People pointing out the problems with hyped products is extremely useful.
The problem is the people pointing out problems seem to refuse to accept that other people are capable of comprehending those problems. A minority of people are complaining about limitations those of us who are interested in the product either doesn't see as a limitation, or limitations that are outweighed by other benefits of the product.
I don't need another device for doing "content creation". I already have one of those I use when I'm at work. When I'm at home or traveling, I want something light I can use to keep in touch with people and entertain myself; I'd rather carry an iPad than a 7 lb laptop. Even at the office, my laptop is tethered to my desk all day, and it's something of a pain to undock it, reset all the open network sessions, and fire up the VPN just to take it into a meeting. With an iPad, I still have a way to check email, read PDFs, and interact with our internal engineering wiki without disturbing my laptop.
My mother doesn't do content creation. She emails her kids, plays light games, and bugs us on Facebook. I'd much rather give her an iPad and force her into Apple's walled garden where she's guaranteed some minimal level of protection from malware than spend another weekend cleaning shit off her Windows laptop because some friend of hers sent her some crappy game with a bunch of spyware inside.
NT 3.51 through 4.0 ran on PowerPC for a short while.
Re:iNough!
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If 1 1/2 lbs is too heavy for the iPad, the JooJoo is going to feel like a lead brick at 2 1/2.
Re:Location without GPS
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
GPS doesn't require the cell phone network, but on the iPhone OS devices, the GPS receiver is integrated into the GSM chipset. Only devices with 3G therefore have one, but GPS works even if the cell network is unavailable.
but until or unless Apple moves out of the hardware business, I just don't see Enterprise level adoption.. Small business perhaps (and as pointed out, it's a big market and one that might benefit more from an 'appliance' model). But if you have to buy an X-serve (and pretty much a single configuration at present) to play you aren't going to get much space in the datacenter.
Just like how I have to buy an IBM box if I want to run AIX or AS/400, a Sun box if I want to run Solaris/SPARC, or a HP box if I want to run HP-UX?
Integrated operating systems and hardware are more common in the datacenter than you think.
Microsoft will offer Mainstream Support for either a minimum of 5 years from the date of a productâ(TM)s general availability, or for 2 years after the successor product (N+1) is released, whichever is longer.
Windows 2k went GA 3/31/2000, and XP went GA 12/31/2001, which means 2k went out of support on 3/31/2005. It's not really Apple's fault that they dropped support for an OS that Microsoft stopped supporting over 3 years ago.
First of all SAN's by inherent design have the ability to aggregate data across multiple ISL's (trunks) in real-time. If you have 2 pipes between switches your I/O's will be evenly distributed across the links adjusting in real time as needed to fully utilize both links. Need more bandwith? Simply plug in another ISL, done.
An FCoE deployment is going to be as local as an FC SAN. You aren't going to do IP routing, you're just doing local ethernet frame switching. There's no IP involved.
Imagine your current FC network today, and replace all the switches and cables with Ethernet.
doing raw ethernet would only ever work in the most local of LAN applications which is rather pointless in most deployments
Which is exactly the deployment FCoE and several upcoming ethernet uses are aimed at.
A handful of SAN boxes serving FCoE on the same segment as the servers they're serving. Basically the same way you provision FC today. The storage and servers are extremely local, and there's no reason to stuff IP in the middle when it will never be routed.
If you want less performance but the ability to route it over an IP network, use iSCSI.
At least in my lab, most of those things get plugged directly into a serial concentrator accessed over the network before they're ever turned on.
I have a $5 USB -> RS232 adapter in my desk drawer for the odd occasion I need it. There's no reason to bulk up the ports on my laptop with a serial port.
They just announced TWO yesterday.. One for bad batteries in first-gen iPod nanos that stopped being sold in December 2006, and one for MagSafe adapters with bad connectors on the end.
The license I choose as an author is binding on everyone else, not me. It's my code, I still own the original copyright, and I can do whatever the hell I want.
There's nothing stopping me from releasing it under the GPL with an exception addendum to account for the iPhone code signing requirements. So if you modify my app and distribute it, you still have to comply with the GPL except for distributing a code signing key to make it work on real hardware.
The POWER5 chips IBM uses in it's pSeries hardware aren't G5 chips. They're still the PowerPC instruction set, but they're distant cousins to the G5s that Apple used to use. And PowerPC wasn't 64 bit from the start, only the G5s are 64 bit. The G4 and below are all 32 bit chips.
In the US, I'm paying my carrier extra via the incoming call charges for the convenience of letting anyone I give my number to reach me, no matter where I am. If I didn't want to pay for that extra flexibility, I'd just let you call my landline where it's free. Even then, a lot of my calls are free since I'm calling other mobile numbers on the same carrier, which are free from most carriers. They only really charge calls that terminate off their network.
In the European model, you're paying more to connect to my cell phone than if that call terminated at my landline, since you want the convenience of reaching me, no matter where I am. If you didn't care, you'd just call my landline and pay a lower tariff.
At the end of the month the net result is about the same, particularly if a high percentage of calls is mobile to mobile. It's just shifting who gets billed when around a bit.
In poker, there is no house. If you're playing online or at a casino, there's still a house. It's just instead of having a few percent advantage in the odds like all other table games, the house rakes a couple percent of each winning pot.
Wrong. Half the point of having a jury of peers instead of government officials is to add another check to the system if the jury feels the law itself is a just one.
Except they don't do it for iPods. Each new "generation" of the iPod has run a different firmware *and* had different capabilities, like being able to search. The older iPods never got the functionality of the newer ones, ever. Clickwheel iPods can't "search", nor do they get the newer iPod games, etc. This is just like digital camera manufacturers, home network gear makers, etc. Very, very, very rarely do they take advantage of the firmware updates to increase functionality in any way. Why should they, when they can make you but version N+1?
Most iPods have radically different hardware than the previous generation too. In addition, there's some accounting rules that come into play with adding functions to something you already shipped and booked the revenue for. Once I've sold you a widget, if I spend any more engineering time to add something to it, I have to find revenue that pays for that somewhere. It's not a problem with OS X, because the $129 Leopard upgrade pays for the engineering in Leopard, not the revenue they already booked and reported when I bought the Mac in the first place.
Apple stated on their last quarter conference call they're changing the way they book AppleTV and iPhone revenues to spread it out over 8 quarters, so they don't have that problem. Even though they get $600 today for an iPhone sold, they don't actually put the whole thing in the books right away as recognized revenue, they apply it over the next two years to ongoing engineering for existing units. Exactly what they'll do with that ability remains to be seen, but they've at least publicly stated their intent to improve the platform for early adopters.
Slashdot Mirror
People pointing out the problems with hyped products is extremely useful.
The problem is the people pointing out problems seem to refuse to accept that other people are capable of comprehending those problems. A minority of people are complaining about limitations those of us who are interested in the product either doesn't see as a limitation, or limitations that are outweighed by other benefits of the product.
I don't need another device for doing "content creation". I already have one of those I use when I'm at work. When I'm at home or traveling, I want something light I can use to keep in touch with people and entertain myself; I'd rather carry an iPad than a 7 lb laptop. Even at the office, my laptop is tethered to my desk all day, and it's something of a pain to undock it, reset all the open network sessions, and fire up the VPN just to take it into a meeting. With an iPad, I still have a way to check email, read PDFs, and interact with our internal engineering wiki without disturbing my laptop.
My mother doesn't do content creation. She emails her kids, plays light games, and bugs us on Facebook. I'd much rather give her an iPad and force her into Apple's walled garden where she's guaranteed some minimal level of protection from malware than spend another weekend cleaning shit off her Windows laptop because some friend of hers sent her some crappy game with a bunch of spyware inside.
[Citation needed]
NT 3.51 through 4.0 ran on PowerPC for a short while.
If 1 1/2 lbs is too heavy for the iPad, the JooJoo is going to feel like a lead brick at 2 1/2.
GPS doesn't require the cell phone network, but on the iPhone OS devices, the GPS receiver is integrated into the GSM chipset. Only devices with 3G therefore have one, but GPS works even if the cell network is unavailable.
Considering Leopard on Intel is UNIX certified, the latest version of OS X is as much Unix as AIX, Irix, or Solaris is.
but until or unless Apple moves out of the hardware business, I just don't see Enterprise level adoption.. Small business perhaps (and as pointed out, it's a big market and one that might benefit more from an 'appliance' model). But if you have to buy an X-serve (and pretty much a single configuration at present) to play you aren't going to get much space in the datacenter.
Just like how I have to buy an IBM box if I want to run AIX or AS/400, a Sun box if I want to run Solaris/SPARC, or a HP box if I want to run HP-UX?
Integrated operating systems and hardware are more common in the datacenter than you think.
The Apple Airport Express and Airport Extreme routers support IPv6, although there's a bug in the latest firmware for doing configured tunnels.
Microsoft will offer Mainstream Support for either a minimum of 5 years from the date of a productâ(TM)s general availability, or for 2 years after the successor product (N+1) is released, whichever is longer.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/default.mspx
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifepolicy
Windows 2k went GA 3/31/2000, and XP went GA 12/31/2001, which means 2k went out of support on 3/31/2005. It's not really Apple's fault that they dropped support for an OS that Microsoft stopped supporting over 3 years ago.
There's still people with 3 digit UIDs around?
I thought they were just the stuff of legends these days.
This is like blowing the engine in a Ford and electing to put a Chevy engine in to replace it.
While still driving down the highway at 60 mph.
First of all SAN's by inherent design have the ability to aggregate data across multiple ISL's (trunks) in real-time. If you have 2 pipes between switches your I/O's will be evenly distributed across the links adjusting in real time as needed to fully utilize both links. Need more bandwith? Simply plug in another ISL, done.
So does Ethernet: EtherChannel.
An FCoE deployment is going to be as local as an FC SAN. You aren't going to do IP routing, you're just doing local ethernet frame switching. There's no IP involved.
Imagine your current FC network today, and replace all the switches and cables with Ethernet.
doing raw ethernet would only ever work in the most local of LAN applications which is rather pointless in most deployments
Which is exactly the deployment FCoE and several upcoming ethernet uses are aimed at.
A handful of SAN boxes serving FCoE on the same segment as the servers they're serving. Basically the same way you provision FC today. The storage and servers are extremely local, and there's no reason to stuff IP in the middle when it will never be routed.
If you want less performance but the ability to route it over an IP network, use iSCSI.
At least in my lab, most of those things get plugged directly into a serial concentrator accessed over the network before they're ever turned on.
I have a $5 USB -> RS232 adapter in my desk drawer for the odd occasion I need it. There's no reason to bulk up the ports on my laptop with a serial port.
Sorry, I'm new here.
Never?
They just announced TWO yesterday.. One for bad batteries in first-gen iPod nanos that stopped being sold in December 2006, and one for MagSafe adapters with bad connectors on the end.
Second, those kind of cheap shots are the things which start flame wars, I'm not sure how it deserves to be in TFS.
Flame wars drive page & ad views. A cheap shot like that is the primary purpose of TFS.
The license I choose as an author is binding on everyone else, not me. It's my code, I still own the original copyright, and I can do whatever the hell I want.
There's nothing stopping me from releasing it under the GPL with an exception addendum to account for the iPhone code signing requirements. So if you modify my app and distribute it, you still have to comply with the GPL except for distributing a code signing key to make it work on real hardware.
The point isn't to make it unbreakable.
It's to make it enough of a pain in the ass that those who manage it realize they're wading into unsupported waters.
The POWER5 chips IBM uses in it's pSeries hardware aren't G5 chips. They're still the PowerPC instruction set, but they're distant cousins to the G5s that Apple used to use. And PowerPC wasn't 64 bit from the start, only the G5s are 64 bit. The G4 and below are all 32 bit chips.
In the US, I'm paying my carrier extra via the incoming call charges for the convenience of letting anyone I give my number to reach me, no matter where I am. If I didn't want to pay for that extra flexibility, I'd just let you call my landline where it's free. Even then, a lot of my calls are free since I'm calling other mobile numbers on the same carrier, which are free from most carriers. They only really charge calls that terminate off their network.
In the European model, you're paying more to connect to my cell phone than if that call terminated at my landline, since you want the convenience of reaching me, no matter where I am. If you didn't care, you'd just call my landline and pay a lower tariff.
At the end of the month the net result is about the same, particularly if a high percentage of calls is mobile to mobile. It's just shifting who gets billed when around a bit.
Wrong. Half the point of having a jury of peers instead of government officials is to add another check to the system if the jury feels the law itself is a just one.
All the exemption does is say Apple can't take you to court on a DMCA violation if you mod your phone.
It doesn't say they can't make it as difficult as they want on you to mod it in the first place.
Except they don't do it for iPods. Each new "generation" of the iPod has run a different firmware *and* had different capabilities, like being able to search. The older iPods never got the functionality of the newer ones, ever. Clickwheel iPods can't "search", nor do they get the newer iPod games, etc. This is just like digital camera manufacturers, home network gear makers, etc. Very, very, very rarely do they take advantage of the firmware updates to increase functionality in any way. Why should they, when they can make you but version N+1?
Most iPods have radically different hardware than the previous generation too. In addition, there's some accounting rules that come into play with adding functions to something you already shipped and booked the revenue for. Once I've sold you a widget, if I spend any more engineering time to add something to it, I have to find revenue that pays for that somewhere. It's not a problem with OS X, because the $129 Leopard upgrade pays for the engineering in Leopard, not the revenue they already booked and reported when I bought the Mac in the first place.Apple stated on their last quarter conference call they're changing the way they book AppleTV and iPhone revenues to spread it out over 8 quarters, so they don't have that problem. Even though they get $600 today for an iPhone sold, they don't actually put the whole thing in the books right away as recognized revenue, they apply it over the next two years to ongoing engineering for existing units. Exactly what they'll do with that ability remains to be seen, but they've at least publicly stated their intent to improve the platform for early adopters.