1) Your speed limitation will be either the network or USB connection. It doesn't really matter how fast the drives are, they will be faster than your connection (for transfer speed). Speed would only matter if it were connected internally on a much faster bus (like SATA, or SCSI), or externally with a much faster connection such as iSCSI or eSATA.
2) Extra RAM will do nothing for performance. See #1. And, as with internal RAID cards, using extra RAM on the controller is *MUCH* less effective than adding more RAM in the server, itself. Then the cache is as close to the applications as possible.
3) Hopefully the RAID (not the drives) it uses won't fail on you, because if it does, all your data will be lost if it corrupts the array. And if it doesn't corrupt the array, it still may be lost if you can't find an EXACT replacement for the NAS.
There are lots of articles and talk about it surfacing in one government after another. And in some, it seems to get watered down to meaninglessness or removed completely (no doubt after behind-the-scenes pressure and corruption). So I have tended to ignore a lot of it. But this one might be firm. Still, having to wait an entire year, will it stick? A year from now, will it really happen there? Has the domino effect started?
That is a complicated question, of which no answer I give here will do it justice. We have always been *ix based, since we have had automation... long before MS-Windows existed. So we have a lot of experience and investment in that environment. We never jumped ship when many others did, and have been awaiting a re-awakening.
The move from UNIX to Linux was easy and logical. We save lots of money compared to both UNIX and MS-Windows installations. Coupled with thin clients, our security and relability are also high, and system maintenance is easier. Upgrade cycles are much slower, too. There are tremendous advantages to such a design. What hurts is when commercial software companies start developing to a single platform only, MS-Windows. It hurts competition, system diversity, freedom, flexibility, and innovation.
So how long can we "hang on" to the past, trying to make a nice present, and hoping for a better future? Hard to say. We take it day-by-day. I don't expect FOSS to address all our problems, and we are perfectly willing to spend money on commercial software and support. But vendors shouldn't force thier single, narrow view of IT down everyones' throats; expecting everyone to use MS-Windows and IE.
95% of our entire facility is Linux based, both server and client (we are long-term, not acute). It is not easy to do, though. Vendors make it incredibly (and unnecessarily) difficult.
So... no, we are not "running MS-Windows anyway". Thus, trying to view an MS-Windows/IE-Only web application is a royal pain in the *ss. I don't really care about the iSite backend- since it is something we won't have to deal with or maintain (or even host- we will use someone else's iSite). But the iSite front end, no matter how intuitive or well designed, still has a major design failure if it ties EVERY user to a single browser/OS.
Nothing is more annoying both on the road *AND IN MY HOUSE WITH MY WINDOWS CLOSED* than to be subjected to mega bass coming from vehicles. It is a terrible invasion of my personal space. Just a single such car can annoy literally hundreds of people every single day, and there are probably many hundreds in any city of any size.
Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a way to fry such systems without damaging the rest of the car? Hey- they are assulting us with waves, we would just be sending some back their way...
simpledog.com isn't even a real website or business operating anything dog related. It is yet another one of those fake, front-end search sites.
If I were you, I would just ignore them or send them a "get lost" type letter. Or better yet, send them a letter that LOOKS like a real response, but is titled "legal response to your letter (legalresponses.com)" and then lists:
Click here for legal aid Click here for legal forms Click here for responses Click here for more info about letters Click here for improve your writing skills Click here for related searches about legalresponses (c) 2007 legalresponses.com . . . about us
Microsoft said it believes individuals, governments and other organizations should be free to choose the software and other technologies that best meet their needs.
As long as that "free to choose" doesn't include buying a comptuer at local retailers with Linux or no OS.
So, other than Novell, many of the "tiny" Linuxes (those with the least user base), seem interested in trying to attach their wagons to the Microsoft train.
I, for one, am not all THAT surprised, but neither all that concerned, either. The message from the other LARGER Linux distros like Redhat, Canonical, and Mandriva, have all have a clear message: ***NO*** If one of those were to fall for it, I would be VERY concerned.
Show us the infringing patents, Microsoft.... we are still waiting...
"Here I am, as asked. I'm not going to lie to you or try to make my ideals look appealing. I won't dress up the message or myself to try to divert your attention from the downsides of the issue.
By down-dressing below the level of just about anyone who would speak at a college, he *IS* diverting people's attention to what he is or isn't wearing.
I don't think he should need to wear a suit. Or even a tie.
But many people would take him a bit more seriously if at least he wore shoes and a decent (collared) shirt and groomed himself a tad better. A decent polo shirt ($20) and a pair of tennis shoes ($20) wouldn't kill him.
It isn't fair or "right" that most people judge other people by what they wear or how they look or based on what accent they have. But the reality is: MOST DO. So, if your object is to try and get people to listen to what you have to say, it would help to look like you should be taken seriously.
So, while I agree with most (certainly not all) of what RMS has to say, he can be somewhat embarassing to the whole idea of Free and Open software. The media will focus on the antics and the message is lost or just dismissed as ramblings from some hippie.
They won't NEED speed traps anymore. Now that you have volunteered to give your position and speed information via GPS to the authorities by broadcasting it all the time, "your ticket is in the mail" from *ANYWHERE*.
No thanks. There is enough monitoring of citizens' activities and controlling what we are "allowed" to do, already.
Don't get me wrong, I love most of OpenOffice and promote it fiercely. But load time on older machines is still an issue. And it just uses too much RAM and CPU on much of what it does. And although it very rarely crashes, it still has lots of misc bugs and malfunctions. Base needs a LOT of work, too... some reporting functions can suck 100% of the CPU for long times, which is just not acceptable.
My main point is that there is enough to keep hundreds of developers busy for years, just fixing, improving, and documenting what is there, without adding in the kitchen sink.
Apparently the OpenOffice team is not listening to what users want. Most of us don't want a "bundled" Email client to add to the bloat.... we already choose the Email client we want to use. I don't want an IM client, web browser, or music player bundled into it either!!!
This is what they should be concentrating on:
1) Faster. Fast loading, faster opening documents, faster saving documents, faster menu response. 2) Smaller. Higher efficiency. Smaller downloads. 3) More stable. Better code. Less crashing. 4) More compatible. With more types of files (for example, docx, wp, svg) 5) Better documented. End user docs, help, and developer docs.
That only works for mail order. Not retail. Ideally, a "solution" would work for all companies and all buying models. So far that would be pre-installation of several choices without activation/cost, or inclusion but not installed choices without activation/cost.
Oh please. Firefox has shown us that a good alternative will indeed make headway, regardless of what is bundled.
Imagine what type of alternatives would have/could have been available if choice were enhanced further. For every Firefox example you can find, one can find dozens (perhaps hundreds) of examples of very good software that has failed because of MS's monopolistic control.
The fact is, Linux just isn't good enough yet.
1) This isn't a Linux issue. It is a bundling issue.
2) There are many other non-MS-Windows OS's.
3) That it is not "good enough" is your opinion, not a fact. It is apparently good enough for many millions of existing users.
Semantics. Who cares... everyone knows what is meant. MS is a monopoly. They have lost several court cases brought against them by governments and private companies due to their abuse of monopolisic power. Lack of competition and freedom have hurt innovation, removed effective consumer choice, fostered multi-prong lock-in, increased overall prices, and destroyed many other interesting companies (ones that could have otherwise succeeded).
Slapping tiny fines on Microsoft each time is a complete waste of time. Unbundling would be one of the few effective measures to keep MS in check.
Of course unbundling doesn't instantly change the percentage of MS-Windows on the desktop. What it does is foster competition and help provent monopolistic control, allowing that percentage to change based on informed (they now know the costs), consumer choice. And THAT is absolutely pro-consumer.
That would not work for retail. Not at all. That would only be effective for mail order.
Besides, in such a case, the OEM could easily preload several ready-to-go, auto-install images on the hard drive. Turn the machine on and the customer has the choice to install what they want.
As much as people are trying to make this a LINUX issue, it isn't. The unbundling of MS-Windows has to stop, and not *JUST* because some people want to run Linux. X86 machines support many more OS's than just Linux or brand-new MS-Windows. BSD, Solaris, BeOS, maybe even MacOS one day, as well as older MS-Windows or already purchased MS-Windows.
There won't BE any real competition until the bundling is broken and consumers can make an ACTIVE choice without being penalized or relegated to a few specific models.
But the truth is: people don't want to do backflips for an operating system
But it doesn't *have* to be difficult. The OEM could preinstall MS-Windows and have it already configured and ready to go, just unlicensed. All you would need is an activation code from MS or a SEPARATE retailer. Not much more effort that a user is already required to perform in order to "register" their MS-Windows, now. But unbundling would have the effect that:
1) MS Windows would no longer be a tax.
2) Users would have the freedom to install an older MS-Windows or some other OS without paying yet again.
3) Consumers will *SEE* the price of the OS, which is an important part for fostering competition.
4) OEM's would not have to maintain "separate" versions of identical computers (hardware)- some with MS-Windows, some without.
5) OEM's could not force a premium on non-MS-Windows machines.
I guarantee that the unbundling of Windows from PCs in the EU will have no effect on Microsoft's sales just because people will use what they are comfortable with.
I think you would be surprised. Once consumers started seeing the prices separately and being forced to make active decisions, the alternatives will start to gain more and more popularity.
The problem is that the article singles out Microsoft as the only one that should be unbundled.
Apple should have to sell computers without an OS too.
Also where do you start to draw the line with computers, pdas, cellphones as the lines start to blur?
There is a very simple answer to your question. You draw the line when a company becomes a convicted monopoly (like Microsoft is, in this case). If Apple had 90% of the market and had hardware that supported competing OS's, and was ruled a monopoly, then sure- they should be forced to unbundle, too.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Your speed limitation will be either the network or USB connection. It doesn't really matter how fast the drives are, they will be faster than your connection (for transfer speed). Speed would only matter if it were connected internally on a much faster bus (like SATA, or SCSI), or externally with a much faster connection such as iSCSI or eSATA.
2) Extra RAM will do nothing for performance. See #1. And, as with internal RAID cards, using extra RAM on the controller is *MUCH* less effective than adding more RAM in the server, itself. Then the cache is as close to the applications as possible.
3) Hopefully the RAID (not the drives) it uses won't fail on you, because if it does, all your data will be lost if it corrupts the array. And if it doesn't corrupt the array, it still may be lost if you can't find an EXACT replacement for the NAS.
There are lots of articles and talk about it surfacing in one government after another. And in some, it seems to get watered down to meaninglessness or removed completely (no doubt after behind-the-scenes pressure and corruption). So I have tended to ignore a lot of it. But this one might be firm. Still, having to wait an entire year, will it stick? A year from now, will it really happen there? Has the domino effect started?
That is a complicated question, of which no answer I give here will do it justice. We have always been *ix based, since we have had automation... long before MS-Windows existed. So we have a lot of experience and investment in that environment. We never jumped ship when many others did, and have been awaiting a re-awakening.
The move from UNIX to Linux was easy and logical. We save lots of money compared to both UNIX and MS-Windows installations. Coupled with thin clients, our security and relability are also high, and system maintenance is easier. Upgrade cycles are much slower, too. There are tremendous advantages to such a design. What hurts is when commercial software companies start developing to a single platform only, MS-Windows. It hurts competition, system diversity, freedom, flexibility, and innovation.
So how long can we "hang on" to the past, trying to make a nice present, and hoping for a better future? Hard to say. We take it day-by-day. I don't expect FOSS to address all our problems, and we are perfectly willing to spend money on commercial software and support. But vendors shouldn't force thier single, narrow view of IT down everyones' throats; expecting everyone to use MS-Windows and IE.
95% of our entire facility is Linux based, both server and client (we are long-term, not acute). It is not easy to do, though. Vendors make it incredibly (and unnecessarily) difficult.
So... no, we are not "running MS-Windows anyway". Thus, trying to view an MS-Windows/IE-Only web application is a royal pain in the *ss. I don't really care about the iSite backend- since it is something we won't have to deal with or maintain (or even host- we will use someone else's iSite). But the iSite front end, no matter how intuitive or well designed, still has a major design failure if it ties EVERY user to a single browser/OS.
We just bought Philips/iSite equipment. Not installed yet.
Biggest complaint- don't expect to use any browser with it OTHER than MS-Windows/IE. So typical. I made sure to complain loudly.
Nothing is more annoying both on the road *AND IN MY HOUSE WITH MY WINDOWS CLOSED* than to be subjected to mega bass coming from vehicles. It is a terrible invasion of my personal space. Just a single such car can annoy literally hundreds of people every single day, and there are probably many hundreds in any city of any size.
Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a way to fry such systems without damaging the rest of the car? Hey- they are assulting us with waves, we would just be sending some back their way...
Yep, I missed that part. Sorry! That is what I get for replying to something so early in the morning.
simpledog.com isn't even a real website or business operating anything dog related. It is yet another one of those fake, front-end search sites.
If I were you, I would just ignore them or send them a "get lost" type letter. Or better yet, send them a letter that LOOKS like a real response, but is titled "legal response to your letter (legalresponses.com)" and then lists:
Click here for legal aid
Click here for legal forms
Click here for responses
Click here for more info about letters
Click here for improve your writing skills
Click here for related searches about legalresponses
(c) 2007 legalresponses.com . . . about us
So, other than Novell, many of the "tiny" Linuxes (those with the least user base), seem interested in trying to attach their wagons to the Microsoft train.
I, for one, am not all THAT surprised, but neither all that concerned, either. The message from the other LARGER Linux distros like Redhat, Canonical, and Mandriva, have all have a clear message: ***NO*** If one of those were to fall for it, I would be VERY concerned.
Show us the infringing patents, Microsoft.... we are still waiting...
I don't think he should need to wear a suit. Or even a tie.
But many people would take him a bit more seriously if at least he wore shoes and a decent (collared) shirt and groomed himself a tad better. A decent polo shirt ($20) and a pair of tennis shoes ($20) wouldn't kill him.
It isn't fair or "right" that most people judge other people by what they wear or how they look or based on what accent they have. But the reality is: MOST DO. So, if your object is to try and get people to listen to what you have to say, it would help to look like you should be taken seriously.
So, while I agree with most (certainly not all) of what RMS has to say, he can be somewhat embarassing to the whole idea of Free and Open software. The media will focus on the antics and the message is lost or just dismissed as ramblings from some hippie.
They won't NEED speed traps anymore. Now that you have volunteered to give your position and speed information via GPS to the authorities by broadcasting it all the time, "your ticket is in the mail" from *ANYWHERE*.
No thanks. There is enough monitoring of citizens' activities and controlling what we are "allowed" to do, already.
Don't get me wrong, I love most of OpenOffice and promote it fiercely. But load time on older machines is still an issue. And it just uses too much RAM and CPU on much of what it does. And although it very rarely crashes, it still has lots of misc bugs and malfunctions. Base needs a LOT of work, too... some reporting functions can suck 100% of the CPU for long times, which is just not acceptable.
My main point is that there is enough to keep hundreds of developers busy for years, just fixing, improving, and documenting what is there, without adding in the kitchen sink.
Apparently the OpenOffice team is not listening to what users want. Most of us don't want a "bundled" Email client to add to the bloat.... we already choose the Email client we want to use. I don't want an IM client, web browser, or music player bundled into it either!!!
This is what they should be concentrating on:
1) Faster. Fast loading, faster opening documents, faster saving documents, faster menu response.
2) Smaller. Higher efficiency. Smaller downloads.
3) More stable. Better code. Less crashing.
4) More compatible. With more types of files (for example, docx, wp, svg)
5) Better documented. End user docs, help, and developer docs.
That only works for mail order. Not retail. Ideally, a "solution" would work for all companies and all buying models. So far that would be pre-installation of several choices without activation/cost, or inclusion but not installed choices without activation/cost.
1) This isn't a Linux issue. It is a bundling issue.
2) There are many other non-MS-Windows OS's.
3) That it is not "good enough" is your opinion, not a fact. It is apparently good enough for many millions of existing users.
Semantics. Who cares... everyone knows what is meant. MS is a monopoly. They have lost several court cases brought against them by governments and private companies due to their abuse of monopolisic power. Lack of competition and freedom have hurt innovation, removed effective consumer choice, fostered multi-prong lock-in, increased overall prices, and destroyed many other interesting companies (ones that could have otherwise succeeded).
Slapping tiny fines on Microsoft each time is a complete waste of time. Unbundling would be one of the few effective measures to keep MS in check.
Duh!
Of course unbundling doesn't instantly change the percentage of MS-Windows on the desktop. What it does is foster competition and help provent monopolistic control, allowing that percentage to change based on informed (they now know the costs), consumer choice. And THAT is absolutely pro-consumer.
That would not work for retail. Not at all. That would only be effective for mail order.
Besides, in such a case, the OEM could easily preload several ready-to-go, auto-install images on the hard drive. Turn the machine on and the customer has the choice to install what they want.
Your comment is completely irrelevant.
As much as people are trying to make this a LINUX issue, it isn't. The unbundling of MS-Windows has to stop, and not *JUST* because some people want to run Linux. X86 machines support many more OS's than just Linux or brand-new MS-Windows. BSD, Solaris, BeOS, maybe even MacOS one day, as well as older MS-Windows or already purchased MS-Windows.
There won't BE any real competition until the bundling is broken and consumers can make an ACTIVE choice without being penalized or relegated to a few specific models.
1) MS Windows would no longer be a tax.
2) Users would have the freedom to install an older MS-Windows or some other OS without paying yet again.
3) Consumers will *SEE* the price of the OS, which is an important part for fostering competition.
4) OEM's would not have to maintain "separate" versions of identical computers (hardware)- some with MS-Windows, some without.
5) OEM's could not force a premium on non-MS-Windows machines. I think you would be surprised. Once consumers started seeing the prices separately and being forced to make active decisions, the alternatives will start to gain more and more popularity.