I don't watch TV at work. I'm busy because I'm the only IT guy in our organization, and I do everything, on top of regular office work, on a shoestring budget.
So while you're sitting in your office preparing the budget to show your boss how many tens of thousands of dollars the new M$ Exchange system is going to cost, maybe think about how lucky you are to be able to do what you love to do full time, with a budget, and proper support staff.
It may not have occurred to you that some of us only do IT for out organizations part time, and visiting the blogs of every single open-source component on our servers is not always practical.
All our workstations have client antivirus protection, so monitoring the status of this particular component was a low-priority. Little did I know that they intended to huck a grenade into my mail configuration. Thus I spent three hours in the middle of the night feverishly trying to fix our mailserver after a panicked call from my bosses.
ClamAV could have simply become impotent and started filling my log files with warnings about upgrading. But they didn't stop there, they basically sabotaged my whole mail configuration. Yes, SABOTAGED.
I have to worry about hackers, spam-ham tweaking, DNS bugs, user help desk. And now you want to give me a lecture about not keeping my server-side virus up-to-date? Up yours!
I'll be looking for an alternative to ClamAV in the very near future.
Since the Chinese government controls the.cn domain, I doubt very much that google.cn will remain operational should Google and China have a less-than-amicable parting of ways.
Though I know a handful of different programming and scripting languages, I'm IT by trade, not a developer. So I've never learned C++.
But, I did cut my teeth on the most basic BASICs: for Commodore 64 and Apple II. It was working in BASIC as a wee kid tinkering around for fun that taught me the fundamental principles of logic, variables, and program flow.
So, thank you BASIC! You'll always hold a special place in my heart.
Honestly, I puzzled over this very cover at the bookstore yesterday whilst picking up my copy of "Active Directory for Dummies".
There are so many technologies that should lend themselves well to O'Reilly covers, yet don't (I also puzzled why the mySQL books didn't have dolphins on them).
But Python not having a python? Well that's just silly...
Does anyone in this thread really think that Apple, a company utterly obsessed with aesthetics, good design, and usability, would put ads in their operating system? Not likely. Remember when Apple switched to Intel chips? There were no "Intel Inside" stickers for Macs.
I think the poster and the first commenter have it right: this is a protection measure to make sure that any company stupid enough to try and set this precedent (advertising in the OS) will have to pay through the nose to Apple. It is in fact, the quintessential poison pill.
Eh... I don't know if you can equate front-end-oriented database apps like Filemaker and Access to SQL-server products. Besides, if Apple owned MySQL, would they really neglect it in favour of Filemaker Server?
It is?
I suppose it depends on who you ask. In my web-development circles, you need a database backend. Because MySQL comes pre-installed on OS X Server, it's sort of the default choice. So perhaps "essential" should have been "important".
The problem is that MySQL the company is a significant contributor to MySQL the project. Personally, I see a lot of value in MySQL, but lately the open-source community's love seems to be shifting to PostgreSQL. So I'm guessing that there's some question as to whether the MySQL project could go it alone without the resources the company provides.
Okay, here goes... Maybe they should sell it to Apple?
Yes, hate me, throw things at me. But Apple DOES love MySQL, it's an essential part of OS X Server. Unlike Oracle, IBM and Microsoft, Apple doesn't own an existing database product. Also keep in mind that MySQL the commercial product is not necessarily synonymous to MySQL the open-source project.
Unfortunately, MySQL uses the GPL, whereas Apple has always preferred to open-source under the Apache license.
I have plenty of gripes about capitalism. But yes, it is AWESOME to see it work the way it's supposed to. Content providers have protected their interests by making an investment in network infrastructure. And by doing so, it makes the internet, and internet-related industries at large, more competitive, diverse, and structurally robust.
Original poster is spot on. The big telecomms like to argue that a tiered internet, where big content providers pay extra for better transport, is necessary (nay, crucial) because that traffic produced by the content providers is consuming so much bandwidth that major infrastructure upgrades are needed.
Instead, we see that big content is handling much of the fat transport by itself. So it seems to me that content providers have stepped up to the plate in terms of managing their own bandwidth usage.
Time for big telecomm to shit down, shut up, and eat crow.
I'm certainly not going to sit here and defend Israel, which has its own laundry list of indiscretions. However, when you go have a head of state going around saying that the holocaust was a lie, that your neighbour should be wiped off the map (however translated), and then tinkering with your elections much to the chagrin of a huge population of politically-inspired young people, whom you then brutally oppress... well, you don't get to play with the big toys.
No one judged if the U.S. and Russia could become nuclear powers because they were the first. But in today's society, if a nation wants to become a member of the nuclear club, they have to earn it. They have to demonstrate that they can wield that technology responsibly. If they can't, they demonstrate that they are a threat to the world community, and the world community feels obliged to protect themselves.
This is not an unreasonable demand. I for one feel that Iran has the potential to be an excellent citizen of the international community, but their current path is not the way to go about it.
Goodness, what a torrent of replies. Allow me to address some things:
- Public forums are not a good place to discuss interface design. Why don't open source projects interview people who want to act as "user consultants"?
- Yes, for-profit software developers don't listen to every single user's suggestion; I can understand how "feature creep" could become a big problem in that regard. However, for-profit has to deliver a decent product with features a majority of its users want. If they don't, they lose business, and profit.
- A totally immodest comment, but I am not, in fact, the exact type of person you should be catering to? I'm a system administrator mostly, and while I enjoy using Thunderbird at my own workstation, I wouldn't dare give it to my users, because of the bugs and inadequacies. If open source software works and is stable, I can push to have it deployed at our entire organization, and translate users' concerns into concise and coherent input. Doesn't that sound nice?
Please don't belittle me. Software is made for users, not developers.
"However, users are clueless about what they really want and you can't possibly use them to write the specs of your product!"
This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands. To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.
I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design. But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?
For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.
Open source is always talking about how they can win over more users. But how do you win over users if you don't focus on usability?
Slashdot Mirror
When you make assumptions, you're an ass.
I don't watch TV at work. I'm busy because I'm the only IT guy in our organization, and I do everything, on top of regular office work, on a shoestring budget.
So while you're sitting in your office preparing the budget to show your boss how many tens of thousands of dollars the new M$ Exchange system is going to cost, maybe think about how lucky you are to be able to do what you love to do full time, with a budget, and proper support staff.
It may not have occurred to you that some of us only do IT for out organizations part time, and visiting the blogs of every single open-source component on our servers is not always practical.
All our workstations have client antivirus protection, so monitoring the status of this particular component was a low-priority. Little did I know that they intended to huck a grenade into my mail configuration. Thus I spent three hours in the middle of the night feverishly trying to fix our mailserver after a panicked call from my bosses.
ClamAV could have simply become impotent and started filling my log files with warnings about upgrading. But they didn't stop there, they basically sabotaged my whole mail configuration. Yes, SABOTAGED.
I have to worry about hackers, spam-ham tweaking, DNS bugs, user help desk. And now you want to give me a lecture about not keeping my server-side virus up-to-date? Up yours!
I'll be looking for an alternative to ClamAV in the very near future.
Okay, got that backwards. So the European standard "permits" broadcasting at lower power, but doesn't require?
Let me get this straight: Israel don't want the iPad in the country because its WiFi transmits at LOWER power than their standards?
Doesn't... lower power mean LESS interference?
Can someone with radio skillz please explain how this makes sense?
"Am I normal or stealing?"
No.
Since the Chinese government controls the .cn domain, I doubt very much that google.cn will remain operational should Google and China have a less-than-amicable parting of ways.
An artist wants to try to ensure that listeners hear their album as a cohesive work. That's all there is to it.
Why the hell would you listen to just one track from The Wall anyways?
Though I know a handful of different programming and scripting languages, I'm IT by trade, not a developer. So I've never learned C++.
But, I did cut my teeth on the most basic BASICs: for Commodore 64 and Apple II. It was working in BASIC as a wee kid tinkering around for fun that taught me the fundamental principles of logic, variables, and program flow.
So, thank you BASIC! You'll always hold a special place in my heart.
Honestly, I puzzled over this very cover at the bookstore yesterday whilst picking up my copy of "Active Directory for Dummies".
There are so many technologies that should lend themselves well to O'Reilly covers, yet don't (I also puzzled why the mySQL books didn't have dolphins on them).
But Python not having a python? Well that's just silly...
Sorry, I'll try harder in the future.
Email reads you!
Does anyone in this thread really think that Apple, a company utterly obsessed with aesthetics, good design, and usability, would put ads in their operating system? Not likely. Remember when Apple switched to Intel chips? There were no "Intel Inside" stickers for Macs.
I think the poster and the first commenter have it right: this is a protection measure to make sure that any company stupid enough to try and set this precedent (advertising in the OS) will have to pay through the nose to Apple. It is in fact, the quintessential poison pill.
Ummm.... Filemaker?
Eh... I don't know if you can equate front-end-oriented database apps like Filemaker and Access to SQL-server products. Besides, if Apple owned MySQL, would they really neglect it in favour of Filemaker Server?
It is?
I suppose it depends on who you ask. In my web-development circles, you need a database backend. Because MySQL comes pre-installed on OS X Server, it's sort of the default choice. So perhaps "essential" should have been "important".
The problem is that MySQL the company is a significant contributor to MySQL the project. Personally, I see a lot of value in MySQL, but lately the open-source community's love seems to be shifting to PostgreSQL. So I'm guessing that there's some question as to whether the MySQL project could go it alone without the resources the company provides.
Okay, here goes... Maybe they should sell it to Apple?
Yes, hate me, throw things at me. But Apple DOES love MySQL, it's an essential part of OS X Server. Unlike Oracle, IBM and Microsoft, Apple doesn't own an existing database product. Also keep in mind that MySQL the commercial product is not necessarily synonymous to MySQL the open-source project.
Unfortunately, MySQL uses the GPL, whereas Apple has always preferred to open-source under the Apache license.
SnotBot.
WELL said, sir.
I have plenty of gripes about capitalism. But yes, it is AWESOME to see it work the way it's supposed to. Content providers have protected their interests by making an investment in network infrastructure. And by doing so, it makes the internet, and internet-related industries at large, more competitive, diverse, and structurally robust.
Getting back on TOPIC...
Original poster is spot on. The big telecomms like to argue that a tiered internet, where big content providers pay extra for better transport, is necessary (nay, crucial) because that traffic produced by the content providers is consuming so much bandwidth that major infrastructure upgrades are needed.
Instead, we see that big content is handling much of the fat transport by itself. So it seems to me that content providers have stepped up to the plate in terms of managing their own bandwidth usage.
Time for big telecomm to shit down, shut up, and eat crow.
Surprise surprise: programming for the iPhone is as lucrative as programming for any other platform.
"Don't hog it all, smelly-head!"
"Go to hell, zitface!"
Boston dynamics teams up with Harvard to make a robot dog with robot bees in its mouth and when it barks it shoots bees at you.
It's about being a grown-up.
I'm certainly not going to sit here and defend Israel, which has its own laundry list of indiscretions. However, when you go have a head of state going around saying that the holocaust was a lie, that your neighbour should be wiped off the map (however translated), and then tinkering with your elections much to the chagrin of a huge population of politically-inspired young people, whom you then brutally oppress... well, you don't get to play with the big toys.
No one judged if the U.S. and Russia could become nuclear powers because they were the first. But in today's society, if a nation wants to become a member of the nuclear club, they have to earn it. They have to demonstrate that they can wield that technology responsibly. If they can't, they demonstrate that they are a threat to the world community, and the world community feels obliged to protect themselves.
This is not an unreasonable demand. I for one feel that Iran has the potential to be an excellent citizen of the international community, but their current path is not the way to go about it.
That was my first thought too...
"... Only after bringing Project Satan to live did they discover they had made a horrible mistake. For you see, it was pure evil!"
Goodness, what a torrent of replies. Allow me to address some things:
- Public forums are not a good place to discuss interface design. Why don't open source projects interview people who want to act as "user consultants"?
- Yes, for-profit software developers don't listen to every single user's suggestion; I can understand how "feature creep" could become a big problem in that regard. However, for-profit has to deliver a decent product with features a majority of its users want. If they don't, they lose business, and profit.
- A totally immodest comment, but I am not, in fact, the exact type of person you should be catering to? I'm a system administrator mostly, and while I enjoy using Thunderbird at my own workstation, I wouldn't dare give it to my users, because of the bugs and inadequacies. If open source software works and is stable, I can push to have it deployed at our entire organization, and translate users' concerns into concise and coherent input. Doesn't that sound nice?
Please don't belittle me. Software is made for users, not developers.
"However, users are clueless about what they really want and you can't possibly use them to write the specs of your product!"
This demonstrates the inherent problem with open source's attitude towards user demands. To them you are either (a) a Programmer, or (b) a Grandma.
I'm an IT professional, a power user, and consider myself a connoisseur of good interface design. But I've never coded a line of C++ in my entire life. Does this make my input useless?
For example, I've been trying to get bugs in Thunderbird fixed for a while that seriously impede usability, but the development team doesn't seem to care.
Open source is always talking about how they can win over more users. But how do you win over users if you don't focus on usability?