewall, FTP, IIS for web serving all included. Because it is built on Windows Server 2008, you get access to all the services that it provides. It will be a huge leap in user experience for your end-users and you'll finally stop fire fighting and actually allow time to deal with the real IT/Business challenges.
Rather than pushing the features, the real work you need to do is to identify business requirements and map them to features, implementation costs, and upkeep costs.
Once you have a sane, self-managing system in place, you can start to role out self-service IT systems for your users so they don't bother you for password resets. Some would say that you're putting yourself out of a job by doing this, but if you play your cards right and plan out the technical and the social aspects of the project, you will really be a hero and you'll probably be seen in a more respectable light.
Use Microsoft Search Server 2008 Express...its free, all you need is a free server box. Also Check out SharePoint Search and FAST enterprise search. http://www.microsoft.com/enterprisesearch
I would agree that if we were still using Windows 9x or DOS that an OS is a commodity. But OSes like Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 are NOT commodities due the functionality and scenarios they enable.
For example: - Would you consider a Cisco VPN Appliance a commodity? - Would you consider Branch Office management tools a commodity - Would you consider modern group policies that let you set USB device access for flash drives and storage, a commodity? - Is Windows XP gonna run in your environment until 2014? These scenarios cost REAL money. Microsoft's value proposition is that use one product and save on the complexity of managing multiple solutions. Every OS update has enabled new scenarios for businesses. What are niche scenarios now will likely be made mainstream by the next OS release. This is the value.
There are many other ways to legitimately rationalize OS upgrades. Those who have the most problems in IT are the ones who are not aligned with the business needs.
This is rudimentary analysis of where actual IT costs exist and what the role of IT is.
If you believe the role of IT is to provide a service to the end-users of the organizations and to enable cost-effective business productivity, then it absolutely makes sense to consider OS upgrades that have the features of Windows 7.
Features like DirectAccess can eliminate the maintenance and software costs associated with VPN . Bitlocker encryption eliminates the need to purchase 3rd party encryption software for compliance and security. BranchCache in tandem with Windows Server 2008 can significantly reduce broadband expenditures while improving overall levels of service. It can also eliminate the need to purchase costly WAN acceleration appliances which are very costly.
There are also less tangible benefits namely the fact that most schools and university will have student on either Vista or Windows 7. This is not opinion, it is fact. Is it realistic for businesses to ignore that new generation of workers will be left to use software that was created when they were only 12?
If you are a mid to large business with a sophisticated employee base and cannot find value in Windows 7 than I really question your competency as a modern IT manager. Now if you're in a position where you are constantly firefighting and battle system uptime, then you probably won't be employed for many more years. Jobs like that will be eliminated by advances in datacenter/cloud computing/outsourcing.
this is not true. All you have to do is visit dell.com or walmart to see that there will be dozens of machines in the sub-$700 price range that run Windows 7 exceptionally well. Last time I checked, the average user just doesn't spend $1000 on a desktop, and great laptops can be purchased for around $500.
If you are building your own machine, then opt for an OEM license rather than RETAIL and only go Professional if you need it. Most home-users will not need it.
Most users would get Windows 7 Home Premium with their computer which is heavily discounted since its an OEM version. Those who have existing RETAIL Windows licenses can simply get "Upgrade" versions and shift license to new machine. If you are upgrading an OEM license, that just make sure you're computer has a decent harddrive and 2GB RAM. A Pentium 4 or any dual-core machine will give great performance.
Regarding Nehalem, you will find that Windows 7 runs FANTASTIC, not good, on Pentium Dual Core E5200 or even CULV Core 2 Duo at 1.4ghz. You don't need an i5/i7 chip to have a top experience. I am using a Lenovo T61p that has a T9300 Core2Duo.
As far as Office, most home users will be fine using the "Home and Student" edition that is usually available for about $100. But even if you don't want to pay for Microsoft Office, Microsoft is releasing an Ad-supported version of Office for FREE! Worse-case scenario, there is always OpenOffice.
Almost any $500 laptop or $400 desktop will run Windows 7 extremely well. Just make sure that the minimum graphics processor is Intel 4500.
actually this is a really poorly written article full of gross errors.
Volume Licensing(VL) is not the same as Software Assurance (SA).
OEM licenses die with a machine. VLs can be moved and reused as long as the new machine came with an OEM license. Think of VLs as a way to upgrade a limited and discounted OEM license.
VL customers can definitely use XP. Most enterprises have VL agreements in place. Those that don't should probably sack their IT department or switch to Linux.
Software Assurance which may or may not be included with a specific VL plan has numerous benefits including getting new versions of the software without paying anything extra i.e. you buy Vista VLs now with SA; when Win7 comes out, you get the upgrade to Win7 at no cost.
VLs can be outright purchases paid in full or you can "lease" the software as a subscription. Subscriptions are advantageous as you do not pay the full price of the software and it provides your IT and Finance department a consistent way to account for IT costs (think operational expenses vs. capital expenses).
Finally it a misconception that VLs are only good for large customers. VLs can be purchased for organizations with as little as 5 computers.
I should correct myself, Search Server 2008 Express scales upto 400,000 documents not 1,000,000 primarily due to 4GB limitation with SQL Server 2005 Express. If you have SQL 2008 Express, I'd have to check the scaling.
One of the big benefits with Microsoft is the ability for granular search tuning. Enterprise Search is a very different from internet search and having access to the search algorithm is key to get better results. Below is a partner who deals with GSA and SharePoint/Search Server.
Try Search Server 2008 Express from Microsoft. Although it has no hard limits, it can index upto a 1 million documents before you have to scale out. Best of all it is free!
If you need high availability, redundancy, fail-over or more document support, look at the standard version of the product or consider SharePoint 2007/2010 or FAST.
Please reference cbrocious where he says "The DLR and IronRuby are released under the MS-PL which is OSI-approved." MS-PL is essentially like the BSD license meaning even if Microsoft stops supporting IronRuby, the community can continue development just like it does with most open-source projects.
I'm no lawyer but the license is royalty-free, world-wide, and non-exclusive, and seems to be irrevocable based on section 3D.
1. Definitions The terms âoereproduce,â âoereproduction,â âoederivative works,â and âoedistributionâ have the same meaning here as under U.S. copyright law.
A âoecontributionâ is the original software, or any additions or changes to the software.
A âoecontributorâ is any person that distributes its contribution under this license.
âoeLicensed patentsâ are a contributorâ(TM)s patent claims that read directly on its contribution.
2. Grant of Rights (A) Copyright Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to reproduce its contribution, prepare derivative works of its contribution, and distribute its contribution or any derivative works that you create.
(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.
Top of page 3. Conditions and Limitations (A) No Trademark License- This license does not grant you rights to use any contributorsâ(TM) name, logo, or trademarks.
(B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.
(C) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices that are present in the software.
(D) If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this license.
(E) The software is licensed âoeas-is.â You bear the risk of using it. The contributors give no express warranties, guarantees or conditions. You may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which this license cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws, the contributors exclude the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.
umm...the UK NHS or Nation Health Service which also happens to be the largest employer in the WORLD uses SharePoint internally as well as for their public facing website infrastructure. I think it looks good. I agree, out of the box, SharePoint needs better templates.
Richard Stallman's quote: "The Two years ago, a thorough study found that the kernel Linux infringed 283 different software patents, and that's just in the US. Of course, by now the number is probably different and might be higher."
http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/tokyo-rms- transcript.en.html#patents
People should not read too much into this. To quote Gartner,
"On 17 January 2007, Microsoft published a bulletin outlining downgrade rights for Windows Vista original equipment manufacturer (OEM) editions (see the Downgrade Rights Chart at http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/resources/volbr ief.mspx). Users buying PCs preloaded with OEM versions of Windows Vista Business or Windows Vista Ultimate may downgrade their PCs to Windows XP Professional only."
This should suffice for 90% of the downgrade requests. Any more esoteric reasons can probably be handled on a case by case basis with Microsoft's Customer Support. The only big change with downgrade rights is that Vista will not allow you to downgrade to anything below XP, i.e Windows 2000.
It took me about 8 hours over the course of a week to feel comfortable with the new layout. For Excel and Powerpoint users, its a HUGE productivity improvement in terms of quality and automation. "Live preview" alone would save most companies a chunk of their licensing costs. Honestly people waste a lot of time creating the look of the document in terms of fonts,colors, and style. Multiply that with the number of documents you do that with for the whole year. You save days!
Additionally, for businesses, if you still think office as a desktop productivity suite, its much more now. It's really one of the best collaboration and development platforms available for your business. You just need to leverage it and understand how you can deploy it as such. Use Sharepoint Server to extend office to your backend.
In the end it comes down to solving a business need rather than playing features games. I know a few companies who did a pilot for OpenOffice, loved it at first, didn't like the performance, and for them, that was more important.
You are 100% on the money with your point. Intel is currently scared to death of paradigm changing technology like CELL and with all 3 major consoles switching to a POWER cpu derivative we are seeing that Intel's only reason for dominance is its hold on the x86 market. Even though their flash, chipsets, mobile, and complimentary platform startegy is very comprehensive and on sound footing, the last thing they want is for the GPU to become the primary dictator for performance improvements. At present the best GPUs are CPU limited, and with 12-18 month product lifecycles, it is going too slow for certain industries. The advent of GPGPU and libraries like GPUFFTW, people are realizing performance boosts that beat Moore's Law. Merom is going to be very competative with AMD's roadmap for the next few years, but if AMD wants to come out way over Intel, integrating certain GPU functions into CPU will give AMD a huge edge(understatement). Additionally this type of combination can be compounded in terms of peformance if we factor in dual-core and multi-core CPUs in the next few years. The whole reason CELL was invented was so that PS3 could overcome Moore's law, the performance just wasn't there in the timeframe needed. Perhaps AMD-ATI could be an alternative since we all know that CELL is not nearly mature enough for general purpose computing due to the lack of an efficient software development tools.
I can't really say why ATI instead of Nvidia though, my guess would be Nvidia is too big and overlapping with its acquisition of ULi. Another possibility is that ATI's solutions are more low-power in design. If you've noticed, Nvidia solutions have been power hungry since they started using Voodoo technology.
Being an apple employee for a year and building PCs since i was 12 (22 now), I'm buying my first powerbook. I was gonna spend money on the highend powerbooks but decided to save and get an ibook, cause you DON'T buy an apple for games. You buy one so you have a computer that you don't have to reformat every year and one that allows you to do cool stuff that applies to everyday life (iLife stuff). Being in College, I kinda stopped playing games. I bought Warcraft 3(PC) but only played 30 games online so far to date...as opposed to the thousands of Starcraft games played in high school.
The point it, its pretty stupid to buy, build, or upgrade a computer for any game especially when the gaming industry is the XBox's bitch. Speaking as an EE major, the IBM 970FX totally has enough power to process Doom3, however, OpenGL, MAC OS X, and optimizations kinda suck in current climate for the gaming industry (mostly Apple's own fault too). GAMES LOOK LIKE CRAP OF MAC COMPARED TO the same level PC. I found that the solution is to build a sub $500 PC or get an XBOX, Xbox being the better alternative.
Right now I spend a total or $250 bucks and have a modded Xbox, 100s of NES games running thru emulators, SNES games, and SEGA Genesis games, PSX games, and a bunch of "backups" on a 180GB harddrive i added to the unit. On top of that, its in my living room connected to a nice TV and sound system.
Did anyone stop to think that Doom3 will probably look just as good on the Xbox even though the system specs of that box is really low compared to modern PCs? Given it wont have soft shadows and one DX9 feature that they implemented in Doom3, but im sure it'll be way more fun to play it in the living room than on the AVERAGE PC OWNER's computer Desk.
Thought i'd throw my 2cents. Oh and for all you idiots like Chris Tom out there, get an Electrical Engineering degree before you talk about CPUs, ISAs, pipelines, ALUs, cache arrangements, Risc vs. Cisc stuff. That, or learn how an i8088 processor works. 90% percent of the flames on the internet are due to people who simply read Slashdot and Tomshardware guide and think they can do comparisons between different technolgies in computing, its way above you so, don't even waste your time.
Yeah ure right, the dvd100i is crap, but then again its first gen. the 200i is must better and that's what we use in our post-production house. Also 4x DVD+RW are planned for the end of this year. 15min DVDs will be nice.
My mistake, i was under the assumption that Slashdot readers were tech savvy commentors that don't like to conform to the grammatical standardz of dumbed down societys and instead prefer like so many casual internet users, to use shortcuts. My bad, ASSHOLES
LET THE FLAMING BEGIN.
If you look from a technological standpoint, DVD+RW is clearly superior cause it was designed from the ground up to MAINTAIN compatibility with existing recorders at FULL SPEC. This is key because where + was built with compatibility in mind, this is not the case with -. With - recording times are limited because of the non standard "video recording mode" and also the lack of mpeg-2 VBR recording. Thats right only CBR with -. Now of course this is all generally speaking. Anyone can choose the author their own dvds using complicated software like Scenarist and perhaps get a nice VBR recording on -, but that fact is we cant simply view this issue from the geek or power user perspective. You have to look at set top boxes, standalones, as well as the computer. In this situation, DVD+RW offers full VBR MPEG-2 recording at various rates unlike the the 2 hour compatibility mode limit of DVD-RW, plus you get on the fly editing and cut scene rewrites.
And the issue of compatibility is really a marketing scam because it really only applys to a fraction of the 1st-Generation DVD players. You all can get NEW better performing players for $80US so whats the issue? Even here, DVD+RW maintains better compatibility. Just look at the supported players list.
The only negative that exists with + is that the media is just too damn expensive compared to -. But this is a temporary set back. DVD-RW has cheaper media but the problem is that ure limited to 1x recording if ure lucky 2x. DVD+RW is now a 2.5x with the new Phillips drive.
I hope this has educated the lot of you minus Pioneer Fanatic owners. Just one more this, if u did purchase a DVD-RW drive, u really didnt make a bad choice cause ure media will still work for reading, and if u are using it, then more power to ya. Plus think about the thousands of blanks that will sell DIRT CHEAP if DVD-RW standard dies.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone please mod down the parent, he is an MS shill. Look at his posting history.
Astroturfers should not be welcome here.
First of all, i'm not an Astroturfer. I work for Microsoft, yes, and all my posts make it pretty clear if you check my history. I am also an IT engineer. The post was talking about how to refresh an aging architecture. While many on this discussion are talking about virtualization, VMWare, moving from x86 -> UltraSPARC, how is showing the poster about a product that perfectly fits is need off topic? Bringing an old multi-server environment down to a automated and redundant 3-server solution is a great suggestion. This is a discussion forum, if I'm not following the rules, let me know, but don't hate just because I'm Microsoft. Here's a list of recent things we've done in the last year for the open-source community.
All PHP workloads supported under Windows Azure including Wordpress.com .NET CLI now under Community Promise .NET Micro Framework 4.0 – Apache 2.0
MySQL supported in “cloud”
Expression Web supports PHP in for developers
Platinum Sponsor of Apache Foundation - $100,000
ASP.NET AJAX Library – Apache 2.0
wrote OAuth WRAP 0.9
openly released XML Seach Suggesions Format
openly released IE Web Slice Specification
openly released OpenService Format Specification
PHP Frameworks Treated as 1st Class Citizens on IIS 7
Free Eclipse support for Silverlight development
Linux code contribution for virtualization
Dedicated iPhone streaming support in IIS
openly released Outlook PST spec released
formed Microsoft - Red Hat form support partnership
Gave Apache Qpid code contribution
released PHP toolkit for ADO.NET Data Services
Dropped CAL requirement for Linux in virtualized workloads on Windows Server
released Live Services plug-in for Moodle released as GPLv2
C# and
released
supported and released SAMBA contributions
OASIS approves nine WS* specifications
If you want to hate because the product sucks or its not an appropriate solution, argue the merits, don't flame me.
Someone please mod up the parent, i'm not off-topic and I happen have been a slashdot reader for over 10 years.
If you have heard of Small Business Server, Microsoft just released a 3 server solution for businesses of your size called EBS. It will do everything you just outlined including setting the foundation for branch office scenarios with redundancy. With EBS, you get SharePoint, Exchange, Fax serving, AD, DNS, DHCP, firewall, FTP, IIS for web serving all included. Because it is built on Windows Server 2008, you get access to all the services that it provides. It will be a huge leap in user experience for your end-users and you'll finally stop fire fighting and actually allow time to deal with the real IT/Business challenges.
Rather than pushing the features, the real work you need to do is to identify business requirements and map them to features, implementation costs, and upkeep costs.
Once you have a sane, self-managing system in place, you can start to role out self-service IT systems for your users so they don't bother you for password resets. Some would say that you're putting yourself out of a job by doing this, but if you play your cards right and plan out the technical and the social aspects of the project, you will really be a hero and you'll probably be seen in a more respectable light.
visit http://www.microsoft.com/ebs
Use Microsoft Search Server 2008 Express...its free, all you need is a free server box. Also Check out SharePoint Search and FAST enterprise search.
http://www.microsoft.com/enterprisesearch
I would agree that if we were still using Windows 9x or DOS that an OS is a commodity. But OSes like Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 are NOT commodities due the functionality and scenarios they enable.
For example:
- Would you consider a Cisco VPN Appliance a commodity?
- Would you consider Branch Office management tools a commodity
- Would you consider modern group policies that let you set USB device access for flash drives and storage, a commodity?
- Is Windows XP gonna run in your environment until 2014?
These scenarios cost REAL money. Microsoft's value proposition is that use one product and save on the complexity of managing multiple solutions. Every OS update has enabled new scenarios for businesses. What are niche scenarios now will likely be made mainstream by the next OS release. This is the value.
There are many other ways to legitimately rationalize OS upgrades. Those who have the most problems in IT are the ones who are not aligned with the business needs.
This is rudimentary analysis of where actual IT costs exist and what the role of IT is.
If you believe the role of IT is to provide a service to the end-users of the organizations and to enable cost-effective business productivity, then it absolutely makes sense to consider OS upgrades that have the features of Windows 7.
Features like DirectAccess can eliminate the maintenance and software costs associated with VPN . Bitlocker encryption eliminates the need to purchase 3rd party encryption software for compliance and security. BranchCache in tandem with Windows Server 2008 can significantly reduce broadband expenditures while improving overall levels of service. It can also eliminate the need to purchase costly WAN acceleration appliances which are very costly.
There are also less tangible benefits namely the fact that most schools and university will have student on either Vista or Windows 7. This is not opinion, it is fact. Is it realistic for businesses to ignore that new generation of workers will be left to use software that was created when they were only 12?
If you are a mid to large business with a sophisticated employee base and cannot find value in Windows 7 than I really question your competency as a modern IT manager. Now if you're in a position where you are constantly firefighting and battle system uptime, then you probably won't be employed for many more years. Jobs like that will be eliminated by advances in datacenter/cloud computing/outsourcing.
this is not true. All you have to do is visit dell.com or walmart to see that there will be dozens of machines in the sub-$700 price range that run Windows 7 exceptionally well. Last time I checked, the average user just doesn't spend $1000 on a desktop, and great laptops can be purchased for around $500.
If you are building your own machine, then opt for an OEM license rather than RETAIL and only go Professional if you need it. Most home-users will not need it.
This is really a disingenuous rebuttal.
Most users would get Windows 7 Home Premium with their computer which is heavily discounted since its an OEM version. Those who have existing RETAIL Windows licenses can simply get "Upgrade" versions and shift license to new machine. If you are upgrading an OEM license, that just make sure you're computer has a decent harddrive and 2GB RAM. A Pentium 4 or any dual-core machine will give great performance.
If you goto http://pricewatch.com/software_oper_system/
you will clearly see that Windows 7 home premium can be ordered for as little as $99 and professional for $139.
Regarding Nehalem, you will find that Windows 7 runs FANTASTIC, not good, on Pentium Dual Core E5200 or even CULV Core 2 Duo at 1.4ghz. You don't need an i5/i7 chip to have a top experience. I am using a Lenovo T61p that has a T9300 Core2Duo.
As far as Office, most home users will be fine using the "Home and Student" edition that is usually available for about $100. But even if you don't want to pay for Microsoft Office, Microsoft is releasing an Ad-supported version of Office for FREE! Worse-case scenario, there is always OpenOffice.
Almost any $500 laptop or $400 desktop will run Windows 7 extremely well. Just make sure that the minimum graphics processor is Intel 4500.
this is not true. Volume licensing can be done with as few as 5 machine. See my earlier slashdot comment.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1271001&cid=28356409
actually this is a really poorly written article full of gross errors.
Volume Licensing(VL) is not the same as Software Assurance (SA).
OEM licenses die with a machine. VLs can be moved and reused as long as the new machine came with an OEM license. Think of VLs as a way to upgrade a limited and discounted OEM license.
VL customers can definitely use XP. Most enterprises have VL agreements in place. Those that don't should probably sack their IT department or switch to Linux.
Software Assurance which may or may not be included with a specific VL plan has numerous benefits including getting new versions of the software without paying anything extra i.e. you buy Vista VLs now with SA; when Win7 comes out, you get the upgrade to Win7 at no cost.
VLs can be outright purchases paid in full or you can "lease" the software as a subscription. Subscriptions are advantageous as you do not pay the full price of the software and it provides your IT and Finance department a consistent way to account for IT costs (think operational expenses vs. capital expenses).
Finally it a misconception that VLs are only good for large customers. VLs can be purchased for organizations with as little as 5 computers.
Comprehensive info on VL is here:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/default.aspx#tab_2
Here is a link to small business information:
http://www.microsoft.com/smallbusiness/buy/software/buy-software.aspx#waystobuy
Here is a link outlining Software Assurance Benefits (download the SA benefits chart PDF):
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/software-assurance/default.aspx#tab_2
Here is a fine print detail for specific technology licensing.
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/about-licensing/volume-licensing-briefs.aspx
My suggestion is you consider Microsoft's Open agreements.
If you have any questions, email me via my blog:
http://blogs.technet.com/tarpara
I should correct myself, Search Server 2008 Express scales upto 400,000 documents not 1,000,000 primarily due to 4GB limitation with SQL Server 2005 Express. If you have SQL 2008 Express, I'd have to check the scaling.
One of the big benefits with Microsoft is the ability for granular search tuning. Enterprise Search is a very different from internet search and having access to the search algorithm is key to get better results. Below is a partner who deals with GSA and SharePoint/Search Server.
http://www.nonlinearcreations.com/blog/index.php/2008/06/30/google-search-appliance-and-microsoft-search-side-by-side/
If you want my powerpoint presentation on Search Server 2008, please visit:
http://www.slideshare.net/ukdpe/microsoft-search-server-2008-technical-overview
Google them? http://www.google.com/enterprise/search/gsa.html
Try Search Server 2008 Express from Microsoft. Although it has no hard limits, it can index upto a 1 million documents before you have to scale out. Best of all it is free!
If you need high availability, redundancy, fail-over or more document support, look at the standard version of the product or consider SharePoint 2007/2010 or FAST.
http://www.microsoft.com/enterprisesearch/en/us/search-server-express.aspx#none
msg me, if you have questions, I work at Microsoft.
Please reference cbrocious where he says "The DLR and IronRuby are released under the MS-PL which is OSI-approved." MS-PL is essentially like the BSD license meaning even if Microsoft stops supporting IronRuby, the community can continue development just like it does with most open-source projects.
I'm no lawyer but the license is royalty-free, world-wide, and non-exclusive, and seems to be irrevocable based on section 3D.
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/licensingbasics/publiclicense.mspx
MS-Public License:
1. Definitions
The terms âoereproduce,â âoereproduction,â âoederivative works,â and âoedistributionâ have the same meaning here as under U.S. copyright law.
A âoecontributionâ is the original software, or any additions or changes to the software.
A âoecontributorâ is any person that distributes its contribution under this license.
âoeLicensed patentsâ are a contributorâ(TM)s patent claims that read directly on its contribution.
2. Grant of Rights
(A) Copyright Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to reproduce its contribution, prepare derivative works of its contribution, and distribute its contribution or any derivative works that you create.
(B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license under its licensed patents to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import, and/or otherwise dispose of its contribution in the software or derivative works of the contribution in the software.
Top of page
3. Conditions and Limitations
(A) No Trademark License- This license does not grant you rights to use any contributorsâ(TM) name, logo, or trademarks.
(B) If you bring a patent claim against any contributor over patents that you claim are infringed by the software, your patent license from such contributor to the software ends automatically.
(C) If you distribute any portion of the software, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices that are present in the software.
(D) If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this license.
(E) The software is licensed âoeas-is.â You bear the risk of using it. The contributors give no express warranties, guarantees or conditions. You may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which this license cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws, the contributors exclude the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.
sorry i meant "National" not "Nation"
umm...the UK NHS or Nation Health Service which also happens to be the largest employer in the WORLD uses SharePoint internally as well as for their public facing website infrastructure. I think it looks good. I agree, out of the box, SharePoint needs better templates.
http://www.nhs.uk/
Richard Stallman's quote: "The Two years ago, a thorough study found that the kernel Linux infringed 283 different software patents, and that's just in the US. Of course, by now the number is probably different and might be higher." http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3/tokyo-rms- transcript.en.html#patents
People should not read too much into this. To quote Gartner,
r ief.mspx). Users buying PCs preloaded with
s ta_oem_downgrade_rights_w_145950.pdf
"On 17 January 2007, Microsoft published a bulletin outlining downgrade rights for Windows Vista
original equipment manufacturer (OEM) editions (see the Downgrade Rights Chart at
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/resources/volb
OEM versions of Windows Vista Business or Windows Vista Ultimate may downgrade their PCs
to Windows XP Professional only."
Check out the full Gartner report here: http://www.gartner.com/resources/145900/145950/vi
This should suffice for 90% of the downgrade requests. Any more esoteric reasons can probably be handled on a case by case basis with Microsoft's Customer Support. The only big change with downgrade rights is that Vista will not allow you to downgrade to anything below XP, i.e Windows 2000.
Instead of caring what other people think, why not just find out and explore yourself with their free test drive.
8 7261033.aspx
r /FX100492001033.aspx
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/HA1016
It doesn't have save or print functions, but we all know how they work.
It took me about 8 hours over the course of a week to feel comfortable with the new layout. For Excel and Powerpoint users, its a HUGE productivity improvement in terms of quality and automation. "Live preview" alone would save most companies a chunk of their licensing costs. Honestly people waste a lot of time creating the look of the document in terms of fonts,colors, and style. Multiply that with the number of documents you do that with for the whole year. You save days!
Additionally, for businesses, if you still think office as a desktop productivity suite, its much more now. It's really one of the best collaboration and development platforms available for your business. You just need to leverage it and understand how you can deploy it as such. Use Sharepoint Server to extend office to your backend.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepointserve
In the end it comes down to solving a business need rather than playing features games. I know a few companies who did a pilot for OpenOffice, loved it at first, didn't like the performance, and for them, that was more important.
You are 100% on the money with your point. Intel is currently scared to death of paradigm changing technology like CELL and with all 3 major consoles switching to a POWER cpu derivative we are seeing that Intel's only reason for dominance is its hold on the x86 market. Even though their flash, chipsets, mobile, and complimentary platform startegy is very comprehensive and on sound footing, the last thing they want is for the GPU to become the primary dictator for performance improvements. At present the best GPUs are CPU limited, and with 12-18 month product lifecycles, it is going too slow for certain industries. The advent of GPGPU and libraries like GPUFFTW, people are realizing performance boosts that beat Moore's Law. Merom is going to be very competative with AMD's roadmap for the next few years, but if AMD wants to come out way over Intel, integrating certain GPU functions into CPU will give AMD a huge edge(understatement). Additionally this type of combination can be compounded in terms of peformance if we factor in dual-core and multi-core CPUs in the next few years. The whole reason CELL was invented was so that PS3 could overcome Moore's law, the performance just wasn't there in the timeframe needed. Perhaps AMD-ATI could be an alternative since we all know that CELL is not nearly mature enough for general purpose computing due to the lack of an efficient software development tools.
/ 29/1424213
I can't really say why ATI instead of Nvidia though, my guess would be Nvidia is too big and overlapping with its acquisition of ULi. Another possibility is that ATI's solutions are more low-power in design. If you've noticed, Nvidia solutions have been power hungry since they started using Voodoo technology.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05
http://www.gpgpu.org/
He said "dick" on crossfire.....that was awesome.
Being an apple employee for a year and building PCs since i was 12 (22 now), I'm buying my first powerbook. I was gonna spend money on the highend powerbooks but decided to save and get an ibook, cause you DON'T buy an apple for games. You buy one so you have a computer that you don't have to reformat every year and one that allows you to do cool stuff that applies to everyday life (iLife stuff). Being in College, I kinda stopped playing games. I bought Warcraft 3(PC) but only played 30 games online so far to date...as opposed to the thousands of Starcraft games played in high school.
The point it, its pretty stupid to buy, build, or upgrade a computer for any game especially when the gaming industry is the XBox's bitch. Speaking as an EE major, the IBM 970FX totally has enough power to process Doom3, however, OpenGL, MAC OS X, and optimizations kinda suck in current climate for the gaming industry (mostly Apple's own fault too). GAMES LOOK LIKE CRAP OF MAC COMPARED TO the same level PC. I found that the solution is to build a sub $500 PC or get an XBOX, Xbox being the better alternative.
Right now I spend a total or $250 bucks and have a modded Xbox, 100s of NES games running thru emulators, SNES games, and SEGA Genesis games, PSX games, and a bunch of "backups" on a 180GB harddrive i added to the unit. On top of that, its in my living room connected to a nice TV and sound system.
Did anyone stop to think that Doom3 will probably look just as good on the Xbox even though the system specs of that box is really low compared to modern PCs? Given it wont have soft shadows and one DX9 feature that they implemented in Doom3, but im sure it'll be way more fun to play it in the living room than on the AVERAGE PC OWNER's computer Desk.
Thought i'd throw my 2cents. Oh and for all you idiots like Chris Tom out there, get an Electrical Engineering degree before you talk about CPUs, ISAs, pipelines, ALUs, cache arrangements, Risc vs. Cisc stuff. That, or learn how an i8088 processor works. 90% percent of the flames on the internet are due to people who simply read Slashdot and Tomshardware guide and think they can do comparisons between different technolgies in computing, its way above you so, don't even waste your time.
Yeah ure right, the dvd100i is crap, but then again its first gen. the 200i is must better and that's what we use in our post-production house. Also 4x DVD+RW are planned for the end of this year. 15min DVDs will be nice.
My mistake, i was under the assumption that Slashdot readers were tech savvy commentors that don't like to conform to the grammatical standardz of dumbed down societys and instead prefer like so many casual internet users, to use shortcuts. My bad, ASSHOLES LET THE FLAMING BEGIN.
If you look from a technological standpoint, DVD+RW is clearly superior cause it was designed from the ground up to MAINTAIN compatibility with existing recorders at FULL SPEC. This is key because where + was built with compatibility in mind, this is not the case with -. With - recording times are limited because of the non standard "video recording mode" and also the lack of mpeg-2 VBR recording. Thats right only CBR with -. Now of course this is all generally speaking. Anyone can choose the author their own dvds using complicated software like Scenarist and perhaps get a nice VBR recording on -, but that fact is we cant simply view this issue from the geek or power user perspective. You have to look at set top boxes, standalones, as well as the computer. In this situation, DVD+RW offers full VBR MPEG-2 recording at various rates unlike the the 2 hour compatibility mode limit of DVD-RW, plus you get on the fly editing and cut scene rewrites.
And the issue of compatibility is really a marketing scam because it really only applys to a fraction of the 1st-Generation DVD players. You all can get NEW better performing players for $80US so whats the issue? Even here, DVD+RW maintains better compatibility. Just look at the supported players list.
The only negative that exists with + is that the media is just too damn expensive compared to -. But this is a temporary set back. DVD-RW has cheaper media but the problem is that ure limited to 1x recording if ure lucky 2x. DVD+RW is now a 2.5x with the new Phillips drive.
I hope this has educated the lot of you minus Pioneer Fanatic owners. Just one more this, if u did purchase a DVD-RW drive, u really didnt make a bad choice cause ure media will still work for reading, and if u are using it, then more power to ya. Plus think about the thousands of blanks that will sell DIRT CHEAP if DVD-RW standard dies.
FOR MORE INFO CHEK OUT WWW.DVDPLUSRW.ORG
PLZ REPLY FOR COMMENTS, I ENCOURAGE THEM