I'm really not buying these specs. What they mean is if you are one of these obsessed gamers with no other life who has to have the greatest fucking video card on some overclocked "riced out" box (preferably with a lucite window and lots of neon), then this is what you will need. And don't forget the flat-screen monitor.
I mean come on. we've heard this line befor: "sure it'll run on an X, but you wont get the FULL experience". Yadda, yadda, yadda. And of course the fact that certain brand names are being thrown around means nothing, right? OPEN YA EYES, BOY!
"Although production staffers identified the problem relatively early, he said, resolving the issue was extremely time-consuming, and editors opted to eliminate half of the planned pages in order to speed the press run."
Either you have it or you don't. How does this work?
Hmmmm. THere was a place I used to work where we had a mirror of our production servers. Now, so you don't go and say, "well that's all good and well, but whart about 100 servers..." we had 30 production servers and 15 for testing... If it does not work on the test system, don't bring it up on production...
Yes,yes, I know, a "suite" is where I work, blaw, balw, blaw. I meant SUIT of course. It's hard to keep up my facade all the time of knowing how to spell.
WOuld the music industry actually be able to win a lawsuit against a university? I know that defending the university against a lawsuit is expensive and I know that universities have reputations to protect but . . . .
You answer your own question. It has nothing to do with if they can win the suite, it has to do with how much the suite would cost the university to win. This is what extortion is about.
What about the music student that's studying 16th century harpsicord?
Are you saying that classical music is not available over Napster? News to me... Are you saying that classical music students don't listen to pop? Hmmm... Next argument...
It's a terrific business model, what are you talking about? You think they don't understand that it's an implied threat? Why else would a university bite? Of course they know it's a threat, and they don't care if you think it's sleazy, what they do care about is how much of a threat the universities think it is. Damn right it's a threat, do you think anyone would pay them otherwise? It's a fine business model in a world where "business ethics" is not about "ethics" but what you can legally get away with.
Was Microsoft *ever* the low price solution? I'm sure I'm not the only one who laughed at the whole "they haven't figure that out yet" part.
Remember, we are not talking about home computing or hobbyist type things here, we are talking business computing. For example, the big HP and DEC machines that the noobs here think of as "mainframes" (now, the Cyber 70 was a "mainframe", but the DECs and Control Data refrigerators where just "minis"). Remember, there was a time, long long ago, about the time Microsoft was formed, that desktops where toys, and getting a minimal machine to do minimal tasks required a lot of $$ investment. At that time, Microsoft was the low boy on the block.
Could be because every time a service provider has come out with a "better, more powerful" connection, that's the way it has been? History, and all of that sort of thing.
What's going on here is that they want to attract more consumer business, not cut into business business. The average consumer is not interested in high uplink rate, because what they are doing is downloading (pr0n?).
This is intended as a consumer product, to get consumer accounts. If it is used on the business side, you can assume because of past practices, that the uplink rate will be reflected in the cost.
First, I don't like this bundling of services. I want lockin in one area to constrain my choice.
Yes of course. This is obvious. But remember that Verizon is out there as a publicly traded company to make money. So while "lockin" may not be so hot for you if you like to shop a la carte, it is a necessary evil if you want to big for-profit company to pay for the infrastructure.
Get real. A penchant for irrelevance is not limited to whites or Americans. Here on Slashdot, we specialize in mentioning Linux in the most unlikely of circumstances. If we follow your logic, apparently that means we all hate Linux.
One set of logic, being found valid, this does not make it valid for all situations, only the situation it is formed around. You make no sense now, my friend.
The typical OSS "fan" will not admit that what attracts them to it is that it is "renegade" and "rebellious" and such. Most of these types make no contributions, they are more like the Gamers who latch on to a game before it become Mega Huge, then tell everyone how passé it is when it becomes Mega Huge.
So, because Lindows has taken Linux and gone after the lowest common denominator, the "average" user, the Uber Script Kiddies and Uber Wanna Be Geeks diss it as not really Linux, after all "grandma" can use it. This is why Red Hat fell out of favor, after all they did for Linux, it got way to easy to use, just not geeky enough, after all, with a graphical installer no less.
Well, Linux is now "here", and the companies that have the resources to do it will now put Linux in everyone's hands, not just the "illuminati" and such. Uber Losers, you will now have to go find another "secret" to imagine only you know the truth about. How about BeOS?
For Microsoft, 20 mill to swat a skeeter biting their back is nothing, it's like you and I buying a can of "Off".
But I would like to say, I think Microsoft not only would have won any court cases, but probably should. "Lindows" is clearly a trademark infringement, and for the so-called "Joe Whatever" so trumpeted here as the "average user", it simply isn't clear that there would be no confusion. Whenever I think people are not that stupid, they always prove me wrong.
At this point I'm about 80% sure that you are white, because only whites, in my experience...
At this point, I am sure you are White American, because only White Americans feel the need to bring race into a question where race was never an issue.
But again, WHY bring it up if it has nothing to do with anything? It's like saying "I know about this project that went to Hell in a hand basket. But hey, by the way, the guy was Indian.
The guy was presumably a full-time student, in a foreign country, away from his family and support system -- might these demands or limitations limit his ability to do the job well? I can only imagine how well I'd perform doing a moderately complex job while being a full-time student a half a world away.
No, I'm sorry, the fact that he was an exchange student of any race has nothing to do with if he can write good code, if his code has bugs. And indeed, it has little to do with writing godd ASP code, which can be done (as far as writing "good" ASP code is possible).
I've heard this same song from a few developers who work at Oracle shops - and I could not disagree more! Database independence in your code should absolutely be a goal!
This assumes that you are writing applications independent of the brand of database (or any other associated application), it's all part and parcel with blindly buying into OOP 100%. But, what if you are not writing for any other database, and your app will never be used with any other database? Than, there is not need for an abstraction layer which brings with it overhead, and has no real purpose within the context of your database-specific application.
I hear this abstraction layer line of thought quite often, yet in many applications, it simply does not make sense. If you are building for Oracle and only Oracle, it makes sense to use hooks that specifically take advantage of Oracle. Sometimes making abstraction the Holy Grail just does not make sense.
Besides, down the road, if you decide that you really didn't want to use Oracle, maybe Steve Balmer moves on to your company, well, that just means some nice Indian programmers have work!
Go ahead and continue to delude yourself, that's fine. But the fact remains, corporate does not care if it's open source or not, and if they do, they are usually biased against it.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent. My shoe polisher needs an IP address. So does my bottle of shampoo.
I mean come on. we've heard this line befor: "sure it'll run on an X, but you wont get the FULL experience". Yadda, yadda, yadda. And of course the fact that certain brand names are being thrown around means nothing, right? OPEN YA EYES, BOY!
The Winner. Hands down.
I think now they are thinking also of the plan for one person. Consult Monster or Dice.
Either you have it or you don't. How does this work?
Hmmmm. THere was a place I used to work where we had a mirror of our production servers. Now, so you don't go and say, "well that's all good and well, but whart about 100 servers..." we had 30 production servers and 15 for testing... If it does not work on the test system, don't bring it up on production...
I'm involved with "coding errors" like this everyday. I work for the Air Force. We call them something different.
Oh yeh. That would probibly be worse than doing nothing. RAII's law firm would consider it a challenge they had to beat.
Yes,yes, I know, a "suite" is where I work, blaw, balw, blaw. I meant SUIT of course. It's hard to keep up my facade all the time of knowing how to spell.
You answer your own question. It has nothing to do with if they can win the suite, it has to do with how much the suite would cost the university to win. This is what extortion is about.
Are you saying that classical music is not available over Napster? News to me... Are you saying that classical music students don't listen to pop? Hmmm... Next argument...
It's a terrific business model, what are you talking about? You think they don't understand that it's an implied threat? Why else would a university bite? Of course they know it's a threat, and they don't care if you think it's sleazy, what they do care about is how much of a threat the universities think it is. Damn right it's a threat, do you think anyone would pay them otherwise? It's a fine business model in a world where "business ethics" is not about "ethics" but what you can legally get away with.
Remember, we are not talking about home computing or hobbyist type things here, we are talking business computing. For example, the big HP and DEC machines that the noobs here think of as "mainframes" (now, the Cyber 70 was a "mainframe", but the DECs and Control Data refrigerators where just "minis"). Remember, there was a time, long long ago, about the time Microsoft was formed, that desktops where toys, and getting a minimal machine to do minimal tasks required a lot of $$ investment. At that time, Microsoft was the low boy on the block.
What's going on here is that they want to attract more consumer business, not cut into business business. The average consumer is not interested in high uplink rate, because what they are doing is downloading (pr0n?).
This is intended as a consumer product, to get consumer accounts. If it is used on the business side, you can assume because of past practices, that the uplink rate will be reflected in the cost.
Yes of course. This is obvious. But remember that Verizon is out there as a publicly traded company to make money. So while "lockin" may not be so hot for you if you like to shop a la carte, it is a necessary evil if you want to big for-profit company to pay for the infrastructure.
One set of logic, being found valid, this does not make it valid for all situations, only the situation it is formed around. You make no sense now, my friend.
So, because Lindows has taken Linux and gone after the lowest common denominator, the "average" user, the Uber Script Kiddies and Uber Wanna Be Geeks diss it as not really Linux, after all "grandma" can use it. This is why Red Hat fell out of favor, after all they did for Linux, it got way to easy to use, just not geeky enough, after all, with a graphical installer no less.
Well, Linux is now "here", and the companies that have the resources to do it will now put Linux in everyone's hands, not just the "illuminati" and such. Uber Losers, you will now have to go find another "secret" to imagine only you know the truth about. How about BeOS?
But I would like to say, I think Microsoft not only would have won any court cases, but probably should. "Lindows" is clearly a trademark infringement, and for the so-called "Joe Whatever" so trumpeted here as the "average user", it simply isn't clear that there would be no confusion. Whenever I think people are not that stupid, they always prove me wrong.
At this point, I am sure you are White American, because only White Americans feel the need to bring race into a question where race was never an issue.
I assume you have experience in this area? NOT.
Having lived in Korea for 2 years, perhaps I may not really know how they treat other races. But they treated me just fine.
But again, WHY bring it up if it has nothing to do with anything? It's like saying "I know about this project that went to Hell in a hand basket. But hey, by the way, the guy was Indian.
No, I'm sorry, the fact that he was an exchange student of any race has nothing to do with if he can write good code, if his code has bugs. And indeed, it has little to do with writing godd ASP code, which can be done (as far as writing "good" ASP code is possible).
This assumes that you are writing applications independent of the brand of database (or any other associated application), it's all part and parcel with blindly buying into OOP 100%. But, what if you are not writing for any other database, and your app will never be used with any other database? Than, there is not need for an abstraction layer which brings with it overhead, and has no real purpose within the context of your database-specific application.
I hear this abstraction layer line of thought quite often, yet in many applications, it simply does not make sense. If you are building for Oracle and only Oracle, it makes sense to use hooks that specifically take advantage of Oracle. Sometimes making abstraction the Holy Grail just does not make sense.
Besides, down the road, if you decide that you really didn't want to use Oracle, maybe Steve Balmer moves on to your company, well, that just means some nice Indian programmers have work!
Go ahead and continue to delude yourself, that's fine. But the fact remains, corporate does not care if it's open source or not, and if they do, they are usually biased against it.
Than why do you bring it up?