Ignoring all the other replies here, essentially the big reason is investment. Sure they talk up the redundancy and capabilities of mainframe, but really they are comparing tens of thousands of dollars on x86 to tens of millions spent on big iron and saying they get better performance from mainframes.
They are expensive to run, and they are expensive to buy. But if you have one and your running custom software that no one know really how it works are you going to spend that $10 million on redundant x86 hardware, then $x million of research/development software which no one can predict how long it will take or how much it will cost?
Distributed programming is not new. We have Java handling processing million of bank transactions a minute where I work. We still have mainframes, because no one wants to foot the bill to replace them.
A handle? So what does my kid have to put up? Happymellon, that sounds like either a girl who is well endowed, or a guy who like boobies:)
Neither are the reason for picking the name, just saying.
OTA broadcasts don't take up any bandwidth? Why are there any complaints about the whitespace movement, and why do they allocate out bands?
DTV (In HD or SD) is a stream of data. They use MPEG compression on the stream because you can only send a certain amount on data over that frequency using modulation. It is the same principal as wi-fi, but only one way. Otherwise we would have gigabit wireless.
I'm afraid you need to look up multiplexing on DTV and see why some channels go up and down in quality depending on what else is being broadcast on that channel.
Oh and my original thought was about UK DTV not moving to HD OTA, but dropping DTV OTA and moving to internet over the TV channels for higher bandwidth, the US is not going to move to free HD over Sat so that argument is moot. (The point being that the BBC owns bandwidth and ISP's are being dicks)
Why would they replace the OTA SD signal with HD? surely the next step is to drop OTA TV to free up the bandwidth. I can see it now, FreeInt to watch all the on demand TV to can eat. Though thats for another two decades.
I think they went for SD over the air because:
1. It was cheaper
2. The digital signal provides a much better picture than the old analogue one anyway that most people wouldn't care
3. Bandwidth over the air is in short supply. Unless your going MPEG4, then HD over the air is a bad idea. The UK has SD over the air. It's the US that's going to have to upgrade again because they did HD over the air in MPEG2.
4. The BBC and ITV have other ideas for HD http://freesat.co.uk/
but wouldn't this mirror the insurance laws in Florida?
For those who don't know, Florida is the most expensive state due to the number of natural disasters for insurance companies. The local government decided that it didn't like the insurance companies jacking up the prices so made it illegal without their approval to have any price increases (guess what, they don't approve any increases). Now it is almost impossible to buy insurance from anyone other than a couple and the state run insurance company which was created due to all their residents being denied. Florida doesn't look like it is going to back down and it is all the citizens who are going to pay when they bankrupt the state insurance due to a major hurricane.
Just because insurance companies deny residents insurance because they can't charge then even the same amount as they would for any other state (which are less likely to have a disaster) doesn't stop them screaming like children and doesn't introduce sanity.
Ah, I wasn't aware that they had changed their licensing schemes. Been out of it for a while, but it left a bitter taste. As for the carbon crediting, I was really meaning that if you wanted to "Go Green", isn't anything else better than x86? I can't see power consuption figures for SPARC but Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_power_dissipation notes that a duel core Power6 uses about 15 watts compared to 65-95 for DC Xeon. So ignoring the "Carbon Credits" thing, you can already save enough power (and probably heat dissipation) without having to redesign your data center by simply slotting in a few Power blades.
But I wouldn't bring Windows in to any equation on system migration, otherwise the idea of moving off x86 anyway (even if your going to be running it in a VM, you should VM on x86!) would probably be heresy;)
IBM promoting a proprietary technology?
Wouldn't you get the same type of saving on moving to Power or Sparc instead of x86 since they are also hugely more energy efficent? You also have to remember that it depends on what your processing, mainframe will only provide you with a speed boost with certain types of basic arithmetic (quite a big speed boost in some cases). So take these increases with a pinch of salt.
On second thoughts perhaps I'm just bitter from increasing capacity the capacity of our mainframes to run more processes, and finding all our existing licenses cost more because they all charge you on potential capacity of the system rather than number of copies even if you not using the extra capacity for the existing apps.
Cross licencing confusion
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
I'm now lost on one small point. So Novell truly does own all the Unix rather than SCO. Microsoft licensed from SCO. Novell licensed back from Microsoft.
If in theory MS needed to license from SCO, (And we can say they did otherwise why did they? And I know it's to fund their lawsuit) then Novell theoretically has IP in Windows.
Does this make it slightly more painful for MS if they make any more claims that Novell then disagrees with?
Love to convert them. In fact though I don't really need to convert them as we use Linux and Solaris for all server applications so they are open to the fact that Windows isn't the be all and end all. Just the desktop.
Unfortunately there are two reasons I can't/won't pick up one of these.
1. Work VPN requires Windows. And no they spend a lot of time making sure the VPN utilities can detect if they are running in a Virtual Machine to stop me doing that. So I duel boot, only needing to go in to Windows if I'm doing something work related.
2. No webcam option. I don't understand why either, the last Dell laptop I bought had a webcam that worked under Linux. A friend only last month booted his relatively Dell with the Ubuntu Live CD which found and worked with his webcam no other effort required.
GSM being an open standard you can build for, CDMA is patent encumbered by Qualcomm, so expect to spend a lot on patent licenses. Other than that GSM is a lot more widespread, in fact most countries don't have CDMA infrastructure. So you can see why the foreign countries, esp. open source projects, concentrate on GSM over CDMA. Oh and CDMA being SIM less means that the phone companies don't have to support your phone (I've heard that was the reason most US telecoms chose it through lock out and licencing), in fact they can prevent you from running a CDMA phone unless they explicitly approve it. GSM, just slip in the SIM and no one is the wiser.
Slashdot Mirror
Ignoring all the other replies here, essentially the big reason is investment. Sure they talk up the redundancy and capabilities of mainframe, but really they are comparing tens of thousands of dollars on x86 to tens of millions spent on big iron and saying they get better performance from mainframes. They are expensive to run, and they are expensive to buy. But if you have one and your running custom software that no one know really how it works are you going to spend that $10 million on redundant x86 hardware, then $x million of research/development software which no one can predict how long it will take or how much it will cost? Distributed programming is not new. We have Java handling processing million of bank transactions a minute where I work. We still have mainframes, because no one wants to foot the bill to replace them.
A handle? So what does my kid have to put up? Happymellon, that sounds like either a girl who is well endowed, or a guy who like boobies :)
Neither are the reason for picking the name, just saying.
Gosh, haven't you heard? BSD is dead. Or have you been silly and reading the articles, instead of arguing in the comments.
OTA broadcasts don't take up any bandwidth? Why are there any complaints about the whitespace movement, and why do they allocate out bands? DTV (In HD or SD) is a stream of data. They use MPEG compression on the stream because you can only send a certain amount on data over that frequency using modulation. It is the same principal as wi-fi, but only one way. Otherwise we would have gigabit wireless.
I'm afraid you need to look up multiplexing on DTV and see why some channels go up and down in quality depending on what else is being broadcast on that channel.
Oh and my original thought was about UK DTV not moving to HD OTA, but dropping DTV OTA and moving to internet over the TV channels for higher bandwidth, the US is not going to move to free HD over Sat so that argument is moot. (The point being that the BBC owns bandwidth and ISP's are being dicks)
Why would they replace the OTA SD signal with HD? surely the next step is to drop OTA TV to free up the bandwidth. I can see it now, FreeInt to watch all the on demand TV to can eat. Though thats for another two decades.
I think they went for SD over the air because:
1. It was cheaper
2. The digital signal provides a much better picture than the old analogue one anyway that most people wouldn't care
3. Bandwidth over the air is in short supply. Unless your going MPEG4, then HD over the air is a bad idea. The UK has SD over the air. It's the US that's going to have to upgrade again because they did HD over the air in MPEG2.
4. The BBC and ITV have other ideas for HD http://freesat.co.uk/
but wouldn't this mirror the insurance laws in Florida? For those who don't know, Florida is the most expensive state due to the number of natural disasters for insurance companies. The local government decided that it didn't like the insurance companies jacking up the prices so made it illegal without their approval to have any price increases (guess what, they don't approve any increases). Now it is almost impossible to buy insurance from anyone other than a couple and the state run insurance company which was created due to all their residents being denied. Florida doesn't look like it is going to back down and it is all the citizens who are going to pay when they bankrupt the state insurance due to a major hurricane. Just because insurance companies deny residents insurance because they can't charge then even the same amount as they would for any other state (which are less likely to have a disaster) doesn't stop them screaming like children and doesn't introduce sanity.
Ah, I wasn't aware that they had changed their licensing schemes. Been out of it for a while, but it left a bitter taste.
;)
As for the carbon crediting, I was really meaning that if you wanted to "Go Green", isn't anything else better than x86?
I can't see power consuption figures for SPARC but Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_power_dissipation notes that a duel core Power6 uses about 15 watts compared to 65-95 for DC Xeon. So ignoring the "Carbon Credits" thing, you can already save enough power (and probably heat dissipation) without having to redesign your data center by simply slotting in a few Power blades.
But I wouldn't bring Windows in to any equation on system migration, otherwise the idea of moving off x86 anyway (even if your going to be running it in a VM, you should VM on x86!) would probably be heresy
IBM promoting a proprietary technology? Wouldn't you get the same type of saving on moving to Power or Sparc instead of x86 since they are also hugely more energy efficent? You also have to remember that it depends on what your processing, mainframe will only provide you with a speed boost with certain types of basic arithmetic (quite a big speed boost in some cases). So take these increases with a pinch of salt. On second thoughts perhaps I'm just bitter from increasing capacity the capacity of our mainframes to run more processes, and finding all our existing licenses cost more because they all charge you on potential capacity of the system rather than number of copies even if you not using the extra capacity for the existing apps.
I'm now lost on one small point. So Novell truly does own all the Unix rather than SCO. Microsoft licensed from SCO. Novell licensed back from Microsoft. If in theory MS needed to license from SCO, (And we can say they did otherwise why did they? And I know it's to fund their lawsuit) then Novell theoretically has IP in Windows. Does this make it slightly more painful for MS if they make any more claims that Novell then disagrees with?
Love to convert them. In fact though I don't really need to convert them as we use Linux and Solaris for all server applications so they are open to the fact that Windows isn't the be all and end all. Just the desktop.
Unfortunately there are two reasons I can't/won't pick up one of these. 1. Work VPN requires Windows. And no they spend a lot of time making sure the VPN utilities can detect if they are running in a Virtual Machine to stop me doing that. So I duel boot, only needing to go in to Windows if I'm doing something work related. 2. No webcam option. I don't understand why either, the last Dell laptop I bought had a webcam that worked under Linux. A friend only last month booted his relatively Dell with the Ubuntu Live CD which found and worked with his webcam no other effort required.
GSM being an open standard you can build for, CDMA is patent encumbered by Qualcomm, so expect to spend a lot on patent licenses. Other than that GSM is a lot more widespread, in fact most countries don't have CDMA infrastructure.
So you can see why the foreign countries, esp. open source projects, concentrate on GSM over CDMA.
Oh and CDMA being SIM less means that the phone companies don't have to support your phone (I've heard that was the reason most US telecoms chose it through lock out and licencing), in fact they can prevent you from running a CDMA phone unless they explicitly approve it. GSM, just slip in the SIM and no one is the wiser.
Ah, you must be using the Firefox widget
I just wanted to disown him, Texas gets enough bad rap :)
Errr... George W. Bush is from Connecticut. He's just too retarded to really know.
6000 mins, is that used in family plans for min sharing? Specially designed so you no longer have to talk to your spouse.
Insightful? This is hilarious
Like these?
To resolve this issue make sure you can run on http://www.reactos.org/