The grandparent I was replying too clearly stated that it was "MySQL, PHP, PostgreSQL" putting the pressure on MS. Those have everything to do with SQL 2005, and nothing to do with Visual Studio.
What do the charge for the regular version of Visual Studio? A decent amount. $50 is peanuts compared when you add in the cost of media/shipping, etc. They dropped from that tiny amount of profit to none on the lightweight version. Not a huge deal for them.
I guess in your mind they can't possibly decide to give away a lightweight tool for free without being forced to. They can. They did it with SQL 2000 long before any opensource DBs were anything of a threat. Not everything has to revolve around OSS, much as many/.'ers like to believe.
(Disclaimer: I'm a big OpenBSD user/fan. Not against OSS. I just don't like folks deluding themselves about it being the center of the known universe)
Let's see, cluster a few machines vs rewriting the business logic in a couple dozen different apps, where a misstep in one screws the data for them all. I think I'll just cluster, thanks.
Keeping the business logic out of the database may be good for you if the only thing your database ever talks to is a web app, but lots of us have databases that talk to a LOT of different applications. Rather than reinvent the wheel implementing the buisness logic in a million apps, we keep it in the database, where it keeps everthing consistant, no matter what app is talking to the database, and where it can run fast.
Sorry. I hate to burst your bubble, but this isn't something new that OS 'forced' on MS. They have offered a free lightweight version of their database for some time. I've been using the free SQL 2000 version on machines for testing for years.
This isn't some 'new thing' that MS is doing because it's running scared of OSS.
You could also have downloaded SQL 2000 in a free limited form as well. They changed the name in 2005 to 'express', but they've had that program for quite a while.
But if you want to run an OS as well (as most do) then you need to factor in the cost of the OS as well...
That's probably why right before it he said is "Please take into account. Most People who choose MS SQL Server already have a windows network". He was hoping trolls like you would then skip over it, but I guess you have to bash MS anytime you can, even if a disclaimer to your point was already in the parent post.
Psst, the info wasn't in the EULA, it was in the Terms and Agreements, a seperate document. The EULA itself doesn't describe it at all. and in the "Terms and Agreements" it never states that the stuf spies on what websites you go to, your email, or that THERE IS NO UNINSTALL PROGRAM FOR IT and that you CAN'T REMOVE THE SOFTWARE!
So no, it wasn't advertised at all as to what it really is.
For every given brand of product, it's easy to find someone that's had impeccable reliability, and it's also easy to find someone that's seen horrid reliability with the same product. I really can't say why.
Easy, it's statistics. Most people you talk to have dealt with a very small sample number of drives, maybe a dozen or so. If they get happen to get failures they think the brand is crap. If they happen not to, the they think the brand is great.
If you want to get a better idea, talk to someone who deals with thousands of drives, like an IT guy from a large company. Then you start to get the view from a statistically meaningful number of drives.
As the other poster said, you can also get a decent idea from the warrenty. If the company (Maxtor) only warrenties their drives for one year, and another (Seagate) warrenties theirs for 5 years, there is probably a reason the one with the longer warrenty is willing to risk returns over a longer period of time. Namely that they won't get that many returned because they are less likely to fail.
Being in charge if several hundred drives at work myself, and talking with IT staffers at larger corps, I can tell you that the correlation seems to fit well.
You also need to keep in mind that even manufacturers who overall make very solid drives (IBM) can make a certain model of drive (Deathstar) that can have a design defect and give the overall brand a worse name than it may deserve. Certain users will have used only a small number of the manufacturers drives, with a high proportion being of the model with the defect, so the brand will see much worse to them than it is overall. High sampling numbers are the key.
Yes, quality died in the late 90's, but it's made a comeback in some places in the last few years. After cheaping out and shortening the lenght of their warrenties to the 1-2 year range of the low end competition, Seagate is back to 5 year warrenties. Several other manufacturers have also followed suite, raising quality and their warrenties.
Assuming it scales literally is rediculous tho. Apple has done great with the investment they made in the iPods with their $1. Do you really think if they invested another $99 into the iPods that 99x more people would buy them? Sorry, no. The markets they are in don't scale that way.
Oh please. I'm sure Michael Dell is a good enough CEO that he could have done something to make Apple workable if he'd actually been in charge of it. Apple was a competitor. Do you really think he was going to spout off good anwers that might be helpful to his competition? This isn't some thinktank person making predictions about the future of the market. It's a CEO of one company asked about 'what to fix' in a competitor. Expeting him to say "Well, they could make a huge turnaround and profit if they'd just..." is a bit rediculous.
I've never uses WoW, and after reading this I never will, or trust any Blizzard apps on my machine. I read my EULAs, but I'm not arrogant enough to assume that most people will read the EULA plus appendice 1, Part 13, subparagraph 1, just to install a friggin game on their system. Any notice that you are going to install something as obtrusive on a machine should be spelled out right upfront. Not hidden a few links away.
I've read the comments on the thread. Some folks are happy. It's still spyware.
Why is it so hard for someone to write a game that simply runs as an application rather than install spyware on my machine? Why can't they make a little more effort when the write the application?
Seriously, hiding bad stuff in multiple appendices and small print is an old trick to hide stuff you don't want to come right out and say. Adding spyware is NOT a normal part of a game contract and the existance of such should be listed clearly up front. The need to make excuses for Blizzard amazes me.
The other big problem is that the warning that they are installing spyware on your machine IS NOT IN THE EULA!!! It is at the bottom of a long separate document, the TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT that the EULA links to. If you just read the EULA you will have no clue that the are installing spyware on your machine. Something that intrusive should be directly stated in the EULA.
I believe that is for VMWare *3*. The same antique version that used to run on FreeBSD as a host. It hasn't worked that way since the 3.x series. There was no support in 4.0, 4.5, or the current 5.0. I've also heard of no support upcoming in version 5.5 that's currently in beta.
It's easy to ftp, even over a flaky dialup. The default install is pretty small. Get it up and working and play. If you want to add more suff later, pkg_add is extremely easy to use.
Re:What would make me try it..
on
OpenBSD 3.8 Released
·
· Score: 3, Informative
VMWare does not run on OpenBSD. You can install it as a guest system, with no support and no VMWare tools for it, but you can't use it as a secure host OS. I've been bugging VMWare for support for it for a long time. I hope anyone else interested will write them as well.
This is a BSD we are talking about. The number refers to the whole operating system. Not just a kernal as in Linux. The same team that works on the kernal works on the rest of the system as well.
Re:T-Shirts are Dandy and All..
on
OpenBSD 3.8 Released
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Lots of folks use it. But many use it in a place you'd never detect it. Firewalls. Your 'netcraft' numbers won't report those, because in the vast majority of cases those will be totally invisible.
Hey coward, there are plenty of laptops out there with replacable/upgradable video cards in them. I'm writing this from a laptop with a card I upgraded.
Slashdot Mirror
What do the charge for the regular version of Visual Studio? A decent amount. $50 is peanuts compared when you add in the cost of media/shipping, etc. They dropped from that tiny amount of profit to none on the lightweight version. Not a huge deal for them.
I guess in your mind they can't possibly decide to give away a lightweight tool for free without being forced to. They can. They did it with SQL 2000 long before any opensource DBs were anything of a threat. Not everything has to revolve around OSS, much as many /.'ers like to believe.
(Disclaimer: I'm a big OpenBSD user/fan. Not against OSS. I just don't like folks deluding themselves about it being the center of the known universe)
Let's see, cluster a few machines vs rewriting the business logic in a couple dozen different apps, where a misstep in one screws the data for them all. I think I'll just cluster, thanks.
Keeping the business logic out of the database may be good for you if the only thing your database ever talks to is a web app, but lots of us have databases that talk to a LOT of different applications. Rather than reinvent the wheel implementing the buisness logic in a million apps, we keep it in the database, where it keeps everthing consistant, no matter what app is talking to the database, and where it can run fast.
This isn't some 'new thing' that MS is doing because it's running scared of OSS.
You could also have downloaded SQL 2000 in a free limited form as well. They changed the name in 2005 to 'express', but they've had that program for quite a while.
That's probably why right before it he said is "Please take into account. Most People who choose MS SQL Server already have a windows network". He was hoping trolls like you would then skip over it, but I guess you have to bash MS anytime you can, even if a disclaimer to your point was already in the parent post.
Nevertheless, Sony doesn't tell you you can't uninstall their spyware.
So no, it wasn't advertised at all as to what it really is.
Easy, it's statistics. Most people you talk to have dealt with a very small sample number of drives, maybe a dozen or so. If they get happen to get failures they think the brand is crap. If they happen not to, the they think the brand is great.
If you want to get a better idea, talk to someone who deals with thousands of drives, like an IT guy from a large company. Then you start to get the view from a statistically meaningful number of drives.
As the other poster said, you can also get a decent idea from the warrenty. If the company (Maxtor) only warrenties their drives for one year, and another (Seagate) warrenties theirs for 5 years, there is probably a reason the one with the longer warrenty is willing to risk returns over a longer period of time. Namely that they won't get that many returned because they are less likely to fail.
Being in charge if several hundred drives at work myself, and talking with IT staffers at larger corps, I can tell you that the correlation seems to fit well.
You also need to keep in mind that even manufacturers who overall make very solid drives (IBM) can make a certain model of drive (Deathstar) that can have a design defect and give the overall brand a worse name than it may deserve. Certain users will have used only a small number of the manufacturers drives, with a high proportion being of the model with the defect, so the brand will see much worse to them than it is overall. High sampling numbers are the key.
Yes, quality died in the late 90's, but it's made a comeback in some places in the last few years. After cheaping out and shortening the lenght of their warrenties to the 1-2 year range of the low end competition, Seagate is back to 5 year warrenties. Several other manufacturers have also followed suite, raising quality and their warrenties.
Assuming it scales literally is rediculous tho. Apple has done great with the investment they made in the iPods with their $1. Do you really think if they invested another $99 into the iPods that 99x more people would buy them? Sorry, no. The markets they are in don't scale that way.
Oh please. I'm sure Michael Dell is a good enough CEO that he could have done something to make Apple workable if he'd actually been in charge of it. Apple was a competitor. Do you really think he was going to spout off good anwers that might be helpful to his competition? This isn't some thinktank person making predictions about the future of the market. It's a CEO of one company asked about 'what to fix' in a competitor. Expeting him to say "Well, they could make a huge turnaround and profit if they'd just..." is a bit rediculous.
for an ancient 3.x version of VMWare. That won't work for 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, or the upcoming 5.5
If you can manage to find the hidden software files and do delete tehm as suggested in the EULA, you will no longer be able to access your CD drive.
Funny how no mention of those points are made in the agreement.
I've read the comments on the thread. Some folks are happy. It's still spyware.
Seriously, hiding bad stuff in multiple appendices and small print is an old trick to hide stuff you don't want to come right out and say. Adding spyware is NOT a normal part of a game contract and the existance of such should be listed clearly up front. The need to make excuses for Blizzard amazes me.
The other big problem is that the warning that they are installing spyware on your machine IS NOT IN THE EULA!!! It is at the bottom of a long separate document, the TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT that the EULA links to. If you just read the EULA you will have no clue that the are installing spyware on your machine. Something that intrusive should be directly stated in the EULA.
I believe that is for VMWare *3*. The same antique version that used to run on FreeBSD as a host. It hasn't worked that way since the 3.x series. There was no support in 4.0, 4.5, or the current 5.0. I've also heard of no support upcoming in version 5.5 that's currently in beta.
It's easy to ftp, even over a flaky dialup. The default install is pretty small. Get it up and working and play. If you want to add more suff later, pkg_add is extremely easy to use.
VMWare does not run on OpenBSD. You can install it as a guest system, with no support and no VMWare tools for it, but you can't use it as a secure host OS. I've been bugging VMWare for support for it for a long time. I hope anyone else interested will write them as well.
oops, copying and pasting too many links. The last one should be http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0321 193660/qid=1130858098/sr=8-4/ref=pd_bbs_4/104-7353 399-4047146?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
But if you really need a book they aren't hard to find.
This is a BSD we are talking about. The number refers to the whole operating system. Not just a kernal as in Linux. The same team that works on the kernal works on the rest of the system as well.
Lots of folks use it. But many use it in a place you'd never detect it. Firewalls. Your 'netcraft' numbers won't report those, because in the vast majority of cases those will be totally invisible.
Hey coward, there are plenty of laptops out there with replacable/upgradable video cards in them. I'm writing this from a laptop with a card I upgraded.