So far everything google has done apart from there ads and search engine has been at best mediocre and at worst pathetically bad (desktop search). Google currently have less than 50% of 1 market, Yahoo having the next largest chunk, so google are hardly even dominant at the moment. It would take only a very small market shift to see the demise of google.
NO Correctly coded Browser Is EVER crashed by a poorly coded page. If your browser crashes from a page the BROWSER has the bug, this is usually one of the best ways to find security holes as many of these Bugs are buffer overflows etc. many security researchers throw garbage at a browser till it crashes then they debug the crash to find the security hole.
I'll give you that I think my numbers were absurdly generous, but then you follow that up with numbers just as bad? you equate the number of downloads of every version of firefox for the past few years to account for a 2-1 ratio of users?
To equate exploits as a measure is sheer stupidity, you claim to be a security expert yet you seem to think that simply because there is no public exploit that the friefox holes are not as bad. Firefox is still a minority browser, until it becomes 25% plus of the market it is simply more benefiticial for hackers to attack the dominant browser. Friefox has proven itself to be swiss cheese as much as IE, if it ever gets to be as popular as ie it will be exploited as much if not more.
I call bullshit. They MYTH about more people looking at the code is exactly that, A myth, 99.9% of people never look at code and those that do more than 99% are not qualified to find security problems
apologies for rudeness of reply. But with PHP the people to blame there are the PHP people, they provide self contained runtimes for IIS and hence it is PHP's responsibility to log what is going on, just as ASP/ASP.NET does. So the logging that sucks is PHP not IIS.
Would appear to be just you. ASP.NET provides full debugging and stack dumps including a HTTP module that you can query through a browser to inspect the calls made tot he pages and the results. Don't blame your incompetence on IIS.
If I was your boss and found out your idea to architecting what will be a large investment, high uptime demands and a large user base was to ask slashot your arse would feel my boot followed closely by the pavement. This sounds like a pretty poorly run place, if you need to ask slashdot for this scale of thing then you are far better off not touching it.
actually in this case yes it does mean the same thing. just because the article is badly worded doesn't make it right. MS are not firing or laying off people for this, they are moving roles overseas, they do this through natural attrition, ie as people leave they do not replace them in the US.
each email/spam sent is an offense in itself. Microsoft sued for email sent through and too hotmail, AOL can sue for AOL, yahoo for yahoo mail. Hence he can be sued by each individual, however it is not cost effective for individuals and hence the existence of class actions.
Absolutely and AOL, Yahoo, gmail et al can also do like MS and put up there own money to fight the scum and win and then do whatever they want with the proceeds.
MS Office is aging technology? you really don't know a lot about their office suite do you? for the average home user sure there is nothing much extra in it, but really what more does a home user need in an office product. Go have a look at corporate features for deployment, integration and management and you will see MS has had massive upgrades to office over the last 5 years.
Sure OS X you can get cheap, but then hell apple could practically give it away with how they screw you on the hardware price.
a router or firewall will NOT protect a world facing server completely. firewall is only as good as what you let in and for most web servers etc this tends to be everything on port 80 or 443 and quite often on other ports for different services. So yes previous poster is correct, if you aren't patching then you should be fired. if you were correctly patching most linux distributions you would have had to restart your box about a dozen times in the last year.
As for uptime excluding patches, there is little or no difference between MS or linux here, I run a datacentre with over 1100 windows boxes, the only time any of them have failed in the last 12 months is for hardware failure and one incident of the san driver screwing a cluster. uptime is pretty much great across properly managed linux or windows boxes.
"One would think the fact that the worlds largest online retailer uses Linux would be compelling enough."
and for every example you can come up with I am sure MS can provide an equivalent. assuming kickbacks is moronic, MS are in enough of the fortune 500 companies to win there sales on proof. The linux community needs to learn from loses not simply abuse those that didn't choose them as being supid. Simply writing a lose of as "oh MS must have bribed them" or "there managers are stupid" is the sort of shit that will ensure linux loses grow.
1.8 billion is there turnover, so $100 million is a massive chunk of money for them. actual profit will only be a percentage of that 1.8 billion. so even if they make 50% profit on everything that is still more than 10%.
lol, gotta laugh, picking on someone for not mentioning there company and then not even having the balls to post using a name. guess that makes you even more mediocre as well as being a hipocrite.
no the goal should not be to fix all bugs. it is a great concept but both financially and project mangement wise unrealistic. You set your goals to what is achievable with the timeframe and resources available, if that is all bugs then fine, but otherwise you set your goals somewhere achievable. To set goals above what is achievable is a sign of a poor project manager as you are setting your team up for failure by with unrealistic goals. There is nothing more depressing and destructive for team moral, for a dev team that works there guts out, only to find they still failed.
correct and it plainly shows that FF is NOT compliant nor has it ever been. I always find it highly amusing when everyone bags MS for non compliance in there browser yet ALL the other browsers are non compliant as well, just not quite as bad.
Slashdot Mirror
So far everything google has done apart from there ads and search engine has been at best mediocre and at worst pathetically bad (desktop search). Google currently have less than 50% of 1 market, Yahoo having the next largest chunk, so google are hardly even dominant at the moment. It would take only a very small market shift to see the demise of google.
yep no beuracatic org ever survives in IT. That is why oracle, apple, IBM, SAP, CA et al all went broke years ago.
NO Correctly coded Browser Is EVER crashed by a poorly coded page. If your browser crashes from a page the BROWSER has the bug, this is usually one of the best ways to find security holes as many of these Bugs are buffer overflows etc. many security researchers throw garbage at a browser till it crashes then they debug the crash to find the security hole.
I'll give you that I think my numbers were absurdly generous, but then you follow that up with numbers just as bad? you equate the number of downloads of every version of firefox for the past few years to account for a 2-1 ratio of users? To equate exploits as a measure is sheer stupidity, you claim to be a security expert yet you seem to think that simply because there is no public exploit that the friefox holes are not as bad. Firefox is still a minority browser, until it becomes 25% plus of the market it is simply more benefiticial for hackers to attack the dominant browser. Friefox has proven itself to be swiss cheese as much as IE, if it ever gets to be as popular as ie it will be exploited as much if not more.
I call bullshit. They MYTH about more people looking at the code is exactly that, A myth, 99.9% of people never look at code and those that do more than 99% are not qualified to find security problems
apologies for rudeness of reply. But with PHP the people to blame there are the PHP people, they provide self contained runtimes for IIS and hence it is PHP's responsibility to log what is going on, just as ASP/ASP.NET does. So the logging that sucks is PHP not IIS.
they got rid of it in 2003. IIS6 moved to XML configuration way back then so this is nothing new. Poorly written or poorly informed article really.
Would appear to be just you. ASP.NET provides full debugging and stack dumps including a HTTP module that you can query through a browser to inspect the calls made tot he pages and the results. Don't blame your incompetence on IIS.
If I was your boss and found out your idea to architecting what will be a large investment, high uptime demands and a large user base was to ask slashot your arse would feel my boot followed closely by the pavement. This sounds like a pretty poorly run place, if you need to ask slashdot for this scale of thing then you are far better off not touching it.
actually in this case yes it does mean the same thing. just because the article is badly worded doesn't make it right. MS are not firing or laying off people for this, they are moving roles overseas, they do this through natural attrition, ie as people leave they do not replace them in the US.
ummm they haven't. This is not MS cutting US employees, they are hiring from overseas instead of hiring more from the US. So your point would be?
each email/spam sent is an offense in itself. Microsoft sued for email sent through and too hotmail, AOL can sue for AOL, yahoo for yahoo mail. Hence he can be sued by each individual, however it is not cost effective for individuals and hence the existence of class actions.
Absolutely and AOL, Yahoo, gmail et al can also do like MS and put up there own money to fight the scum and win and then do whatever they want with the proceeds.
MS Office is aging technology? you really don't know a lot about their office suite do you? for the average home user sure there is nothing much extra in it, but really what more does a home user need in an office product. Go have a look at corporate features for deployment, integration and management and you will see MS has had massive upgrades to office over the last 5 years. Sure OS X you can get cheap, but then hell apple could practically give it away with how they screw you on the hardware price.
spam email has never had a 10% success rate, it doesn't even have a 1% success rate. spam sits in the .1 to .01% success rate.
a router or firewall will NOT protect a world facing server completely. firewall is only as good as what you let in and for most web servers etc this tends to be everything on port 80 or 443 and quite often on other ports for different services. So yes previous poster is correct, if you aren't patching then you should be fired. if you were correctly patching most linux distributions you would have had to restart your box about a dozen times in the last year. As for uptime excluding patches, there is little or no difference between MS or linux here, I run a datacentre with over 1100 windows boxes, the only time any of them have failed in the last 12 months is for hardware failure and one incident of the san driver screwing a cluster. uptime is pretty much great across properly managed linux or windows boxes.
"One would think the fact that the worlds largest online retailer uses Linux would be compelling enough." and for every example you can come up with I am sure MS can provide an equivalent. assuming kickbacks is moronic, MS are in enough of the fortune 500 companies to win there sales on proof. The linux community needs to learn from loses not simply abuse those that didn't choose them as being supid. Simply writing a lose of as "oh MS must have bribed them" or "there managers are stupid" is the sort of shit that will ensure linux loses grow.
1.8 billion is there turnover, so $100 million is a massive chunk of money for them. actual profit will only be a percentage of that 1.8 billion. so even if they make 50% profit on everything that is still more than 10%.
lol, gotta laugh, picking on someone for not mentioning there company and then not even having the balls to post using a name. guess that makes you even more mediocre as well as being a hipocrite.
ahhhh yeah. but then the exact same thing can be said of google which is just as horrendeously overpriced.
At the time lotus did not compete with MS either, MS needed them to work to be able to sell there OS.
no the goal should not be to fix all bugs. it is a great concept but both financially and project mangement wise unrealistic. You set your goals to what is achievable with the timeframe and resources available, if that is all bugs then fine, but otherwise you set your goals somewhere achievable. To set goals above what is achievable is a sign of a poor project manager as you are setting your team up for failure by with unrealistic goals. There is nothing more depressing and destructive for team moral, for a dev team that works there guts out, only to find they still failed.
correct and it plainly shows that FF is NOT compliant nor has it ever been. I always find it highly amusing when everyone bags MS for non compliance in there browser yet ALL the other browsers are non compliant as well, just not quite as bad.
No need to intentionally program bugs into the kernel, have you seen the amount of kernel patches released this year for linux :-(.
correct IBM goes for the more direct sleezy approach. paying for politian "business" trips and buying them expensive dinners.