"I buy apple because its easy to use and maintain. My time is worth far more than a bunch of windows and linux distro headaches."
good little Apple boy, you've learned the mantra. nevermind the massive bugs and hours of time lost for people who installed that $39 "upgrade". all your files deleted at once.. oops. it's ok, its all part of the Apple Experience.
I do accuse them of an inflated self image, but I never claimed to be superior or intended to exclude myself from "people" when I say that we are stupid. maybe you misread?
i've put os x on three of my own machines and helped a few friends do theirs as well. nobody had any significant troubles and afaik all are quite stable, solid machines now. truely sorry about your luck, but I think you had an atypical experience.
"People aren't that stupid".. I'm going to guess you are young:) People *are* that stupid. Empires are being built as we speak on the backs and with the bucks of people that are actually, honestly, that stupid.
Apple's appeal has nothing to do with nerds. My friends who own them are some of the least technically inclined folks I call friends. They are generally affluent, somewhat successful, maybe a bit conceited/smug, and yes.. "that" stupid. They love their Apples, and they talk about them *a lot*. They talk about them to their other non nerd somewhat successful friends, who sometimes end up buying one, although of course a higher/newer model than the original person has, they'll be quick to point out next time they see them.
These are people with money. They are happy to spend it on something that inflates their ever expanding self image. These are the people that bring money to Apple. They buy 3 or 4 ipods for their kid, a couple iphones, the drawer full of accessories, a mac laptop and a mac desktop every couple years if not more often, and they really are that stupid. This is a valued Apple customer to whom Apple will strive to provide the Apple experience. And they will enjoy the Apple experience, because they are Apple people. And they really are that stupid.
Microsoft is able to make massive profits selling mainly software.. software that a user can run on any machine they want to run it on. They do not make money on hardware. They take a significant loss on every Xbox sold, try google: http://www.google.com/search?q=microsoft+loses+money+on+xbox
Why can MS make profits that dwarf Apple's without profiting from hardware? (MS's net profit last quarter was down 32% but still over 3 times that of Apple's which was up).
What is MS doing so much better than Apple?
Using the example of Apple's attempt to sell System 7 to Mac clone makers as evidence that they cannot survive as a software company is not fair. System 7 was 1) a piece of crap and 2) not able to run on PCs, i.e. 90%+ of computers could not use their product back then even if they wanted to.
Today is a very different situation. Apple's software runs great on most any PC, and OS X is quite a nice environment. You didn't see people in 1995 getting excited about porting System 7 to, well.. anything. Today, running OS X on a wide range of non Apple hardware is very popular, and usually quite simple to do.
(unlike the above, which is based on fact, the following is merely my own opinion, based on my own impressions)
Of course Apple has their reasons for not moving into the software business. They might be quite valid, but I don't believe it has to do with profitability, at least not directly.
Apple doesn't really care if they sell hardware or software. They care about selling an image, a lifestyle, a brand. Nobody really buys a Mac because it's more useful than the alternatives. There's very little that Win\Linux\Mac can do that Win\Linux\Mac cannot, certainly not enough to justify the premium pricing. People buy Apple because they like to own Apple, they like to be an Apple guy or whatever they call themselves. This is a very powerful thing, and Apple is making extraordinary profits on slightly above average products by perpetuating the Apple culture. To make Apple software available to everyone would dilute the brand. It's not special if everyone can have it. My friends who are "Apple guys" spend a great deal of time talking about how different their system is, highlighting the (mostly trivial, from a functional stance) things that set it apart from the masses. Owning Apple makes them feel special, like they are somehow superior for buying Apple. This is a hugely valuable resource for Apple, and I think they would be foolish to risk compromising the culture they've created. In my opinion, this is the true reason you will not likely see Apple software available on normal computers.
If you don't know me by now (If you don't know me) You will never never never know me (No you won't) If you don't know me by now You will never never never know me
0.29 was 1992. 17 *years* ago. If you're still struggling with basic system configuration... wow.
eats breathes and dreams in HTML, PHP and HTTPD.conf files.
what do any of these things have to do with linux? do you think that apache and php somehow work differently when you run them on a different platform? httpd.conf is still httpd.conf on win* and os x. php likewise.
Well, just because *you* have a hard time managing your Linux system doesn't mean we all do. Linux is not for everyone, and frankly I don't see why some people try to propose that it is. Some of us understand enough about this or that to use Linux very effectively for one purpose or another. Some people don't, and end up frustrated when they can't make things work. Who is to blame? Not linux experts/devs, not clueless users. It is the fault of whomever suggested to these frustrated types that they should be using Linux at all in the first place.
An interesting point.. perhaps Google should cut off all iphone users from Google services such as search, maps, gmail, etc. etc. Truth is that many things iphone users like to do come from google, not apple.
i just told some lies on a web form and got emailed some zenoss propaganda.
zenoss licensing cost for 5000 devices is $350,000/yr (that much i'd guess is pretty true, its a zenoss marketing doc)
they claim HPs solution costs $2,000,000 up front and $354,000 each year after the first (hp throws in the first 350k value with your $2mil purchase! call now and you'll get the miracle slicer. but wait, theres more).
they go on to claim it costs over $1 million to implement HPs stuff but only $90k to do zenoss, blah blah whatever.
well we know zenoss is stretching those numbers any way it can.. but how far is anybody's guess. at face value its $1,050,000 zenoss vs $2,708,00 hp at three years. even if its exaggerated by %50, and assuming equal everything else you'd only match prices in year 4. Dont know what the lifecycle and upgrade costs are with hp's product, dont know if 50% is any where close to the amount zenoss is skewing the number.. its possible it could go either way but still i lean towards hp being somewhat to much more expensive. and supposedly zenoss will guaranty 50% saving, but you have to already have bought HP to qualify, so whats the point there i dont know.
well that assumes free support on openview. not really HP's style, especially with enterprise products. support on their sans is roughly %30 of purchase price per year, thats the only frame of reference i have. don't sick on your shoes;)
I wasnt able to find what support on Openview costs, it seems to be available but pricing is a big secret or I suck at google. or both.
zenoss gets a head start with $0 vs $1.3 million (or 650,000 if we assume a similar 50% discount).
then you add support and really we dont know how it all turns out unless someone knows support costs for openview, but dont get sick yet, i'd bet openview manages to keep a healty lead.
You missed the volume and site licensing options available for networks of 1000 nodes+
Their pricing seems in line with their competition, a quick search finds the follow pricing for HP offerings:
Network Node Manager, $6,000; OpenView Operation, $17,995; OpenView Internet Services, starts at $12,449 for 5 targets. Additional targets: 5, $2,038; 25, $10,207; 250, $65,160.
I am not familiar with how their product line works, and I'm sure they also have volume licensing agreements for large customers, but using your same logic applied to what I could quickly glean from this article, it would seem HP's product would cost $6000 + $17,995 + $12,449 + (4995 / 250 * $65,160) = $1,338,340.80. So Zenoss is quite the bargain:)
Silly of me to even do the math, since both of our numbers are very wrong.
software development certainly does not equal "i need to run arbitrary software" on our network. god knows the last people you want installing whatever they want are developers. They do have special needs that require a different configuration than some other departments, but your code monkeys can be put in a cage without losing productivity. IT dept is the same, different config profile but definitely not "run arbitrary software". unless you're incredibly lazy, neither of those situations warrants an open door policy with foreign code.
a couple years ago i worked at a company the used NOD32 and they were often bringing infected machines in to the IT dept despite the software being updated and supposedly working. now I work at a company that used symantec, and they were often bringing infected machines in to the IT dept despite the software being updated and supposedly working. One of my current coworkers used to work at place where they used Panda. They were often bringing infected machines in to the IT dept despite the software being updated and supposedly working.
I'd love to be able to use osx on our network, but there are some serious roadblocks. #1 is the price of the workstations. when you need 300 bog standard desktops on a tight budget, your options from apple are... lacking to say the least. #2 is compatibility. entourage is very weak as an exchange client in a business environment. OWA on non-IE browsers is not great either. CAD and ERP software is limited. #3 is the cost of (re)training employees. with windows you get the benefit of your users having the same system at home/previous job/etc. even very simple differences in the ui require real support resources. some people just don't get it, no matter what "it" is.
also, while i am a fan of osx and use it personally, i don't put any faith in the "macs are more secure" arguments. every security analysis I've seen shows that macs are actually easier to exploit (probably will improve in 10.6). maybe the small installed base just isn't worth the effort to malware creators (yet), but if you use security as justification for switching to the PHB, I think you're setting yourself up to look really bad.
typical ipsec overhead on data packets is 52 bytes
Crap that adds at least 0.05 milliseconds to the time it takes to transmit a packet with my upload speed...... Who knew I was holding myself back that badly.
You're not looking at the big picture. Sure, it isn't much time to get 52 bytes to your next hop. But even assuming that every hop between your network and corporate is just as fast, you've added 0.05ms * (about) 20 (hops) just to get there, and thats assuming a perfect world where there is no contention at any of the routers. Combined with the number of lookups on a typical web page and you've probably added half a second or more to every page's loading time. There are too many factors involved to be exact, but at times this delay will be even worse.
you've also added all the hops between your host and work, the hops inside your corp. network to the DNS server, then the hops back out to the net and all the way to the authoritative server, quite possibly doubling or worse the number of hops for any uncached query. its a crapshoot whether you've reduced or increased the hops for cached answers.
My goal wasn't to reduce the number of hops, it was to be a more polite user of the root nameservers and not to have to deal with Time Warner's NXDOMAIN hijacking.
And my goal was to show how silly an idea it would be to take your solution and apply it to a large number of users, as you suggested OpenDNS could do. It wouldn't be a good solution.
not an efficient solution, to say the least.
Got a better suggestion, Mr. Nitpicker?
Yes. Don't use the services of companies that hijack DNS.
sorry to be all bitchy. i just hate companies that prey on the ignorant. i've had to help clients resolve so many issues caused by opendns it's made me bitter I guess.
typical ipsec overhead on data packets is 52 bytes. ignoring all the housekeeping traffic since you probably need the tunnel for other purposes anyway, you've still managed to approximately double the size of your queries (of course depending on the length of the name you are looking up). you've also added all the hops between your host and work, the hops inside your corp. network to the DNS server, then the hops back out to the net and all the way to the authoritative server, quite possibly doubling or worse the number of hops for any uncached query. its a crapshoot whether you've reduced or increased the hops for cached answers.
I route all of my DNS requests through a VPN to the DNS server at my office. Not everybody has this luxury though.
not everybody would want to take a simple udp packet and turn it into god knows how much traffic, adding a ridiculous amount of latency to something that depends on speed. luxury my ass.
I wonder if OpenDNS would be inclined to set up a VPN solution for people stuck with an ISP as arrogant as Comcast?
No, they won't. Because although OpenDNS is a bunch of opportunistic scammers, they aren't dumb.
you are correct about the resolution. due to the n800s small size, this makes it a very high dpi screen. things look great, and text is very easy to read, but you are also right that the size is just too small for extended reading or viewing. the n800 is a compromise, if you need something very small (fit in pocket.. well some pockets) then its one of your best options at the moment, but if you can handle a larger device then probably you would want something else.
those things can be done with a variety of existing devices, devices that have been available for years and with broad support from established companies. in fact, many companies already do what you're talking about with the vehicle scheduling. they also do timeclocks, security camera monitoring etc. all with existing devices.
the nokia n8xx are pretty cheap now. they make a very nice ultra portable, good for web browsing, email, IM, watching movies, music, etc. with the 810 model or a bluetooth keyboard they are usable for terminal sessions and a litle bit of work.
I don't use mine much when at home, but its great for travelling.
Slashdot Mirror
"I buy apple because its easy to use and maintain. My time is worth far more than a bunch of windows and linux distro headaches."
good little Apple boy, you've learned the mantra. nevermind the massive bugs and hours of time lost for people who installed that $39 "upgrade". all your files deleted at once.. oops. it's ok, its all part of the Apple Experience.
I do accuse them of an inflated self image, but I never claimed to be superior or intended to exclude myself from "people" when I say that we are stupid. maybe you misread?
i've put os x on three of my own machines and helped a few friends do theirs as well.
nobody had any significant troubles and afaik all are quite stable, solid machines now.
truely sorry about your luck, but I think you had an atypical experience.
"People aren't that stupid".. I'm going to guess you are young :) People *are* that stupid. Empires are being built as we speak on the backs and with the bucks of people that are actually, honestly, that stupid.
Apple's appeal has nothing to do with nerds. My friends who own them are some of the least technically inclined folks I call friends. They are generally affluent, somewhat successful, maybe a bit conceited/smug, and yes.. "that" stupid. They love their Apples, and they talk about them *a lot*. They talk about them to their other non nerd somewhat successful friends, who sometimes end up buying one, although of course a higher/newer model than the original person has, they'll be quick to point out next time they see them.
These are people with money. They are happy to spend it on something that inflates their ever expanding self image. These are the people that bring money to Apple. They buy 3 or 4 ipods for their kid, a couple iphones, the drawer full of accessories, a mac laptop and a mac desktop every couple years if not more often, and they really are that stupid. This is a valued Apple customer to whom Apple will strive to provide the Apple experience. And they will enjoy the Apple experience, because they are Apple people. And they really are that stupid.
Microsoft is able to make massive profits selling mainly software.. software that a user can run on any machine they want to run it on. They do not make money on hardware. They take a significant loss on every Xbox sold, try google: http://www.google.com/search?q=microsoft+loses+money+on+xbox
Why can MS make profits that dwarf Apple's without profiting from hardware? (MS's net profit last quarter was down 32% but still over 3 times that of Apple's which was up).
What is MS doing so much better than Apple?
Using the example of Apple's attempt to sell System 7 to Mac clone makers as evidence that they cannot survive as a software company is not fair. System 7 was 1) a piece of crap and 2) not able to run on PCs, i.e. 90%+ of computers could not use their product back then even if they wanted to.
Today is a very different situation. Apple's software runs great on most any PC, and OS X is quite a nice environment. You didn't see people in 1995 getting excited about porting System 7 to, well.. anything. Today, running OS X on a wide range of non Apple hardware is very popular, and usually quite simple to do.
(unlike the above, which is based on fact, the following is merely my own opinion, based on my own impressions)
Of course Apple has their reasons for not moving into the software business. They might be quite valid, but I don't believe it has to do with profitability, at least not directly.
Apple doesn't really care if they sell hardware or software. They care about selling an image, a lifestyle, a brand. Nobody really buys a Mac because it's more useful than the alternatives. There's very little that Win\Linux\Mac can do that Win\Linux\Mac cannot, certainly not enough to justify the premium pricing. People buy Apple because they like to own Apple, they like to be an Apple guy or whatever they call themselves. This is a very powerful thing, and Apple is making extraordinary profits on slightly above average products by perpetuating the Apple culture. To make Apple software available to everyone would dilute the brand. It's not special if everyone can have it. My friends who are "Apple guys" spend a great deal of time talking about how different their system is, highlighting the (mostly trivial, from a functional stance) things that set it apart from the masses. Owning Apple makes them feel special, like they are somehow superior for buying Apple. This is a hugely valuable resource for Apple, and I think they would be foolish to risk compromising the culture they've created. In my opinion, this is the true reason you will not likely see Apple software available on normal computers.
If you think maintaining a linux system is more work than any other OS, you don't know how to do. Talk about being dim.
I've been using Linux since kernel version 0.29
If you don't know me by now (If you don't know me)
You will never never never know me (No you won't)
If you don't know me by now
You will never never never know me
0.29 was 1992. 17 *years* ago. If you're still struggling with basic system configuration... wow.
eats breathes and dreams in HTML, PHP and HTTPD.conf files.
what do any of these things have to do with linux? do you think that apache and php somehow work differently when you run them on a different platform? httpd.conf is still httpd.conf on win* and os x. php likewise.
Well, just because *you* have a hard time managing your Linux system doesn't mean we all do. Linux is not for everyone, and frankly I don't see why some people try to propose that it is. Some of us understand enough about this or that to use Linux very effectively for one purpose or another. Some people don't, and end up frustrated when they can't make things work. Who is to blame? Not linux experts/devs, not clueless users. It is the fault of whomever suggested to these frustrated types that they should be using Linux at all in the first place.
An interesting point.. perhaps Google should cut off all iphone users from Google services such as search, maps, gmail, etc. etc.
Truth is that many things iphone users like to do come from google, not apple.
i just told some lies on a web form and got emailed some zenoss propaganda.
zenoss licensing cost for 5000 devices is $350,000/yr
(that much i'd guess is pretty true, its a zenoss marketing doc)
they claim HPs solution costs $2,000,000 up front and $354,000 each year after the first (hp throws in the first 350k value with your $2mil purchase! call now and you'll get the miracle slicer. but wait, theres more).
they go on to claim it costs over $1 million to implement HPs stuff but only $90k to do zenoss, blah blah whatever.
well we know zenoss is stretching those numbers any way it can.. but how far is anybody's guess. at face value its $1,050,000 zenoss vs $2,708,00 hp at three years. even if its exaggerated by %50, and assuming equal everything else you'd only match prices in year 4. Dont know what the lifecycle and upgrade costs are with hp's product, dont know if 50% is any where close to the amount zenoss is skewing the number.. its possible it could go either way but still i lean towards hp being somewhat to much more expensive. and supposedly zenoss will guaranty 50% saving, but you have to already have bought HP to qualify, so whats the point there i dont know.
well that assumes free support on openview. not really HP's style, especially with enterprise products. support on their sans is roughly %30 of purchase price per year, thats the only frame of reference i have. don't sick on your shoes ;)
I wasnt able to find what support on Openview costs, it seems to be available but pricing is a big secret or I suck at google. or both.
zenoss gets a head start with $0 vs $1.3 million (or 650,000 if we assume a similar 50% discount).
then you add support and really we dont know how it all turns out unless someone knows support costs for openview, but dont get sick yet, i'd bet openview manages to keep a healty lead.
You missed the volume and site licensing options available for networks of 1000 nodes+
Their pricing seems in line with their competition, a quick search finds the follow pricing for HP offerings:
Network Node Manager, $6,000; OpenView Operation, $17,995; OpenView Internet Services, starts at $12,449 for 5 targets. Additional targets: 5, $2,038; 25, $10,207; 250, $65,160.
I am not familiar with how their product line works, and I'm sure they also have volume licensing agreements for large customers, but using your same logic applied to what I could quickly glean from this article, it would seem HP's product would cost $6000 + $17,995 + $12,449 + (4995 / 250 * $65,160) = $1,338,340.80. So Zenoss is quite the bargain :)
Silly of me to even do the math, since both of our numbers are very wrong.
software development certainly does not equal "i need to run arbitrary software" on our network. god knows the last people you want installing whatever they want are developers. They do have special needs that require a different configuration than some other departments, but your code monkeys can be put in a cage without losing productivity.
IT dept is the same, different config profile but definitely not "run arbitrary software". unless you're incredibly lazy, neither of those situations warrants an open door policy with foreign code.
i'm genuinely interested.. what type of organization has this need? executing arbitrary software? seems unsupportable.
a couple years ago i worked at a company the used NOD32 and they were often bringing infected machines in to the IT dept despite the software being updated and supposedly working. now I work at a company that used symantec, and they were often bringing infected machines in to the IT dept despite the software being updated and supposedly working. One of my current coworkers used to work at place where they used Panda. They were often bringing infected machines in to the IT dept despite the software being updated and supposedly working.
WTF?
I'd love to be able to use osx on our network, but there are some serious roadblocks. #1 is the price of the workstations. when you need 300 bog standard desktops on a tight budget, your options from apple are... lacking to say the least. #2 is compatibility. entourage is very weak as an exchange client in a business environment. OWA on non-IE browsers is not great either. CAD and ERP software is limited. #3 is the cost of (re)training employees. with windows you get the benefit of your users having the same system at home/previous job/etc. even very simple differences in the ui require real support resources. some people just don't get it, no matter what "it" is.
also, while i am a fan of osx and use it personally, i don't put any faith in the "macs are more secure" arguments. every security analysis I've seen shows that macs are actually easier to exploit (probably will improve in 10.6). maybe the small installed base just isn't worth the effort to malware creators (yet), but if you use security as justification for switching to the PHB, I think you're setting yourself up to look really bad.
typical ipsec overhead on data packets is 52 bytes
Crap that adds at least 0.05 milliseconds to the time it takes to transmit a packet with my upload speed...... Who knew I was holding myself back that badly.
You're not looking at the big picture. Sure, it isn't much time to get 52 bytes to your next hop. But even assuming that every hop between your network and corporate is just as fast, you've added 0.05ms * (about) 20 (hops) just to get there, and thats assuming a perfect world where there is no contention at any of the routers. Combined with the number of lookups on a typical web page and you've probably added half a second or more to every page's loading time. There are too many factors involved to be exact, but at times this delay will be even worse.
you've also added all the hops between your host and work, the hops inside your corp. network to the DNS server, then the hops back out to the net and all the way to the authoritative server, quite possibly doubling or worse the number of hops for any uncached query. its a crapshoot whether you've reduced or increased the hops for cached answers.
My goal wasn't to reduce the number of hops, it was to be a more polite user of the root nameservers and not to have to deal with Time Warner's NXDOMAIN hijacking.
And my goal was to show how silly an idea it would be to take your solution and apply it to a large number of users, as you suggested OpenDNS could do. It wouldn't be a good solution.
not an efficient solution, to say the least.
Got a better suggestion, Mr. Nitpicker?
Yes. Don't use the services of companies that hijack DNS.
sorry to be all bitchy. i just hate companies that prey on the ignorant. i've had to help clients resolve so many issues caused by opendns it's made me bitter I guess.
typical ipsec overhead on data packets is 52 bytes. ignoring all the housekeeping traffic since you probably need the tunnel for other purposes anyway, you've still managed to approximately double the size of your queries (of course depending on the length of the name you are looking up). you've also added all the hops between your host and work, the hops inside your corp. network to the DNS server, then the hops back out to the net and all the way to the authoritative server, quite possibly doubling or worse the number of hops for any uncached query. its a crapshoot whether you've reduced or increased the hops for cached answers.
not an efficient solution, to say the least.
I route all of my DNS requests through a VPN to the DNS server at my office. Not everybody has this luxury though.
not everybody would want to take a simple udp packet and turn it into god knows how much traffic, adding a ridiculous amount of latency to something that depends on speed. luxury my ass.
I wonder if OpenDNS would be inclined to set up a VPN solution for people stuck with an ISP as arrogant as Comcast?
No, they won't. Because although OpenDNS is a bunch of opportunistic scammers, they aren't dumb.
you are correct about the resolution. due to the n800s small size, this makes it a very high dpi screen. things look great, and text is very easy to read, but you are also right that the size is just too small for extended reading or viewing. the n800 is a compromise, if you need something very small (fit in pocket.. well some pockets) then its one of your best options at the moment, but if you can handle a larger device then probably you would want something else.
not sure i understand what you're saying. both a netbook and this tablet have wifi and larger screens than an iphone. is that lame?
those things can be done with a variety of existing devices, devices that have been available for years and with broad support from established companies. in fact, many companies already do what you're talking about with the vehicle scheduling. they also do timeclocks, security camera monitoring etc. all with existing devices.
the nokia n8xx are pretty cheap now. they make a very nice ultra portable, good for web browsing, email, IM, watching movies, music, etc. with the 810 model or a bluetooth keyboard they are usable for terminal sessions and a litle bit of work.
I don't use mine much when at home, but its great for travelling.