And that several reams of paper and new toner that someone had to physically replace? Your analogy would be correct if you received 1000 PDFs, but you received a physical product that costs real money to produce.
On top of that, if the club reimbursed you for the printing costs then that's fraud as well. Or were they complicit in this scheme to rip others students off?
Google might be using third party technology which Google is unable to license to others to redistribute. By not enforcing this, they may lose the ability to continue to use it themselves and would have to remove these apps permanently from the market.
Of course, all that's based on assumptions like every other post here.
Wouldn't work without a major redesign. Hard drives aren't sealed to the outside world; there has to be an equilibrium between air pressure and volume.
They're not? So any dust/smoke particles and so on are free to enter the spinning platter area?
If you're just buying a license from a third party that bought it from Microsoft several years ago or bought it from Microsoft with the addendum that it will not be supported then it's your problem if there's an issue.
The latter case I agree with. In the former, if you bought it new and weren't informed there's a defect that won't be fixed you ought to be entitled for a refund.
Software costs money to support. Pay for the support, use open source software or buy new software.
Ah, a car analogy. It's more like this: You go to the Honda dealership and take a look at their 2010 models and purchase a vehicle. You discover that the engine has a serious flaw in it and ask Honda for a fix. Honda refuses because that engine is based on an 8 year old engine design. Except in this case, instead of a Honda you bought a brand new netbook and instead of an engine it came with a new copy of Windows XP.
This analogy sucks, because you can replace the netbooks "engine" with a bootable USB drive and Linux for FREE OR a bootable CD and Windows 7 for under 100 bucks.
Sure, and if it came with a defective hard drive you could replace that too. Never mind that you paid good money for the defective components it came with that you now have to waste your time and money replacing, whether software or hardware.
Ah, a car analogy. It's more like this: You go to the Honda dealership and take a look at their 2010 models and purchase a vehicle. You discover that the engine has a serious flaw in it and ask Honda for a fix. Honda refuses because that engine is based on an 8 year old engine design. Except in this case, instead of a Honda you bought a brand new netbook and instead of an engine it came with a new copy of Windows XP.
Sharing knowledge != teaching. When I was a teenager, if I created something cool I'd want to show all my friends and boast about it. Inevitably, they'd ask how I did it and I would reluctantly show them the source code. That was sharing knowledge and I never sat down and formally taught anyone.
ok, so what happens during Christmas time when they ARE using the majority of the resources they have available? Does that mean I'll just have to deal with a lower resource pool and subsequently crappier service? No thanks. I'm not a big fan of all this fancy pants cloud stuff.
You do your due diligence and ensure that Amazon will not degrade your service during their peak times. If it's as you say, then you would not use them. If, however, they have grown their capacity to account for both cloud services and internal peak times and they will guarantee service levels, then you can make an informed decision there too.
... but it is likely that investors are flocking to "the cloud" in the hopes that they can grab control of anything, and then profit from that control.
Does your bank grab control of the contents of safety deposit boxes and then profit from that control?
Let's say you were starting up a new tech site and your website was going to be the greatest thing since Slashdot. So you plan on having Slashdot-levels of traffic. You do a bit of planning and expect that you'd need about 8 front-end web servers to distribute the load, 4 beefy database servers, and a couple more for handling your email, DNS, backups, and whatever else. So let's say that adds up to 16 servers. And (hand waving here) let's say that total hardware cost comes to $50,000.
To host those servers, you're going to need a data center. So you'll need to find a provider and pay them roughly $1000/month for a rack to put them in. On top of that, you'll need to pay for bandwidth which let's say is another $1000/month. You'll also need a system administrator to manage all those servers. So your first year cost is:
$50,000 - servers $12,000 - rack space $12,000 - bandwidth $100,000 - administrator ------ $174,000 - total
That's non-cloud computing. Cloud computing comes in several different models. The first is utility computing. Instead of shelling out $50,000 for all that hardware, why not pay a provider like Amazon for their EC2 systems? You're essentially paying on an hourly basis for the use of their servers, but you can scale up or down easily to account for traffic spikes and dips. If you only need 8 web servers and 4 database servers during peak times, you can perhaps save a bit. And if you really only need 2 database and 2 web servers, then you haven't paid for a lot of hardware that's collecting dust. If you really do need all that power all of the time, then you'd pay Amazon more in hourly fees than it would cost to buy it all yourself.
The second way is a hybrid. You still have all your own servers, but you use services from various companies to implement your system. Amazon's S3 storage for example. You continue to host the main hardware, but you rely on these external services for additional functionality. In the case of Amazon S3, it gives you access to very high speed static file hosting and essentially unlimited amounts of storage at a fairly reasonable cost.
The last way is going all cloud. Your services run on a provider's infrastructure and you have no concept of a physical server. If your site receives more traffic, the provider automagically creates more instances of your service to handle the load. This is the Google App Engine and Microsoft Azure models. All the data is stored and managed by the provider. It's still your data and all these providers have confidentiality clauses. Barring a court order, nobody will (or, more accurately, should) be snooping into the data they store on your behalf. You don't need to worry about firewalls, security patching, hardware issues at 3 in the morning, and so on.
I've simplified this down to a few different models... there are many other possibilities as well, such as all cloud with a few dedicated colo servers to handle specific tasks, but that's the nutshell.
Think of it like getting a safety deposit box at a bank. You could build your own safe, professionally install it, hire security guards to watch it around the clock, have alarms and monitoring systems, etc. If you need enough storage such that the bank would charge you through the nose to use their safety deposit boxes, then building your own makes sense. For smaller scale operations, you're better off paying the bank to use their safety deposit box. They're experts at managing security risk, and you can be pretty confident that they'll do a good job.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't know about you, but I want to go to the grocery story at 20,000 MPH, and be able to bring back a container full of stuff too!
If you live so far from the grocery store you need a 20,000 MPH craft to get there, it's time to start growing your own.
Do you know where one can purchase grocery store seeds?
And that several reams of paper and new toner that someone had to physically replace? Your analogy would be correct if you received 1000 PDFs, but you received a physical product that costs real money to produce.
On top of that, if the club reimbursed you for the printing costs then that's fraud as well. Or were they complicit in this scheme to rip others students off?
Google might be using third party technology which Google is unable to license to others to redistribute. By not enforcing this, they may lose the ability to continue to use it themselves and would have to remove these apps permanently from the market.
Of course, all that's based on assumptions like every other post here.
I think it's time for a big dose of, as Mr. Shuttleworth himself so elaborately expressed, shut the fuck up.
I think you mean eloquently, not elaborately. I'll shut the fuck up now.
(and spreadsheets aren't databases, you can't write SQL queries against them)
You realize there's been ODBC and JDBC drivers for Excel spreadsheets for many years now, right?
Instead of being slightly subtle, you went for blatantly in-your-face explanation. Something a little better would have been:
Subject: "I hope he has protection..."
Body: "... for Federal 'pound-me-in-the-assets' prison."
See? You make a reference to the same joke, but incorporate the word "assets" in a novel way. This has been a preview of Joke Construction 101.
And light pollution.
Something is amiss indeed. You left this out:
0800: Class on proper use of 24 hour clock
Unless after hunting and foraging at 10 AM you wait until 2 AM to have lunch.
Wouldn't work without a major redesign. Hard drives aren't sealed to the outside world; there has to be an equilibrium between air pressure and volume.
They're not? So any dust/smoke particles and so on are free to enter the spinning platter area?
If you're just buying a license from a third party that bought it from Microsoft several years ago or bought it from Microsoft with the addendum that it will not be supported then it's your problem if there's an issue.
The latter case I agree with. In the former, if you bought it new and weren't informed there's a defect that won't be fixed you ought to be entitled for a refund.
Software costs money to support. Pay for the support, use open source software or buy new software.
Agreed.
Ah, a car analogy. It's more like this: You go to the Honda dealership and take a look at their 2010 models and purchase a vehicle. You discover that the engine has a serious flaw in it and ask Honda for a fix. Honda refuses because that engine is based on an 8 year old engine design. Except in this case, instead of a Honda you bought a brand new netbook and instead of an engine it came with a new copy of Windows XP.
This analogy sucks, because you can replace the netbooks "engine" with a bootable USB drive and Linux for FREE OR a bootable CD and Windows 7 for under 100 bucks.
Sure, and if it came with a defective hard drive you could replace that too. Never mind that you paid good money for the defective components it came with that you now have to waste your time and money replacing, whether software or hardware.
Looks like a smurf sat on the photocopier.
Ah, a car analogy. It's more like this: You go to the Honda dealership and take a look at their 2010 models and purchase a vehicle. You discover that the engine has a serious flaw in it and ask Honda for a fix. Honda refuses because that engine is based on an 8 year old engine design. Except in this case, instead of a Honda you bought a brand new netbook and instead of an engine it came with a new copy of Windows XP.
Nice correlation. Now about that causation...
Sharing knowledge != teaching. When I was a teenager, if I created something cool I'd want to show all my friends and boast about it. Inevitably, they'd ask how I did it and I would reluctantly show them the source code. That was sharing knowledge and I never sat down and formally taught anyone.
Looks like the patent judge through the book in Facebook's face.
Is that when Alice faces many adventures in "Through the Looking Book"?
I bet Microsoft is the most expensive square.
I think his sig is grammar bait.
Sorry, thought you said 'beefy' servers. In my world your $50k total hardware cost doesn't buy the firewalls.
Clearly I was referring to lean beef. :) Yeah, I realize my hardware numbers are out to lunch.
It's not like as though the company was named "Rusty Trombones Inc." or something
That would be a Commander Riker reference?
Let me help you with that:
http://www.google.com/search?q=palentir
Here is the full URL since you can't determine if the shortened one is going to goatse or a Rick Roll:
http://arstechnica.com/staff/carthage/2009/09/the-cloud-that-term-does-not-mean-what-you-think-it-means.ars
ok, so what happens during Christmas time when they ARE using the majority of the resources they have available? Does that mean I'll just have to deal with a lower resource pool and subsequently crappier service? No thanks. I'm not a big fan of all this fancy pants cloud stuff.
You do your due diligence and ensure that Amazon will not degrade your service during their peak times. If it's as you say, then you would not use them. If, however, they have grown their capacity to account for both cloud services and internal peak times and they will guarantee service levels, then you can make an informed decision there too.
... but it is likely that investors are flocking to "the cloud" in the hopes that they can grab control of anything, and then profit from that control.
Does your bank grab control of the contents of safety deposit boxes and then profit from that control?
Let's say you were starting up a new tech site and your website was going to be the greatest thing since Slashdot. So you plan on having Slashdot-levels of traffic. You do a bit of planning and expect that you'd need about 8 front-end web servers to distribute the load, 4 beefy database servers, and a couple more for handling your email, DNS, backups, and whatever else. So let's say that adds up to 16 servers. And (hand waving here) let's say that total hardware cost comes to $50,000.
To host those servers, you're going to need a data center. So you'll need to find a provider and pay them roughly $1000/month for a rack to put them in. On top of that, you'll need to pay for bandwidth which let's say is another $1000/month. You'll also need a system administrator to manage all those servers. So your first year cost is:
$50,000 - servers
$12,000 - rack space
$12,000 - bandwidth
$100,000 - administrator
------
$174,000 - total
That's non-cloud computing. Cloud computing comes in several different models. The first is utility computing. Instead of shelling out $50,000 for all that hardware, why not pay a provider like Amazon for their EC2 systems? You're essentially paying on an hourly basis for the use of their servers, but you can scale up or down easily to account for traffic spikes and dips. If you only need 8 web servers and 4 database servers during peak times, you can perhaps save a bit. And if you really only need 2 database and 2 web servers, then you haven't paid for a lot of hardware that's collecting dust. If you really do need all that power all of the time, then you'd pay Amazon more in hourly fees than it would cost to buy it all yourself.
The second way is a hybrid. You still have all your own servers, but you use services from various companies to implement your system. Amazon's S3 storage for example. You continue to host the main hardware, but you rely on these external services for additional functionality. In the case of Amazon S3, it gives you access to very high speed static file hosting and essentially unlimited amounts of storage at a fairly reasonable cost.
The last way is going all cloud. Your services run on a provider's infrastructure and you have no concept of a physical server. If your site receives more traffic, the provider automagically creates more instances of your service to handle the load. This is the Google App Engine and Microsoft Azure models. All the data is stored and managed by the provider. It's still your data and all these providers have confidentiality clauses. Barring a court order, nobody will (or, more accurately, should) be snooping into the data they store on your behalf. You don't need to worry about firewalls, security patching, hardware issues at 3 in the morning, and so on.
I've simplified this down to a few different models... there are many other possibilities as well, such as all cloud with a few dedicated colo servers to handle specific tasks, but that's the nutshell.
Think of it like getting a safety deposit box at a bank. You could build your own safe, professionally install it, hire security guards to watch it around the clock, have alarms and monitoring systems, etc. If you need enough storage such that the bank would charge you through the nose to use their safety deposit boxes, then building your own makes sense. For smaller scale operations, you're better off paying the bank to use their safety deposit box. They're experts at managing security risk, and you can be pretty confident that they'll do a good job.