True, but the GUI doesn't take 25% CPU or 30-50% of memory. Our cheapest, oldest servers are 32-bit and can only use 4 GB of RAM. Even then, the GUI environment probably adds 300 MB of memory utilization, which is rarely an issue for those servers than usually don't go over 2 GB of total memory utilization.
Intensive applications reside on servers with 76GB of RAM, where those 300 MB become a drop in the bucket.
When you start talking about really large numbers of servers and virtualization, you can see real savings by skipping the GUI. But the parent claiming that a GUI always takes 25% CPU and 30-50% of memory is frankly lying.
The main advantages of a GUI-less server environment disappear for a small business with one or a handful of servers. And they can run Windows Server 8 with a GUI.
This is moving forward. Let's say you have 100 web servers in a pool and you need to make changes to the entire pool. The traditional approach was to remote into each one and make those changes through IIS Admin in the GUI. Now Microsoft wants you to push the change to all 100 servers at once with Powershell.
In reality, Microsoft doesn't need to be more efficient. You can always buy more processing power, which everyone loves. You buy more hardware and more Windows licenses.
The real key is administrative tasks. If you have 100 servers in a pool dedicated to a single task, you need to be able to perform tasks easily on all of them at the same time. The shift to Powershell is all about administering MULTIPLE servers. Removing the GUI is forcing people to learn more efficient ways to manage their environment.
That's pretty much what I was trying to express. If no one can access through thoughts, and you can't access the thoughts of others, then do you really have free speech?
The 2nd Amendment was aimed at allowing for a private militia that could stand up to the government. During the Revolutionary War, that is precisely what happened. In the 21st Century, are individuals owning guns going to be able to stand up to the US military?
Every military grade weapons should be legal for everyone to purchase, or we need to rethink the 2nd amendment.
The reason that freedom of press is specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights is not that the specific medium of a newspaper is so important, so much as that was the most visible media at that time to share thoughts and opinions. I'd contend that same concept applies to the internet today. Denying access to the internet may seem to be a first world problem that people can't check Facebook, but at the same time you're denying people access to the thoughts and opinions of society, or sharing their own.
Will 3D add anything to watching Two And A Half Men? Probably not.
Will it add something to watching movies, or sports? Probably so.
HDTV adoption was driven by movies and sports, and not so much by sitcoms. 3D adoption could be the same. I know ESPN does a few sporting events in 3D. If DirectTV started showing all of their sports packages in 3D, it might push the TV adoption considerably.
While I agree that the proper Windows convention is to store settings in Documents and Settings, it isn't unusual for apps to have ini files in Program Files, and to use registry setting as well. Not to mention those apps are wiped away in the refresh. Microsoft keeps saying you keep all your apps in the refresh, but that is precisely what is misleading. You only keep apps that come from the App Store.
Documents and Settings is backed up, it wipes your computer, does a new Windows install, and then downloads apps from the Windows App Store again. Any apps (and potentially settings, save games, etc) from apps outside the App Store are wiped.
I take it you refuse to go to any site that is ad supported (such as Slashdot), watch TV, read magazines, listen to the radio, etc, because I find it hard to believe you are hypocritical or disingenuous in your claims.
Or perhaps you should just admit now that you're being irrational in calling advertising a soul stealing business model.
I've purchased adwords and paid for advertising with Google. I was never given customer data from Google.
I was only given stats on how effective those specific adwords promotions were for getting clicks.
There is no soul being transferred. If you can't see the difference between this and directly selling customer data that people believed was private, then I don't know what to tell you.
Google doesn't hand anything of the customers to advertisers. They hand ads from the advertisers to the customers. There is a distinct difference compared to companies like Facebook that do basically sell your data directly.
I believe Zynga took in more money than EA this past year. And a couple years ago Zynga didn't even exist. EA has been scrambling to copy Zynga's freemium model.
MMO after MMO that was losing money have switched to freemium models and become more successful than they ever were with premium models.
And companies like IBM, Google, etc. make billions on the back of open source software. But clearly you're right that this is the exception and can only work in a handful of cases. They must only succeed out of dumb luck, because the model itself can't possibly make any sense. Companies like Google don't know what they're doing.
Google announced Google TV too early, and it wasn't ready for primetime. Then they decided to pull back and told consumers not to buy early devices, because Google would re-launch a better software stack down the road. Hardware partners couldn't have been pleased with that.
We're going to see a revamped Android 4.0 Google TV, but Google still burned bridges with companies like Logitech.
The weird thing is that Netflix servers all run on Linux, and the company talks about how their business model wouldn't work if it wasn't for Linux. But they have no intention of supporting Linux desktop users.
This also isn't news. When they announced the device months ago they said it would use proprietary memory, and people reported that memory would be really expensive.
The device itself is selling at $250, which really isn't a bad price for the hardware if you look at it. I suspect they're selling the device for a loss and trying to make their money back with the storage.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought they tried licensing Java to Google for Android for just under 2 billion, and now want over 6 billion in damages.
True, but the GUI doesn't take 25% CPU or 30-50% of memory. Our cheapest, oldest servers are 32-bit and can only use 4 GB of RAM. Even then, the GUI environment probably adds 300 MB of memory utilization, which is rarely an issue for those servers than usually don't go over 2 GB of total memory utilization.
Intensive applications reside on servers with 76GB of RAM, where those 300 MB become a drop in the bucket.
When you start talking about really large numbers of servers and virtualization, you can see real savings by skipping the GUI. But the parent claiming that a GUI always takes 25% CPU and 30-50% of memory is frankly lying.
The main advantages of a GUI-less server environment disappear for a small business with one or a handful of servers. And they can run Windows Server 8 with a GUI.
This is moving forward. Let's say you have 100 web servers in a pool and you need to make changes to the entire pool. The traditional approach was to remote into each one and make those changes through IIS Admin in the GUI. Now Microsoft wants you to push the change to all 100 servers at once with Powershell.
In the future you may need to just dedicate a VM for those apps.
In reality, Microsoft doesn't need to be more efficient. You can always buy more processing power, which everyone loves. You buy more hardware and more Windows licenses.
The real key is administrative tasks. If you have 100 servers in a pool dedicated to a single task, you need to be able to perform tasks easily on all of them at the same time. The shift to Powershell is all about administering MULTIPLE servers. Removing the GUI is forcing people to learn more efficient ways to manage their environment.
Aside from some of SQL servers, I have very few servers with a 25% CPU load.
Having a GUI (that sits unused when no one is logged into the server) does not create this massive load that you suggest it does.
I run my Linux servers headless obviously. And I wasn't aware of any of my servers having specialized GPUs dedicated to application computing.
I'm migrating the website and haven't finished migrating it.
That's pretty much what I was trying to express. If no one can access through thoughts, and you can't access the thoughts of others, then do you really have free speech?
The 2nd Amendment was aimed at allowing for a private militia that could stand up to the government. During the Revolutionary War, that is precisely what happened. In the 21st Century, are individuals owning guns going to be able to stand up to the US military?
Every military grade weapons should be legal for everyone to purchase, or we need to rethink the 2nd amendment.
The reason that freedom of press is specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights is not that the specific medium of a newspaper is so important, so much as that was the most visible media at that time to share thoughts and opinions. I'd contend that same concept applies to the internet today. Denying access to the internet may seem to be a first world problem that people can't check Facebook, but at the same time you're denying people access to the thoughts and opinions of society, or sharing their own.
Will 3D add anything to watching Two And A Half Men? Probably not.
Will it add something to watching movies, or sports? Probably so.
HDTV adoption was driven by movies and sports, and not so much by sitcoms. 3D adoption could be the same. I know ESPN does a few sporting events in 3D. If DirectTV started showing all of their sports packages in 3D, it might push the TV adoption considerably.
While I agree that the proper Windows convention is to store settings in Documents and Settings, it isn't unusual for apps to have ini files in Program Files, and to use registry setting as well. Not to mention those apps are wiped away in the refresh. Microsoft keeps saying you keep all your apps in the refresh, but that is precisely what is misleading. You only keep apps that come from the App Store.
Documents and Settings is backed up, it wipes your computer, does a new Windows install, and then downloads apps from the Windows App Store again. Any apps (and potentially settings, save games, etc) from apps outside the App Store are wiped.
I take it you refuse to go to any site that is ad supported (such as Slashdot), watch TV, read magazines, listen to the radio, etc, because I find it hard to believe you are hypocritical or disingenuous in your claims.
Or perhaps you should just admit now that you're being irrational in calling advertising a soul stealing business model.
I've purchased adwords and paid for advertising with Google. I was never given customer data from Google.
I was only given stats on how effective those specific adwords promotions were for getting clicks.
There is no soul being transferred. If you can't see the difference between this and directly selling customer data that people believed was private, then I don't know what to tell you.
Google doesn't hand anything of the customers to advertisers. They hand ads from the advertisers to the customers. There is a distinct difference compared to companies like Facebook that do basically sell your data directly.
Freemium is a mix of free and premium, which means it is supported by micro-transactions or a percentage of the customers paying a subscription.
Freemium does not mean free for everyone, but supported by ads.
I believe Zynga took in more money than EA this past year. And a couple years ago Zynga didn't even exist. EA has been scrambling to copy Zynga's freemium model.
MMO after MMO that was losing money have switched to freemium models and become more successful than they ever were with premium models.
And companies like IBM, Google, etc. make billions on the back of open source software. But clearly you're right that this is the exception and can only work in a handful of cases. They must only succeed out of dumb luck, because the model itself can't possibly make any sense. Companies like Google don't know what they're doing.
Does FreeDOS support fossil drivers?
Though in all seriousness, you can run a classic BBS over telnet with synchro.net and it is fantastic.
Like the Streisand effect, we need a Christoforo effect.
Google announced Google TV too early, and it wasn't ready for primetime. Then they decided to pull back and told consumers not to buy early devices, because Google would re-launch a better software stack down the road. Hardware partners couldn't have been pleased with that.
We're going to see a revamped Android 4.0 Google TV, but Google still burned bridges with companies like Logitech.
The weird thing is that Netflix servers all run on Linux, and the company talks about how their business model wouldn't work if it wasn't for Linux. But they have no intention of supporting Linux desktop users.
All Boxee users see the same ads, and use the same Boxee accounts to access paid services, of which Boxee is surely getting a kickback.
That being said, Boxee has decided to crap on their desktop users, and especially their Linux desktop users from day one.
This also isn't news. When they announced the device months ago they said it would use proprietary memory, and people reported that memory would be really expensive.
The device itself is selling at $250, which really isn't a bad price for the hardware if you look at it. I suspect they're selling the device for a loss and trying to make their money back with the storage.