I've never seen a case when portability across several unknown databases was a concern. What kind of project would necessitate that? I've worked on many different projects (generally very large data stores), but I've never seen one where an added layer would be necessary. I'd almost say that if somebody came to me with requirements for "database portability", that would raise a major red flag for me that the project may have some bigger issues.
FYI: I was an Oracle developer (not a DBA) for several years.
All excellent points. I probably should start looking into PostgreSQL before our business gets too much bigger to see if it does what we need, and is stable. It'll be a while (if ever) before we can afford a consultant/programmer to maintain it, but we're adding more MS SQL stored procedures on a weekly basis.
Not true. A competent developer might use an abstraction system to deal with all queries in a cross-database manner. For example, Perl's Class::DBI module, which uses the DBI/DBD interface set to generate queries for database systems for whichever database an application connects to.
That's what I'm talking about. You're a non-database person that doesn't understand the difference between a query and a compiled, cached stored procedure that lives right next to the DB engine itself. If you can, find an experienced database person and have them sit down with you to explain the difference between a stored procedure and a query. Totally different things, residing on totally different layers. There's really no substitute for stored procedures if performance is important.
Again, I still contend that a competent database architect/developer/DBA will use database-specific stored procedures where performance is important.
It's my opinion that you shouldn't need a computer (running Windows!) just to ring people up.
If you're gonna compete in this day and age, you MUST HAVE a sophisticated inventory management system, which requires the use of a PC. Retailers that use the old-fashioned registers are quickly either dying off or switching over. Of course, there are exceptions... retailers that sell just a handful of products, or those who sell very large items infrequently could get away with not using a PC. Personally, I couldn't imagine *not* using a PC to ring up customers.
Being locked into a single vendor for something this crucial is never good practice
That's a myth. It depends on the vendor. Microsoft is simply not going to close it's doors in our lifetime. I'd bet my life on it.
Plus, with databases, vendor-lock in is a moot point. Why? A. No competent business will change it's main database willy-nilly. B. There's no such thing as lock-in with a database. If you need to move the data, you just pull it out. That's what databases do. C. If your company is doing anything with the database more complicated than a recipie list, any competent database developer is going to use stored procedures heavily, which are ALL database-specific.
More importantly, what were the estimated cost savings of using proprietary packages vs. paying for in house development? Was it done for philosophical reasons, or because you needed functionality that wasn't available from off-the-shelf software?
I said "retail", not e-commerce. Have you, personally, ever seen somebody behind a counter, trying to ring up customers via the web??? That's like pounding nails with a sausage. It can be done, but it's a terrible idea.
I don't know much about Apache, but as a business owner, I tend to agree with her. The apps we run, especially as a small company are the definition of "Mission Critical". If the apps that we use stop working for any reason, we're shut down, and people don't get paid. It's that serious. With my proprietary point-of-sale system, for example, if I have a register go down at rush hour, I call the manufacturer's help desk, and get it fixed on the spot. The service may not always be exceptional, but they have the manpower and the money to stand behind it when the shit hits the fan. I don't want to be told to "leave a message, and somebody will call me back". I don't want support from somebody who can't get a developer on the phone if need be. I don't want to have to search through newsgroups, message boards, etc. to find my answer. Few programmers/OSS advocates understand what "mission critical" really means. No matter how good the software is, "mission critical" software backed up by a team of 2 developers and a bunch of volunteers doesn't qualify.
Actually, I'm one business owner who's a geek and who does pay attention. I can tell you from my point of view (small company... ~5 employees, growing quickly), the *vast* majority of the OSS offerings out there are embarassing when compared to what's already out there are regular proprietary software. I'd *love* to make the leap, but the quality and functionality of most of the things I've seen is laughable, really. About all we use is VNC, and while it's a great program, what we use it for isn't mission critical by any stretch of the imagination.
I found this article to be funny as hell. In particular, I'm interested in point-of-sale systems. The ones they mention, well, quite honestly, they all suck when compared to proprietary solutions.
1. Web based... who in their right mind would use a web app for retail sales? I shouldn't even have to explain myself further on this one.
2. None of them integrate with established accounting packages such as Quickbooks or Peachtree.
3. Most of them use MySQL. My business and my paycheck and my employees paychecks will *not* rely on MySQL. 'nuff said.
4. The features are just sad. None offer integrated credit card processing, which is now considered a "basic" feature of point of sale. There are countless other features which no open source POS system offers that are too numerous to list.
5. Hardware support is poor.
6. Most of these packages don't have support (ie: a register goes down during rush hour... who do you call?)
In all honesty, I'm going to continue looking at open source packages, but right now, there's nothing even close to the stuff you can buy off the shelf. Hell, you can get QBPOS at Staples for $800, and it'll already run circles around even the most advanced open source version. Or, take a look at MS' RMS. That program (about $1200/register) makes these other programs look like "Hello World".
Sounds to me though that you are hooked on authority.
No, I hate to see knowledge, information, and skill watered down. Not every Joe Schmoe is an expert just because they say that they are. That kind of weak, lame justification is exactly what religion rests on... the book is true because the book says it's true. Those of us who actually take the time to learn a subject, or a skill have to fight against the idiotic masses every day, as is, without having every idiot call themselves a "writer" or a "programmer" (web pages are rarely a simple "document" any more, FYI) or a "mechanic", etc., etc.
Holy shit... I just found a fossil in the parking lot gravel... I guess I'm a paleontoligist... or maybe an archaeologist, too!
Re:I think there is a market for maybe five comput
on
Textbooks With EULAs
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Ebooks might not be very usable just yet (and I think they work just fine on my PDA), but what's to say they won't be in the future?
Well, the difference is that eBooks have been tried coutless times over the past 5-10 years. The technology is there (how complicated can you make reading a book?). My point is that it's not a "new" technology by any stretch. They've not taken off for *many* reasons. Yes I read a Slashdot post about a "new" revolutionary "eBook" company every few weeks it seems, and of course, they always flop. And not just kinda' flop... I mean *really* flop. I was wrong it my original post... it was $3.2 million in the last quarter. Still... that's a *tiny* amount. A single grocery store will do more business than that. I know that I, as a businessperson, wouldn't even bother with a market that tiny.
So then, there's no value any more in an education, which allows a person to be an authority on a subject? There's no value in an editor, which can make an otherwise unreadable book readable?
This is the main problem with this whole Wiki/GNU thing as far as books go... There's no standard for quality or even correctness of information. The kind of thing you're advocating leads to the dilluting of correct information with crap. Just like with the web, the signal/noise ratio is dropping at an alarming rate. Many people now think that Google is authoritative, and if they read it online, it must be true. At least with books as they currently are, we have a structure in place that allows an average person to be reasonably sure, or at least much more so than with information online, that the information they're reading is accurate. One of my geek things is botany. I'll read books on botany all day, just so long as they're written by somebody with an education, meaning that they may have a clue. Joe Blow publishing a GNU licensed book called "Plants Is Good" is pretty useless to me.
For some topics you'd still need outside texts but basic biology, chemistry and physics there's no reason those couldn't be standardized. PV=NRT hasn't changed in years.
You're right. Then why don't you start the trend? Get it kick started, so to speak? Go ahead and get a Bachelor's degree, Master's Degree, and a PHD. Then, write a book. Then, pay somebody to print and distribute it. Good luck!
EBooks are a failure... get over it
on
Textbooks With EULAs
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I don't understand some people's (companies') obsession with e-Books. They didn't catch on. People don't like them. They're a royal pain in the ass. The article says that there are roughly $3.2 million dollars worth of e-books sold every year. $3.2 million?!? That's essentially -zero-. So why are companies still trying to push what has been proven time and time again to be a product that nobody wants? It ain't gonna work.
I'm glad I'm not the only person who thinks so. I know that if I were a writer, I'd be pissed as hell with people calling anybody who signs up for a blog a "writer". Kinda like calling anybody who can make a web page a "programmer". Big difference.
There's a huge difference between a "Writer" and a "blogger". "Writer" generally connotes some kind of skill or aptitude towards writing. Not everybody who posts intriguing details of a LAN party is a writer. In fact, most people are NOT writers. Anybody, though, can be a blogger. In fact, a "blogger" generally connotes somebody narcissistic who is NOT a writer. Stephen King, John Steinbeck, Hunter S. Thompson, and others are "writers". John224@aol.com is a "blogger".
I don't think it's as simple as you say that it is, Mr. Troll. There's also lots, and lots and lots of BAD and WRONG information out there. As an animal person who owns a pet supply shop, I know that animal people very often can obsess about their hobby. I have people tell me the most riduclous, wrong, and even dangerous things that they seem to think are true because they read it online. There's a massive amount of bad information on the web because any moron can post anything they'd like and call it fact. And then, we also have groupthink where something *must* be true because *everybody* else agrees on it (hence, the problem with Wikipedia and its ilk). Information is being cheapened and dilluted with so much crap, it's tough to sort out the good from the bad. That's kinda' why libraries aren't going to go anywhere anytime soon.
So is a cat 5 cable. But again, it depends on what you're doing. If you're sending emails, then anything, including dial-up works just fine. If you're playing games, then sure, wireless will probably work fine (I don't play games... not sure if most wireless is fast enough for online games). IF you're just browsing web pages, then again, even dial up would work just fine. If, like me, you're doing massive FTP's and/or Terminal Services connections all of the time, and your livelihood relies on that Net connection, then wireless simply isn't an option.
It's kinda' like if you had a delivery service, and you decided to use all electric vehicles: you could, it would work. But you'd spend more, have less reliability, and worse performance. Not exactly the kind of reliability/performance that most people would want for their livelihood.
In my view, wireless still sucks. It's still slow and unreliable when compared against a $2 cat 5 cable. I tried several times (802.11B, 802.11G, bluetooth, infrared), but I've been disappointed every time. I just got finished wiring my house with Cat 5, and my business is all wired with Cat 5. I'll let you uber-geeks with extra money fight it out. I'm waiting for a few more years for all of the kinks to get worked out, for real de facto standards to be established, and for prices to drop. For now, I'm very happily wired.
I'll dump Microsoft as soon as there's a decent alternative. Right now, there's NO good alternative on the market. If it's a toss up between BallBuster and a local guy (or even Netflix), I'll go with the local guy or Netflix in a heartbeat.
Slashdot Mirror
I've never seen a case when portability across several unknown databases was a concern. What kind of project would necessitate that? I've worked on many different projects (generally very large data stores), but I've never seen one where an added layer would be necessary. I'd almost say that if somebody came to me with requirements for "database portability", that would raise a major red flag for me that the project may have some bigger issues.
FYI: I was an Oracle developer (not a DBA) for several years.
How is Web based a terrible idea (intranet/http)?
Much too slow. Poor, if any support for hardware.
All excellent points. I probably should start looking into PostgreSQL before our business gets too much bigger to see if it does what we need, and is stable. It'll be a while (if ever) before we can afford a consultant/programmer to maintain it, but we're adding more MS SQL stored procedures on a weekly basis.
Not true. A competent developer might use an abstraction system to deal with all queries in a cross-database manner. For example, Perl's Class::DBI module, which uses the DBI/DBD interface set to generate queries for database systems for whichever database an application connects to.
That's what I'm talking about. You're a non-database person that doesn't understand the difference between a query and a compiled, cached stored procedure that lives right next to the DB engine itself. If you can, find an experienced database person and have them sit down with you to explain the difference between a stored procedure and a query. Totally different things, residing on totally different layers. There's really no substitute for stored procedures if performance is important.
Again, I still contend that a competent database architect/developer/DBA will use database-specific stored procedures where performance is important.
It's my opinion that you shouldn't need a computer (running Windows!) just to ring people up.
If you're gonna compete in this day and age, you MUST HAVE a sophisticated inventory management system, which requires the use of a PC. Retailers that use the old-fashioned registers are quickly either dying off or switching over. Of course, there are exceptions... retailers that sell just a handful of products, or those who sell very large items infrequently could get away with not using a PC. Personally, I couldn't imagine *not* using a PC to ring up customers.
Being locked into a single vendor for something this crucial is never good practice
That's a myth. It depends on the vendor. Microsoft is simply not going to close it's doors in our lifetime. I'd bet my life on it.
Plus, with databases, vendor-lock in is a moot point. Why? A. No competent business will change it's main database willy-nilly. B. There's no such thing as lock-in with a database. If you need to move the data, you just pull it out. That's what databases do. C. If your company is doing anything with the database more complicated than a recipie list, any competent database developer is going to use stored procedures heavily, which are ALL database-specific.
More importantly, what were the estimated cost savings of using proprietary packages vs. paying for in house development? Was it done for philosophical reasons, or because you needed functionality that wasn't available from off-the-shelf software?
I said "retail", not e-commerce. Have you, personally, ever seen somebody behind a counter, trying to ring up customers via the web??? That's like pounding nails with a sausage. It can be done, but it's a terrible idea.
You didn't read the parent post. He was talking about mission critical in a business environment.
"Jumping on IRC and asking somebody" isn't a solution for a what he's asking.
I don't know much about Apache, but as a business owner, I tend to agree with her. The apps we run, especially as a small company are the definition of "Mission Critical". If the apps that we use stop working for any reason, we're shut down, and people don't get paid. It's that serious. With my proprietary point-of-sale system, for example, if I have a register go down at rush hour, I call the manufacturer's help desk, and get it fixed on the spot. The service may not always be exceptional, but they have the manpower and the money to stand behind it when the shit hits the fan. I don't want to be told to "leave a message, and somebody will call me back". I don't want support from somebody who can't get a developer on the phone if need be. I don't want to have to search through newsgroups, message boards, etc. to find my answer. Few programmers/OSS advocates understand what "mission critical" really means. No matter how good the software is, "mission critical" software backed up by a team of 2 developers and a bunch of volunteers doesn't qualify.
Actually, I'm one business owner who's a geek and who does pay attention. I can tell you from my point of view (small company... ~5 employees, growing quickly), the *vast* majority of the OSS offerings out there are embarassing when compared to what's already out there are regular proprietary software. I'd *love* to make the leap, but the quality and functionality of most of the things I've seen is laughable, really. About all we use is VNC, and while it's a great program, what we use it for isn't mission critical by any stretch of the imagination.
No, unfortunately that has about 1/10 of the functionality of Quickbooks.
I found this article to be funny as hell. In particular, I'm interested in point-of-sale systems. The ones they mention, well, quite honestly, they all suck when compared to proprietary solutions.
1. Web based... who in their right mind would use a web app for retail sales? I shouldn't even have to explain myself further on this one.
2. None of them integrate with established accounting packages such as Quickbooks or Peachtree.
3. Most of them use MySQL. My business and my paycheck and my employees paychecks will *not* rely on MySQL. 'nuff said.
4. The features are just sad. None offer integrated credit card processing, which is now considered a "basic" feature of point of sale. There are countless other features which no open source POS system offers that are too numerous to list.
5. Hardware support is poor.
6. Most of these packages don't have support (ie: a register goes down during rush hour... who do you call?)
In all honesty, I'm going to continue looking at open source packages, but right now, there's nothing even close to the stuff you can buy off the shelf. Hell, you can get QBPOS at Staples for $800, and it'll already run circles around even the most advanced open source version. Or, take a look at MS' RMS. That program (about $1200/register) makes these other programs look like "Hello World".
Sounds to me though that you are hooked on authority.
No, I hate to see knowledge, information, and skill watered down. Not every Joe Schmoe is an expert just because they say that they are. That kind of weak, lame justification is exactly what religion rests on... the book is true because the book says it's true. Those of us who actually take the time to learn a subject, or a skill have to fight against the idiotic masses every day, as is, without having every idiot call themselves a "writer" or a "programmer" (web pages are rarely a simple "document" any more, FYI) or a "mechanic", etc., etc.
Holy shit... I just found a fossil in the parking lot gravel... I guess I'm a paleontoligist... or maybe an archaeologist, too!
Ebooks might not be very usable just yet (and I think they work just fine on my PDA), but what's to say they won't be in the future?
Well, the difference is that eBooks have been tried coutless times over the past 5-10 years. The technology is there (how complicated can you make reading a book?). My point is that it's not a "new" technology by any stretch. They've not taken off for *many* reasons. Yes I read a Slashdot post about a "new" revolutionary "eBook" company every few weeks it seems, and of course, they always flop. And not just kinda' flop... I mean *really* flop. I was wrong it my original post... it was $3.2 million in the last quarter. Still... that's a *tiny* amount. A single grocery store will do more business than that. I know that I, as a businessperson, wouldn't even bother with a market that tiny.
So then, there's no value any more in an education, which allows a person to be an authority on a subject? There's no value in an editor, which can make an otherwise unreadable book readable?
This is the main problem with this whole Wiki/GNU thing as far as books go... There's no standard for quality or even correctness of information. The kind of thing you're advocating leads to the dilluting of correct information with crap. Just like with the web, the signal/noise ratio is dropping at an alarming rate. Many people now think that Google is authoritative, and if they read it online, it must be true. At least with books as they currently are, we have a structure in place that allows an average person to be reasonably sure, or at least much more so than with information online, that the information they're reading is accurate. One of my geek things is botany. I'll read books on botany all day, just so long as they're written by somebody with an education, meaning that they may have a clue. Joe Blow publishing a GNU licensed book called "Plants Is Good" is pretty useless to me.
For some topics you'd still need outside texts but basic biology, chemistry and physics there's no reason those couldn't be standardized. PV=NRT hasn't changed in years.
You're right. Then why don't you start the trend? Get it kick started, so to speak? Go ahead and get a Bachelor's degree, Master's Degree, and a PHD. Then, write a book. Then, pay somebody to print and distribute it. Good luck!
I don't understand some people's (companies') obsession with e-Books. They didn't catch on. People don't like them. They're a royal pain in the ass. The article says that there are roughly $3.2 million dollars worth of e-books sold every year. $3.2 million?!? That's essentially -zero-. So why are companies still trying to push what has been proven time and time again to be a product that nobody wants? It ain't gonna work.
I'm glad I'm not the only person who thinks so. I know that if I were a writer, I'd be pissed as hell with people calling anybody who signs up for a blog a "writer". Kinda like calling anybody who can make a web page a "programmer". Big difference.
There's a huge difference between a "Writer" and a "blogger". "Writer" generally connotes some kind of skill or aptitude towards writing. Not everybody who posts intriguing details of a LAN party is a writer. In fact, most people are NOT writers. Anybody, though, can be a blogger. In fact, a "blogger" generally connotes somebody narcissistic who is NOT a writer. Stephen King, John Steinbeck, Hunter S. Thompson, and others are "writers". John224@aol.com is a "blogger".
I don't think it's as simple as you say that it is, Mr. Troll. There's also lots, and lots and lots of BAD and WRONG information out there. As an animal person who owns a pet supply shop, I know that animal people very often can obsess about their hobby. I have people tell me the most riduclous, wrong, and even dangerous things that they seem to think are true because they read it online. There's a massive amount of bad information on the web because any moron can post anything they'd like and call it fact. And then, we also have groupthink where something *must* be true because *everybody* else agrees on it (hence, the problem with Wikipedia and its ilk). Information is being cheapened and dilluted with so much crap, it's tough to sort out the good from the bad. That's kinda' why libraries aren't going to go anywhere anytime soon.
Wireless is fantastic for notebooks.
So is a cat 5 cable. But again, it depends on what you're doing. If you're sending emails, then anything, including dial-up works just fine. If you're playing games, then sure, wireless will probably work fine (I don't play games... not sure if most wireless is fast enough for online games). IF you're just browsing web pages, then again, even dial up would work just fine. If, like me, you're doing massive FTP's and/or Terminal Services connections all of the time, and your livelihood relies on that Net connection, then wireless simply isn't an option.
It's kinda' like if you had a delivery service, and you decided to use all electric vehicles: you could, it would work. But you'd spend more, have less reliability, and worse performance. Not exactly the kind of reliability/performance that most people would want for their livelihood.
Yeah but try surfing the web from you deck.
:)
I've got an outside Cat 5 jack and a bunch of 20-30-ish foot cables.
In my view, wireless still sucks. It's still slow and unreliable when compared against a $2 cat 5 cable. I tried several times (802.11B, 802.11G, bluetooth, infrared), but I've been disappointed every time. I just got finished wiring my house with Cat 5, and my business is all wired with Cat 5. I'll let you uber-geeks with extra money fight it out. I'm waiting for a few more years for all of the kinks to get worked out, for real de facto standards to be established, and for prices to drop. For now, I'm very happily wired.
I'll dump Microsoft as soon as there's a decent alternative. Right now, there's NO good alternative on the market. If it's a toss up between BallBuster and a local guy (or even Netflix), I'll go with the local guy or Netflix in a heartbeat.