It could be interesting to see the results of such a social move. I can percieve that generally, unless there is a major social move on the viewpoint, it would be just a 'fad' amongst the wealthy / high-society. To make it last beyond that would almost require it to be socially unacceptable on a large scale rather than just 'un-cool', to have a house that is not ecologically friendly. Until the technology comes down in price a little thats unlikely to happen. As soon as you start to see solar panels and the like dropping into the price range of the average wage holder, eco-friendly houses are unlikely to be made. The EU currently offers a very nice subsidy for having solar panels fitted, provided you use authorised builders (so as to avoid the cowboy builders cheating the government), but even with the subsidy its still quite an expense and it'll take quite a few years to make the money back in savings from the initial purchase. As pathetic as it really does seem (though I'm as big a culprit as anyone else), the green drive only goes for us so far as it doesn't affect the wallet. A lot of us will stand and say "oh yes, we're eco-friendly" and "why doesn't the government do more towards the environment", but when it affects our wallets we sort-of back away. Many of us could probably afford to put up a panel or two on our houses, but we balk at the cost, ignoring the green benefits.
I hasten to point out... that 1/10th of $2m a month is still $200,000 a month, not the kind of revenue they're going to be ecstatic about losing.
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
I'd stop wasting your time if I were you. He's a died in the wool Slashdot educated MS hater. (for the record, I don't like MS) There can be no circumstances underwhich MS can possibly be defended, they should all burn and die a horrible death, along with anyone that happens to even remotely defend them etc.. etc.. etc..
link that up with technology such at decaying DVDs and you're sorted.
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
The fact remains that Microsoft could NOT do this with their own OS. If they could, they would have by now.
That is, even by/. standards a rather specious anti-MS argument. Just because you can afford to do something doesn't mean you necessrily should, nor does it mean it makes economical sense. Why would Microsoft want to fork out money on a whole series of servers (and associated maintenance / upgrade costs), based in several different geographical locations, pay for employment and training costs of getting staff in to maintain a system, when its an awful lot cheaper just to buy in an external solution, which can be made available near instantaneously. Odds are that anything MS put together would see barely more than 15% load for the most part, except for during DDOS's. Having a server farm 85% idle, just in case, is a big waste of money.
Just because they can afford to do it doesn't mean they should. Thats basic economics.
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
Re:Those results are skewed because of Akamai
on
Hardening Apache
·
· Score: 1
MS used/use Akamai to reduce the impact of any attempted DDOSs. I'm sure you can imagine how many people are regularly trying to attack MS. MS's own servers are all running IIS, which is hardly surprising, its merely their outsourced caching that use Apache, and MS won't have much control over what their outsourcers choose to do. If MS started throwing its weight around when trying to get caching services I'm sure doors would just slam in their faces, rather than co-operate. Regarding the 'duck and cover' comments, I'd imagine that they were emergency provisions MS put into place when they realised just what was about to occur, or what was occuring (massive virus caused DDOS.) When you're in a hurry you're not about to say "We'll only use you if you're running IIS", they'd just want the service there ASAPNetcraft's own explanation
Think of it, the city could reduce costs in other areas such as, say water meter reading - instead of having guy go out with a scanner to each meter, it could transmit to the office when necessary.
Think of it, the city could dramatically reduce water bills all over the city by having water meters transmit their reading.. ready for a hacker to capture, and falsify.
You would NOT need a TV Licence if you had a TV tuner in your MAC. All you have to prove is that the tuner is not tuned into any channels, and has no nearby aerial connection on it. There are a lot of people in the UK that have TVs specifically for DVD players / Gamecubes / Playstations etc, that don't have TV licences and don't have to have a TV licence, because the TVs aren't used to pick up terrestrial.
Its worthwhile noting as well: If a TV licence inspector comes visiting, you are under NO legal obligation to let them into your house, regardless of what they tell you. Only if they have a Police Warranty are they able to enter your premesis without your permission, and TV Detector vans are not admissable evidence for a search warranty to be granted. Essentially, provided they can't see the screen from the door (or hear it), and there is no obvious indication of other illegal activity taking place, its very difficult for them to get a warranty.
... if you can call "It may or may not happen" a prediction.
Today, I shall be going out with a glove on one hand. The weatherman this morning said it was going to be hot, but on the other hand there was a risk of it being a bit chilly.
I used to have a VIA based mobo, it was my first DDR based system. Superb performance, barely stable though. I used to spend half my time fighting with bizarre errors and the like, trying to work out why some odd crashes were occuring. I've pretty much sworn against using VIA ever again after that, although I do aknowledge that is quite a foolish attitude, everyone makes mistakes now and then. In the future it may be they do produce a decent chipset, and I'll end up going back on my word.
A few months after getting the VIA system, I upgraded to an Nforce2 based system (Abit NF7), and blinked in stunned amazement as the system remained steady as a rock. I've had just one system crash since I switched to Nforce2, superb overclockability, and very respectable performance (easily beating some 'top end' P4s at stuff like SETI unit crunching, in part due to dual channel memory) googlecached:OcUK SETI benchmarks
Given the toaster ovens that Intel is now maskerading as processors, I'm very glad my XP-M runs so cool, and with so little in the way of cooling (one 75mm HSF unit, one 120mm 7 volted exhaust fan, one ultra-quiet SilenX 60mm intake), I'm running faster, cooler, quieter and for cheaper than machines mine outperforms.
That is quite a lot of work for Intel to do when they are also talking about dual cores. It's a lot of tech to get right all at the same time, especially given the delays involved with the Nocona launch and the associated motherboards. Itwould give them some rather nice options though, rather than using Hypertransport they could use PCI-E to join CPU's and have controllers on the CPU like the Opterons. Also because the CPU's are joined with a serial bus you can move them onto riser cards and make the most of the real estate in the chassis meaning you should be able to pack more CPU's in a smaller space.
More CPUs in a smaller space? Sheesh... P4s are toasty enough as it is, and can take quite some noisy fans to cool 'em, but shoving more in the same space? Ikes. I wouldn't want to be sharing the same room with one of those.
From a system perspective surely you'd almost have to have memory on those riser cards too, or you'd just be reducing the effective operating memory per processor, presenting yet another bottleneck to the overall system performance. You'd almost be better off with a blade server
Unfortunately I can just conceive that far too many sys-admins will cave in and do exactly what dear Aunty Microsoft tells them to do, forcing those of us without our heads stuck in the sand to fight a rear-guard action.
It seems to be a standard thing with mobile phones. At a band rehearsal about a year ago we'd just reached the end of a song when we heard the classic du du du (etc) tone coming from the lead guitarists amp; his phone was sitting on top of it. Then the bassist phone did the same thing to his amp, then the keyboard players, and so on around the room, all within the space of a minute. The sound guy just looked exasperated at us all and rolled his eyes (he's forever reminding us to turn phones off when we rehearse)
Great, so they look at their phone to work out why it dropped out right as they swerve their vehicle into you.
Then imagine how the driver tries to explain to the police / their insurance company just why they were swerving..
I'd love to take a mobile jammer with me on trains and other forms of public transport, or into cinemas / concert halls, upon hearing "I can't talk long, I'm on the train", or even the phone ring, I'd love to be able to press a button and jam their conversation, especially as most are conducted at about 40db. The only thing that stops me is that it would jam medical pagers for doctors and emergency service reserves on duty..
Actually, I HAVE adandoned Windows.
I only run it at work, and even there, I'm porting our software away from MFC and other MS lock-ins towards tools like MINGW.
Ultimately, cross-compilers will produce the Windows binaries.
As far as the open source community is concerned its quite productive to produce cross-compilters that can produce windows binaries. Windows is still the dominant desktop by a long stretch. Open source is sneaking in, both through Linux, and more so through free open source alternatives to mainstream expensive applications. It is in the Open Source movements best interest (certainly currently) to support cross-development, slowly but surely changing social exceptance of open source software. There is no logical argument for Microsoft to produce a cross-compiling development package, it would be against any kind of good business practice.
Why on earth would Microsoft write a set of programming tools to operate under other competitors OSs? Its surprising enough that they produce versions of Office for Macs. It'd be rather akin to shooting themselves in the foot.
"Here you go, here's a development tool for you to use to write software for Linux that'll reduce our income." Sure, thats going to happen.
But even then, in the safety of your office you're bombarded by logos. As I sit here I've got a monitor with a prominent logo at the central bottom. The keyboard has a logo in the top right corner, the mouse has one on it not to far from the bottom. Its on a commercially branded mouse-mat, which came with the PC. The PC itself has the OEMs logo on it. Beside my monitor is a very nice calender showing me a picture of a local castle... and its also got a corporation logo nestled right beside the actual date segment. I've got a mug here with tea in it that has a logo on it. Virtually everything around me advertises in one way or another the company that manufactured it. Thank God I use FireFox or I'd be inundated with pop-ups during legitimate browsing. Hell, even Windows regularly lets you know its a Microsoft product, especially if you use IE, which'll bump you off to MSN at the drop of a hat.
Corporate brand is absolutely everywhere, its a wonder that we can make any rational purchasing decisions, unless we can honestly state we've got so used to seeing it it doesn't make a blind bit of difference.
Derren Brown, a British psychological trickster, hired some top advertising bods to come up with a logo for a fictious company, a pet cemetry. When they'd finished their design he revealed his design which he'd done in advance, which was about 98% identical. He then revealed the trick. The two advertising people had been picked up by a driver, and taken to their destination along a specific route. All along the route there were small signs, logos and the like. So small you'd barely notice them, like a A4 poster on the edge of a building amongst other posters. Despite this they'd influenced the two advertising people. They'd at best have only glanced at these planted images, completely subconciously. It all goes to show that no matter how oblivious we think we are to logo'ing and advertising it still has an impact in our views.
Oh yeah... hell how I know that.
"Here's a truck load of money for you to spend, but it must be spent on new computers."
"We haven't got sufficient network infrastructure to deal with that extra load, we need a whole new distribution point."
"That'll cost to much, you're only allowed to buy network cables"
"But that means we'll have to use our spare old hubs and route all traffic down a single 100mb pipe"
"so?"
or even better, a few years back the government looked at support staff salaries, saw that they were crap and said "Right we'll set up a bonus scheme", so once a year I can apply for a bonus, jumping through a few hoops to get it. All of 150 GBP, PRE-tax (nice government, giving money to itself)
Part of the problem is the pay that the public sector gives tends to be rather poor, and a reasonable number of those employed in the Network teams aren't that knowledgable about computers. Sure they can use windows and office, and do simple AD maintenance, but when it somes to the nitty gritty stuff they haven't got a clue and just outsource stuff or go with what salesmen say. Shockingly regularly you find that the network admin is a former teacher who's just doing it more as a hobby. I guess it goes hand in hand with the attitude that if you're a teacher you can teach anything. Sometimes they're good, they teach themselves a lot of stuff, but often seem to just learn enough to get by. I'm part of a more unusual (in education) team, with people that know what they're talking about, and can at least tell the difference between a network card and a modem. Pays still bad though. Many places just don't realise, despite how often they are told, that if they spent that little bit extra in salary they'd save a lot more in useless purchases and would probably have a much better and more secure network.
The British government keeps pouring money into these different schemes, capturing headlines, but failing to solve the issue that education is overall woefully underfunded. If they'd just pour that money into education generally they'd solve way more problems, rather than earmarking it for a specific purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
It could be interesting to see the results of such a social move. I can percieve that generally, unless there is a major social move on the viewpoint, it would be just a 'fad' amongst the wealthy / high-society. To make it last beyond that would almost require it to be socially unacceptable on a large scale rather than just 'un-cool', to have a house that is not ecologically friendly. Until the technology comes down in price a little thats unlikely to happen. As soon as you start to see solar panels and the like dropping into the price range of the average wage holder, eco-friendly houses are unlikely to be made. The EU currently offers a very nice subsidy for having solar panels fitted, provided you use authorised builders (so as to avoid the cowboy builders cheating the government), but even with the subsidy its still quite an expense and it'll take quite a few years to make the money back in savings from the initial purchase. As pathetic as it really does seem (though I'm as big a culprit as anyone else), the green drive only goes for us so far as it doesn't affect the wallet. A lot of us will stand and say "oh yes, we're eco-friendly" and "why doesn't the government do more towards the environment", but when it affects our wallets we sort-of back away. Many of us could probably afford to put up a panel or two on our houses, but we balk at the cost, ignoring the green benefits.
I hasten to point out... that 1/10th of $2m a month is still $200,000 a month, not the kind of revenue they're going to be ecstatic about losing.
I'd stop wasting your time if I were you. He's a died in the wool Slashdot educated MS hater. (for the record, I don't like MS) There can be no circumstances underwhich MS can possibly be defended, they should all burn and die a horrible death, along with anyone that happens to even remotely defend them etc.. etc.. etc..
link that up with technology such at decaying DVDs and you're sorted.
The fact remains that Microsoft could NOT do this with their own OS. If they could, they would have by now.
That is, even by /. standards a rather specious anti-MS argument. Just because you can afford to do something doesn't mean you necessrily should, nor does it mean it makes economical sense. Why would Microsoft want to fork out money on a whole series of servers (and associated maintenance / upgrade costs), based in several different geographical locations, pay for employment and training costs of getting staff in to maintain a system, when its an awful lot cheaper just to buy in an external solution, which can be made available near instantaneously. Odds are that anything MS put together would see barely more than 15% load for the most part, except for during DDOS's. Having a server farm 85% idle, just in case, is a big waste of money.
Just because they can afford to do it doesn't mean they should. Thats basic economics.
Damnit... preview preview preview... Netcrafts own explanation You can see some details of the akamai servers here
MS used/use Akamai to reduce the impact of any attempted DDOSs. I'm sure you can imagine how many people are regularly trying to attack MS. MS's own servers are all running IIS, which is hardly surprising, its merely their outsourced caching that use Apache, and MS won't have much control over what their outsourcers choose to do. If MS started throwing its weight around when trying to get caching services I'm sure doors would just slam in their faces, rather than co-operate. Regarding the 'duck and cover' comments, I'd imagine that they were emergency provisions MS put into place when they realised just what was about to occur, or what was occuring (massive virus caused DDOS.) When you're in a hurry you're not about to say "We'll only use you if you're running IIS", they'd just want the service there ASAPNetcraft's own explanation
Think of it, the city could dramatically reduce water bills all over the city by having water meters transmit their reading.. ready for a hacker to capture, and falsify.
You would NOT need a TV Licence if you had a TV tuner in your MAC. All you have to prove is that the tuner is not tuned into any channels, and has no nearby aerial connection on it. There are a lot of people in the UK that have TVs specifically for DVD players / Gamecubes / Playstations etc, that don't have TV licences and don't have to have a TV licence, because the TVs aren't used to pick up terrestrial. Its worthwhile noting as well: If a TV licence inspector comes visiting, you are under NO legal obligation to let them into your house, regardless of what they tell you. Only if they have a Police Warranty are they able to enter your premesis without your permission, and TV Detector vans are not admissable evidence for a search warranty to be granted. Essentially, provided they can't see the screen from the door (or hear it), and there is no obvious indication of other illegal activity taking place, its very difficult for them to get a warranty.
I never thought I'd see that phrase used without a guffaw.. amazing.
IN Soviet Russia, GPS satellites txt you!
... if you can call "It may or may not happen" a prediction.
Today, I shall be going out with a glove on one hand. The weatherman this morning said it was going to be hot, but on the other hand there was a risk of it being a bit chilly.
I used to have a VIA based mobo, it was my first DDR based system. Superb performance, barely stable though. I used to spend half my time fighting with bizarre errors and the like, trying to work out why some odd crashes were occuring. I've pretty much sworn against using VIA ever again after that, although I do aknowledge that is quite a foolish attitude, everyone makes mistakes now and then. In the future it may be they do produce a decent chipset, and I'll end up going back on my word. A few months after getting the VIA system, I upgraded to an Nforce2 based system (Abit NF7), and blinked in stunned amazement as the system remained steady as a rock. I've had just one system crash since I switched to Nforce2, superb overclockability, and very respectable performance (easily beating some 'top end' P4s at stuff like SETI unit crunching, in part due to dual channel memory) googlecached:OcUK SETI benchmarks
Given the toaster ovens that Intel is now maskerading as processors, I'm very glad my XP-M runs so cool, and with so little in the way of cooling (one 75mm HSF unit, one 120mm 7 volted exhaust fan, one ultra-quiet SilenX 60mm intake), I'm running faster, cooler, quieter and for cheaper than machines mine outperforms.
Someone remind me, why should I use Intel?
Wow.. a complete plot synopsis in a paragraph.
Thank you for saving me from having to sit through that crap stretched out over an hour and a half!
That is quite a lot of work for Intel to do when they are also talking about dual cores. It's a lot of tech to get right all at the same time, especially given the delays involved with the Nocona launch and the associated motherboards. Itwould give them some rather nice options though, rather than using Hypertransport they could use PCI-E to join CPU's and have controllers on the CPU like the Opterons. Also because the CPU's are joined with a serial bus you can move them onto riser cards and make the most of the real estate in the chassis meaning you should be able to pack more CPU's in a smaller space.
More CPUs in a smaller space? Sheesh... P4s are toasty enough as it is, and can take quite some noisy fans to cool 'em, but shoving more in the same space? Ikes. I wouldn't want to be sharing the same room with one of those.
From a system perspective surely you'd almost have to have memory on those riser cards too, or you'd just be reducing the effective operating memory per processor, presenting yet another bottleneck to the overall system performance. You'd almost be better off with a blade server
Unfortunately I can just conceive that far too many sys-admins will cave in and do exactly what dear Aunty Microsoft tells them to do, forcing those of us without our heads stuck in the sand to fight a rear-guard action.
... A French police spokesman talking about the stolen U2 album confirmed that "We still haven't found what we're looking for."
It seems to be a standard thing with mobile phones. At a band rehearsal about a year ago we'd just reached the end of a song when we heard the classic du du du (etc) tone coming from the lead guitarists amp; his phone was sitting on top of it. Then the bassist phone did the same thing to his amp, then the keyboard players, and so on around the room, all within the space of a minute. The sound guy just looked exasperated at us all and rolled his eyes (he's forever reminding us to turn phones off when we rehearse)
Then imagine how the driver tries to explain to the police / their insurance company just why they were swerving..
I'd love to take a mobile jammer with me on trains and other forms of public transport, or into cinemas / concert halls, upon hearing "I can't talk long, I'm on the train", or even the phone ring, I'd love to be able to press a button and jam their conversation, especially as most are conducted at about 40db. The only thing that stops me is that it would jam medical pagers for doctors and emergency service reserves on duty..
As far as the open source community is concerned its quite productive to produce cross-compilters that can produce windows binaries. Windows is still the dominant desktop by a long stretch. Open source is sneaking in, both through Linux, and more so through free open source alternatives to mainstream expensive applications. It is in the Open Source movements best interest (certainly currently) to support cross-development, slowly but surely changing social exceptance of open source software. There is no logical argument for Microsoft to produce a cross-compiling development package, it would be against any kind of good business practice.
Why on earth would Microsoft write a set of programming tools to operate under other competitors OSs? Its surprising enough that they produce versions of Office for Macs. It'd be rather akin to shooting themselves in the foot. "Here you go, here's a development tool for you to use to write software for Linux that'll reduce our income." Sure, thats going to happen.
But even then, in the safety of your office you're bombarded by logos. As I sit here I've got a monitor with a prominent logo at the central bottom. The keyboard has a logo in the top right corner, the mouse has one on it not to far from the bottom. Its on a commercially branded mouse-mat, which came with the PC. The PC itself has the OEMs logo on it. Beside my monitor is a very nice calender showing me a picture of a local castle... and its also got a corporation logo nestled right beside the actual date segment. I've got a mug here with tea in it that has a logo on it. Virtually everything around me advertises in one way or another the company that manufactured it. Thank God I use FireFox or I'd be inundated with pop-ups during legitimate browsing. Hell, even Windows regularly lets you know its a Microsoft product, especially if you use IE, which'll bump you off to MSN at the drop of a hat.
Corporate brand is absolutely everywhere, its a wonder that we can make any rational purchasing decisions, unless we can honestly state we've got so used to seeing it it doesn't make a blind bit of difference.
Derren Brown, a British psychological trickster, hired some top advertising bods to come up with a logo for a fictious company, a pet cemetry. When they'd finished their design he revealed his design which he'd done in advance, which was about 98% identical. He then revealed the trick. The two advertising people had been picked up by a driver, and taken to their destination along a specific route. All along the route there were small signs, logos and the like. So small you'd barely notice them, like a A4 poster on the edge of a building amongst other posters. Despite this they'd influenced the two advertising people. They'd at best have only glanced at these planted images, completely subconciously. It all goes to show that no matter how oblivious we think we are to logo'ing and advertising it still has an impact in our views.
Oh yeah... hell how I know that. "Here's a truck load of money for you to spend, but it must be spent on new computers." "We haven't got sufficient network infrastructure to deal with that extra load, we need a whole new distribution point." "That'll cost to much, you're only allowed to buy network cables" "But that means we'll have to use our spare old hubs and route all traffic down a single 100mb pipe" "so?" or even better, a few years back the government looked at support staff salaries, saw that they were crap and said "Right we'll set up a bonus scheme", so once a year I can apply for a bonus, jumping through a few hoops to get it. All of 150 GBP, PRE-tax (nice government, giving money to itself)
Part of the problem is the pay that the public sector gives tends to be rather poor, and a reasonable number of those employed in the Network teams aren't that knowledgable about computers. Sure they can use windows and office, and do simple AD maintenance, but when it somes to the nitty gritty stuff they haven't got a clue and just outsource stuff or go with what salesmen say. Shockingly regularly you find that the network admin is a former teacher who's just doing it more as a hobby. I guess it goes hand in hand with the attitude that if you're a teacher you can teach anything. Sometimes they're good, they teach themselves a lot of stuff, but often seem to just learn enough to get by. I'm part of a more unusual (in education) team, with people that know what they're talking about, and can at least tell the difference between a network card and a modem. Pays still bad though. Many places just don't realise, despite how often they are told, that if they spent that little bit extra in salary they'd save a lot more in useless purchases and would probably have a much better and more secure network. The British government keeps pouring money into these different schemes, capturing headlines, but failing to solve the issue that education is overall woefully underfunded. If they'd just pour that money into education generally they'd solve way more problems, rather than earmarking it for a specific purpose.