According to this ASP will be integrated into IIS. Exectly what that will mean is not very clear to me, but it is interesting to note that this is the opposite direction of what Apache is doing with PHP, mod_perl , etc.
Perhaps this is like when MS decided to mode the graphics subsystem into the kernel, a way to gain performance at the cost of security and stability.
Ok, so everyone should love Larry because he is a buddy of Linus. That is just stupid. They spin he has been putting on all things Open source lately, I wonder how things are really going between him and Linus right now.
No. That could be a fluke. But when you start thinking about all the innovative open source software in the world, you see that he's just spreading FUD. Applications like Valgrind, Tomboy F-spot, Muine and amaroK are all pretty innovative, in my opinion.
It's a blog, it's not supposed to be politically expedient. It's not supposed to get the Mozilla project _anything_. The only problem I see with blogs is that people take them far to seriously. Jokes, ideas and brainfarts are taken to be the ultimate truth in sensationalist articles on Slashdot, OSnews and the Register.
Yeah, I've heard BS stories like that one before. I highly doubt the parent is a true story, and if it is, this should not reflect badly on the DVD format. It is simply a case of incompetence in putting all your eggs in one basket. The same thing could have happened to a tape, which is why important data should be stored in multiple copies at multiple places.
I understand, but I don't agree. Google embraces other peoples ideas, extend them in innovative ways and gain market share by offering superior products.
Microsoft embraces other peoples ideas, extend them in inferior incompatible ways, and bundle them with their operating system to drive the competitors out of buisness.
I have nothing at all against MSN search or MSN Virtual earth, since as far as I can tell, Microsoft hasn't attempted to use it's monopoly status to kill the competition yet. But on the other hand, I'm not using MSN search since it is an inferior copy of Google search. And the same seems to be true for Virtual earth, though we won't know for sure until it arrives.
I don't think AJAX will remain a javascript/css monstrosity. I think that things like Ruby on rails will be used to give developers a really great environment to develop cross platform/browser compatible web apps with rich interfaces and thick buzzword-rich marketspeak without touching that icky css/javascript goo.
My predictions: In a few years, AJAX style web apps are roughly as easy to write as standalone applications, but debuging them on multiple platforms will still be hard. Standalone applications will still offer more possibilities than web apps. As web applications grow more sophisticated, the security issues escalate.
Google isn't the first map provider. Google is the firs map provider to do it right. To take a good idea and implement it in a useable, technichally sound way often requires much more innovation than simply coming up with an idea.
I'm sure a lot of people though 'Hey, wouldn't it be nice with a search engine that actually finds the good stuff on the web' before Google, maybe some even though alkong the lines of Googles pagerank. But taking that idea and turning it into what Google is today - that is innovative. On the other hand, when Microsoft looked at the pagerank algorithm and said 'Hey - we can copy this and make our own site', that was not innovation, because they are copying an implementation, not an idea.
Google innovated by making a search engine that was an order of magnitude better than any that had previously existed.
Google innovated by making a online mapping app that contains an order of magnitude more data than previous efforts, by making tha data hackable, and by making a much, much better user interface.
Google didn't really innovate by buying Dejanews, AFAIK. Google groups is kinf of bleh.
Google innovated by making their image search contain an order of magnitude more images.
I don't know about how Google compares with other local specific content providers.
Competition? Sure! But going from the press release, I doubt Virtual Earth will be better than Google Maps in any significant way. They couldn't think up anything more exciting than 'It's like if you took Google Maps... and _rotated_ it.'
Microsoft are doing exactly what they have been doing with great sucess for the last few decades. They find cool technology, create a cheap knockof, and leverage their OS monopoly to push the original innovator out of buisness. The only difference is that Microsoft hasn't been able to leverage their OS monompoly against Google yet. I'm sure they will think of ways eventually. All they have to do is integrate MSN search, maps, etc. into the core operating system.
What are you saying??? Other people are eating BSD alive, and you say it is not dying? Microsoft bit down hard and tore BSDs left foot right of! It is decaying in the fould beasts belly as we are speaking! Of course this is killing BSD. BSD is just limping along, trying against all odds to outrun the pack of wild hyenas that are stealing more of it's codebase every day. But where are they going to run with only one foot? Where I ask you?
Note to moderators and BSD zealots - this is a _joke_.
The Power CPU architecture may be open, but we're talking about the whole Macintosh architecture. And since Apple chose to close various parts of it, it is a 100% one man show.
I don't agree with the statement "it is dominant because the market favors a bad open architecture over a good closed one". A bad open architecture will beat a good closed architecture because of the increased competition in a free market with multiple actors will create a superior product. Saying that the market favors an open architecture makes it sound like a moral choice.
Sure the Mac has advantages because Apple knows and controls everything. But an open archiecture like x86 offer more performance, more software and more hardware. And it does it cheaper and more convenient.
Yeah that really sets Apple apart from other companies like Sun, IBM and HP... NOT. All the Unix providers have exactly the same control.
You got it backwards. There are many closed architectures with one company dictating hardware and software. It is in fact the x86 that is unique in that multiple companies provide each part of the computer in an open architecture. And though this solution has it's problems, I think it has shown itself to be vastly superior to a closed system like the Mac.
Also keep in mind that if Apple where the dominating computer provider, they could probably had squished open source efforts like Linux in the cradle by closing specs and making new hardware incompatbile. The X86 may not be pretty, but I'd prefer it over a closed architecture any day.
Slashdot Mirror
They are proving once and for all that there is no swedish conspiracy.
According to this ASP will be integrated into IIS. Exectly what that will mean is not very clear to me, but it is interesting to note that this is the opposite direction of what Apache is doing with PHP, mod_perl , etc.
Perhaps this is like when MS decided to mode the graphics subsystem into the kernel, a way to gain performance at the cost of security and stability.
Ok, so everyone should love Larry because he is a buddy of Linus. That is just stupid. They spin he has been putting on all things Open source lately, I wonder how things are really going between him and Linus right now.
No. That could be a fluke. But when you start thinking about all the innovative open source software in the world, you see that he's just spreading FUD. Applications like Valgrind, Tomboy F-spot, Muine and amaroK are all pretty innovative, in my opinion.
It's a blog, it's not supposed to be politically expedient. It's not supposed to get the Mozilla project _anything_. The only problem I see with blogs is that people take them far to seriously. Jokes, ideas and brainfarts are taken to be the ultimate truth in sensationalist articles on Slashdot, OSnews and the Register.
Apple actually did have a version of Mac OS 7 running in x86. They called it Project Star Trek.
Yeah, I've heard BS stories like that one before. I highly doubt the parent is a true story, and if it is, this should not reflect badly on the DVD format. It is simply a case of incompetence in putting all your eggs in one basket. The same thing could have happened to a tape, which is why important data should be stored in multiple copies at multiple places.
Do you tape an mp3-player to your head and pretend you're a Borg?
Does Google have an operating system monopoly that I'm not aware of?
I understand, but I don't agree. Google embraces other peoples ideas, extend them in innovative ways and gain market share by offering superior products.
Microsoft embraces other peoples ideas, extend them in inferior incompatible ways, and bundle them with their operating system to drive the competitors out of buisness.
I have nothing at all against MSN search or MSN Virtual earth, since as far as I can tell, Microsoft hasn't attempted to use it's monopoly status to kill the competition yet. But on the other hand, I'm not using MSN search since it is an inferior copy of Google search. And the same seems to be true for Virtual earth, though we won't know for sure until it arrives.
I don't think AJAX will remain a javascript/css monstrosity. I think that things like Ruby on rails will be used to give developers a really great environment to develop cross platform/browser compatible web apps with rich interfaces and thick buzzword-rich marketspeak without touching that icky css/javascript goo.
My predictions: In a few years, AJAX style web apps are roughly as easy to write as standalone applications, but debuging them on multiple platforms will still be hard. Standalone applications will still offer more possibilities than web apps. As web applications grow more sophisticated, the security issues escalate.
Google isn't the first map provider. Google is the firs map provider to do it right. To take a good idea and implement it in a useable, technichally sound way often requires much more innovation than simply coming up with an idea.
I'm sure a lot of people though 'Hey, wouldn't it be nice with a search engine that actually finds the good stuff on the web' before Google, maybe some even though alkong the lines of Googles pagerank. But taking that idea and turning it into what Google is today - that is innovative. On the other hand, when Microsoft looked at the pagerank algorithm and said 'Hey - we can copy this and make our own site', that was not innovation, because they are copying an implementation, not an idea.
Google innovated by making a search engine that was an order of magnitude better than any that had previously existed.
Google innovated by making a online mapping app that contains an order of magnitude more data than previous efforts, by making tha data hackable, and by making a much, much better user interface.
Google didn't really innovate by buying Dejanews, AFAIK. Google groups is kinf of bleh.
Google innovated by making their image search contain an order of magnitude more images.
I don't know about how Google compares with other local specific content providers.
I'd say Google does it's fair bit of innovations.
Competition? Sure! But going from the press release, I doubt Virtual Earth will be better than Google Maps in any significant way. They couldn't think up anything more exciting than 'It's like if you took Google Maps... and _rotated_ it.'
Microsoft are doing exactly what they have been doing with great sucess for the last few decades. They find cool technology, create a cheap knockof, and leverage their OS monopoly to push the original innovator out of buisness. The only difference is that Microsoft hasn't been able to leverage their OS monompoly against Google yet. I'm sure they will think of ways eventually. All they have to do is integrate MSN search, maps, etc. into the core operating system.
Yay. A service that offers nothing that Google maps doesn't already do - but with a 45 degree angle.
Not a single comment, and the site is already crawling. I guess some people actually read the articles!
What are you saying??? Other people are eating BSD alive, and you say it is not dying? Microsoft bit down hard and tore BSDs left foot right of! It is decaying in the fould beasts belly as we are speaking! Of course this is killing BSD. BSD is just limping along, trying against all odds to outrun the pack of wild hyenas that are stealing more of it's codebase every day. But where are they going to run with only one foot? Where I ask you?
Note to moderators and BSD zealots - this is a _joke_.
The Power CPU architecture may be open, but we're talking about the whole Macintosh architecture. And since Apple chose to close various parts of it, it is a 100% one man show.
I don't agree with the statement "it is dominant because the market favors a bad open architecture over a good closed one". A bad open architecture will beat a good closed architecture because of the increased competition in a free market with multiple actors will create a superior product. Saying that the market favors an open architecture makes it sound like a moral choice.
Sure the Mac has advantages because Apple knows and controls everything. But an open archiecture like x86 offer more performance, more software and more hardware. And it does it cheaper and more convenient.
Ok. Had no idea. Thanks.
They've got a brand new major number, they don't really need new features.
Digital did this with their FX!32 emulator. They could run Windows binaries at pretty decent speeds on NT Alpha.
But that is a non-standard add-on card, right?
Yeah that really sets Apple apart from other companies like Sun, IBM and HP... NOT. All the Unix providers have exactly the same control.
You got it backwards. There are many closed architectures with one company dictating hardware and software. It is in fact the x86 that is unique in that multiple companies provide each part of the computer in an open architecture. And though this solution has it's problems, I think it has shown itself to be vastly superior to a closed system like the Mac.
Also keep in mind that if Apple where the dominating computer provider, they could probably had squished open source efforts like Linux in the cradle by closing specs and making new hardware incompatbile. The X86 may not be pretty, but I'd prefer it over a closed architecture any day.