I've known developers who have almost no test data in their tables develop thier app with no indexes and redicuolusly inefficeint queires that are speedy in development because thier is almost no data. Then when a few months of data gets in the database they have no idea why the app mystriously slowed down.
Why even go to files, everything should be kept in one large file, that way we don't have to worry about opening multiple files or searching them, this approach is much simpler and will lead to no database crashes. Those extra layers like caching data pages, what did they do but eat up resources. Or about DBMS's annoying layers of backup options, who needs those. Index that make loading data quicker, come on we all know the b-tree concept was just made up, indexes actually do nothing. Finally whats up with relationships, what a hassel, lets just store all the data for all our records on every record and update it every where it occurs when we need to change it, that way we don't have the unneeded overhead of joining tables and only storing data once.
All modern RDMS's cache their data pages, be it SQL Server, Oracle, Sybase DB2 or one of the lesser database engines. Unless you have enough memory to keep all your data pages and index pages in memory you are going to be cycling pages out of the cahce. If you application server can hold the data in memory for a time period, even if for a relatively short time such as 1 or 2 minutes(big difference on a busy server) you will see better database and application performance, because your RDMS won't be wasting its memory on data that you know hasn't changed. It is always going to be faster to go to memory in your webserver to retrieve values than to go out to your database even if the database resides on the same machine as your webserver and it as the data pages you are looking for in cache. Your arguement about FIrefox or Konqueror render time is irrelvant, unless your users are using an antique machine or you are pushing lots of multimedia, render speed is meaningless because is basically instantaneous on IE, Mozilla, Netscape, Opera or whatever else browser you choose to use.
My guess is that your servers are no where near saturation so caching doesn't matter to you.
I don't know where you are from but where I live the only IT jobs somebody can get right out of high school is isp tech support. To transition from that to any real IT job is almost impossible because either people with expierence or degrees(or worse both) will always beat you out for the jobs. Your idea is the worst I can't believe you have been modded insightful. Anyplace that would higher a kid out of highschool to be a network admin doesn't know what it is doing. In the increasing competitive world of IT you need more education than ever unless you've got the expirence.
Plus you'll learn concepts at Univ. that will blast you past people who only went to tech school . Tech school people generally hit a glass ceiling at about mid level jobs, partially because of biast and partially because tech school grads aren't as good.
Your statement should be modified to say nothing beats a solid education complemented with real world expierence. In the real world you will only encounter so many situations and without education you will not have the full problem solving ability to overcome new problems in a decent time frame.
Majors like Finance, Decision Science, Economics, and Account are every bit as difficult as Computer Science. You think to highly of yourself. I've got a BSBA and am working on a MS and I'll tell you I've had some business classes just as tough as any computer classes.
I don't know the stats but I would imagine that majors like Information Systems, MIS, BIS and similar ones to those would be syphoning off some of the computer science majors. Just because you want to work in IT doesn't mean you need Computer Science. Lets face it to work on internal tracking systems you hardly need to know complier design but some businss\IT integration classes may help. Many Universities now offer atleast one Info System type major and one CS type major. Combine the IS majors becoming more common with the perception that tech jobs are a bust now and its easy to see why CS enrollment is dropping.
That is the most ridiculously stupid comment I've ever heard. If it was so much better to have multiple pointers, then we all would be using touch screen monitors, which have been out for years and allow for all 10 fingers to be pointers.
Couldn't you use an extreme large dataset quick sort routine, but instead of having the array nodes be in memory instead be file names and then swap out the files positions for every sort change. That should get the disks running while driving up memory usage and cpu usage.
I just want javascript to function the same on all browsers, its so much easier to work around CSS problems then Javascript, you have to write two functions half the time. This I don't even blame on Mircosoft, its Netscape fault back in the late 90's when they didn't care about standards for Javascript and messed the whole thing up.
Not to troll, but your crazy. If they limit Javascript they will kill millions of websites, just to get at Google. Make no mistake Google is still small time compared to MS, large corporate clients would be very upset when their webpages cease to function properly on IE. MS wouldn't do something to hurt themselves with businesses
Rewriting a product in a new language from existing code costs very little
Even on applications with only a few thousand lines of code this would be very expensive. It would cost thousands. Also I don't know where your going to find a programmer for $10 an hour that you would trust to program on anything important to your organization. Most entry programming jobs around here start at $20 an hour and I'm not even in a major market
Thats were your wrong, I was running a copy of IE 3 the other the day and MS send a witch who turned me into a newt for using it after its end of life cycle.
MS is trying to get rid of COM all signs point to it. Parts of Windows Server 2003 are written in.NET. Most of LongHorn will be written in.NET. The new SQL Server will heavily utilize.NET. Kill VB6 helps them move towards an end of life for COM and COM+. Of course the problem for developers isn't the inability to learn VB.NET but the fact that a large VB 5 or 6 program will not directly or even easily port to VB.NET. But I would be very surprised if someone with a VB 6 program decides to port it to Java, they obviously have a Windows platform which Java can run on, but.NET would be the obvious upgrade path if forced. Some may leave out of spite to some other non MS programming platform, but not many.
If your making a web site for a company its them who loses out. If your making a web site for a charity they lose out. If your making a web site for a college they lose out. No browser is 100% standards compliant with everything W3 puts out, not even Firefox. Best practive for a commercial/general public site is code for IE and Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox varient. Ideally you don't put anything out there that doesn't render correctly on IE or Firefox and you got a good site for the general public. If your working on an intranet site and you know what your users are using go ahead and code for a browser if not, don't be stupid and cut off your head to spite your face.
Also I remember back in the late 90's when IE was more standards compliant than Netscape.
You have a very specific example. But in the real world, releasing a site to the general public it must be fully usable by IE. I worked at an ISP doing tech support a few years ago and you would not believe how many customers thought Internet Explorer is the only way to access the Internet. You might say they are dumb then, but hey if your trying to sell a product or get information out you need to reach as many people as possible. Now that is a good example for training to show differences in browsers, by the way Opera has standards problems as well.
50% of people don't know how to get a different browser than the one that came with their computer, a lot of home users can't even figure out Windows Update which is two or three clicks. You have to write your pages for your audience not try and change your audience if you are writing a site. Just because you like Konqueor doesn't mean your sites vistors will use it because you want them to.
Windows Server 2003/2000 Datacenter has no problems running more than two processors, it does it with ease and works well for things SQL Server and IIS, your other points are valid though.
Slashdot Mirror
I've known developers who have almost no test data in their tables develop thier app with no indexes and redicuolusly inefficeint queires that are speedy in development because thier is almost no data. Then when a few months of data gets in the database they have no idea why the app mystriously slowed down.
Why even go to files, everything should be kept in one large file, that way we don't have to worry about opening multiple files or searching them, this approach is much simpler and will lead to no database crashes. Those extra layers like caching data pages, what did they do but eat up resources. Or about DBMS's annoying layers of backup options, who needs those. Index that make loading data quicker, come on we all know the b-tree concept was just made up, indexes actually do nothing. Finally whats up with relationships, what a hassel, lets just store all the data for all our records on every record and update it every where it occurs when we need to change it, that way we don't have the unneeded overhead of joining tables and only storing data once.
All modern RDMS's cache their data pages, be it SQL Server, Oracle, Sybase DB2 or one of the lesser database engines. Unless you have enough memory to keep all your data pages and index pages in memory you are going to be cycling pages out of the cahce. If you application server can hold the data in memory for a time period, even if for a relatively short time such as 1 or 2 minutes(big difference on a busy server) you will see better database and application performance, because your RDMS won't be wasting its memory on data that you know hasn't changed. It is always going to be faster to go to memory in your webserver to retrieve values than to go out to your database even if the database resides on the same machine as your webserver and it as the data pages you are looking for in cache. Your arguement about FIrefox or Konqueror render time is irrelvant, unless your users are using an antique machine or you are pushing lots of multimedia, render speed is meaningless because is basically instantaneous on IE, Mozilla, Netscape, Opera or whatever else browser you choose to use. My guess is that your servers are no where near saturation so caching doesn't matter to you.
VB.NET has a cache object for this specific use, I think a VB.NET programmer would know about this concept.
I don't know where you are from but where I live the only IT jobs somebody can get right out of high school is isp tech support. To transition from that to any real IT job is almost impossible because either people with expierence or degrees(or worse both) will always beat you out for the jobs. Your idea is the worst I can't believe you have been modded insightful. Anyplace that would higher a kid out of highschool to be a network admin doesn't know what it is doing. In the increasing competitive world of IT you need more education than ever unless you've got the expirence.
Plus you'll learn concepts at Univ. that will blast you past people who only went to tech school . Tech school people generally hit a glass ceiling at about mid level jobs, partially because of biast and partially because tech school grads aren't as good.
Your statement should be modified to say nothing beats a solid education complemented with real world expierence. In the real world you will only encounter so many situations and without education you will not have the full problem solving ability to overcome new problems in a decent time frame.
I think these sizes are more important for servers than desktops.
Majors like Finance, Decision Science, Economics, and Account are every bit as difficult as Computer Science. You think to highly of yourself. I've got a BSBA and am working on a MS and I'll tell you I've had some business classes just as tough as any computer classes.
I don't know the stats but I would imagine that majors like Information Systems, MIS, BIS and similar ones to those would be syphoning off some of the computer science majors. Just because you want to work in IT doesn't mean you need Computer Science. Lets face it to work on internal tracking systems you hardly need to know complier design but some businss\IT integration classes may help. Many Universities now offer atleast one Info System type major and one CS type major. Combine the IS majors becoming more common with the perception that tech jobs are a bust now and its easy to see why CS enrollment is dropping.
If you are a Windows only shop and most of your applications are web apps then a Windows Thin Client is a good choice if it is licenses cheap enough.
That is the most ridiculously stupid comment I've ever heard. If it was so much better to have multiple pointers, then we all would be using touch screen monitors, which have been out for years and allow for all 10 fingers to be pointers.
Couldn't you use an extreme large dataset quick sort routine, but instead of having the array nodes be in memory instead be file names and then swap out the files positions for every sort change. That should get the disks running while driving up memory usage and cpu usage.
That depends on the prof, some do like it when you have a counter opinion, as long as you have good data/sources to back it up.
I just want javascript to function the same on all browsers, its so much easier to work around CSS problems then Javascript, you have to write two functions half the time. This I don't even blame on Mircosoft, its Netscape fault back in the late 90's when they didn't care about standards for Javascript and messed the whole thing up.
Not to troll, but your crazy. If they limit Javascript they will kill millions of websites, just to get at Google. Make no mistake Google is still small time compared to MS, large corporate clients would be very upset when their webpages cease to function properly on IE. MS wouldn't do something to hurt themselves with businesses
Rewriting a product in a new language from existing code costs very little
Even on applications with only a few thousand lines of code this would be very expensive. It would cost thousands. Also I don't know where your going to find a programmer for $10 an hour that you would trust to program on anything important to your organization. Most entry programming jobs around here start at $20 an hour and I'm not even in a major market
Migrating an ASP page to ASP.NET is relatively easy. I think they will go to ASP.NET, unless they are hitting a lot VB6 COM objects.
Well if things like options explicit and options strick are turned on it prevents people from using a lot of bad habbits.
Thats were your wrong, I was running a copy of IE 3 the other the day and MS send a witch who turned me into a newt for using it after its end of life cycle.
PS. It got better.
MS is trying to get rid of COM all signs point to it. Parts of Windows Server 2003 are written in .NET. Most of LongHorn will be written in .NET. The new SQL Server will heavily utilize .NET. Kill VB6 helps them move towards an end of life for COM and COM+. Of course the problem for developers isn't the inability to learn VB.NET but the fact that a large VB 5 or 6 program will not directly or even easily port to VB.NET. But I would be very surprised if someone with a VB 6 program decides to port it to Java, they obviously have a Windows platform which Java can run on, but .NET would be the obvious upgrade path if forced. Some may leave out of spite to some other non MS programming platform, but not many.
If your making a web site for a company its them who loses out. If your making a web site for a charity they lose out. If your making a web site for a college they lose out. No browser is 100% standards compliant with everything W3 puts out, not even Firefox. Best practive for a commercial/general public site is code for IE and Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox varient. Ideally you don't put anything out there that doesn't render correctly on IE or Firefox and you got a good site for the general public. If your working on an intranet site and you know what your users are using go ahead and code for a browser if not, don't be stupid and cut off your head to spite your face.
Also I remember back in the late 90's when IE was more standards compliant than Netscape.
You have a very specific example. But in the real world, releasing a site to the general public it must be fully usable by IE. I worked at an ISP doing tech support a few years ago and you would not believe how many customers thought Internet Explorer is the only way to access the Internet. You might say they are dumb then, but hey if your trying to sell a product or get information out you need to reach as many people as possible. Now that is a good example for training to show differences in browsers, by the way Opera has standards problems as well.
50% of people don't know how to get a different browser than the one that came with their computer, a lot of home users can't even figure out Windows Update which is two or three clicks. You have to write your pages for your audience not try and change your audience if you are writing a site. Just because you like Konqueor doesn't mean your sites vistors will use it because you want them to.
If you are making a web page and you are not coding so that is renders correctly on IE you are a fool. It has 85% market share.
I was under the impression that Oracle uses Sun extensively, it(Solaris that is) is the number one platform that Oracle is deployed on.
Windows Server 2003/2000 Datacenter has no problems running more than two processors, it does it with ease and works well for things SQL Server and IIS, your other points are valid though.