"The newest "Choose or Lose" video will feature characters from popular video games such as The Sims and BloodRayne..."
When I first saw this, I thought that the A-list characters would be doing this: Mario, Luigi, Samus, and Donkey Kong; maybe with a cameo by Bowser to help drive the point home.
If they can't get the best of the best to help push us to vote, then just how important is this, really?
I have the first edition of this book, and found it to be excellent. I'd consider it the first of two essential books for Cocoa programming (the second being the O'Reilly book, which I use as a class reference).
I've seen the list of what's been updated, but it isn't enough to convince me that getting the second edition is worth the price if you already own the first. Are the differences enough to warrant the additional investment?
The one thing that people seem to forget is that driving is a privelege, not something that everyone has a right to do. Thus, because it's forgotten, it's abused.
And horribly so.
Make people feel that driving, and hence their license, is something that could be removed if they violate the law. Give the law some teeth. Hopefully, an initiative like this will have the side effect of getting some of the worst offenders off the road and prompt cities to improve their public transportation infrastructure.
I remember, when I was about 14, getting into an argument (through e-mail) with him while I was trying to understand more about TCP/IP stacks on Digital UNIX. He felt the need to point out at least twice per e-mail that he had invented Ethernet. That's not including the line he had in his.sig, where he made sure everyone knew that he was the "father" of Ethernet.
Creator of Ethernet or not, I just came away with the impression that he was an egotistical person who never did anything else and intended to just rest on his laurels, as if that would get him by for the rest of his life.
This being Apple has nothing to do with the responses here. I haven't read one yet (admittedly, I read on 4) that was apologetic towards Apple.
This has nothing to do with Apple vs. Employee. This doesn't even have to do with Big Software Company vs. Underdog Employee.
"If this is a precedent"? Of course it isn't! This happens every day. This is part of the law in California (and in many other states.) It's happened to me, it's happened to many others, and it will happen again.
Your fears of GPL'ed code and the Linux kernel are somewhat well grounded. You see, the issue with the situation at Apple is that they're claiming (by the sounds of it, correctly) that they own the copyright to the software that this person wrote. If the code were GPL'ed, the license would no longer apply as the developer didn't own the copyright that would grant him the ability to license it in that manner. Take a look at the Linux kernel developers. Those that work for companies (perhaps unrelated) do what they're doing with the knowledge and blessing of their employeer (and, in those cases, their employer either licenses the code or expressly waives their copyright to the work.)
This isn't dangerous in the least, unless you're a software developer that doesn't know the law. It should be common sense to not write software on your own that is in any way similar to the software your employer writes.
I'm very surprised that no one has mentioned this already, but this was done years ago.
I'm by no means an OpenVMS expert, so if there's one in the house please feel free to correct me.
At a past client (nearly seven years ago) I recall staring in awe when I learned some of the details about the VMS filesystem. Filenames were appended with a colon, followed by a number (for example, "README.TXT;5"). The number after the colon represented the version number.
Accessing the filename (without the colon or version number) would yield you the most recent (higher-numbered) version of the file. If you need to access a previous version, however, you could do that by appending the colon and the appropriate number.
Unfortunately, I don't know how this worked on an application level (say with a database that constantly openened and wrote to a file), but it was a wonderful feature to have for text files--both configuration and code. The number of versions kept by the filesystem could even be configured.
That's not at all a denial of the rumor. They're merely saying that there's nothing to announce now.
The rumor states that Apple and McDonald's are close to announcing a deal. Nowhere does it say that the promotion is about to begin, or that an agreement has even been reached.
Easy answer: people tend to want to share information about the things that they like. Unless someone feels very strongly against something, they're unlikely to spend the time and effort it would take to write a thourough review about it.
"Most of the pages in the robots.txt are actually 404's and dont exist anymore. Its that simple. Keeps the robots from constantly requesting content that doesn't exist anymore. A few are blocked because they are bandwidth intensive videos and things, and some others are blocked for more mundane reasons I assume."
But why doesn't that content exist anymore?
Could they be:
covering up the terrible connections between the White House's tee-ball games and Iraqi chemical weapons manufacture?
hiding the First Lady's photessay on Iraq?
covering up the details of Iraq's top-secret fitness program?
covering up the private portal site to the White House's Iraq web mail portal?
These reasons don't sound mundane to me! No. Not at all!
They sound downright sinister!
Again, if you had at least skimmed the review, you would have noticed that the reviewer said this very thing a number of times. It was never meant to be a "review", nor did the reviewer expect to grasp some of the concepts at all - and the rest, only after at least a year of reading and studying.
GNOME with Sawfish is a much tougher sell to a simplicity-minded CDE administrator than GNOME with Metacity will be, I suspect.
That statement right there hit the nail on the head, so to speak. There are a huge number of people that hate the CDE and wish it had never been born. The majority of those folks have usually never used more than one "corporate" UNIX system. I still remember the day, after numerous upgrades of several different systems (over the course of more than a year) that I walked into the datacenter and looked at the heads attached to our primary servers (17 primary servers, a few hundred smaller servers w/o heads).
Seventeen boxes. Among them several HP-UX, Digital UNIX, OpenVMS, Solaris, and a lone Linux box (yup, we were testing it back then for a web server). All running CDE. Five different OSes, a single common interface that used a single common configuration script (and associated.fp and action files). Once I saw that I stopped hating CDE and realized how it can really make an admin's life easier.:)
I think that's the same goal that Sun is shooting for. I know that they've caught a lot of flak for moving away from CDE - especially to GNOME, something that many Solaris admins I know consider "flashy". Moving to a simpler window manager is probably a good move on their part, and will be an easier move for those admins that really loved the CDE's simplicity.
Everybody has the source, and it is apparently quite usable since many people sue it.
Choosing to use a window manager because of the number of people that sue it sounds like a relatively bad idea to me. I'd expect that Sun's legal department would generally recommend against using that window manager. Best to go with the product that's generated the least number of lawsuits.
The parent poster either didn't read the review much, already had a strong bias against the book (or author), or doesn't have much of an open mind. My point of view, anyways.:)
From the original review: but in the final analysis is he a crank or a revolutionary genius? Who knows, but it's going to be a new nerd pastime for the next decade to argue that point.
The reply: This means he's almost certainly a crank. If actual scientists were arguing heavily about it, there might be a bit more uncertainty. But if the debate is happening amongst people whose knowledge of physics comes mainly from Star Trek, then that pretty much settles the matter in advance.
I didn't come away with that point of view at all. When the review said "nerds", I didn't take it to mean the folks "whose knowledge of physics comes mainly from Star Trek." And the bit about him being a boy genius and the author of Mathematica didn't sounds like the beginnings of any sort of argument to me. I'm sorry, but it just didn't seem like the reviewer said "He was a boy genius, wrote Mathematica, so he must be absolutely correct."
I had no idea who Wolfram was before reading this - to me, it served as an introduction as to who the author was. That I feel, combined with his 10-year solitude, says quite a bit about the author's personality - something that the reviewer acknoledged in a number of places.
In fact, the reviewer was critical at a number of points, especially when talking about the arrogant tone of the writing and the vagueness of some of what was presented. Didn't sounds to me as if this was one of Wolfram's "followers", but someone who got a very interesting book (that he happened to have been hearing about for awhile and was anxiously awaiting), and was trying to digest it and understand it so as to be better able to form an opinion.
As far as the bit about other scientists ignoring him (and several other statements along similar lines), your post really sounds a bit condescending. The reviewer himself stated that he had a few degrees (one physics, I believe?) and that the reviewer himself didn't fully understand all that was in the book. That right there speaks quite well for the reviewer. I've also read other reviews from other scientists, and I've seen a pretty decent amount of debate so far. Some truly hate it and feel it's pure crap. Others like some of the ideas, but feel it's not enough. It doesn't even seem as if this reviewer thought this book was the be-all-end-all text, the answer to everything.
So far, it looks as if the primary intent (at least of the review - possibly even the book, though who knows?) was to spark a discussion. Not a bunch of namecalling (crank!), but honest discussion.
You don't pay attention much, do you? If you read just a little further you'd notice that he said he's looked through each of the chapters. Not in any great detail, but enough to get what the subject matter was.
Now, if you actually read the "review" before making this comment, you'd know that it wasn't a real review at all, nor does it contain reactions and interviews. It's simply a chapter-by-chapter summary of what's in the book - and not a very good summary at that, because the "reviewer" states quite frequently that he didn't read it all and/or doesn't understand it all and cannot summarize it properly.
Someone do us a favor and mod the parent post down. Mod me down if you must, too, but the parent poster is obviously a troll (and yes, I fell for the bait).;)
Sounds exactly like some of the soap operas my mother used to watch. You know, the ones where some chick is terrorized by someone who's really her long lost evil twin. The evil twin somehow kills the good chick, then the good chick wakes up at the end of the week and realizes it was all some horrible nightmare.
I've never seen a complete episode of X-Files. Your post above made me realize that I really wasn't missing much, other than some paranormal, conspiracy theorists type of soap.:)
"This article basically says that you can take a midrange Sun server and do everything that a z800 can do but much better. I don't know of any Sun Server that can run N Linux clients in a VM at full speed. "
Please point out the point in the article where this is mentioned, because I don't recall this ever being said.:)
As a matter of fact, there are several points in the article where the author mentions that Sun (and other, traditional UNIX solutions) are intended to be used for completely different purposes than mainframes. From what I've read, he doesn't seem to be saying "Linux on an z/Series system outright sucks". I see an article who's point is "Don't spend $5M+ on a z/Series with Linux when one (or several, or whatever) PC or Sun system will do.
Looking at the sidebars from the article, it appears that this is just part one in a series of three. From some of the statements in these sidebars, it appears that the main focus of this is trying to cut through much of IBM's FUD and point out that Linux on the mainframe isn't always the right way to go. He specifically states that in the second part he'll cover the areas in which he feels Linux on the mainframe makes sense.
Finally, as far as being a Sun FUD campaign, what the hell makes you think that? I haven't seen one shred of evidence to support that. Sure, he only has figures for PCs and Suns, but he states that it's because that's all he had access to at the time. He came right out in the clear and admitted that so that everyone reading the article can keep that in mind. Having worked on both Sun and HP systems, I'm convinced that - if the Sun statistics are acurrate - the stats will be similar on a similarly configured HP box as well.
Now, just calm down a bit, okay? This is starting to sound like the arguments that I hear over the cube walls sometimes, with the mainframe folks cutting the UNIX and NT folks, and vice versa. This is the kind of crap that makes UNIX and NT folks think of the "mainframers" as a bunch of old bigots with blinders on. I think we all realize that different types of systems are valuable for different purposes, and most of us who read Slashdot regularly knows how to keep an open mind.
I agree completely. How many of us remember when HP bought Apollo? The same thing happened there - the name stuck around long enough to server two purposes: get people who used Apollo products used to the change and get enough time to do a full migration/conversion/deletion.
Now, the only time I see the Apollo name is when I walk into a shop that still runs some old system - usually on an admin's desk. It's that way with DEC now, too - every so often I walk into a shop that still has an old VAX up and running.
In the news today: "A young man was tragically found dead yesterday while sitting at his computer. The young man recently received orders e-mailed directly from Sony in the form of a press release. While seemingly benign, both a local attorney and the young man's mother feel that the press release forces children and young adults to wait in front of their computer for days on end for more news of an allegedly upcoming game titled "EverQuest II".
The young man, who remains unidentified at this point, was found starved and dehydrated in front of his computer. He appears to not have moved from his chair for several weeks. The young man's mother asserts that this is because press releases of this sort prey upon the weaknesses that many young, nerdy kids have. These children, she feels, wait abominally long periods of time for the first peice of new on this new "EverCrack", as she calls it.
Psychologists feel that this is a desperate effort on the part of these children to be seen as "cool" by having the newest bit of information on this elusive video game. Once these children are seen by their demanding peers as sources of information, this "hobby" of theirs begins to become addictive. They are, in effect, on a "high" as they delight in sharing the newest bit of news with their friends.
I've tried a number of times in the past to get my parents to switch over to Linux and OSS, and I used to recommend it to just about everybody. I always told people how easy it was to et up and use. This was a few years ago. Needless to say, I've learned a lot since then - the few people I've convinced to try it were never terribly happy, and after a week or so desperately wanted to switch back. I've learned my lesson, and now would never really recommend Linux or OSS to anybody unless they express an interest in learning more.
People who learned to use Windows and MacOS expect things from their software that OSS programmers have yet to really give them. What it boils down to is a polished product. I'll admit - I think the KOffice suite, StarOffice 6, The Gimp, and many other OSS projects are incredible. They're complete, relatively bug free, and give me all of the features that I want. But when compared with similar software on Windows and MacOS, most people find the OSS stuff just feels klunky. Most OSS software (let me stress the most - certainly not all OSS software is like this) just isn't as polished-looking to the degree that a lot of common Windows and MacOS programs are.
It's not so much about stability for the typical user. Sure, they want stability. They also want something that's intuitive, compatible with what their friends and coworkers use, and looks clean. They want software with a very adequate and easy to use help system, for when they get stuck.
Also, they don't want something with the exact same features as what they're currently using. After all, why switch unless you'll also be going to something better? The better the software can meld into how they currently do things, the more likely they'll switch.
In other words: yes the software needs to look pretty. Yes, it needs to be functional. Yes, it should be relatively bug free. But it also needs to integrate just as well or even better than what they're using now. It can't just be a functional replacement - it really needs to be something different and offer something remarkably better than current solutions. Finally, price isn't as much of a concern as most people think. That's not enough to make people switch from something the way they do things now, otherwise we'd have already seen the mass migration away from Windows and other closed-source, proprietary products.
At this point, the only leverage that they really have is fear - they're trying to intimidate you. This is what they've done to hundreds of other companies. They come in, use your "acceptance" of a software product's EULA as a hammer, and either force an audit (which, with the criminal penalties they throw at you, gets to be scarily expensive) or force you to pay upfront and forget about the audit.
Yeah, some people call it legalized extortion. IANAL.:)
For something like this, they should really go through your university's legal department. If the legal department hasn't gotten involved yet, then get them involved now! Get some counsel. They are the folks that were hired to protect you from this sort of thing (among many others).
This sounds just like pure intimidation to me. Especially once you mentioned that the audit includes personally owned computers. If they want to audit my personal laptop, which I bring into the office sometime, they would not send the notice to my employer. They would send it to me. Like I said before, talk to a lawyer. A lawyer, not the Slashdot crowd, can give you the best advice.
One of the things that you seem to have forgotten is that many of the cities that are legalizing their use on sidewalks are also limiting the top speed of the Segway. In addition to that, the Segway itself can have limits placed on its top speed.
Sure, you make a point - it wouldn't be pleasant to have tons of these things on the sidewalk all going 14 MPH. Do you really think that will happen, though? Come on, these won't be used by the majority of idiots that insist on using bicycles and inline skates on sidewalks, at least not at first. It's liable to be used for more practical purposes first - mail carriers, disabled folk, lazy mid-level management commuters. I can imagine a few idiots zooming around as fast as they can, but I think it's more likely that people will be moving around at the equivalent of a brisk walk.
I've read in a number of places that the tires on a Segway can be switched out and replaced with snow tires. I haven't seen any pictures or heard any additional info on the snow tires, however. I guess it remains to be seen how much of a difference they can make.
Check out Enfish Onespace for those of you running MS Outlook. Not only does it do great text mining of all e-mails, it does the same with contacts and with files on your hard drive (the professional version handles network files, as well).
It's got a clean UI, but it is a bit hard getting used to. I've found it to be a great tool for finding info in a snap - I just enter a search phrase and instantly get a list of relevant e-mails, Word docs, spreadsheets, contacts, and even websites.
And nope, I'm not associated with them in any way - I just like the product.:)
Actually, from what Microsoft has said, they're doing just that.
I'm a hardcore corporate UNIX guy. Solaris, HP-UX, and AIX. Like most everyone else, though, I use a lot of Microsoft products. You know what? They're actually fairly decent. That's partly because of how ubiquitous they've become. But also, they always ran well - at least for me.
I sat through a Microsoft presentation the other day where they talked about their future product line. They had a lot of into about the Windows.NET server line. A lot of good stuff. I got a chance to play with Windows.NET Beta 3 and guess what? Everything (port- and service-wise) is disabled by default. The admin specifically turns on services and ports as needed. They've done a lot to make security the default.
Keep in mind their past history, as well. The article mentions that this latest push - Gates' latest memo - is only one of three. Take a look at those last two.
The first was to get Windows onto every desktop. I know, it's not on *every* desktop (I've got a Solaris CDE desktop at home and a KDE desktop here at the office), but it just as while may be. Most desktops are Windows, whether folks like it or not.
The second memo? The Internet. Everyone knows that Microsoft had no clue what the Internet was about. After Gates' released his memo, every product from the company had Internet capabilities built in within the year. Some were crap, but they evolved. Now, it's the central point in many of their products - and it's getting stronger. A lot of folks are upset that Microsoft has "taken over the net".
What does that say? Again, whether we like it or not, I really think Microsoft will deliver on this one. And if Microsoft really, truly fixes their security issues, I will definately back the company and its' products.
Slashdot Mirror
"The newest "Choose or Lose" video will feature characters from popular video games such as The Sims and BloodRayne..."
When I first saw this, I thought that the A-list characters would be doing this: Mario, Luigi, Samus, and Donkey Kong; maybe with a cameo by Bowser to help drive the point home.
If they can't get the best of the best to help push us to vote, then just how important is this, really?
I have the first edition of this book, and found it to be excellent. I'd consider it the first of two essential books for Cocoa programming (the second being the O'Reilly book, which I use as a class reference).
I've seen the list of what's been updated, but it isn't enough to convince me that getting the second edition is worth the price if you already own the first. Are the differences enough to warrant the additional investment?
I agree wholeheartedly.
The one thing that people seem to forget is that driving is a privelege, not something that everyone has a right to do. Thus, because it's forgotten, it's abused.
And horribly so.
Make people feel that driving, and hence their license, is something that could be removed if they violate the law. Give the law some teeth. Hopefully, an initiative like this will have the side effect of getting some of the worst offenders off the road and prompt cities to improve their public transportation infrastructure.
I remember, when I was about 14, getting into an argument (through e-mail) with him while I was trying to understand more about TCP/IP stacks on Digital UNIX. He felt the need to point out at least twice per e-mail that he had invented Ethernet. That's not including the line he had in his .sig, where he made sure everyone knew that he was the "father" of Ethernet.
Creator of Ethernet or not, I just came away with the impression that he was an egotistical person who never did anything else and intended to just rest on his laurels, as if that would get him by for the rest of his life.
This being Apple has nothing to do with the responses here. I haven't read one yet (admittedly, I read on 4) that was apologetic towards Apple.
This has nothing to do with Apple vs. Employee. This doesn't even have to do with Big Software Company vs. Underdog Employee.
"If this is a precedent"? Of course it isn't! This happens every day. This is part of the law in California (and in many other states.) It's happened to me, it's happened to many others, and it will happen again.
Your fears of GPL'ed code and the Linux kernel are somewhat well grounded. You see, the issue with the situation at Apple is that they're claiming (by the sounds of it, correctly) that they own the copyright to the software that this person wrote. If the code were GPL'ed, the license would no longer apply as the developer didn't own the copyright that would grant him the ability to license it in that manner. Take a look at the Linux kernel developers. Those that work for companies (perhaps unrelated) do what they're doing with the knowledge and blessing of their employeer (and, in those cases, their employer either licenses the code or expressly waives their copyright to the work.)
This isn't dangerous in the least, unless you're a software developer that doesn't know the law. It should be common sense to not write software on your own that is in any way similar to the software your employer writes.
I'm very surprised that no one has mentioned this already, but this was done years ago.
I'm by no means an OpenVMS expert, so if there's one in the house please feel free to correct me.
At a past client (nearly seven years ago) I recall staring in awe when I learned some of the details about the VMS filesystem. Filenames were appended with a colon, followed by a number (for example, "README.TXT;5"). The number after the colon represented the version number.
Accessing the filename (without the colon or version number) would yield you the most recent (higher-numbered) version of the file. If you need to access a previous version, however, you could do that by appending the colon and the appropriate number.
Unfortunately, I don't know how this worked on an application level (say with a database that constantly openened and wrote to a file), but it was a wonderful feature to have for text files--both configuration and code. The number of versions kept by the filesystem could even be configured.
That's not at all a denial of the rumor. They're merely saying that there's nothing to announce now.
The rumor states that Apple and McDonald's are close to announcing a deal. Nowhere does it say that the promotion is about to begin, or that an agreement has even been reached.
Easy answer: people tend to want to share information about the things that they like. Unless someone feels very strongly against something, they're unlikely to spend the time and effort it would take to write a thourough review about it.
- covering up the terrible connections between the White House's tee-ball games and Iraqi chemical weapons manufacture?
- hiding the First Lady's photessay on Iraq?
- covering up the details of Iraq's top-secret fitness program?
- covering up the private portal site to the White House's Iraq web mail portal?
These reasons don't sound mundane to me! No. Not at all! They sound downright sinister!10Gb speeds should be enough for anybody
:)
Just like 640KB of RAM should be enough for anybody?
Again, if you had at least skimmed the review, you would have noticed that the reviewer said this very thing a number of times. It was never meant to be a "review", nor did the reviewer expect to grasp some of the concepts at all - and the rest, only after at least a year of reading and studying.
GNOME with Sawfish is a much tougher sell to a simplicity-minded CDE administrator than GNOME with Metacity will be, I suspect.
.fp and action files). Once I saw that I stopped hating CDE and realized how it can really make an admin's life easier. :)
That statement right there hit the nail on the head, so to speak. There are a huge number of people that hate the CDE and wish it had never been born. The majority of those folks have usually never used more than one "corporate" UNIX system. I still remember the day, after numerous upgrades of several different systems (over the course of more than a year) that I walked into the datacenter and looked at the heads attached to our primary servers (17 primary servers, a few hundred smaller servers w/o heads).
Seventeen boxes. Among them several HP-UX, Digital UNIX, OpenVMS, Solaris, and a lone Linux box (yup, we were testing it back then for a web server). All running CDE. Five different OSes, a single common interface that used a single common configuration script (and associated
I think that's the same goal that Sun is shooting for. I know that they've caught a lot of flak for moving away from CDE - especially to GNOME, something that many Solaris admins I know consider "flashy". Moving to a simpler window manager is probably a good move on their part, and will be an easier move for those admins that really loved the CDE's simplicity.
Everybody has the source, and it is apparently quite usable since many people sue it.
Choosing to use a window manager because of the number of people that sue it sounds like a relatively bad idea to me. I'd expect that Sun's legal department would generally recommend against using that window manager. Best to go with the product that's generated the least number of lawsuits.
The parent poster either didn't read the review much, already had a strong bias against the book (or author), or doesn't have much of an open mind. My point of view, anyways. :)
From the original review: but in the final analysis is he a crank or a revolutionary genius? Who knows, but it's going to be a new nerd pastime for the next decade to argue that point.
The reply: This means he's almost certainly a crank. If actual scientists were arguing heavily about it, there might be a bit more uncertainty. But if the debate is happening amongst people whose knowledge of physics comes mainly from Star Trek, then that pretty much settles the matter in advance.
I didn't come away with that point of view at all. When the review said "nerds", I didn't take it to mean the folks "whose knowledge of physics comes mainly from Star Trek." And the bit about him being a boy genius and the author of Mathematica didn't sounds like the beginnings of any sort of argument to me. I'm sorry, but it just didn't seem like the reviewer said "He was a boy genius, wrote Mathematica, so he must be absolutely correct."
I had no idea who Wolfram was before reading this - to me, it served as an introduction as to who the author was. That I feel, combined with his 10-year solitude, says quite a bit about the author's personality - something that the reviewer acknoledged in a number of places.
In fact, the reviewer was critical at a number of points, especially when talking about the arrogant tone of the writing and the vagueness of some of what was presented. Didn't sounds to me as if this was one of Wolfram's "followers", but someone who got a very interesting book (that he happened to have been hearing about for awhile and was anxiously awaiting), and was trying to digest it and understand it so as to be better able to form an opinion.
As far as the bit about other scientists ignoring him (and several other statements along similar lines), your post really sounds a bit condescending. The reviewer himself stated that he had a few degrees (one physics, I believe?) and that the reviewer himself didn't fully understand all that was in the book. That right there speaks quite well for the reviewer. I've also read other reviews from other scientists, and I've seen a pretty decent amount of debate so far. Some truly hate it and feel it's pure crap. Others like some of the ideas, but feel it's not enough. It doesn't even seem as if this reviewer thought this book was the be-all-end-all text, the answer to everything.
So far, it looks as if the primary intent (at least of the review - possibly even the book, though who knows?) was to spark a discussion. Not a bunch of namecalling (crank!), but honest discussion.
You don't pay attention much, do you? If you read just a little further you'd notice that he said he's looked through each of the chapters. Not in any great detail, but enough to get what the subject matter was.
;)
Now, if you actually read the "review" before making this comment, you'd know that it wasn't a real review at all, nor does it contain reactions and interviews. It's simply a chapter-by-chapter summary of what's in the book - and not a very good summary at that, because the "reviewer" states quite frequently that he didn't read it all and/or doesn't understand it all and cannot summarize it properly.
Someone do us a favor and mod the parent post down. Mod me down if you must, too, but the parent poster is obviously a troll (and yes, I fell for the bait).
Sounds exactly like some of the soap operas my mother used to watch. You know, the ones where some chick is terrorized by someone who's really her long lost evil twin. The evil twin somehow kills the good chick, then the good chick wakes up at the end of the week and realizes it was all some horrible nightmare.
:)
I've never seen a complete episode of X-Files. Your post above made me realize that I really wasn't missing much, other than some paranormal, conspiracy theorists type of soap.
"This article basically says that you can take a midrange Sun server and do everything that a z800 can do but much better. I don't know of any Sun Server that can run N Linux clients in a VM at full speed. "
:)
Please point out the point in the article where this is mentioned, because I don't recall this ever being said.
As a matter of fact, there are several points in the article where the author mentions that Sun (and other, traditional UNIX solutions) are intended to be used for completely different purposes than mainframes. From what I've read, he doesn't seem to be saying "Linux on an z/Series system outright sucks". I see an article who's point is "Don't spend $5M+ on a z/Series with Linux when one (or several, or whatever) PC or Sun system will do.
Looking at the sidebars from the article, it appears that this is just part one in a series of three. From some of the statements in these sidebars, it appears that the main focus of this is trying to cut through much of IBM's FUD and point out that Linux on the mainframe isn't always the right way to go. He specifically states that in the second part he'll cover the areas in which he feels Linux on the mainframe makes sense.
Finally, as far as being a Sun FUD campaign, what the hell makes you think that? I haven't seen one shred of evidence to support that. Sure, he only has figures for PCs and Suns, but he states that it's because that's all he had access to at the time. He came right out in the clear and admitted that so that everyone reading the article can keep that in mind. Having worked on both Sun and HP systems, I'm convinced that - if the Sun statistics are acurrate - the stats will be similar on a similarly configured HP box as well.
Now, just calm down a bit, okay? This is starting to sound like the arguments that I hear over the cube walls sometimes, with the mainframe folks cutting the UNIX and NT folks, and vice versa. This is the kind of crap that makes UNIX and NT folks think of the "mainframers" as a bunch of old bigots with blinders on. I think we all realize that different types of systems are valuable for different purposes, and most of us who read Slashdot regularly knows how to keep an open mind.
I agree completely. How many of us remember when HP bought Apollo? The same thing happened there - the name stuck around long enough to server two purposes: get people who used Apollo products used to the change and get enough time to do a full migration/conversion/deletion.
Now, the only time I see the Apollo name is when I walk into a shop that still runs some old system - usually on an admin's desk. It's that way with DEC now, too - every so often I walk into a shop that still has an old VAX up and running.
In the news today: "A young man was tragically found dead yesterday while sitting at his computer. The young man recently received orders e-mailed directly from Sony in the form of a press release. While seemingly benign, both a local attorney and the young man's mother feel that the press release forces children and young adults to wait in front of their computer for days on end for more news of an allegedly upcoming game titled "EverQuest II".
The young man, who remains unidentified at this point, was found starved and dehydrated in front of his computer. He appears to not have moved from his chair for several weeks. The young man's mother asserts that this is because press releases of this sort prey upon the weaknesses that many young, nerdy kids have. These children, she feels, wait abominally long periods of time for the first peice of new on this new "EverCrack", as she calls it.
Psychologists feel that this is a desperate effort on the part of these children to be seen as "cool" by having the newest bit of information on this elusive video game. Once these children are seen by their demanding peers as sources of information, this "hobby" of theirs begins to become addictive. They are, in effect, on a "high" as they delight in sharing the newest bit of news with their friends.
I've tried a number of times in the past to get my parents to switch over to Linux and OSS, and I used to recommend it to just about everybody. I always told people how easy it was to et up and use. This was a few years ago. Needless to say, I've learned a lot since then - the few people I've convinced to try it were never terribly happy, and after a week or so desperately wanted to switch back. I've learned my lesson, and now would never really recommend Linux or OSS to anybody unless they express an interest in learning more.
People who learned to use Windows and MacOS expect things from their software that OSS programmers have yet to really give them. What it boils down to is a polished product. I'll admit - I think the KOffice suite, StarOffice 6, The Gimp, and many other OSS projects are incredible. They're complete, relatively bug free, and give me all of the features that I want. But when compared with similar software on Windows and MacOS, most people find the OSS stuff just feels klunky. Most OSS software (let me stress the most - certainly not all OSS software is like this) just isn't as polished-looking to the degree that a lot of common Windows and MacOS programs are.
It's not so much about stability for the typical user. Sure, they want stability. They also want something that's intuitive, compatible with what their friends and coworkers use, and looks clean. They want software with a very adequate and easy to use help system, for when they get stuck.
Also, they don't want something with the exact same features as what they're currently using. After all, why switch unless you'll also be going to something better? The better the software can meld into how they currently do things, the more likely they'll switch.
In other words: yes the software needs to look pretty. Yes, it needs to be functional. Yes, it should be relatively bug free. But it also needs to integrate just as well or even better than what they're using now. It can't just be a functional replacement - it really needs to be something different and offer something remarkably better than current solutions. Finally, price isn't as much of a concern as most people think. That's not enough to make people switch from something the way they do things now, otherwise we'd have already seen the mass migration away from Windows and other closed-source, proprietary products.
At this point, the only leverage that they really have is fear - they're trying to intimidate you. This is what they've done to hundreds of other companies. They come in, use your "acceptance" of a software product's EULA as a hammer, and either force an audit (which, with the criminal penalties they throw at you, gets to be scarily expensive) or force you to pay upfront and forget about the audit.
:)
Yeah, some people call it legalized extortion. IANAL.
For something like this, they should really go through your university's legal department. If the legal department hasn't gotten involved yet, then get them involved now! Get some counsel. They are the folks that were hired to protect you from this sort of thing (among many others).
This sounds just like pure intimidation to me. Especially once you mentioned that the audit includes personally owned computers. If they want to audit my personal laptop, which I bring into the office sometime, they would not send the notice to my employer. They would send it to me. Like I said before, talk to a lawyer. A lawyer, not the Slashdot crowd, can give you the best advice.
One of the things that you seem to have forgotten is that many of the cities that are legalizing their use on sidewalks are also limiting the top speed of the Segway. In addition to that, the Segway itself can have limits placed on its top speed.
Sure, you make a point - it wouldn't be pleasant to have tons of these things on the sidewalk all going 14 MPH. Do you really think that will happen, though? Come on, these won't be used by the majority of idiots that insist on using bicycles and inline skates on sidewalks, at least not at first. It's liable to be used for more practical purposes first - mail carriers, disabled folk, lazy mid-level management commuters. I can imagine a few idiots zooming around as fast as they can, but I think it's more likely that people will be moving around at the equivalent of a brisk walk.
I've read in a number of places that the tires on a Segway can be switched out and replaced with snow tires. I haven't seen any pictures or heard any additional info on the snow tires, however. I guess it remains to be seen how much of a difference they can make.
Check out Enfish Onespace for those of you running MS Outlook. Not only does it do great text mining of all e-mails, it does the same with contacts and with files on your hard drive (the professional version handles network files, as well).
:)
It's got a clean UI, but it is a bit hard getting used to. I've found it to be a great tool for finding info in a snap - I just enter a search phrase and instantly get a list of relevant e-mails, Word docs, spreadsheets, contacts, and even websites.
And nope, I'm not associated with them in any way - I just like the product.
Actually, from what Microsoft has said, they're doing just that.
.NET server line. A lot of good stuff. I got a chance to play with Windows .NET Beta 3 and guess what? Everything (port- and service-wise) is disabled by default. The admin specifically turns on services and ports as needed. They've done a lot to make security the default.
I'm a hardcore corporate UNIX guy. Solaris, HP-UX, and AIX. Like most everyone else, though, I use a lot of Microsoft products. You know what? They're actually fairly decent. That's partly because of how ubiquitous they've become. But also, they always ran well - at least for me.
I sat through a Microsoft presentation the other day where they talked about their future product line. They had a lot of into about the Windows
Keep in mind their past history, as well. The article mentions that this latest push - Gates' latest memo - is only one of three. Take a look at those last two.
The first was to get Windows onto every desktop. I know, it's not on *every* desktop (I've got a Solaris CDE desktop at home and a KDE desktop here at the office), but it just as while may be. Most desktops are Windows, whether folks like it or not.
The second memo? The Internet. Everyone knows that Microsoft had no clue what the Internet was about. After Gates' released his memo, every product from the company had Internet capabilities built in within the year. Some were crap, but they evolved. Now, it's the central point in many of their products - and it's getting stronger. A lot of folks are upset that Microsoft has "taken over the net".
What does that say? Again, whether we like it or not, I really think Microsoft will deliver on this one. And if Microsoft really, truly fixes their security issues, I will definately back the company and its' products.