I agree wholeheartedly. However, the flip side is that Apple ought not have to support the device short of hardware failures.
Face it... people buy Apple because it works out of the box without having to configure anything. People who buy Apple products are generally okay with being limited on capabilities.
I am not an application virtualization guru by any stretech but I thought that you basically had "hypervisor light" for the desktop.
But if the poster of this question is saying "Hey, I have a bunch of hardware that isn't homogenous, I have needs that prevent me from virtualizing.. how do I virtualize?" Then I guess I don't understand the question...
I am in IT. I was also the first to enter the virtualized environment. There were a few quirks early on. once I worked through them on my system, I introduced five more users. Stabalize, then five more. Withing 12 months, all users will be in this envrionment.
Again, it works well in my environment. Not saying it is the solution everywhere.
"The reasons most companies do this is because it gives the illusion of control and less work: You only need to update one image on a server, not 10,000 workstations, and you can lock it down pretty hard. But it's an illusion that sacrifices functionality and speed in many implimentations.
I've used Citrix as a client. It's painful, even on a LAN, because the sessions can randomly timeout, disconnect, or the server becomes oversaturated by a few users running an intensive database query that sucks all the CPU cycles from everyone else's session -- which when the database is hosted on the same server can create a horrible bottleneck that won't show up in the lab."
Sorry, but you have something configured horribly wrong. Part of the beauty of virtualization is being able to control the resources dedicated to any one process. You can allow anyone to have as much as they need... unless they are choking off another resource.
And who would allow 10k connetions to one physical server?
Well, then if you are worried about GPU virtualization, why not go with application virtualization?
Of course, I have a hard time believing that 20 workstations is all that hard to maintain. unless they are geographically disbursed, I am not sure if virtualization is worth the effort.
Who said he has multiple IT people working? My guess is that it is a smaller shop and they have one or maybe two people doing double duty as IT admin/other duties. My guess could be wrong, but so could yours:)
Actually, in a way i am complaining I get taxed too little. I earned just shy of six figures and paid less that 1,000 in Federal taxes. I paid more to my city than I did to Feds.
While I don't like paying money, I do recognize one must pay their share.
If I could snap my fingers, we'd cut federal spending by a third and raise taxes to where we had no suprlus or deficit.
Easier said than done. I used to get an almost "0" or pay a small amunt each year. However, now I am not even remotely able to guess. Why? The rules on deductions keep changing. I ended up with close to a grand back because of graduate school deductions, child care deductions and other items that I didn't anticipate.
And frankly, the number of write offs is ridiculous. I would much rahter have a system that is more transparent and more simple. As much as I make, I should be paying a higher percentage of income tax. But I also shouldn't get nickle andd imed with hidde taxes.
Simply be honest about what things cost and what will need to be charged.
Um, no... no it isn't. The worst way to manage your money is to spend like mad with no correlation to income.
GP is using a suboptimal savings strategy. But he is saving. In the grand scheme of things, he is on the right side of the savers' bell curve. Most people's idea of savings is to have enough for Friday night's party.
you know, i used to agree with you 100%. I aim for a zero refund (which is hard with the way tax rules are changing so quickly). But then I had a change of heart when I realized not everyone is like me.
Some folks aren't as disciplined with savings, and this is a way they force themselves to save. I think it is wonderful when people realize their areas of relative weakness and work around it. If someone has a drinking problem... is it so bad that they avoid driving by the neighborhood bar? Sure, it might be an incovenience, but they are avoiding a bigger problem.
So, if someone chooses to use the IRS as their piggy bank... good for them. At least they recognize a problem, and are doing something about it.
What I would recommend is that GP at least look at some type of savings account that auto deducts. But even if he doesn't, then it is great that he has some type of savings plan.
Technology, in and of itself, will not improve meetings. Effective management improves meetings.
Give a group of inefficient people an IM client, and they will be inefficient people IMing all day and interrupting.
I learned a lot about running meetings from effective managers and ineffective ones. My favorite example was a Senior VP for a regional bank. He held monthly meeting with all managers. Each manager was alloted time to speak. But you better damn well have something to say. Most managers passed time off to the next. Only the hihglights that really impacted the group as a whole got shared. Generally 15-20 people invited. Meetings 15-20 minutes. It was effective use of time, effective information. managers could seek each other out if they had other things to discuss.
Want to have good meetings? * Invite only those that should be there. You don't need 3 marketing guys for your project kickoff meeting * Above 8 or 9 invitees is a big fat warning sign. * Have a written agenda. Circulate it beforehand. * Have a hard end time to meetings. Make it intentionally shorter than it usually would go. * Make decisions beforehand with the key people. Most decisions don't really get made in the big meeting. Two or three key decision makers on the same page and the rest follow or simply refine the decision.
i am not a hardware expert. However, I have a few uses for something like that in the small company where I work. $4k is pricey, but for applications that rely on huge file I/O and is sensitive to speed, this is viable.
I've already ordered a SAN solution.... but if I were making the decision again, and the price dropped by a factor of four, I would likely go with the SSD if I could mix and match with traditional hard drives.
One thing to keep in mind is that these advertisements are not targeted at you. These are marketed towards the buffoons who NEED this kind of reminder.
So don't take it personally. Imagine the ads are being delivered to that one doofus friend of yours who thinks it is uncool to wear a seatbelt or have a "few" drinks before hopping behind the wheel.
Yeah, you do have a point. However, most of the instances I have seen of Indian outsourcing get reversed in really short order. It doesn't take long for shit code to get exposed.
If you can be replaced by an Indian code monkey, you don't deserve to have an IT job. Having worked with a number of them, I can say with all sincerity that the average Indian outsourcer has the programming capabilities of the College Junior who is signed up for IT because they want a big paycheck. No creativity... no inherent understanding.
And this is from a manager.. not someone who's job is threatened by this type of outsourcing.
Slashdot Mirror
kdawson actually posted a story worthy of the front page of Slashdot. I acutally did a doubletake.
This has to be the collest story I have read in weeks, and all you can do is critize a tounge in cheek comment?
Some mod has no sense of humor. Please mod parent up.
Why do i keep talking about hardware failures? Where else do I talk about it?
And if you read my comment, I clearly state that is something Apple SHOULD still be on the hook for.
Can somone translate this to English?
I agree wholeheartedly. However, the flip side is that Apple ought not have to support the device short of hardware failures.
Face it... people buy Apple because it works out of the box without having to configure anything. People who buy Apple products are generally okay with being limited on capabilities.
I am not an application virtualization guru by any stretech but I thought that you basically had "hypervisor light" for the desktop.
But if the poster of this question is saying "Hey, I have a bunch of hardware that isn't homogenous, I have needs that prevent me from virtualizing.. how do I virtualize?" Then I guess I don't understand the question...
I am in IT. I was also the first to enter the virtualized environment. There were a few quirks early on. once I worked through them on my system, I introduced five more users. Stabalize, then five more. Withing 12 months, all users will be in this envrionment.
Again, it works well in my environment. Not saying it is the solution everywhere.
"The reasons most companies do this is because it gives the illusion of control and less work: You only need to update one image on a server, not 10,000 workstations, and you can lock it down pretty hard. But it's an illusion that sacrifices functionality and speed in many implimentations.
I've used Citrix as a client. It's painful, even on a LAN, because the sessions can randomly timeout, disconnect, or the server becomes oversaturated by a few users running an intensive database query that sucks all the CPU cycles from everyone else's session -- which when the database is hosted on the same server can create a horrible bottleneck that won't show up in the lab."
Sorry, but you have something configured horribly wrong. Part of the beauty of virtualization is being able to control the resources dedicated to any one process. You can allow anyone to have as much as they need... unless they are choking off another resource.
And who would allow 10k connetions to one physical server?
Well, then if you are worried about GPU virtualization, why not go with application virtualization?
Of course, I have a hard time believing that 20 workstations is all that hard to maintain. unless they are geographically disbursed, I am not sure if virtualization is worth the effort.
Who said he has multiple IT people working? My guess is that it is a smaller shop and they have one or maybe two people doing double duty as IT admin/other duties. My guess could be wrong, but so could yours :)
I am in a virtualized environment and it works fine. I guess it really depends on your situation.
Most of my users are using basic business apps. For these things, Citrix XenApps (I think that is the name this week) works well.
Using Citrix. Not sure if this is what you are looking for or not...
Actually, in a way i am complaining I get taxed too little. I earned just shy of six figures and paid less that 1,000 in Federal taxes. I paid more to my city than I did to Feds.
While I don't like paying money, I do recognize one must pay their share.
If I could snap my fingers, we'd cut federal spending by a third and raise taxes to where we had no suprlus or deficit.
Easier said than done. I used to get an almost "0" or pay a small amunt each year. However, now I am not even remotely able to guess. Why? The rules on deductions keep changing. I ended up with close to a grand back because of graduate school deductions, child care deductions and other items that I didn't anticipate.
And frankly, the number of write offs is ridiculous. I would much rahter have a system that is more transparent and more simple. As much as I make, I should be paying a higher percentage of income tax. But I also shouldn't get nickle andd imed with hidde taxes.
Simply be honest about what things cost and what will need to be charged.
Um, no... no it isn't. The worst way to manage your money is to spend like mad with no correlation to income.
GP is using a suboptimal savings strategy. But he is saving. In the grand scheme of things, he is on the right side of the savers' bell curve. Most people's idea of savings is to have enough for Friday night's party.
you know, i used to agree with you 100%. I aim for a zero refund (which is hard with the way tax rules are changing so quickly). But then I had a change of heart when I realized not everyone is like me.
Some folks aren't as disciplined with savings, and this is a way they force themselves to save. I think it is wonderful when people realize their areas of relative weakness and work around it. If someone has a drinking problem... is it so bad that they avoid driving by the neighborhood bar? Sure, it might be an incovenience, but they are avoiding a bigger problem.
So, if someone chooses to use the IRS as their piggy bank... good for them. At least they recognize a problem, and are doing something about it.
What I would recommend is that GP at least look at some type of savings account that auto deducts. But even if he doesn't, then it is great that he has some type of savings plan.
Mean and median are two entirely different things. I can easily see a relatively small percentage of people really skewing the numbers.
Technology, in and of itself, will not improve meetings. Effective management improves meetings.
Give a group of inefficient people an IM client, and they will be inefficient people IMing all day and interrupting.
I learned a lot about running meetings from effective managers and ineffective ones. My favorite example was a Senior VP for a regional bank. He held monthly meeting with all managers. Each manager was alloted time to speak. But you better damn well have something to say. Most managers passed time off to the next. Only the hihglights that really impacted the group as a whole got shared. Generally 15-20 people invited. Meetings 15-20 minutes. It was effective use of time, effective information. managers could seek each other out if they had other things to discuss.
Want to have good meetings?
* Invite only those that should be there. You don't need 3 marketing guys for your project kickoff meeting
* Above 8 or 9 invitees is a big fat warning sign.
* Have a written agenda. Circulate it beforehand.
* Have a hard end time to meetings. Make it intentionally shorter than it usually would go.
* Make decisions beforehand with the key people. Most decisions don't really get made in the big meeting. Two or three key decision makers on the same page and the rest follow or simply refine the decision.
i am not a hardware expert. However, I have a few uses for something like that in the small company where I work. $4k is pricey, but for applications that rely on huge file I/O and is sensitive to speed, this is viable.
I've already ordered a SAN solution.... but if I were making the decision again, and the price dropped by a factor of four, I would likely go with the SSD if I could mix and match with traditional hard drives.
No offense, but I think you read more of a nasty tone than was there.
As a noob at this type of thing myself, I found the info interesting.
Hi Leebert,
One thing to keep in mind is that these advertisements are not targeted at you. These are marketed towards the buffoons who NEED this kind of reminder.
So don't take it personally. Imagine the ads are being delivered to that one doofus friend of yours who thinks it is uncool to wear a seatbelt or have a "few" drinks before hopping behind the wheel.
Gotta love Slashdot where false dichotomies get insightful mods.
Yeah, you do have a point. However, most of the instances I have seen of Indian outsourcing get reversed in really short order. It doesn't take long for shit code to get exposed.
If you can be replaced by an Indian code monkey, you don't deserve to have an IT job. Having worked with a number of them, I can say with all sincerity that the average Indian outsourcer has the programming capabilities of the College Junior who is signed up for IT because they want a big paycheck. No creativity... no inherent understanding.
And this is from a manager.. not someone who's job is threatened by this type of outsourcing.