I used to work for a company that sells a blocking appliance (WebFilter by TeleMate.Net) and pitched the idea of using Beysian For categorization shortly after Paul Graham's "A plan for spam" in september of last year.
Also pitched the "hey, I'm a big boy, let me go to the blocked site, but log it" idea.
Since they were already had a long term contract with another company for the categorization (which works pretty well) no one was very interested in re-doing that component. The other idea got an "interesting, but there is already to many other features the customer is asking for" response.
Why? Because billionaires generally don't need to steal (oops, sorry, "take without paying for") their music.
I can't say that I know any billionaires, but do know a young fellow who is worth around 250 million. You'd know the name if I said it. Anyhow, I've been to his house a few times, puttered around on his home network. Never saw a whole lot in the way of music (wasn't really looking), but he has more warez than you can possibly imagine.
Been to any construction sites lately? I have not noticed a single worker using one of these new fangles stanlet hammers. But I sure as shit see a lot of Hatachi, Milwaulkee, and Porter-Cable nail guns:P Yes, the word with the same type of wood, but those damn tool companies went and changed the nails. So you have a choice: Use an old fasioned hammer or bite the bullet and upgrade your "hardware" and "software" to take advantage of new features.
Hrm, about two months ago. It was an application written for police officers to run on hardended laptops mounted in the cars. Of course these laptops only come with 256 meg so the application runs (and looks) like total ass. Before that, about a year and a half ago. Limewire. Again, ran and looked like ass.
Besides, how can.NET ever really be a long term (it might be a short term) threat to java, since you'll never be able to use.NET on anything but Windows.
I know this is going to sound crazy, but Windows runs on more than 90% of the worlds desktops. So it could certainly be a threat by beating Java in ONLY that small market.
Typical. And the reason open source isn't beating the crap out of MS on the desktop right now. "Oh, you want a feature? Add it yourself, fuckface!". Get a clue. End users, the people who make end user products sucessful, are generally NOT coders.
The phone company must provide you with 911 service even if you do not subscribe to the service, but that requires you to have working phone lines and a telephone handset.
The phone company is not required to make sure the wiring inside of your house is in shape or provide that handset. Furthur there is nothing that says you, as a homeowner, cannot physically disconnect from the telco and still be within the law.
Come to think of it, if cheap internet-based long distance becomes an everyday reality, the next step is to outsource boilerroom telemarketing to India. And then how do you go about enforcing a Do Not Call list?
You don't. Unless the telco's are going to shut down the offenders on their own (and do you think they will?) we'll basically start to get our calls from other countries.
Methinks in the end it's just going to be another industry that's going to move to an underdeveloped country. And I'd imagine that the decrease in labor costs will be enough to offset the increased long distance charges.
Actually the choice to give out the dividend was made on Jan. 16 2003 and paid out on March 7th. And the choice for 2004 is not to be made until this november.
Make the entire part of windows A pain in the arse to every user.
If Linux is already a better operating system for the desktop why would you have to go out of your way make it a pain in the arse?
now if you have linux stations running say win95 or 98 for your legacy apps in a Vmware session, you eliminate the headaches of windows system management.
How, exactly? Each of these images still need to interoperate with all of the existing infrastructure. They still need adminstration. So now you need Linux AND windows admins.
Simply only have the desired legacy apps on the windows side, and remove the web browser,ftp,etc... the users now cant hose it by installing elf-bowling or clicking OK to install gator. next you can simply have linux replace the windows VMware file every time it reboots. plus have a new image rolled out to all systems without any intervention.
All of this was already possible with Terminal Server. They did this to the support monkeys at my previous job. Was pretty funny, they couldn't do anything but work.
It's brilliant! and about time someone in a IT department made such a great decision to start a migration from microsoft and closed source in a smoother way.
So you equate a smooth rollout with intentionally making things a painful for your end users. *sigh*
currently there isn't a mature messaging server and MSMQ is not appropriate for high load messaging platform.
Can't help you there.
SOAP is too damn heavy weight to scale well beyond 60 concurrent requests for a single CPU 3ghz system.
Is it SOAP itself that's too heavy weight or Microsofts implementation? First thing I would suggest doing is doing some benchmarks between different implementations. You may find out that SOAP is the wrong way to go and decide to go with a different technology. Also, do you need the openness of SOAP or could you do with remoting which will net you immediate performance gains?
SQL Server doesn't support C# triggers or a way to embed C# applications within the database
I can see how this would be a handy feature. You are right, though, it does not exist. Not sure how this is an issue of scalabilty, though.
The through put of SQL Server is still around 200 concurrent requests for a single or dual CPU box. I've read the posts about Transaction Processing Council, but get real, who can afford to spend 6 million on a 64 CPU box?
Well, you always have the option of using a different database. There are managed providers for Oracle if you decide to go that route.
the clients we target are small-ish, so they can't spend more than 30-50K on a server. so where does that leave you in terms of scalability
I think this is the same question as the previous. "It's not scaling well enough on my hardware and I can't afford something more expensive".
I've been been running benchmarks with dynamic code that does quite a bit of reflection and the performance doesn't impress me.
Don't do that, then. Before Java and C# programmers did just fine without 'reflection'. If its performance is not what you need code an alternative.
I've also compared the performance of a static ASP/HTML page to webservice page and the throughput goes from 150-200 to about 10-20 on a 2.4-2.6Ghz system
What's a static ASP/HTML page? ASP by it's very nature is not a static page. The ASP.NET page you are comparing it to is compiled and if they are doing the same work then ASP.NET will generally outperform it's older brother. Do you have a small testcase you could post which illustrates these benchmarks?
to get good through put with SQL Server you have to use async calls, but what if you have to do sync calls? From what I've seen the performance isn't great (it's ok) and I don't like the idea of setting up partitions. Sure, you can put mirrored raid on all the DB servers, but that doesn't help me if a partition goes down and the data is no longer available.
Again, look for an alternative DB if you can't wring the performace out of SQL server that you need. Or rethink your implementation.
I asked a MS SQL Server DBA about real-time replication across multiple servers and his remark was "it doesn't work, don't use it."
Different database?
It was a good try, but I don't think you really gave anyone enough information to solve your problems. Most of them seem to be related to SQL server, so I'm not sure why the blame is getting placed on.NET (.NET as in the CLR, and the framework). My only real suggestion would be to hire a sharp developer who has experience doing nasty things to SQL server if you are going to stick with it.
Is there a court order that says microsoft has to split them? If not then they won and are not required to do so and the comparison of the grandparent post is perfectly valid.
If MS WAS ordered to split and remove IE then I guess the parent post has a point.
How about McDonalads giving you the option to order something from Burger King, and if you decide you would rather have the Whopper they go ahead and drive across the street to pick it up for you?
I will never understand why people would write in a "java for windows" when they can write in a Java for all operating systems. C# seems to me like a less sophisticated version of Java that has the added drawback of locking you in to a single platform.
I think I can answer this in a few parts.
Java is a better language than C++. It was written without having to support the baggage of an earlier language (although it does borrow some of its syntax, but not at the expense of clarity). It has garbage collection, which actually works pretty darned good for a lot of classes of applications. All of the above are applicable to C#.
So why C# instead Java? Well if you're not concerned with being locked into a single platform (which has the lions share of the market locked up) you get all of the advantages of Java with quite a few extras thrown in.
Applications which look like Native Win32 apps. Sorry, Java looks like ass.
Applications that just seem faster. Sorry, Java just makes my new box feel like an 8088.
A great set of development tools and a huge body of excellent documentation.
The ability to pre-compile applications, negating speed disadvantages of the JIT compiler.
There are situations in which PHP's easiness actually make it more difficult to use, but generally ASP using VBScript suffers even worse. I remember the difficulty I had trying to explain to a friend at my last job that VBScript sacrificed power and therefore ease of use for more accomplished programmers in favor of an easy learning curve and simplicity for beginners. I don't think he ever quite understood that VBScript is actually easier to learn, because he repeatedly suffered from what it lacks.
Of course, ASP/VBS is one of those things that are extremely easy to get started with, but when things get complex you end up with a huge mess. It's a weakly typed language, you have to resort to COM objects for any meaningful separation of presentation and logic, and it's strictly procedural.
There are times when I miss some options I had with ASP/would have with.Net (mainly OOP), but there were more times I missed what I would have had with PHP when working with ASP.
So what would you miss if you were to switch from PHP to ASP.NET/C# or ASP.NET/VB.NET?
Still, the biggest problem is that.Net, as with virtually everything Micro$oft, does an inadequate and troublesome job of implementation even with what it gets right. The well-publicized flaws of.Net should suffice to show that it needs to be replaced/refurbished and that this time M$ needs to have a tight, talented core of coders focus on it rather than a huge assemblage of folk working willy-nilly rushing to completion with inadequate coordination.
I'm curious about these flaws. What are they?
I would dislike using.Net both because I don't care for the tools and because, again, the flaws seem to overwhelm the advantages.
When we use PHP (which we use for projects that we need to get out the door faster, amongst other reasons), we always write in OO.
Hey, if I needed to hang a picture I could always pop a porno into the DVD player and drive the nail into the wall with my little stiff wee wee. But really, I'm probably better off with a hammer.
Without a doubt, the latter of the two was far superior in every aspect, INCLUDING EASE OF USE. PHP has got to be the easiest freakin language ever
A lot of things are "easier" than ASP.NET/ADO.NET coded using an OOP language. For simple things you're better off using something like PHP or ASP/VBS. Of course when project complexity reaches a certain point you'll start to find real advantages to going with a modern approach that seperates the presentation layer from the business layer. Of course taking this approach can make writing a simple application seem daunting, but in the long run it pays off.
It has a lot to do with simply knowing what sort of application you're going to be writing and picking the proper tool for the job.
Apache trumps IIS with the ability to do the majority of configuring with one file, instead of having to browse through a maze of tabbed windows with options, checkboxes, pop-up boxes, etc.
Totally. 100% agreed. Much easier to administer Apache via it's text configuration IMO.
C# has, off top of head, nested classes. Which are the same thing as Java's static inner classes.
Re:Yeah, thats super. We all need more of this.
on
dB Drag Racing
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Wait a second... Is this the same slashdot that got so pissed off when the sentator from Utah thought it would be a good idea to destroy file traders computers?
Slashdot Mirror
I used to work for a company that sells a blocking appliance (WebFilter by TeleMate.Net) and pitched the idea of using Beysian For categorization shortly after Paul Graham's "A plan for spam" in september of last year.
Also pitched the "hey, I'm a big boy, let me go to the blocked site, but log it" idea.
Since they were already had a long term contract with another company for the categorization (which works pretty well) no one was very interested in re-doing that component. The other idea got an "interesting, but there is already to many other features the customer is asking for" response.
Ah well.
Why? Because billionaires generally don't need to steal (oops, sorry, "take without paying for") their music.
I can't say that I know any billionaires, but do know a young fellow who is worth around 250 million. You'd know the name if I said it. Anyhow, I've been to his house a few times, puttered around on his home network. Never saw a whole lot in the way of music (wasn't really looking), but he has more warez than you can possibly imagine.
they will work with same type of nails and wood
:P Yes, the word with the same type of wood, but those damn tool companies went and changed the nails. So you have a choice: Use an old fasioned hammer or bite the bullet and upgrade your "hardware" and "software" to take advantage of new features.
Been to any construction sites lately? I have not noticed a single worker using one of these new fangles stanlet hammers. But I sure as shit see a lot of Hatachi, Milwaulkee, and Porter-Cable nail guns
You are correct, good point.
When was the last time you used a .NET program?
.NET ever really be a long term (it might be a short term) threat to java, since you'll never be able to use .NET on anything but Windows.
About five minutes ago. My website.
When was the last time you used a java program?
Hrm, about two months ago. It was an application written for police officers to run on hardended laptops mounted in the cars. Of course these laptops only come with 256 meg so the application runs (and looks) like total ass. Before that, about a year and a half ago. Limewire. Again, ran and looked like ass.
Besides, how can
I know this is going to sound crazy, but Windows runs on more than 90% of the worlds desktops. So it could certainly be a threat by beating Java in ONLY that small market.
Oh, and don't forget rotor and mono.
Typical. And the reason open source isn't beating the crap out of MS on the desktop right now. "Oh, you want a feature? Add it yourself, fuckface!". Get a clue. End users, the people who make end user products sucessful, are generally NOT coders.
Sorta.
The phone company must provide you with 911 service even if you do not subscribe to the service, but that requires you to have working phone lines and a telephone handset.
The phone company is not required to make sure the wiring inside of your house is in shape or provide that handset. Furthur there is nothing that says you, as a homeowner, cannot physically disconnect from the telco and still be within the law.
Come to think of it, if cheap internet-based long distance becomes an everyday reality, the next step is to outsource boilerroom telemarketing to India. And then how do you go about enforcing a Do Not Call list?
You don't. Unless the telco's are going to shut down the offenders on their own (and do you think they will?) we'll basically start to get our calls from other countries.
Methinks in the end it's just going to be another industry that's going to move to an underdeveloped country. And I'd imagine that the decrease in labor costs will be enough to offset the increased long distance charges.
Actually the choice to give out the dividend was made on Jan. 16 2003 and paid out on March 7th. And the choice for 2004 is not to be made until this november.
:(
You failed at failing me
can be best represented by by ....
A really big fucking number
Gotta spend money on something or investors will get all uppity and start demanding dividends and whatnot.
Microsoft pays dividends.
Make the entire part of windows A pain in the arse to every user.
If Linux is already a better operating system for the desktop why would you have to go out of your way make it a pain in the arse?
now if you have linux stations running say win95 or 98 for your legacy apps in a Vmware session, you eliminate the headaches of windows system management.
How, exactly? Each of these images still need to interoperate with all of the existing infrastructure. They still need adminstration. So now you need Linux AND windows admins.
Simply only have the desired legacy apps on the windows side, and remove the web browser,ftp,etc... the users now cant hose it by installing elf-bowling or clicking OK to install gator. next you can simply have linux replace the windows VMware file every time it reboots. plus have a new image rolled out to all systems without any intervention.
All of this was already possible with Terminal Server. They did this to the support monkeys at my previous job. Was pretty funny, they couldn't do anything but work.
It's brilliant! and about time someone in a IT department made such a great decision to start a migration from microsoft and closed source in a smoother way.
So you equate a smooth rollout with intentionally making things a painful for your end users. *sigh*
Feel free to mod ME down for a stupid MOD PARENT UP post, but it's got to be said :P
MOD PARENT UP.
currently there isn't a mature messaging server and MSMQ is not appropriate for high load messaging platform.
.NET (.NET as in the CLR, and the framework). My only real suggestion would be to hire a sharp developer who has experience doing nasty things to SQL server if you are going to stick with it.
Can't help you there.
SOAP is too damn heavy weight to scale well beyond 60 concurrent requests for a single CPU 3ghz system.
Is it SOAP itself that's too heavy weight or Microsofts implementation? First thing I would suggest doing is doing some benchmarks between different implementations. You may find out that SOAP is the wrong way to go and decide to go with a different technology. Also, do you need the openness of SOAP or could you do with remoting which will net you immediate performance gains?
SQL Server doesn't support C# triggers or a way to embed C# applications within the database
I can see how this would be a handy feature. You are right, though, it does not exist. Not sure how this is an issue of scalabilty, though.
The through put of SQL Server is still around 200 concurrent requests for a single or dual CPU box. I've read the posts about Transaction Processing Council, but get real, who can afford to spend 6 million on a 64 CPU box?
Well, you always have the option of using a different database. There are managed providers for Oracle if you decide to go that route.
the clients we target are small-ish, so they can't spend more than 30-50K on a server. so where does that leave you in terms of scalability
I think this is the same question as the previous. "It's not scaling well enough on my hardware and I can't afford something more expensive".
I've been been running benchmarks with dynamic code that does quite a bit of reflection and the performance doesn't impress me.
Don't do that, then. Before Java and C# programmers did just fine without 'reflection'. If its performance is not what you need code an alternative.
I've also compared the performance of a static ASP/HTML page to webservice page and the throughput goes from 150-200 to about 10-20 on a 2.4-2.6Ghz system
What's a static ASP/HTML page? ASP by it's very nature is not a static page. The ASP.NET page you are comparing it to is compiled and if they are doing the same work then ASP.NET will generally outperform it's older brother. Do you have a small testcase you could post which illustrates these benchmarks?
to get good through put with SQL Server you have to use async calls, but what if you have to do sync calls? From what I've seen the performance isn't great (it's ok) and I don't like the idea of setting up partitions. Sure, you can put mirrored raid on all the DB servers, but that doesn't help me if a partition goes down and the data is no longer available.
Again, look for an alternative DB if you can't wring the performace out of SQL server that you need. Or rethink your implementation.
I asked a MS SQL Server DBA about real-time replication across multiple servers and his remark was "it doesn't work, don't use it."
Different database?
It was a good try, but I don't think you really gave anyone enough information to solve your problems. Most of them seem to be related to SQL server, so I'm not sure why the blame is getting placed on
Correct. They are giving grants now.
Heart Medicine? Web Browser? Methinks your anology is really just a crafty emotional appeal.
Is there a court order that says microsoft has to split them? If not then they won and are not required to do so and the comparison of the grandparent post is perfectly valid.
If MS WAS ordered to split and remove IE then I guess the parent post has a point.
How about McDonalads giving you the option to order something from Burger King, and if you decide you would rather have the Whopper they go ahead and drive across the street to pick it up for you?
Can't say I can blame them. I mean, I know how pissed of I would be if I came back from christmas vacation and the janitor had mangled my code.
Oh, and could you refill the pack of toilet seat covers in the near stall in the second floor women's room? Mrs. Martin keeps complaining about it.
I will never understand why people would write in a "java for windows" when they can write in a Java for all operating systems. C# seems to me like a less sophisticated version of Java that has the added drawback of locking you in to a single platform.
I think I can answer this in a few parts.
Java is a better language than C++. It was written without having to support the baggage of an earlier language (although it does borrow some of its syntax, but not at the expense of clarity). It has garbage collection, which actually works pretty darned good for a lot of classes of applications. All of the above are applicable to C#.
So why C# instead Java? Well if you're not concerned with being locked into a single platform (which has the lions share of the market locked up) you get all of the advantages of Java with quite a few extras thrown in.
Applications which look like Native Win32 apps. Sorry, Java looks like ass.
Applications that just seem faster. Sorry, Java just makes my new box feel like an 8088.
A great set of development tools and a huge body of excellent documentation.
The ability to pre-compile applications, negating speed disadvantages of the JIT compiler.
There are situations in which PHP's easiness actually make it more difficult to use, but generally ASP using VBScript suffers even worse. I remember the difficulty I had trying to explain to a friend at my last job that VBScript sacrificed power and therefore ease of use for more accomplished programmers in favor of an easy learning curve and simplicity for beginners. I don't think he ever quite understood that VBScript is actually easier to learn, because he repeatedly suffered from what it lacks.
.Net (mainly OOP), but there were more times I missed what I would have had with PHP when working with ASP.
.Net, as with virtually everything Micro$oft, does an inadequate and troublesome job of implementation even with what it gets right. The well-publicized flaws of .Net should suffice to show that it needs to be replaced/refurbished and that this time M$ needs to have a tight, talented core of coders focus on it rather than a huge assemblage of folk working willy-nilly rushing to completion with inadequate coordination.
.Net both because I don't care for the tools and because, again, the flaws seem to overwhelm the advantages.
Of course, ASP/VBS is one of those things that are extremely easy to get started with, but when things get complex you end up with a huge mess. It's a weakly typed language, you have to resort to COM objects for any meaningful separation of presentation and logic, and it's strictly procedural.
There are times when I miss some options I had with ASP/would have with
So what would you miss if you were to switch from PHP to ASP.NET/C# or ASP.NET/VB.NET?
Still, the biggest problem is that
I'm curious about these flaws. What are they?
I would dislike using
What exactly is wrong with the tools?
When we use PHP (which we use for projects that we need to get out the door faster, amongst other reasons), we always write in OO.
Hey, if I needed to hang a picture I could always pop a porno into the DVD player and drive the nail into the wall with my little stiff wee wee. But really, I'm probably better off with a hammer.
That was my point. Was not a PHP bash.
Without a doubt, the latter of the two was far superior in every aspect, INCLUDING EASE OF USE. PHP has got to be the easiest freakin language ever
A lot of things are "easier" than ASP.NET/ADO.NET coded using an OOP language. For simple things you're better off using something like PHP or ASP/VBS. Of course when project complexity reaches a certain point you'll start to find real advantages to going with a modern approach that seperates the presentation layer from the business layer. Of course taking this approach can make writing a simple application seem daunting, but in the long run it pays off.
It has a lot to do with simply knowing what sort of application you're going to be writing and picking the proper tool for the job.
Apache trumps IIS with the ability to do the majority of configuring with one file, instead of having to browse through a maze of tabbed windows with options, checkboxes, pop-up boxes, etc.
Totally. 100% agreed. Much easier to administer Apache via it's text configuration IMO.
C# has, off top of head, nested classes. Which are the same thing as Java's static inner classes.
Wait a second... Is this the same slashdot that got so pissed off when the sentator from Utah thought it would be a good idea to destroy file traders computers?