This is just an inverted version of the "network computing" universe where we all use thin clients that use a central server to do work. It can never become mainstream due to the physical limitations, not the technology ones. Suppose I am a corporation and I need a new big-iron system to process daily orders from our web site. Let's try grid computing: all 1000 employees in the company install a piece of software on their PC so we can use each PC to process an order, based on availability. The number of problems with this, as compared to using a central server, is incredible.
1) Still need a central server for storage/backup 2) One server needs one UPS, 1000 workstations... 3) Worsktations are flaky: They reboot, crash, play video games, etc. The distributed software can handle this, but the inefficiency involved is painstaking. I hope everybody doesn't run Windows Update all at once, or all the PCs could go down. 4) The corporate network is now a bottleneck.
I rattled off this list in about 30 seconds, so I'm sure there are lots more. Since these are physical limitations, not technology limitations, they aren't going away.
Affirmative Action REQUIRED a percentage of peopel to be of a certain race. This is where Affirmative Action is a problem. The bill proposed here does not require that any percentage of software be open-source. It requires that they be considered. In effect, this bill does nothing except force people to open their eyes a bit. If open-source really is better, then this is all that is necessary.
#1: You referred to property get/sets, but that isn't what the author was talking about. He was talking about external configuration files, environment configuration files, an serialization.
#2: The author explicitly lists what information, beyond the methods, you can get from.NET. To briefly reiterate, he listed meta-information about methods which is necessary to make it truly useful. Knowing a method name and parameters isn't the whole deal.
#3: You ask "how is this better?" which is exactly what page 3 of the article describers. The author explicitly lists advantages of archives over JAR files. He points out that it isn't a magnanimous difference, but he certainly answers your question.
#4: You've obviously never done cross-language RMI. One of the running Jokes about Java is that Java is great at communicating with other languages: so long as the other langauge is Java. Microsoft has taken cross-language support to a new level - which is one of the things that really attracts VB, Java, and C++ developers to.NET.
I've never seen an organization that had QA done by technical persons. But this type of stuff is out of the realm of QA. QA did there job by verifying that the functionality worked as described. But this wasn't a QC mistake, this was a design flaw. The design describes where the data comes from and where it is stored.
So far, I have yet to see a source control system that is client-server. I've used PVCS, CVS, and VSS. They all store their "database" in some proprietary file array. VSS has the craziest scheme I've seen before, while PVCS and CVS seem to have the basic concept of a file is an archive. But really, for all the same reasons as any other database (security, performance, backup, transactions,...) it should be client-server.
Is this not done for historical reasons, or technical ones?
The best layout I've worked in had "supercubes" of 4x4 people, partially connected to other supercubes, with extra high walls. This was a great layout, since people had their backs to each other, but could turn around and chat with a coworker. Best to keep teams together so they can pow-wow as necessary. High walls prevented disturbances.
I hope the lameness filter doesn't kick my ASCII art ___ ___ |A B| | | |C D| |-- --| |E F| | | |H G| --- ---
Why would a content provider choose to use Microsoft's implementation of MPEG4, when there are freely available royalty-free open-source implementations?
Scenario: I make a web site, I want to distribute media. Why not use DIVX? Or XVid? Those codecs are as easily available as any others, and I don't have to pay a fee to encode using them. Further, I make a movie I want to show in one of these new "digital" theaters -- same question. Why? OR screw that and use MPEG2. Is the performance difference worth the cost?
It depends on what they mean by "ActiveX" support. "ActiveX" is a Microsoft buzzword, so it is tough to figure that out. I assume they mean support for the tag that IE uses to embed COM ActiveX control in a web page by specifying the class ID.
Does anyone really want this? Who uses Activex other than corporations that are too dumb to use Java?
You can already get a plug-in for Mozilla that supports ActiveX. Specifically, it allows the tag so that Mozilla can run embedded ActiveX controls. I used this at work for a week so I could use Mozilla to run some proprietary web-enabled app. In the end, it was terrible because it meant my PC was no open to many of the same security flaws IE is, so I finally removed it. (And now other stuff didn't work, because both the and versions would work, so I would get weird effects on pages that tried to be cross-browser compliant)
If you read the article, ignore the stats. They are over-simplified and there is no text to qualify them. Example:
CMM level 4
USA: 41%
Overseas: 59%
What does this mean? 41% of all us companies are CMM level 4? level 4 or above? Or does it mean all CMM level 4 companies are in the US and 59% are overseas?
(These are rhetorical questions - the answer is irrelevant, the point is that it isn't clarified in the paper so don't even pay attention to them)
After reading the article, I decided to follow the link to their web site and peek at the source. I was quite surprised by what I saw. Here are some quotes from the article and the related HTML I saw:
Do we want to send a 100KB index page full of Flash?
// CALLED BY FLASH HEADER
function changeiframe(iframemode) {...
...no code forking, no alternate stylesheets, and no box model hacks.
if (navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase().indexOf('webtv' )...
ie = "Microsoft Internet Explorer";
ns = "Netscape";
if (navigator.appVersion...
if (document.cookie.indexOf("ESPNMotionClient=true") != -1 ) {
document.write('
I don't see that they've followed a single one of the guidelines. Maybe I'm looking at the completely wrong site or something?!?! I see browser-specific javascript, ActiveX controls, checks for browser and javascript versions, and flash.
Will someone please clarify exactly what a patent covers? I thought a patent covered a particular implementation of something.
For example, can I not create my own online ordering system that allows a purchase with only one click? So long as I don't have the same object model or database schema as Amazon, I thought I was fine.
I also thought it was fine for me to create a system that charges toy race cars using magnetic inductance. Just because the Candela Rechargable Lamps use a "patented" magnetic induction charging system doesn't mean I cannot do something similar. I just need to be careful if I make lamps, since if my design matches theirs then I am infringing.
I have my name on a patent filed by my employer, but our patent has full object models and design docs. I thought that was because patented that particular design/implementation, not the concept of what the system does. All responses are appreciated.
Undoubtedly, the first 5 million entries will be along these lines. So I fully expect Mr McLean to disable internet access, and/or modify the page at http://www.noodleroni.com/beerlyrics.txt to say "SUCKER!" or something like that.:-)
Few people, even business directors, have the legal knowledge to understand licensing issues. It sounds like this guy is just trying to throw out legal jargon so that you cannot argue the points technically. It is an avoidance technique.
I take it they have an existing child with a genetic disorder.
Are they screening for a genetically compatible match to the existing child, to act as a blood donor, or are they just trying to have a healthy baby? What the deal with the umbilical cord?
1) "Control Center" is not an application at all. I am amazed how so many Linux designers think that changing your network settings is an applied use for computers. It is a "utility" or "maintenance" or soemthing like that. This makes it tough for users to find things, because they see "Word Processing" right next to "NIC IP wonker"
First thing I do on any new *nix or Windows install is reorganize the folders.
1b) Oh, and I HATE Programs->Adobe Acrobat->Acrobat Stuff->Arobat reader. Talk about abuse of a hierarchy. OR Programs->Distributor->Manufacturer Name->Program folder->Program shortcut. Aaargh!
2) Microsoft has become good at making nag screens. Things like Options->Hide Menu Bar displaying a dialog that says "To make the menu bar reappear, press ctrl-m. [ ] Do not show this message again" Maybe it miffs some users, but I still appreciate being notified of this stuff since, as you point out, it changes all the time. I would like more of those in KDE/Gnome.
And what features AREN'T accessible from OpenGL? Nobody has ever told me that. You can always build on top of the OpenGL foundation, and use the hardware specific, cutting edge stuff on top of that.
I'm glad you asked. There are many features missing from openGL. In my opinion, that is its achilles heel. I recommend that you check out some of the emerging OpenGL 1.2 and 2.0 standards, so you are informed on this issue. OpenGL is aging, and that is why many companies are choosing to move to DirectX.
1) HTTP doesn't support resumed downloading.
- That's ridiculous. It has since HTTP/1.1 years ago. In fact, it can even do things like request bytes 70,000 - 80,000, then 90,763 - 96,450, etc. 2) HTTP doesn't support security/authentication
- Ridiculous. HTTP has an open-ended model for authentication and security, many of which are secure and standardized. If you REALLY need security, use HTTPS. 3) HTTP doesn't support uploading
- HTTP/1.1 has had this for a while. Netscape 4.7, Mozilla 1.1, and IE 4+ support this. I must admit though, it sucks.:-)
Several people have pointed out the real differences: 1) FTP doesn't like firewalls
- Passive FTP fixes this, but it has quirks and limitations. 2) FTP supports directory listing, renaming, uploading, changing of permissions, etc.
- This is what FTP is for
- This can be done in HTTP, but requires serious work
- If the scope creeps, shell access would be better.
2 strings walk into a bar. The first string says to the bartender, "Bartender, I'll have a beer. u.5n$x5t?*&4ru!2[sACC~ErJ" The second string says "Pardon my friend, he isn't NULL terminated."
Hmmmmmmmmmm, you are right, I intermixed two separate points there. Probably should have been two separate posts. (Naahhhh, longer post = better karma:-) )
I am saying both, but perhaps one causes the other? The typical geeks do not have the same needs as typical computer users. So they neither demand usablility, nor know how to design it. But this hurts the normal consumers, but also the geeks.
UDF is the answer, but neither Linux nor Windows support it very well. The only Windows solution I know of is a 3rd party add-on called Adaptec DirectCD, that comes with EZ CD Creator. It's free for reading, but commercial for writing. Is there anything else? What does Linux support?
The Linux community will be much better off when geeks realize that there is no difference between a geek and a consumer. All of the things that make "consumer" Linux easy should be placed into the Geek distros. If they shouldn't, then there is something wrong with the feature. Let me provide a scenario:
I went to a Linux Users Group meeting, and one of the Windows geeks posted the question "What do you guys do with your computers?" The answers were amazing - none of them did word processing, or craeted graphics, or music. None of them were math geeks, or biology geeks, or programmers. None of them were homemakers, or fire fighters, or teachers... they were all sysadmins. To them, an "applied" use of a computer was adding users and scanning for viruses. These types of geeks aren't qualified to determine what should be in an OS since they don't even know for themselves what they are using their computers for. It's like those guys who have 3 cars in the backyard, tuned and customized, but they would never think to run them on the road. So they don't know that the new super-duper engine they just installed dies after 3000 miles.:-)
Let me tie this into a quote from the article:
...Phoenix and Galeon and Konqueror and the others are all wonderful, but I don't have a personal need for a browser other than Mozilla...
Most distros I have seen come with multiple web browsers, multiple MP3 and video players, several window managers, and more text editors than I ever knew existed. The result is the exact same crime we claim against Microsoft: bloat! Installs in the multiple gigabyte range. It becomes difficult just to browse the web or play an MP3. We need geeks who have a real use for their PCs to be deciding what goes in a distro. This is good for geeks, and it is good for consumers.
There's nothing that stops someone from whipping open extra CD #7 and installing the obscure browser and mp3 player they like. But it is better of to start out clean and nice and pretty, and let someone customize it, than to start out bloated and force users to trim things out.
Slashdot Mirror
This is just an inverted version of the "network computing" universe where we all use thin clients that use a central server to do work. It can never become mainstream due to the physical limitations, not the technology ones. Suppose I am a corporation and I need a new big-iron system to process daily orders from our web site. Let's try grid computing: all 1000 employees in the company install a piece of software on their PC so we can use each PC to process an order, based on availability. The number of problems with this, as compared to using a central server, is incredible.
1) Still need a central server for storage/backup
2) One server needs one UPS, 1000 workstations...
3) Worsktations are flaky: They reboot, crash, play video games, etc. The distributed software can handle this, but the inefficiency involved is painstaking. I hope everybody doesn't run Windows Update all at once, or all the PCs could go down.
4) The corporate network is now a bottleneck.
I rattled off this list in about 30 seconds, so I'm sure there are lots more. Since these are physical limitations, not technology limitations, they aren't going away.
Affirmative Action REQUIRED a percentage of peopel to be of a certain race. This is where Affirmative Action is a problem. The bill proposed here does not require that any percentage of software be open-source. It requires that they be considered. In effect, this bill does nothing except force people to open their eyes a bit. If open-source really is better, then this is all that is necessary.
I don't think you read the article.
.NET. To briefly reiterate, he listed meta-information about methods which is necessary to make it truly useful. Knowing a method name and parameters isn't the whole deal.
.NET.
#1: You referred to property get/sets, but that isn't what the author was talking about. He was talking about external configuration files, environment configuration files, an serialization.
#2: The author explicitly lists what information, beyond the methods, you can get from
#3: You ask "how is this better?" which is exactly what page 3 of the article describers. The author explicitly lists advantages of archives over JAR files. He points out that it isn't a magnanimous difference, but he certainly answers your question.
#4: You've obviously never done cross-language RMI. One of the running Jokes about Java is that Java is great at communicating with other languages: so long as the other langauge is Java. Microsoft has taken cross-language support to a new level - which is one of the things that really attracts VB, Java, and C++ developers to
I've never seen an organization that had QA done by technical persons. But this type of stuff is out of the realm of QA. QA did there job by verifying that the functionality worked as described. But this wasn't a QC mistake, this was a design flaw. The design describes where the data comes from and where it is stored.
Does anyone know why all the DVD drives on the market are limited to 4.7GB? I thought DVDs could handle far more than that.
Absolutely. No double-standard here. If you publicly share files on your network, then, well, they are public.
So far, I have yet to see a source control system that is client-server. I've used PVCS, CVS, and VSS. They all store their "database" in some proprietary file array. VSS has the craziest scheme I've seen before, while PVCS and CVS seem to have the basic concept of a file is an archive. But really, for all the same reasons as any other database (security, performance, backup, transactions, ...) it should be client-server.
Is this not done for historical reasons, or technical ones?
The best layout I've worked in had "supercubes" of 4x4 people, partially connected to other supercubes, with extra high walls. This was a great layout, since people had their backs to each other, but could turn around and chat with a coworker. Best to keep teams together so they can pow-wow as necessary. High walls prevented disturbances.
I hope the lameness filter doesn't kick my ASCII art
___ ___
|A B|
| |
|C D|
|-- --|
|E F|
| |
|H G|
--- ---
Why would a content provider choose to use Microsoft's implementation of MPEG4, when there are freely available royalty-free open-source implementations?
Scenario: I make a web site, I want to distribute media. Why not use DIVX? Or XVid? Those codecs are as easily available as any others, and I don't have to pay a fee to encode using them. Further, I make a movie I want to show in one of these new "digital" theaters -- same question. Why? OR screw that and use MPEG2. Is the performance difference worth the cost?
Would laser games such as Photon, Ultrazone, XP LaserSport, etc. be affected by this patent? Would they be considered prior art?
It depends on what they mean by "ActiveX" support. "ActiveX" is a Microsoft buzzword, so it is tough to figure that out. I assume they mean support for the tag that IE uses to embed COM ActiveX control in a web page by specifying the class ID.
Does anyone really want this? Who uses Activex other than corporations that are too dumb to use Java?
You can already get a plug-in for Mozilla that supports ActiveX. Specifically, it allows the tag so that Mozilla can run embedded ActiveX controls. I used this at work for a week so I could use Mozilla to run some proprietary web-enabled app. In the end, it was terrible because it meant my PC was no open to many of the same security flaws IE is, so I finally removed it. (And now other stuff didn't work, because both the and versions would work, so I would get weird effects on pages that tried to be cross-browser compliant)
Where do I get a copy of Red Hat 8.1 that is Windows certified?
If you read the article, ignore the stats. They are over-simplified and there is no text to qualify them. Example:
CMM level 4
USA: 41%
Overseas: 59%
What does this mean? 41% of all us companies are CMM level 4? level 4 or above? Or does it mean all CMM level 4 companies are in the US and 59% are overseas?
(These are rhetorical questions - the answer is irrelevant, the point is that it isn't clarified in the paper so don't even pay attention to them)
After reading the article, I decided to follow the link to their web site and peek at the source. I was quite surprised by what I saw. Here are some quotes from the article and the related HTML I saw:
function changeiframe(iframemode) {... if (navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase().indexOf('webtv
I don't see that they've followed a single one of the guidelines. Maybe I'm looking at the completely wrong site or something?!?! I see browser-specific javascript, ActiveX controls, checks for browser and javascript versions, and flash.
No, this post is not CSS/XHTML compliant. :-)
Will someone please clarify exactly what a patent covers? I thought a patent covered a particular implementation of something.
For example, can I not create my own online ordering system that allows a purchase with only one click? So long as I don't have the same object model or database schema as Amazon, I thought I was fine.
I also thought it was fine for me to create a system that charges toy race cars using magnetic inductance. Just because the Candela Rechargable Lamps use a "patented" magnetic induction charging system doesn't mean I cannot do something similar. I just need to be careful if I make lamps, since if my design matches theirs then I am infringing.
I have my name on a patent filed by my employer, but our patent has full object models and design docs. I thought that was because patented that particular design/implementation, not the concept of what the system does. All responses are appreciated.
lynx -dump http://www.noodleroni.com/beerlyrics.txt
:-)
Undoubtedly, the first 5 million entries will be along these lines. So I fully expect Mr McLean to disable internet access, and/or modify the page at http://www.noodleroni.com/beerlyrics.txt to say "SUCKER!" or something like that.
Few people, even business directors, have the legal knowledge to understand licensing issues. It sounds like this guy is just trying to throw out legal jargon so that you cannot argue the points technically. It is an avoidance technique.
I take it they have an existing child with a genetic disorder.
Are they screening for a genetically compatible match to the existing child, to act as a blood donor, or are they just trying to have a healthy baby? What the deal with the umbilical cord?
I would like to point out 2 things in your post:
1) "Control Center" is not an application at all. I am amazed how so many Linux designers think that changing your network settings is an applied use for computers. It is a "utility" or "maintenance" or soemthing like that. This makes it tough for users to find things, because they see "Word Processing" right next to "NIC IP wonker"
First thing I do on any new *nix or Windows install is reorganize the folders.
1b) Oh, and I HATE Programs->Adobe Acrobat->Acrobat Stuff->Arobat reader. Talk about abuse of a hierarchy. OR Programs->Distributor->Manufacturer Name->Program folder->Program shortcut. Aaargh!
2) Microsoft has become good at making nag screens. Things like Options->Hide Menu Bar displaying a dialog that says "To make the menu bar reappear, press ctrl-m. [ ] Do not show this message again" Maybe it miffs some users, but I still appreciate being notified of this stuff since, as you point out, it changes all the time. I would like more of those in KDE/Gnome.
I see too many FUD replies here:
:-)
1) HTTP doesn't support resumed downloading.
- That's ridiculous. It has since HTTP/1.1 years ago. In fact, it can even do things like request bytes 70,000 - 80,000, then 90,763 - 96,450, etc.
2) HTTP doesn't support security/authentication
- Ridiculous. HTTP has an open-ended model for authentication and security, many of which are secure and standardized. If you REALLY need security, use HTTPS.
3) HTTP doesn't support uploading
- HTTP/1.1 has had this for a while. Netscape 4.7, Mozilla 1.1, and IE 4+ support this. I must admit though, it sucks.
Several people have pointed out the real differences:
1) FTP doesn't like firewalls
- Passive FTP fixes this, but it has quirks and limitations.
2) FTP supports directory listing, renaming, uploading, changing of permissions, etc.
- This is what FTP is for
- This can be done in HTTP, but requires serious work
- If the scope creeps, shell access would be better.
2 strings walk into a bar. The first string says to the bartender, "Bartender, I'll have a beer. u.5n$x5t?*&4ru!2[sACC~ErJ" The second string says "Pardon my friend, he isn't NULL terminated."
Hmmmmmmmmmm, you are right, I intermixed two separate points there. Probably should have been two separate posts. (Naahhhh, longer post = better karma :-) )
I am saying both, but perhaps one causes the other? The typical geeks do not have the same needs as typical computer users. So they neither demand usablility, nor know how to design it. But this hurts the normal consumers, but also the geeks.
UDF is the answer, but neither Linux nor Windows support it very well. The only Windows solution I know of is a 3rd party add-on called Adaptec DirectCD, that comes with EZ CD Creator. It's free for reading, but commercial for writing. Is there anything else? What does Linux support?
The Linux community will be much better off when geeks realize that there is no difference between a geek and a consumer. All of the things that make "consumer" Linux easy should be placed into the Geek distros. If they shouldn't, then there is something wrong with the feature. Let me provide a scenario:
I went to a Linux Users Group meeting, and one of the Windows geeks posted the question "What do you guys do with your computers?" The answers were amazing - none of them did word processing, or craeted graphics, or music. None of them were math geeks, or biology geeks, or programmers. None of them were homemakers, or fire fighters, or teachers... they were all sysadmins. To them, an "applied" use of a computer was adding users and scanning for viruses. These types of geeks aren't qualified to determine what should be in an OS since they don't even know for themselves what they are using their computers for. It's like those guys who have 3 cars in the backyard, tuned and customized, but they would never think to run them on the road. So they don't know that the new super-duper engine they just installed dies after 3000 miles. :-)
Let me tie this into a quote from the article:
Most distros I have seen come with multiple web browsers, multiple MP3 and video players, several window managers, and more text editors than I ever knew existed. The result is the exact same crime we claim against Microsoft: bloat! Installs in the multiple gigabyte range. It becomes difficult just to browse the web or play an MP3. We need geeks who have a real use for their PCs to be deciding what goes in a distro. This is good for geeks, and it is good for consumers.
There's nothing that stops someone from whipping open extra CD #7 and installing the obscure browser and mp3 player they like. But it is better of to start out clean and nice and pretty, and let someone customize it, than to start out bloated and force users to trim things out.