Now I'm really sad... EJB's? They're awful, for so many reasons.
Now Hibernate, especially with Spring transaction management is much easier to deal with for most cases. And it works very simply, and there's even a native SQL-like object query language called HQL to help. And it writes very efficient SQL queries (I've done a lot of investigation on this on objects backed by tables with tens of millions of rows) to the back end, is entirely DBMS-agnostic, and is apparently the basis for many of EJB 3.0's enhancements over 2.0.
Most J2EE devs don't get much choice on this stuff, but if you do, learn these 2 frameworks. They're even Open Source (and free-as-in-beer) so you can hardly go wrong, really.
... that I (as an EA) don't really understand the proposition and what I can do with it. Sure I've read the blurb, I've even been to Menlo Park and had the presentation, but the question I want to answer is *what* of all my core apps I'm going to run on it. Do I get to go to Oracle grid on this stuff? Can I run all my core back office apps on it? What do I pay on top of the $1/cpu/hr? Bandwidth back to head office?
On top of all that, it's clear that I'm not going to abandon our existing investment in Sun hardware to take immediate advantage of this while that hardware still has a leasing life of 2-3 years. Sure I'm interested, it doesn't particularly benefit the company to have a stack of office space devoted to a computer room, and it's harder still when the business grows fast and we constantly need more gear. But Sun aren't in my face about this stuff, aren't giving me the numbers I need to take it to the CIO. When they do, then I'll think about it.
On the other hand, Sun are to be congratulated on their other initiatives in this kind of pricing model. To an enterprise with small numbers of staff but high revenue, their per FTE/yr software licensing on Java Enterprise System et al is a wonderful model which many other vendors will have to catch up with as we move to multi-core CPU's as standard. For us, the other J2EE vendors just can't compete on price (FOSS excluded of course).
Utility computing is coming, let's face it - but mainly it's a question of education of the masses, and time to get through hardware replacement cycles. Of course I'm a bit surprised that there's NO customers yet, but that still doesn't mean there won't be, ever.
I've found it extremely useful for dealing with specific as well as general problems with Oracle.
But in general, if you know one RDBMS, then until you need specific features it's not too hard - I taught myself with the aid of the manuals and some experimentation.
HTH
I should point out, of course, the delicious irony of not accepting electronic comments on a proposal to accept electronic-only pre-registration.
I should also point out that your delightfully bureaucratic rules on how to deliver comments as appended to your email do not, in fact, preclude the submission of comments in electronic form - they simply give instructions on how to deliver documents in paper form.
Thirdly, I should point out that, in fact, I did not send an email containing my comments but rather submitted my comments using a web form on your own web site. So your assertion that the comments were made via email is presumably only true if the comments I submitted were then converted to an email format by the systems running your web site.
I am also somewhat saddened by all of the above, which seem, ultimately, unreasonable. As a member of the public and the IT community who, these days, rarely, if ever, delivers documents of any kind by paper mail, your failure to accept electronic comment is mystifying. I have no particular interest in submitting a short comment with 5 copies by paper delivery, it seems somewhat onerous to have to do so, when your department presumably would save considerable sums of money by *preferring* electronic comment.
In any regard, my comments stand and I have taken the liberty of posting them on several IT web sites and encouraging other people to submit similar comments. I am sure that my comment will not be the only one made in a similar vein. You and your department are of course at liberty to take note of my opinions or ignore them completely, as you see fit.
We have received an email from you regarding the proposed rulemaking on electronic-only preregistration. The comments you submitted cannot be considered because they were in the form of email. As the instructions in the Copyright Office's Federal Register notice state, comments can be delivered to the Copyright Office by the
following means:
If hand delivered by a private party, an original and five copies of any comment should be brought to Room LM-401 of the James Madison Memorial Building between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. and the envelope should be addressed as follows: Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Copyright Office, James
Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000. If hand delivered by a commercial courier, an original and five copies of any comment must be delivered to the Congressional Courier Acceptance Site located at Second and D Streets, NE., Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. The envelope should be addressed as follows: Copyright Office General Counsel, Room LM-403, James Madison Memorial Building, 101
Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. If sent by mail, an original and five copies of any comment should be addressed to: Copyright GC/ I&R, P.O. Box 70400, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024-0400. Comments may not be delivered by means of overnight delivery services such as Federal Express, United Parcel Service, etc., due to delays in processing receipt of such deliveries.
I read a proposed policy with title "Preregistration of Certain Unpublished Copyright Claims" which asks me as a member of the public to inform your office if I would have any problem if I were required to use the Microsoft Internet Explorer browser for preregistering a work.
Below you can read my personal opinion and feedback on this issue.
I have no access to Microsoft Internet Explorer because I chose to prevent access to it (for security reasons) on all my personal computers and use the Mozilla Firefox browser instead. Whilst my job provides me with access to Internet Explorer, I would be unwilling to submit personal copyright claims through my employer's systems for a variety of reasons related to privacy, intellectual property, and ethical standards.
Microsoft Internet Explorer uses proprietary technology, such as ActiveX, which other Web browsers usually do not support. It also fails to correctly implement a number of crucial Web standards which are critical to interoperability of HTML web pages across different browsers. As a result, I regularly have difficulty navigating websites that are designed exclusively for Internet Explorer, but which are often otherwise compliant with international standards.
As an IT professional with considerable experience in web development for multiple browsers, I know that it is possible to design a website accessible with any modern Web browser, by using Web standards such as XHTML and CSS, and - whenever interactivity is needed - JavaScript and Java applets (which can run on most operating systems).
Requiring users to use a particular Web browser causes disruption, especially for Apple Macintosh and GNU/Linux or BSD operating systems users, who often have no access to Microsoft Windows and may have never used Microsoft Internet Explorer before. When a user community such as yours extends across (potentially) many millions of users, excluding these groups potentially disenfranchises them altogether, and at the very least can cost them significant time and effort (and potentially money) to access a service such as yours that forms one of the underpinnings of the copyright system. This can only be a bad thing.
Please consider the difficulties of non-Microsoft operating system users, as well as those who choose not to use Microsoft's Internet Explorer on their Windows PC's, and try to provide a standards-oriented Web design, which would make their life (and ultimately your IT staff's life) much easier.
I implemented a similar system in a brewery warehouse about 12 years ago - we used ceiling mounted RF tags and a reader on the roof of the fork (with a 10-12 foot range), connected to the fork release/grab mechanism to match ceiling tag against location when the forkie picks up stock or puts it down - and there you go - he doesn't have to scan anything, but you know where that pallet is all the time.
There are/were alternative solutions which involve mounting the reader under the body of the fork and burying some seriously small tags in the slab of the warehouse floor - this may be more practical depending on your individual needs.
Out of doors, we used D-GPS (differential GPS) which was able to use standard GPS and a calibrated base station with a precisely-known position to iron out the fluctuations in GPS positioning - this allowed us to locate straddle forks at the local docks to the level of accuracy you describe, but as you say it's impractical indoors.
I'd say any method attempting triangulation is doomed to being (i) expensive , (ii) overly complex, and (iii) unreliable in a normal warehouse environment where there's lots of lovely racking and stock to get in the way of RF transmissions.
HTH
Dan Shannon
Sorry, but you just miss a major point - if someone manufactures a pill, taken once daily, that make you live *forever*, then that's an awful lot of pills a day we're all (many of us at least) going to be paying for, *forever*, ergo a lot of moolah to be made. A single-shot serum seems as ridiculous as all those 'fountain of eternal youth' movies.
Take a look at their P&L's. Seven billion doesn't last that long with a company that size if you're not making money.
You're clearly not an accountant then. Cashflow and profit (or in Sun's case, loss) are different things.
In my opinion, Sun's problem lies in converting their wealth of vision into reality at the consulting level. Here in Australia they seem to be desperate for consulting revenue, but can't provide great consultants to back up the great vision that issues forth from Menlo Park's EBC.
However, some of their disruptive moves - like the Java Enterprise System's licensing model - work extremely well, but it will take a while for the business cycle to demonstrate whether client uptake will deliver the $$$
Ahh... sarcasm... there's a thing that should confuse the (presumably American) producers.
I live in fear that the whole film will be ruined by a failure to understand the humour of the whole thing and somehow try to make it 'heroic' - simple suburban man (Dentarthurdent) kidnapped by aliens (Vogons) saves Universe with paranoid android blah blah blah. Do we get to keep the point about planning permission for demolition of the Earth/Arthur's house? I fear not. Will Arthur hand over a $100 bill for his last round down the pub? I expect so.
I'd say that the SFX actually *made* the TV series as good as it was. And the Vogons *should* look like fat buggers in a fat rubbery fat suit.
Of course you're right - but no IT department just produces reports. If it's just cutting reports, pure SQL is just dandy. If you want to actually model the way your data works around the way the business wants to work, then OO, Java (and a O-R mapping tool like Hibernate) can let you forget the SQL and get on with writing business processes.
One thing I will say is that many people out here in the real world are still pushing the idea of shoving all your business logic into J2EE - that really *does* take 5 times as long - especially when, like where I work, there's several core apps that were built on mainframe over the last 15+ years in COBOL, and contain a shed-load of working business logic. Don't bother - build the connectors and re-use the code you've already built - it's only when you want to connect your web app to the fax servers and the COBOL app and the workflow system and the G/L app and the mail and the email and the, well, everything else, that J2EE integration starts to look kinda useful...
LDAP's good because you don't need to 'roll your own' security solution for every new app.
Any road up, that's enough from me:)
Re:SCO is just doing what they need to do
on
SCO Volleys to Red Hat
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
That's IP, kids. Not something any serious business should take lightly.
No, you're wrong - our legal team would do the same thing, but only because they don't understand IP in the software world. Only last year they wanted Sun Microsystems to assign all of their IP in 2 4800's we were about to buy to us...
Lawyers are lawyers - they want to assure their continued existence by making life hard for us 'mere mortals' - meanwhile we have to continue to do business, which means sometimes you make compromises on IP to get the job done - I'll settle for irrevocable licenses to use and modify any day (despite IBM's defence)
RealityShunt's signature (Democracy is susceptible to being led astray by having scapegoats paraded in front of the electorate) is possibly the most illuminating here - McBride's alleged missive is clearly not playing to the techincally-minded minority but rather, politician-in-an-election-year-stlye, playing to the masses with tales of evil and plenty of out-of-context quoting to boot. One can only hope that the trial judge is herself (or himself) literate in the software arts.
Slashdot Mirror
The famed acid2 test renders truly badly: http://www.webstandards.org/act/acid2/test.html#to p
Now Hibernate, especially with Spring transaction management is much easier to deal with for most cases. And it works very simply, and there's even a native SQL-like object query language called HQL to help. And it writes very efficient SQL queries (I've done a lot of investigation on this on objects backed by tables with tens of millions of rows) to the back end, is entirely DBMS-agnostic, and is apparently the basis for many of EJB 3.0's enhancements over 2.0.
Most J2EE devs don't get much choice on this stuff, but if you do, learn these 2 frameworks. They're even Open Source (and free-as-in-beer) so you can hardly go wrong, really.
HTH
Dan
... that I (as an EA) don't really understand the proposition and what I can do with it. Sure I've read the blurb, I've even been to Menlo Park and had the presentation, but the question I want to answer is *what* of all my core apps I'm going to run on it. Do I get to go to Oracle grid on this stuff? Can I run all my core back office apps on it? What do I pay on top of the $1/cpu/hr? Bandwidth back to head office?
On top of all that, it's clear that I'm not going to abandon our existing investment in Sun hardware to take immediate advantage of this while that hardware still has a leasing life of 2-3 years. Sure I'm interested, it doesn't particularly benefit the company to have a stack of office space devoted to a computer room, and it's harder still when the business grows fast and we constantly need more gear. But Sun aren't in my face about this stuff, aren't giving me the numbers I need to take it to the CIO. When they do, then I'll think about it.
On the other hand, Sun are to be congratulated on their other initiatives in this kind of pricing model. To an enterprise with small numbers of staff but high revenue, their per FTE/yr software licensing on Java Enterprise System et al is a wonderful model which many other vendors will have to catch up with as we move to multi-core CPU's as standard. For us, the other J2EE vendors just can't compete on price (FOSS excluded of course).
Utility computing is coming, let's face it - but mainly it's a question of education of the masses, and time to get through hardware replacement cycles. Of course I'm a bit surprised that there's NO customers yet, but that still doesn't mean there won't be, ever.
Tom's website is at http://asktom.oracle.com/
I've found it extremely useful for dealing with specific as well as general problems with Oracle.
But in general, if you know one RDBMS, then until you need specific features it's not too hard - I taught myself with the aid of the manuals and some experimentation. HTH
Dan
Thank you for your prompt response.
I should point out, of course, the delicious irony of not accepting electronic comments on a proposal to accept electronic-only pre-registration.
I should also point out that your delightfully bureaucratic rules on how to deliver comments as appended to your email do not, in fact, preclude the submission of comments in electronic form - they simply give instructions on how to deliver documents in paper form.
Thirdly, I should point out that, in fact, I did not send an email containing my comments but rather submitted my comments using a web form on your own web site. So your assertion that the comments were made via email is presumably only true if the comments I submitted were then converted to an email format by the systems running your web site.
I am also somewhat saddened by all of the above, which seem, ultimately, unreasonable. As a member of the public and the IT community who, these days, rarely, if ever, delivers documents of any kind by paper mail, your failure to accept electronic comment is mystifying. I have no particular interest in submitting a short comment with 5 copies by paper delivery, it seems somewhat onerous to have to do so, when your department presumably would save considerable sums of money by *preferring* electronic comment.
In any regard, my comments stand and I have taken the liberty of posting them on several IT web sites and encouraging other people to submit similar comments. I am sure that my comment will not be the only one made in a similar vein. You and your department are of course at liberty to take note of my opinions or ignore them completely, as you see fit.
Regards
Dan Shannon
We have received an email from you regarding the proposed rulemaking on electronic-only preregistration. The comments you submitted cannot be considered because they were in the form of email. As the instructions in the Copyright Office's Federal Register notice state, comments can be delivered to the Copyright Office by the following means:
m l) as well as the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking published Aug. 4 (available on the Copyright office website at http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2005/70fr44878.htm l).
If hand delivered by a private party, an original and five copies of any comment should be brought to Room LM-401 of the James Madison Memorial Building between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. and the envelope should be addressed as follows: Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial Building, Room LM-401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20559-6000. If hand delivered by a commercial courier, an original and five copies of any comment must be delivered to the Congressional Courier Acceptance Site located at Second and D Streets, NE., Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. The envelope should be addressed as follows: Copyright Office General Counsel, Room LM-403, James Madison Memorial Building, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington, DC. If sent by mail, an original and five copies of any comment should be addressed to: Copyright GC/ I&R, P.O. Box 70400, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024-0400. Comments may not be delivered by means of overnight delivery services such as Federal Express, United Parcel Service, etc., due to delays in processing receipt of such deliveries.
If you wish to submit comments, we strongly urge that you first read the entire notice of proposed rulemaking published July 22 (available on the Copyright office website at http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2005/70fr42286.ht
... random grammar failures!
To whom it may concern,
m l
At the URL:
http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2005/70fr44878.ht
I read a proposed policy with title "Preregistration of Certain Unpublished Copyright Claims" which asks me as a member of the public to inform your office if I would have any problem if I were required to use the Microsoft Internet Explorer browser for preregistering a work.
Below you can read my personal opinion and feedback on this issue.
I have no access to Microsoft Internet Explorer because I chose to prevent access to it (for security reasons) on all my personal computers and use the Mozilla Firefox browser instead. Whilst my job provides me with access to Internet Explorer, I would be unwilling to submit personal copyright claims through my employer's systems for a variety of reasons related to privacy, intellectual property, and ethical standards.
Microsoft Internet Explorer uses proprietary technology, such as ActiveX, which other Web browsers usually do not support. It also fails to correctly implement a number of crucial Web standards which are critical to interoperability of HTML web pages across different browsers. As a result, I regularly have difficulty navigating websites that are designed exclusively for Internet Explorer, but which are often otherwise compliant with international standards.
As an IT professional with considerable experience in web development for multiple browsers, I know that it is possible to design a website accessible with any modern Web browser, by using Web standards such as XHTML and CSS, and - whenever interactivity is needed - JavaScript and Java applets (which can run on most operating systems).
Requiring users to use a particular Web browser causes disruption, especially for Apple Macintosh and GNU/Linux or BSD operating systems users, who often have no access to Microsoft Windows and may have never used Microsoft Internet Explorer before. When a user community such as yours extends across (potentially) many millions of users, excluding these groups potentially disenfranchises them altogether, and at the very least can cost them significant time and effort (and potentially money) to access a service such as yours that forms one of the underpinnings of the copyright system. This can only be a bad thing.
Please consider the difficulties of non-Microsoft operating system users, as well as those who choose not to use Microsoft's Internet Explorer on their Windows PC's, and try to provide a standards-oriented Web design, which would make their life (and ultimately your IT staff's life) much easier.
Yours
your name goes here!
I implemented a similar system in a brewery warehouse about 12 years ago - we used ceiling mounted RF tags and a reader on the roof of the fork (with a 10-12 foot range), connected to the fork release/grab mechanism to match ceiling tag against location when the forkie picks up stock or puts it down - and there you go - he doesn't have to scan anything, but you know where that pallet is all the time. There are/were alternative solutions which involve mounting the reader under the body of the fork and burying some seriously small tags in the slab of the warehouse floor - this may be more practical depending on your individual needs. Out of doors, we used D-GPS (differential GPS) which was able to use standard GPS and a calibrated base station with a precisely-known position to iron out the fluctuations in GPS positioning - this allowed us to locate straddle forks at the local docks to the level of accuracy you describe, but as you say it's impractical indoors. I'd say any method attempting triangulation is doomed to being (i) expensive , (ii) overly complex, and (iii) unreliable in a normal warehouse environment where there's lots of lovely racking and stock to get in the way of RF transmissions. HTH Dan Shannon
Sorry, but you just miss a major point - if someone manufactures a pill, taken once daily, that make you live *forever*, then that's an awful lot of pills a day we're all (many of us at least) going to be paying for, *forever*, ergo a lot of moolah to be made. A single-shot serum seems as ridiculous as all those 'fountain of eternal youth' movies.
Take a look at their P&L's. Seven billion doesn't last that long with a company that size if you're not making money.
You're clearly not an accountant then. Cashflow and profit (or in Sun's case, loss) are different things. In my opinion, Sun's problem lies in converting their wealth of vision into reality at the consulting level. Here in Australia they seem to be desperate for consulting revenue, but can't provide great consultants to back up the great vision that issues forth from Menlo Park's EBC. However, some of their disruptive moves - like the Java Enterprise System's licensing model - work extremely well, but it will take a while for the business cycle to demonstrate whether client uptake will deliver the $$$
Ahh... sarcasm... there's a thing that should confuse the (presumably American) producers.
I live in fear that the whole film will be ruined by a failure to understand the humour of the whole thing and somehow try to make it 'heroic' - simple suburban man (Dentarthurdent) kidnapped by aliens (Vogons) saves Universe with paranoid android blah blah blah. Do we get to keep the point about planning permission for demolition of the Earth/Arthur's house? I fear not. Will Arthur hand over a $100 bill for his last round down the pub? I expect so.
I'd say that the SFX actually *made* the TV series as good as it was. And the Vogons *should* look like fat buggers in a fat rubbery fat suit.
Of course you're right - but no IT department just produces reports. If it's just cutting reports, pure SQL is just dandy. If you want to actually model the way your data works around the way the business wants to work, then OO, Java (and a O-R mapping tool like Hibernate) can let you forget the SQL and get on with writing business processes. One thing I will say is that many people out here in the real world are still pushing the idea of shoving all your business logic into J2EE - that really *does* take 5 times as long - especially when, like where I work, there's several core apps that were built on mainframe over the last 15+ years in COBOL, and contain a shed-load of working business logic. Don't bother - build the connectors and re-use the code you've already built - it's only when you want to connect your web app to the fax servers and the COBOL app and the workflow system and the G/L app and the mail and the email and the, well, everything else, that J2EE integration starts to look kinda useful... LDAP's good because you don't need to 'roll your own' security solution for every new app. Any road up, that's enough from me :)
RealityShunt's signature (Democracy is susceptible to being led astray by having scapegoats paraded in front of the electorate) is possibly the most illuminating here - McBride's alleged missive is clearly not playing to the techincally-minded minority but rather, politician-in-an-election-year-stlye, playing to the masses with tales of evil and plenty of out-of-context quoting to boot. One can only hope that the trial judge is herself (or himself) literate in the software arts.