28 posts • joined 29 May 2008
They do everything this way
Amazon's entire business model is to do everything within a hairsbreadth of cost. It minimizes taxable profit, raises the bar for competitors and helps avoid laziness that fat margins can foster. It crushed a lot of bookstores, then retailers, and it's sticking its nose in the IT tent now. They're not perfect, but they do a pretty good job, so get ready for a long series of weaker players to get better or get out (Hello Adobe!)
Re: That's nature
Also looking at that link it shows that this was an Apple app shown at a TechCrunch conference. That is, an app that usually goes thru some serious vetting shown at a fairly mainstream conference rather than some pimply-faced basement gathering of teenaged wanna-be script kiddies. I'd look at that conference, see execs from Facebook, Yahoo and LinedIn and assume it would be professional enough to bring my daughter to. I'd expect to see grownups doing cool things that she'd like to aspire to.
This is not how adults should act in a professional environment. To those who think differently, know that in the US this sort of thing would get you chewed up by HR in most major companies. Mostly anyone I've worked for in the past ten or fifteen years would not tolerate this in the least. Grow up.
> "More money than brains."
Or "More dollars than sense."
Re: Reality check for lotuseaters
Totally agree, but go back and read again. It looks like he realizes that only offering 99.5% looks bad so we should offer 24x7 and a good RTO rather than a specific uptime number. Which is a totally bogus faux-metric that the cloud vendors dreamed up. I'd rather get a solid schedule with an identified service window than some gob "blurring a solution’s non-functional availability and reliability requirements" so that when the system inevitably goes down I can steer that away from business hours to a maintenance period after midnight.
Gavin, if you showed up in my office offering this pablum you'd face a short period of rude questioning followed a rather abrupt end to the meeting.
Re: Cost vs advantages
Right. This stuff isn't magic no matter how mysterious it might appear to some. You wouldn't expect the phones to be answered 24x7 or the manufacturing lines to go three shifts without an investment in staff or gear, and IT isn't much different.
If it sounds cool and you think you want to be Always On! then call your staff and Get A Bid! because it shouldn't be free. There are costs to this that are being paid by those "consumer grade" companies like Facebook, and they are paying them because it's their bread and butter core business. Before your widget company makes a similar choice they need to decide how core this is, how global they are, and what IT is worth at 3:00am. "Just because you can doesn't mean you need to."
Re: Why should techies be replacing disk drives at all?
They might be copying Google now, but if they can go even cheaper and save on power to boot I don't see why they'd stay that course.
Re: 5 years?
Did you read the post? He said "at some point", meaning that the candidate is capable of settling in if he likes the gig. Some people can't get along and portray constantly moving as some sort of positive. I like folks that CAN stay when they choose to, though my threshold is closer to 3-4 years.
Oh please, SAP is awful to work with
All well and good: big corporate work is hard and should be somewhat expensive. When you choose an ERP platform you are really committing your entire business to a single vendor. Spending vast resources to roll your own solutions in areas that are available off the shelf is frequently a dumb move. No one disputes any of that.
But SAP is miles beyond other companies in terms of the number of products you have to keep track of, the types of licenses you have to manage, how much stuff costs, and how hard they are to deal with. Other rapacious monster corporations we deal with are as expensive or complex (SAS, Oracle and IBM for example) but SAP beats them all in most negative categories. And most of it is completely unnecessary: there are other companies who have useful license tracking, simple user models, usable support sites and an un-antagonistic sales force, and they seem to be making a lot of money. I don't mind writing the huge check if that's what the work costs, but the hassle of owning SAP stuff is a drag.
Utterly off topic, but...
That picture of Steve Milligan looks like he could be Steve Balmer's little brother. It's kind of creepy.
Re: From the other point of view.
Actually that sort of explains the fact that Bing's owner is responsible for half the requests. If Bing finds it they can get Google to wipe it out. It probably works as a process, but it's got to be a bit emasculating over time...
Re: That's because Apple aren't restricting their users to IE.
If the plugins worked that'd be a huge differentiator.
Oh, that can't be it...
For one thing it's way more than 340 characters. But really, what sort of killer writes a third party retrospective like that? You're as bad as the guy in the article.
Are you high?
How are you son? Ever worked in a real company, one where you have to explain to your boss what everyone does? Companies don't want to spend a headcount on something that should be easy to buy and forget. Companies don't want custom functionality or enhancement, they just want things to not break as time passes and the world moves away from a particular version. And we're not talking IE6 here either; the guy in the article didn't even get his release through testing before support was dropped. That's not cool.
I think FF is wonderful and I recommend it widely, but the reason it has a bazillion downloads is that it's easier to reinstall than repair. Remember when everyone in open source made fun of MS for "Reboot - reinstall - resign"? Well it applies to FF now. It isn't simple software anymore, and the idea of casually reinstalling it on hundreds or thousands of desktops is laughable.
That's still the case...
...and if you think users are displeased with running OS X Server on a desktop, just imagine their joy at running it in a VM on a desktop.
We haven't hit bottom yet.
The Server OS isn't going anywhere because it does do a few things very well. It handles patches, it serves OD and it's pretty stable. But it does a terrible job at some important things like the policy granularity mentioned above. So don't fret about the future of the OS yet.
On the other hand tossing the hardware overboard, stonewalling any sort of server virtualization and generally making it difficult to administer your own machines makes me think that Apple would prefer to start doing it for you in a model not too far from the ipad. That is, require a lot of connectivity, load a lot of software and data from the cloud, and continue to charge you monthly for things you might just as easily do yourself. They've already changed the education licensing to require OS and app payments each year on purchased laptops and servers.
So yes it sucks, but the school I work with is kind of stuck with our installed base and the sucking is getting worse. We haven't hit bottom yet...
Wait, go back...
So you want to build a lot of private clouds and the standards are there to make them interoperable? Hmmm. OK, we build local clouds and then pass their data through non-standard public clouds to reach other local clouds. Should not the publics be part of the standard then, or do they already have a mechanism for passing data in and out? Well they're already in business, so some such mechanism must exist, which means that's probably not what's really needed here. What else could cause Intel to raise and group like this? Hmmm. I wonder what they could be up to? I mean, really the only thing coming here is a standard that could guide a lot of huge server customers to choose OH I GET IT NOW.
Preparing for a surge that didn't materialize?
My guess is the Amazon host was only there in anticipation of a huge crush of interested readers or a DoS attack from the govt. Now that the initial wave has passed and there are copies out in the wild they can drop the huge server option to reduce the legal risks and avoid some costs. Occam's razor and all that.
@Sentient: This is what I would expect from a software architect.
"On the few occasions that I saw him in public he was very clear and capable at getting the idea across. He came across as a person with a vision capable of getting his company to execute that. This is what I would expect from a software architect.... I wonder why people expect technical smart people to be good at inspiring others or profiling themselves."
Inspiring others is an important part of architecture.
Architecture serves little purpose if developers won't follow it, and forcing them to do so only works some of the time. Frankly architecture works better when sold as a good thing rather than a required thing, and outside your building you can't force customers to do anything anyway. So if you want your architecture to go anywhere you need to convince developers to follow it. You can try to get the developers themselves to carry the flag, but when you want a coherent message you can't count on herding the cats in your direction. That's when you want a Chief Architect, and it's why he wasn't as successful as he could have been.
Of course the other reason he didn't set the world alight was that the company is a Ballmer production and subject to his utterly benighted view of the future. Gates was a number of things, but at the end of the day he could pick a direction and get everyone marching. Monkey Steve hasn't got the good nose for direction and he isn't able to get his troops moving well.
that IS funny
>> It provoked the usual responses, but nothing like those when we played it backwards. Now that IS funny.
Student? He's 27!
When I begin my life of crime I'm going to carry a cane and wear a sweater so all the news outlets can refer to it in stories. I'll garner all sorts of sympathy from folks not paying attention. "Elderly, benign cripple arrested" they'll say, and juries will swoon.
SP was not designed, it grew.
Sharepoint was never designed as a single package. It grew organically into this giant sabre-toothed platypus that might be fun to look at but is absolute hell on zookeepers. Portals, sure we got portals. Here, let me hang a search on the side here. Oh, and reporting, that can go here. Look, another Search engine! Hey, this is fun! Ooh, shrapnel from the PerformancePoint crash. That can go over here...
Plane crash? Amateur..
The best way to fake your own death is hanging.
Or, hey, help them to death
Just have everyone bundle up their entire site each day and send it all in. At once. Every day. Maybe include a few other choice morsels for posterity, like say all their vacation pictures and maybe an old SUSE distro and some Win2K updates and 200MB of random text. At any rate, be careful what you ask for: "All" can be Pretty Big (and really useless.)
Give a man a fire...
Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
I hope those were employees
Tell me that's not an actual boyband attempting to make a living with these talents. And as for the intent, of course it was silly. Try to imagine your next several ad campaigns for automated pipette technology without getting a little goofy.
Personal vs professional
"What I do in my own time with my own resources is none of my company's business. "
Well that's true, and I suppose everyone agrees with you. But *this* case of cop crashers was totally job-related and continued to be even after the officers clocked out. People wonder whatarethepoliceupto and whoisrunningthisshow and ohmygodthinkofthechildren because of what uniformed employees are doing online. As was said above, if they were passing around crash pictures at the bar after work they'd be reprimanded too. The claptrap about Web 2.0 is as stupid in this context as all others.
Now if the website was talking up officers' fondness for Yanni tunes (a far more egregious offence IMHO) then you'd be completely justified in your outrage, as it's not related to on-the-job dumb.
Show Your Work
>"If you want statistics, try this: without food imports, 1.6 billion Chinese people must subsist on their own arable land, 1 square foot of which must sustain 7 adults. If half of the Chinese population have a child, this would raise their population from 1.6 billion to 2.0 billion. That same square foot of arable land (nine months later) must sustain *9 adults*. "
Show your work. (No, no, not the having a child part, Paris.) Explain the piece where nine months pass and then there are hundreds of millions of new adults. No wonder they're having trouble feeding everyone...
@ unlimited - Not everything has to be revolutionary
Anyone looking to The Reg for serious development insight probably isn't too advanced for refreshers like Don't Overbuild.
But really the point here is watching out for devs creating Valhalla rather than coding to requirements. The author could have been explicit that he was sketching out one boundary of the developer world rather than the center, but honestly it pretty apparent that's what he was aiming at. There's clearly a time and a place for reuse, frameworks and serious architecture, but even in those cases you frequently run into places where a little more design (and design review) would have resulted in a lot more clarity and maintainability. It's not revolutionary, just common sense that isn't always that common. I guess it comes down to making sure project goals are clear from the beginning and everyone keeps in mind how much reuse is needed, how much flexibility will really ever be used and what costs to simplicity are justified. (Oh wait, that's what the article actually said.)
- YARR! Pirates walk the plank: DMCA magnets sink in Google results
- Pics Whisper tracks its users. So we tracked down its LA office. This is what happened next
- Review Xperia Z3: Crikey, Sony – ANOTHER flagship phondleslab?
- OnePlus One cut-price Android phone on sale to all... for 1 HOUR
- UNIX greybeards threaten Debian fork over systemd plan