It obviously sounds like you've never been through "DLL HELL." If you only run one application, Exchange in your case, on an NT server, then usually you can have a very stable system that practically never goes down. BUT, if you try to run various applications from various different vendors on one box, then you're looking for trouble. I wouldn't, for example, run Exchange, Office Professional, IIS, another web proxy, may be some SQL apps, and a bunch of printers of one NT box. While you can do this with Linux with no problem, NT will most likely have MAJOR problems because different apps like to update SYSTEM dll's with their different versions. THAT's where you have a major issue.
O.K., that helps a little. Why couldn't they have included this info in the actual distribution? Who would have though to go to dominopower.com instead of looking on lotus.com or notes.net? Anyway, thanks for the tip.
Well, that was a completely useless waste of my time. I downloaded the 94MB file and ran the install. No problems there, except that it couldn't automatically create the notes user and group so I had to do it manually and then reinstall. But, what after the install? No man pages, no documentation, no instructions. I checked the notes home page and couldn't find any additional documentation package I needed to download. I tried running the programs in the bin directory, but they kept saying that it couldn't find a notes.ini file and did nothing at all (except for nsd which dumped my machine info and checkos which say my OS is unsupported!).
I can say that/usr/lotus took up 45395K and/usr/local/notesdata took up 107841K as du reported it. That's over 150MB that's gonna be freed from my hard drive Real Soon Now(tm).
I didn't expect to be greeted with a fancy GUI or anything, as I understand this is only the "server" software, but it would have been nice to have an installation guide that told you what to do after the installation was completed. The "help" directory under the notesdata had some huge files, that ended in nsf and apparently are notes "internal" proprietary help file format. How am I supposed to read them if I can't even fire up the server?
I'll leave the software on my HD for now, but if anyone can point me to an installation or setup guide I'd be greatful.
Don't know about any "hazzles" of moving to domino, but the download is a 90-day evaluation license. I'm downloading it now, but it's 97MB so will take a few minutes...
This is interesting, but from my reading their Linux implementation is just a stop-gap temporary solution to get off the old MD hardware. Sounds like they have not yet picked their ERP software which they will eventually move over the Pick stuff to (they are running Pick on top of Linux at this point, apparently).
In this context, "this context" being SlashDot, the general public refers to the general public of our virtual community, a large percentage of which I believe are either professional programmers or have programming skills. It does not refer to the general public "at large," whom I concede do not comprehend most of the sujects that we discuss. So don't go using the fact that the "general public" cares little for the details of source code licenses as an "excuse" for Sun. Your "general public" are often a bunch of bafoons who are lead by the media like the pied piper, not because they are unintelligent but because they simply don't care.
That we have a sense of humor, yes! Don't take everything so personally. Lighten up. Learn to laugh. That's what we are doing about Sun's weak attempt to pull the wool over our eyes.
We need companies to develop things. Things like hardware. Things I can't develop in my own house (a chip fab plan is a little over my household budget:-). I'm willing to pay a fair price for others, companies or otherwise, to do what I can't.
Do commercial companies need US! to develop software for them???!!! If the answer is yes, then they should be willing to abide by our requirements if they expect our support. Companies should not expect us to provide free labor to them so they can go around and sell it back to us at a healthy margin.
If the answer is no, companies don't need our help to develop software for them, then they are free to release their code under any license they choose. They should not, however, approach our community with the premise that their license is "free" and deserves just as much respect/attention as others. That, IMO, assumes that we are a ignorant of business/licensing issues and are just a bunch of idiot savant like programmers who have no talent in other fields and can't even comprehend the trick they are trying to play on us. That is very offensive to me. (Even though I expect a BIG shipment of Sun hardware next week at work and am excited about getting it all setup, I won't get sucked into developing software for Sun instead of my true Community).
No, but I do believe that Sun's portrayal of their license as just-as-free as the GPL and other "open source" licenses is dangerous. What the previous poster said makes perfect sense to me. What you can't seem to grasp is the having a truely "free" license is more important to some of us than any of the "goodies" that may lie buried in the Sun source code. People who comment on the "unfreeness" of Sun's license are just trying to remind those of us who agree that it is "dangerous" in our view to get involved in contributing to a non-free community. I think you are the one that is being overdramatic, as I don't think anyone even hinted that we believe we are forced to use the code. We know it's our choice, and I can't personally blame Sun for their stance. It is important, IMHO, to remind the truely free of us what is at stake here though.
It's very simple. Any author can release their code in any license they want. An author can also release their code under multiple licenses. Microsoft apparently didn't want to abide by the rules of the GPL so they decided to pursue a different contract which didn't force them to disclose any of their source. They had to pay for this special license, as well they should.
And Netscape doesn't have anywhere near the resources that Microsoft has. When Microsoft bought "Internet Explorer" and through tons of resources at making it "better" than Navigator (which they could only afford because of their OS monopoly) Netscape was forced to "cut corners." If some other company, such as whoever makes Opera, started to compete with Netscape, instead of the Microsoft behemoth, I don't believe Navigator would be in such a mess it is.
Don't cha see? This is exactly what the whole anti-trust case is about. Microsoft's actions in destroying competition in other non-OS areas by using it's influence in their OS monopoly. Whether that comes in the form of product tieing, which they did (in forcing OEMs to exclusively tie IE with their monopoly OS), or using their monopoly profits to buy out their competition or buy into another market (which they did with their $40 over-fair-value for Windows 98 upgrade per customer), it's illegal for a company holding a monopoly to do.
Besides, I don't know what your talking about with regard to Netscape being buggy in Linux. I'm running it right now and don't have any problems. In fact, I can't remember when the last time that it crashed was. And, even if it does, it's not going to take the whole computer down with it. I have much more occurances of IE crashing on my laptop than Communicator on my Linux box. Perhaps you are going to too many Microsoft oriented web sites that use that proprietary Microsoft HTML that Communicator can't handle that well???
You could turn that around and have it make just as much sense:
"That date notation is used most commonly other than in the US and in the UK (DD-MM-YYYY), and it is dangerous because it is often indistinguishable from MM DD YYYY. (ex. 05-04-1999) The international standard date notation is YYYY-MM-DD. I believe most people use the notation mm. dd. yyyy, or with the month name."
But when you "say" a date you usually say the month, day, and year, like January first two-thousand, so MM-DD-YYYY makes more sense, symantically. In this notation, you could substitute the month abbreviation or whole name and have the same date, said the same way:
1-1-2000 Jan-1-2000 January-1-2000 January 1st, 2000
It doesn't make much sense, to me, to have the full digit format "different" than how the date is usually said. Of course, I don't know that non-US people say the date as "the first of January, 2000!" all the time. While I can see this order used in some situations, I believe the month, day, year order is more common in spoken conversation. When someone asks you when you were born, do you say "January 1st, 2000" or "the first of January, 2000?"
It depends on what you mean by interfere, of course. The executive branch is the one prosecuting the case, so they obviously have some influence on the outcome of the case. If they are very strongly prosecuting the case then there is a greater "chance" that the Judicial branch will find that more laws were violated, or the laws were violated more blatantly, than if the Executive branch prosecuted the case "lightly" or with reduced force.
So, no, the Executive branch has no "direct" influence on the Judicial branch and what they find/rule. However, they definately have an indirect influence which does not conflict with the separation of powers. They certainly are not directly forcing or impelling the Judicial branch to make any particular finding/ruling.
The problem with whatever term is used to describe the action is that now there is a large body of software that is NOT prohibited from being distributed. The advocates of intellectual property would like people to believe that copying or sharing ANY software, whether it is actually prohibited from being distributed by it's authors or not, is bad, "evil" and morally wrong because it "harms" "good" people trying to make an "honest" living with their IP. This is the subtle, subconcious manipulation, that gets those who believe they have a right to give away their IP (if you even believe in such a thing) to others so upset.
So, yes, you can use "theft" or "piracy" or any other term with bad connotations you want. However, I believe to be truely "fair" one must use a term that indicates the act itself, sharing or copying software with others, is in and of itself not a "bad" or wrong act. Only when done with the "IP" of others without their permission is this a "wrong" act. So, that's why there is a "problem" with the way everyone currently refers to the practice.
There is such a thing as objectivity. There's also the problem in America of everyone sugar-coating the "problems" and not calling a jackass a jackass. Parents not raising their kids right, trying to be their friends before an authority figure, is an example. You sound like you just want to sugar-coat this topic and say, basically, "can't we all get along" and "oh, don't be so hard on the guy."
He dodged the questions I was most interested in hearing answers to. Those were how much he felt responsible for apparently getting a guy fired from his job when he did nothing wrong. Not answering questions or acusations that are brought directly from the source seems to be tantamount to admitting your guilt.
I never heard of the guy before, and didn't have any preconceived opinions. After reading the questions, and his response, I tend to believe his detractors rather than his "explaination."
There's a lot of people here on/. that have not "already made up their mind" on a wide variety of topics. I think he blew a huge chance to "get the facts straight" if he thought they were incorrect.
I honestly believe that one of the reasons why navigator is as buggy as it is is due to Microsoft's monopoly on the OS and their illegal leveraging and tying of their browser with their monopoly product. That they added a few additional features that were not hammered out in an official standards group is a non issue as long as they FULLY publish the new functionality, which I'm under the impression that they did.
So you're blaming Netscape for the fact that Microsoft doesn't have a standards compliant browser? Please, go troll elsewhere.
AOL didn't get suckered. There's a thing called due dilligence. If they didn't do it, then it's their own fault.
Yep, you got that right. Like Fizgig said, it's a Xeon/w 2MB cache. Those chips are MUCH more expensive. Plus, I kinda doubt the $6500 list quoted on IBM's web page is for the "raw" chip. Probably includes a CPU "board" that plugs into the Netfinity much like Compaq's SMP servers do.
I was a little surprised also, because I had to spec out a E450 running Solaris vs an Intel box running WindowsNT. Much to my surprise the Intel/Windows "solution" was more expensive than the SPARC/Solaris option. It was great to see because I don't think the apps that we were going to run on it would have faired too well with the NT server.
And I did try to be "fair" to the Intel/Windows box by spec'ng out "comparable" equipment. I could have spec'd out the 8-way Netfinity which would have really cost more than the SPARC, but that wouldn't be too fair now, would it?
Look at an IBM Netfinity 7000 M10 3SY. It's a 4 CPU Pentium III Xeon 550Mhz/w 2MB Cache server. The base system, with one CPU, cost $15,053.35. The CPU's for this guy are $6,521.74 according to IBM's web site.
Look at a Sun Enterprise 450. It's a 4 CPU UltraSPARC-II 400Mhz/w 4MB Cache server. The base system, with one CPU, cost $15945. The CPU's for this guy are $5600 according to SUN's web site.
Let's see:
* 32 bit CPU vs 64 bit CPU.
* 2MB Cache vs 4MB cache.
* $15K vs $16K.
* 550MHz CISC vs 400MHz RISC.
Which would you rather have, given that they are approximately the same price (and the UltraSparc-II CPU's are much less)?
Slashdot Mirror
It obviously sounds like you've never been through "DLL HELL." If you only run one application, Exchange in your case, on an NT server, then usually you can have a very stable system that practically never goes down. BUT, if you try to run various applications from various different vendors on one box, then you're looking for trouble. I wouldn't, for example, run Exchange, Office Professional, IIS, another web proxy, may be some SQL apps, and a bunch of printers of one NT box. While you can do this with Linux with no problem, NT will most likely have MAJOR problems because different apps like to update SYSTEM dll's with their different versions. THAT's where you have a major issue.
O.K., that helps a little. Why couldn't they have included this info in the actual distribution? Who would have though to go to dominopower.com instead of looking on lotus.com or notes.net? Anyway, thanks for the tip.
Well check out this quick review that I did. I don't think a screenshot of a directory listing would be that salesworthy.
Well, that was a completely useless waste of my time. I downloaded the 94MB file and ran the install. No problems there, except that it couldn't automatically create the notes user and group so I had to do it manually and then reinstall. But, what after the install? No man pages, no documentation, no instructions. I checked the notes home page and couldn't find any additional documentation package I needed to download. I tried running the programs in the bin directory, but they kept saying that it couldn't find a notes.ini file and did nothing at all (except for nsd which dumped my machine info and checkos which say my OS is unsupported!).
/usr/lotus took up 45395K and /usr/local/notesdata took up 107841K as du reported it. That's over 150MB that's gonna be freed from my hard drive Real Soon Now(tm).
I can say that
I didn't expect to be greeted with a fancy GUI or anything, as I understand this is only the "server" software, but it would have been nice to have an installation guide that told you what to do after the installation was completed. The "help" directory under the notesdata had some huge files, that ended in nsf and apparently are notes "internal" proprietary help file format. How am I supposed to read them if I can't even fire up the server?
I'll leave the software on my HD for now, but if anyone can point me to an installation or setup guide I'd be greatful.
Don't know about any "hazzles" of moving to domino, but the download is a 90-day evaluation license. I'm downloading it now, but it's 97MB so will take a few minutes...
If you want to evaluate it, just download it.
And we're putting gigabit Ethernet interfaces on ours...
This is interesting, but from my reading their Linux implementation is just a stop-gap temporary solution to get off the old MD hardware. Sounds like they have not yet picked their ERP software which they will eventually move over the Pick stuff to (they are running Pick on top of Linux at this point, apparently).
Wonder who it will be? SAP?
In this context, "this context" being SlashDot, the general public refers to the general public of our virtual community, a large percentage of which I believe are either professional programmers or have programming skills. It does not refer to the general public "at large," whom I concede do not comprehend most of the sujects that we discuss. So don't go using the fact that the "general public" cares little for the details of source code licenses as an "excuse" for Sun. Your "general public" are often a bunch of bafoons who are lead by the media like the pied piper, not because they are unintelligent but because they simply don't care.
That we have a sense of humor, yes! Don't take everything so personally. Lighten up. Learn to laugh. That's what we are doing about Sun's weak attempt to pull the wool over our eyes.
Here's a very simple idea.
:-). I'm willing to pay a fair price for others, companies or otherwise, to do what I can't.
We need companies to develop things. Things like hardware. Things I can't develop in my own house (a chip fab plan is a little over my household budget
Do commercial companies need US! to develop software for them???!!! If the answer is yes, then they should be willing to abide by our requirements if they expect our support. Companies should not expect us to provide free labor to them so they can go around and sell it back to us at a healthy margin.
If the answer is no, companies don't need our help to develop software for them, then they are free to release their code under any license they choose. They should not, however, approach our community with the premise that their license is "free" and deserves just as much respect/attention as others. That, IMO, assumes that we are a ignorant of business/licensing issues and are just a bunch of idiot savant like programmers who have no talent in other fields and can't even comprehend the trick they are trying to play on us. That is very offensive to me. (Even though I expect a BIG shipment of Sun hardware next week at work and am excited about getting it all setup, I won't get sucked into developing software for Sun instead of my true Community).
No, but I do believe that Sun's portrayal of their license as just-as-free as the GPL and other "open source" licenses is dangerous. What the previous poster said makes perfect sense to me. What you can't seem to grasp is the having a truely "free" license is more important to some of us than any of the "goodies" that may lie buried in the Sun source code. People who comment on the "unfreeness" of Sun's license are just trying to remind those of us who agree that it is "dangerous" in our view to get involved in contributing to a non-free community. I think you are the one that is being overdramatic, as I don't think anyone even hinted that we believe we are forced to use the code. We know it's our choice, and I can't personally blame Sun for their stance. It is important, IMHO, to remind the truely free of us what is at stake here though.
It's very simple. Any author can release their code in any license they want. An author can also release their code under multiple licenses. Microsoft apparently didn't want to abide by the rules of the GPL so they decided to pursue a different contract which didn't force them to disclose any of their source. They had to pay for this special license, as well they should.
And Netscape doesn't have anywhere near the resources that Microsoft has. When Microsoft bought "Internet Explorer" and through tons of resources at making it "better" than Navigator (which they could only afford because of their OS monopoly) Netscape was forced to "cut corners." If some other company, such as whoever makes Opera, started to compete with Netscape, instead of the Microsoft behemoth, I don't believe Navigator would be in such a mess it is.
Don't cha see? This is exactly what the whole anti-trust case is about. Microsoft's actions in destroying competition in other non-OS areas by using it's influence in their OS monopoly. Whether that comes in the form of product tieing, which they did (in forcing OEMs to exclusively tie IE with their monopoly OS), or using their monopoly profits to buy out their competition or buy into another market (which they did with their $40 over-fair-value for Windows 98 upgrade per customer), it's illegal for a company holding a monopoly to do.
Besides, I don't know what your talking about with regard to Netscape being buggy in Linux. I'm running it right now and don't have any problems. In fact, I can't remember when the last time that it crashed was. And, even if it does, it's not going to take the whole computer down with it. I have much more occurances of IE crashing on my laptop than Communicator on my Linux box. Perhaps you are going to too many Microsoft oriented web sites that use that proprietary Microsoft HTML that Communicator can't handle that well???
You forgot 451 - the temperature in Fahrenheit at which paper spontaneously combusts.
You could turn that around and have it make just as much sense:
"That date notation is used most commonly other than in the US and in the UK (DD-MM-YYYY), and it is dangerous because it is often indistinguishable from MM DD YYYY. (ex. 05-04-1999) The international standard date notation is YYYY-MM-DD. I believe most people use the notation mm. dd. yyyy, or with the month name."
But when you "say" a date you usually say the month, day, and year, like January first two-thousand, so MM-DD-YYYY makes more sense, symantically. In this notation, you could substitute the month abbreviation or whole name and have the same date, said the same way:
1-1-2000
Jan-1-2000
January-1-2000
January 1st, 2000
It doesn't make much sense, to me, to have the full digit format "different" than how the date is usually said. Of course, I don't know that non-US people say the date as "the first of January, 2000!" all the time. While I can see this order used in some situations, I believe the month, day, year order is more common in spoken conversation. When someone asks you when you were born, do you say "January 1st, 2000" or "the first of January, 2000?"
It depends on what you mean by interfere, of course. The executive branch is the one prosecuting the case, so they obviously have some influence on the outcome of the case. If they are very strongly prosecuting the case then there is a greater "chance" that the Judicial branch will find that more laws were violated, or the laws were violated more blatantly, than if the Executive branch prosecuted the case "lightly" or with reduced force.
So, no, the Executive branch has no "direct" influence on the Judicial branch and what they find/rule. However, they definately have an indirect influence which does not conflict with the separation of powers. They certainly are not directly forcing or impelling the Judicial branch to make any particular finding/ruling.
The problem with whatever term is used to describe the action is that now there is a large body of software that is NOT prohibited from being distributed. The advocates of intellectual property would like people to believe that copying or sharing ANY software, whether it is actually prohibited from being distributed by it's authors or not, is bad, "evil" and morally wrong because it "harms" "good" people trying to make an "honest" living with their IP. This is the subtle, subconcious manipulation, that gets those who believe they have a right to give away their IP (if you even believe in such a thing) to others so upset.
So, yes, you can use "theft" or "piracy" or any other term with bad connotations you want. However, I believe to be truely "fair" one must use a term that indicates the act itself, sharing or copying software with others, is in and of itself not a "bad" or wrong act. Only when done with the "IP" of others without their permission is this a "wrong" act. So, that's why there is a "problem" with the way everyone currently refers to the practice.
Canadian libel law is different than US libel law.
There is such a thing as objectivity. There's also the problem in America of everyone sugar-coating the "problems" and not calling a jackass a jackass. Parents not raising their kids right, trying to be their friends before an authority figure, is an example. You sound like you just want to sugar-coat this topic and say, basically, "can't we all get along" and "oh, don't be so hard on the guy."
He dodged the questions I was most interested in hearing answers to. Those were how much he felt responsible for apparently getting a guy fired from his job when he did nothing wrong. Not answering questions or acusations that are brought directly from the source seems to be tantamount to admitting your guilt.
I never heard of the guy before, and didn't have any preconceived opinions. After reading the questions, and his response, I tend to believe his detractors rather than his "explaination."
/. that have not "already made up their mind" on a wide variety of topics. I think he blew a huge chance to "get the facts straight" if he thought they were incorrect.
There's a lot of people here on
I honestly believe that one of the reasons why navigator is as buggy as it is is due to Microsoft's monopoly on the OS and their illegal leveraging and tying of their browser with their monopoly product. That they added a few additional features that were not hammered out in an official standards group is a non issue as long as they FULLY publish the new functionality, which I'm under the impression that they did.
So you're blaming Netscape for the fact that Microsoft doesn't have a standards compliant browser? Please, go troll elsewhere.
AOL didn't get suckered. There's a thing called due dilligence. If they didn't do it, then it's their own fault.
Hmm. My browser (4.7) did just fine, and I reloaded it a couple of times just to make sure. I'd suggest upgrading.
Yep, you got that right. Like Fizgig said, it's a Xeon /w 2MB cache. Those chips are MUCH more expensive. Plus, I kinda doubt the $6500 list quoted on IBM's web page is for the "raw" chip. Probably includes a CPU "board" that plugs into the Netfinity much like Compaq's SMP servers do.
I was a little surprised also, because I had to spec out a E450 running Solaris vs an Intel box running WindowsNT. Much to my surprise the Intel/Windows "solution" was more expensive than the SPARC/Solaris option. It was great to see because I don't think the apps that we were going to run on it would have faired too well with the NT server.
And I did try to be "fair" to the Intel/Windows box by spec'ng out "comparable" equipment. I could have spec'd out the 8-way Netfinity which would have really cost more than the SPARC, but that wouldn't be too fair now, would it?
Are you guys crazy?
/w 2MB Cache server. The base system, with one CPU, cost $15,053.35. The CPU's for this guy are $6,521.74 according to IBM's web site.
/w 4MB Cache server. The base system, with one CPU, cost $15945. The CPU's for this guy are $5600 according to SUN's web site.
Look at an IBM Netfinity 7000 M10 3SY. It's a 4 CPU Pentium III Xeon 550Mhz
Look at a Sun Enterprise 450. It's a 4 CPU UltraSPARC-II 400Mhz
Let's see:
* 32 bit CPU vs 64 bit CPU.
* 2MB Cache vs 4MB cache.
* $15K vs $16K.
* 550MHz CISC vs 400MHz RISC.
Which would you rather have, given that they are approximately the same price (and the UltraSparc-II CPU's are much less)?
I think it's a no-brainer.