You recall what, exactly? You've only cited 'public Internet' examples. The statistics on internal corporate server usage are much more difficult to obtain.
A dork with air amerikka as his url is going to bloviate about my knowlege of 'Enterprise?'
You really missed the point. The Internet is a big giveaway. That you can point to five or six Big Successes that don't use Microsoft servers totally MISSES the point that corporate America, internally, does.
Let us know when you've gotten a job at a company that doesn't run it's internal web server on a wobbly 386sx running Linux.
It is customary at many schools and businesses to stack the old machines on pallets when the new machines arrive. The pallets then 'go away' because the machines on them won't run the latest Redmond bloatware. It's not a 'wild exception' to get deals like that. It was a somewhat unusually low price, as it's more typical to pay $5-6 each for similar machines at similar auctions (Dell Optiplexes with Pentium III processors, 128M of RAM...)
Do you have any understanding of the fact that 'Google Technology' represents something more than a URL that you enter to do a search? There is actual technology behind the spider/index/search mechanism. Technology that you do NOT get for free because you happen to make use of the search capability.
Lots of companies, incidentally, are licensing Google's search engine for internal use.
Carry on thinking 'it is all for free' if you wish.
That's very similar to the Nigerian Scam on a certain level.
The crook 'involved' you in the conspiracy in a way, by saying 'cops cops' and forcing you to a decision to collaborate with him 'against the system' to get a good deal.
Buying computers from shady strangers for $300 and then immediately selling them for $1100 is not "common" in the civilized parts of the society.
To counter your arguement, I've resold computer equipment with an equivalent or greater markup.
I bought two skids of Dell computers at a school auction. Aprox. 80 machines that I got for $40 (good day at the auction). I sold two dozen or so of the machines after testing/reconditioning them for a range between $20-80 on eBay to various people.
Similar markup in price, and an entirely legitimate undertaking.
It's reasonable to assume that the eBay seller, who was probably regularly buying machines for $300 from unknown strangers and selling them on eBay for 4 times that amount, should have questioned his sources a little more, to avoid being seen as an obvious fence for stolen merchandise.
The guy who bought it on eBay has no way of knowing the source of the laptop. He has no idea that dirtbag eBay seller bought it from some skinny chick for $300.
80% of what market? The 'waste time' sites we all browse from home, and that people slough off at work reading?
Web-enabling a company internally doesn't show up in your 80% statistic. External spiders don't count Human Resource servers at XYZ Incorporated.
Nobody, or very few people, pay for the stuff that the bulk of the Apache servers deliver. A lot of companies pay dearly, and benefit greatly, from the internal content that IIS delivers to employees.
I would also point out that Apache runs on FAR more servers than IIS.
I'd like to point out that even in their heyday, Netscape didn't fool themselves into thinking they were 'winning' on the basis of the count of public-facing Internet websites.
Apache can run on any number of millions of Internet servers, serving up vanity pages and mom-and-pop retail sites.
The money is in corporate Intranet servers facing inward, to employees. And crummy site-counter statistics on the Web aren't even CAPABLE of counting those.
I worked at a company where a 'company founder' like Jobs was around. He was powerful enough to walk into any meeting and destroy the possibility of anything productive coming out of it by nitpick and tangental rant.
There was a reason Jobs needed to leave Apple at that time. It wasn't a 'coup.' It was a purge.
How do I translate 'Unicode will make us free' into twentyseven languages by tomorrow morning so it can go on the coffee mugs we'll give away at next Tuesday's motivational meeting?
They should be spinning these things off when they show potential, not continuing to bind everything together through Windows and IP.
Unfortunately, Microsoft has profitted immensely from the ability to channel IP between divisions through internal conduits (i.e. the proverbial hidden system calls the Office Developers get to exploit that competitors never have access to...)
Furthermore: Split it all up and it's not the Sears, Roebuck, and Co. that customers expect. It would become a bunch of botique stores at the mall.
It is one thing when they audit the config looking for packaging/install bugs, quite another when the flown in experts are proposing a complete shakeup of the entire application and physical architecture.
Alternative view:
It is in the nature of 'flown in experts' to take a 'high view' and trash the entire design of a project they were not involved with at ground level.
Hopefully there was some core competence in the original architects and management will listen to it and take a moderate approach to reworking the project, not just listen to some late-coming flacks.
Last time Microsoft 'took on an enemy' it was Netscape. The result was that the company was driven to ruin, eventually so low that it was bought by AOL. The Netscape technology in their browser became "Open Source" for the community.
It might be nice if Google, five years from now, is a powerful piece of open source technology that we all have free access to.
Now, Microsoft is trying to up their profits on paper, so they're squeezing employees for that money. Nevermind that Microsoft is still making around a billion a month. And nevermind that Microsoft's lack of profit growth is directly attributable to those managers who are making a million a year in salary.
Wow. All they need to do is hire YOU, since you have it all completely figured out, huh?
It was incredibly stupid that they threw it all away to 'start over.'
My understanding is that Bill Gates didn't want every sale he made to involve a royalty payment to a competitor. The same reason many hardware vendors wouldn't promote OS/2 on their systems.
Most 'random DSL lines' have a DSL modem that imposes a NAT router right in the hardware. Mine imposes a limit of ONE machine on said NAT router. So you stick on a 'broadband router' after that which shares stuff around to other machines you own.
It's pretty effective at blocking bad things from out-of-the-box Microsoft systems. Not that I've ever BOUGHT a system out-of-the-box with a Microsoft OS on it... (wait... that 486 laptop back in the early 90s....).
Slashdot Mirror
What is the point in going to places where there is no power plug if you're going to lie in the tent playing some electronic game?
If you're good at basketball, you can pretty much only use that skill to play basketball.
Not really true. The 'fitness' aspect of basketball, at least, makes it easier to frame houses, etc.
Indeed. I prefer FVWM2 over the bloat desktops. Ever installed a 'modern desktop' freenix? Yikes!
Huh! I seem to recall....
You recall what, exactly? You've only cited 'public Internet' examples. The statistics on internal corporate server usage are much more difficult to obtain.
I guess we're both blowing hot air.
A dork with air amerikka as his url is going to bloviate about my knowlege of 'Enterprise?'
You really missed the point. The Internet is a big giveaway. That you can point to five or six Big Successes that don't use Microsoft servers totally MISSES the point that corporate America, internally, does.
Let us know when you've gotten a job at a company that doesn't run it's internal web server on a wobbly 386sx running Linux.
Reams of paperwork? Boondooglery?
I probably have the recitpt somewhere.
It is customary at many schools and businesses to stack the old machines on pallets when the new machines arrive. The pallets then 'go away' because the machines on them won't run the latest Redmond bloatware. It's not a 'wild exception' to get deals like that. It was a somewhat unusually low price, as it's more typical to pay $5-6 each for similar machines at similar auctions (Dell Optiplexes with Pentium III processors, 128M of RAM...)
Do you have any understanding of the fact that 'Google Technology' represents something more than a URL that you enter to do a search? There is actual technology behind the spider/index/search mechanism. Technology that you do NOT get for free because you happen to make use of the search capability.
Lots of companies, incidentally, are licensing Google's search engine for internal use.
Carry on thinking 'it is all for free' if you wish.
That's very similar to the Nigerian Scam on a certain level.
The crook 'involved' you in the conspiracy in a way, by saying 'cops cops' and forcing you to a decision to collaborate with him 'against the system' to get a good deal.
Buying computers from shady strangers for $300 and then immediately selling them for $1100 is not "common" in the civilized parts of the society.
To counter your arguement, I've resold computer equipment with an equivalent or greater markup.
I bought two skids of Dell computers at a school auction. Aprox. 80 machines that I got for $40 (good day at the auction). I sold two dozen or so of the machines after testing/reconditioning them for a range between $20-80 on eBay to various people.
Similar markup in price, and an entirely legitimate undertaking.
It's reasonable to assume that the eBay seller, who was probably regularly buying machines for $300 from unknown strangers and selling them on eBay for 4 times that amount, should have questioned his sources a little more, to avoid being seen as an obvious fence for stolen merchandise.
The guy who bought it on eBay has no way of knowing the source of the laptop. He has no idea that dirtbag eBay seller bought it from some skinny chick for $300.
Is the NIC in this machine hardwared into the motherboard? Is the MAC address changable?
There wasn't a lightbulb-change feature in Unix in 1987. Why do you even bring up Linux here?
80% of what market? The 'waste time' sites we all browse from home, and that people slough off at work reading?
Web-enabling a company internally doesn't show up in your 80% statistic. External spiders don't count Human Resource servers at XYZ Incorporated.
Nobody, or very few people, pay for the stuff that the bulk of the Apache servers deliver. A lot of companies pay dearly, and benefit greatly, from the internal content that IIS delivers to employees.
I would also point out that Apache runs on FAR more servers than IIS.
I'd like to point out that even in their heyday, Netscape didn't fool themselves into thinking they were 'winning' on the basis of the count of public-facing Internet websites.
Apache can run on any number of millions of Internet servers, serving up vanity pages and mom-and-pop retail sites.
The money is in corporate Intranet servers facing inward, to employees. And crummy site-counter statistics on the Web aren't even CAPABLE of counting those.
I worked at a company where a 'company founder' like Jobs was around. He was powerful enough to walk into any meeting and destroy the possibility of anything productive coming out of it by nitpick and tangental rant.
There was a reason Jobs needed to leave Apple at that time. It wasn't a 'coup.' It was a purge.
How do I translate 'Unicode will make us free' into twentyseven languages by tomorrow morning so it can go on the coffee mugs we'll give away at next Tuesday's motivational meeting?
Or 'the intimate life of Steve Jobs' coke spoon.'
Who renders the nasal hairs? Are they reflective?
They should be spinning these things off when they show potential, not continuing to bind everything together through Windows and IP.
Unfortunately, Microsoft has profitted immensely from the ability to channel IP between divisions through internal conduits (i.e. the proverbial hidden system calls the Office Developers get to exploit that competitors never have access to...)
Furthermore: Split it all up and it's not the Sears, Roebuck, and Co. that customers expect. It would become a bunch of botique stores at the mall.
Your wording needs a little correction:
"Netscape used to be THE place to work, much like Google is now."
There. That wasn't difficult.
Alternative view:
It is in the nature of 'flown in experts' to take a 'high view' and trash the entire design of a project they were not involved with at ground level.
Hopefully there was some core competence in the original architects and management will listen to it and take a moderate approach to reworking the project, not just listen to some late-coming flacks.
The interesting thing is:
Last time Microsoft 'took on an enemy' it was Netscape. The result was that the company was driven to ruin, eventually so low that it was bought by AOL. The Netscape technology in their browser became "Open Source" for the community.
It might be nice if Google, five years from now, is a powerful piece of open source technology that we all have free access to.
Wow. All they need to do is hire YOU, since you have it all completely figured out, huh?
Windows Vista may well be their Edsel
Ummm, Windows ME is Microsoft's Edsel.
Who knows. Vista may be a nice Mustang. Or a muscular F150 Pickup truck.
But it's fashionable in these parts to frag Microsoft.
It was incredibly stupid that they threw it all away to 'start over.'
My understanding is that Bill Gates didn't want every sale he made to involve a royalty payment to a competitor. The same reason many hardware vendors wouldn't promote OS/2 on their systems.
Most 'random DSL lines' have a DSL modem that imposes a NAT router right in the hardware. Mine imposes a limit of ONE machine on said NAT router. So you stick on a 'broadband router' after that which shares stuff around to other machines you own.
It's pretty effective at blocking bad things from out-of-the-box Microsoft systems. Not that I've ever BOUGHT a system out-of-the-box with a Microsoft OS on it... (wait... that 486 laptop back in the early 90s....).