774 posts • joined 21 Sep 2010
Re: A bit strange...
"I do wonder if credit reporting companies will be next."
I can't see many people shedding a tear if that were to happen, although charlatans wanting to acquire a veneer of legitimacy maybe irritated of having to find another way short-cut around due diligence.
[GCHQ] operates with rigorous oversight.
... And in other news, we all have nothing left to hide so there no point in them intercepting traffic.
Re: Words fail me...
"if the government had access to information on everyone to the same extent Google does,"
Some governments *do* have access to the exact same information that Google does, either via interception, strong-arming, warrants or by purchasing the data.
"The history of Windows dates back to September 1981, when Chase Bishop, a computer scientist, designed the first model of an electronic device and project "Interface Manager" was started." - Wikipedia
It appears that you have not verified that time line against the source attributed to that sentence.
"I never said "released". Troll harder. I'm at least not claiming that anyone supports a v1 OS anymore."
In fairness you are correct, although release was implied given the context of the discussion with respect to developers/users actually getting support for the product they were using over a long period of time
On the other hand you did write "a track record of supporting operating systems longer than any other vendor" referring to Microsoft, which you would have known to be false had you taken a couple of minutes to visit Microsoft & Redhat's websites - or even Wikipedia.
"Says the man who thinks .NET frameworks previous to 4 aren't cumulative."
Says the man who claimed that MS Windows was released in 1981...
Re: So it works as well as Flash on OS/X ?
"SlackWare, Suse and RedHat do not support "OSes that predate Microsoft's NT 3.51" - they support more recent iterations."
Err, an iteration of an OS is just a new version of the same code base. You were talking about "operating systems", not releases of OSes after all.
"If I were judging MS the way you judge IBM et al, I could say "Microsoft have been supporting this single OS (Windows) since September 1981" but that would be disingenuous at best so I won't. I would be obliged if you'd show others the same courtesy."
MS didn't ship Windows 1.0 until 1985, so no, you couldn't make that claim on the basis of product name. If you wanted to base it on code-base then you would have to limit your claim to NT and it's descendents released back in '93 (I don't know of anyone who ran NT 3.1).
If we take the "every release is a new OS" approach then MS don't look any better than Redhat. Their current oldest supported release is Vista, released in 2006, extended support ending 2017, by contrast Redhat released RHEL4 in 2005 and it's extended support will also end in 2017.
So "a track record of supporting operating systems longer than any other vendor " is not true. MS does support their releases for a long time, just not quite as long as (some) other vendors.
Re: So it works as well as Flash on OS/X ?
"What, a track record of supporting operating systems longer than any other vendor"
"Does my memory fail me?"
I suspect that your memory has quietly forgotten Vista, and you haven't ever heard of folks like IBM and HP. In IBM's case they're still supporting an OS that was shipping before Bill flunked college. As it happens even newbies like Slackware, SUSE & Redhat support OSes that predate Microsoft's NT 3.51. :)
Re: Clearly MS read Elop's memo...
".Net already runs on more recent Windows versions than XP."
Sure it does, but it doesn't change the fact that Windows is a legacy platform. Windows 8.1 ticks all the boxes that OpenVMS did on the day of it's release... Single vendor, a 'mature' ecosystem, failing to gain significant market share in the fast growing market segments of the day, it's a legacy platform.
Choosing to post as AC speaks volumes for the quality of your unsubstantiated claims of "lower vulnerability counts". If you believed your assertions you wouldn't have a problem with associating them with your account name, did the 19 year old remotely exploitable vuln spook you ?
For the record I reckon C# and .NET are better than Java, so I am pleased to see that there is an escape route for users of that tool chain.
Clearly MS read Elop's memo...
Fair play to MS for providing a life-raft for developers deserting the legacy Windows platform. Genuinely welcome news from Redmond for once. Let's hope they choose not to subsidize that move with more extortion by nebulous patents.
"Of course police and security services should get the instruments they need to fight crime, but not more,"
Naw. The fuzz should get the instruments they need to reduce crime and enforce the law fairly, but those instruments require transparent and independent oversight, not only for legitimacy and trust but to ensure they are not misused. The crucial transparent and independent oversight bit hasn't even been discussed let alone offered yet.
Re: Don't go Windows, and if you do, keep your options open
"But the common Enterprise Linux versions like Redhat and Suse actually cost more than Windows Server to license."
Microsoft charged $128* to report a bug in their newfangled NT 3.51, that said they did thrown in the "warranty" for the distribution media for nothing.
*=actually £128, but hey I'm giving their dollar price to show them in the best possible light.
The fact is with a Linux you can run the crown jewels on something like RHEL (and get support), and run something like Centos on everything else (eg: desktops, lappies etc). You can't really do that in the Microsoft ecosystem, there are no competing vendors offering compatible products just 'partners' whose whole business case rests on MS choosing to allow them to exist.
It doesn't stop at the partners either, MS, can actually revoke a license to run your software on instances of their OS on your hardware. I guess if you are in the business of running Microsoft gear you don't see it in those terms, or you believe it'll never happen, or it is a failure your business can survive.
While some folks are in the business of running Microsoft software, other people run software to help them make their businesses more profitable. They *could* choose to take on the $ole Vendor gamble, but instead they choose to hedge their bets with multiple Open Source distribution vendors.
The competition in the Linux market place is stronger, broader (embedded -> top end HPC) and the cost of moving from one vendor to another is tiny compared to moving from MS to *anything* else. I'm not even making this up, MS, their beholden customers and their shills state this as fact in public over and over again, they broadcast it far and wide as if it were a virtue rather than a millstone.
So lots of Microsoft advocates agree that migrating from MS to anything else is cripplingly expensive, and products get EOL'd sooner or later, therefore an MS solution will inevitably be cripplingly expensive. A rational response would be to make sure you don't use MS stuff in the first place, and this is what has been happening over the last decade or so.
More and more new stuff is getting written for Open Source platforms everyday, meanwhile more and more MS stuff is getting decommissioned and replaced with Open Source everyday. Despite it's continued growth Windows has been 'legacy software' for a decade now, it's in it's twilight years in all but branding. Like it or not Open Source is at the foot of a much longer growth curve than the one enjoyed by Windows.
The challenge faced by MS is that Windows doesn't really have a USP beyond being compatible with itself. Don't worry for MS though, they will continue to tax Open Source via patents etc, they will do fine, just don't expect them to make any further contributions to making you richer.
"get a good Java programmer who knows how to aggressively recover resources."
Those folks are rarer than hens teeth, and even the "good" ones tend to prioritise quick delivery over runtime performance.
"or better still code in a better language. "
We don't always get to choose what language people write code in... You've been pretty unhelpful tbh. :)
"I have done several the other way. Java processes in particular seem to run much better on Windows Server - and are certainly much easier to manage."
Are there any specific things that make managing Java processes on Windows easier ? I haven't really seen any difference - but the kinds of problems I come across are JVMs exploding due to exhausting their heap, or missing resources not showing up until runtime...
Re: May I humbly say
"The comments were above were genuinely educational and informative. I came away having learned something."
I look at it as a "return to form", it's how the Register *used* to be in the dim and distant past before the shills and alt.flame refugees invaded.
Re: Want more surveillance?
"Sadly for all the 'freedom loving tards' also known as Neville Chamberlain's brothers after 'peace in our time',"
It's easy to put the boot into Neville, but it's far harder to see exactly what Britain could have usefully done in '38 given the state of it's armed forces at the time. A year made a big difference for the better in terms of re-arming. Even then British troops were fighting tanks with entrenching tools, pistols and .303 rifles as they withdrew from Dunkirk...
Tell us genius AC, what would you have done in Neville's place ? Declared war in 1938 and sent troops into Germany armed with shovels & .303s against tanks, 88s & dive bombers ?
I find it ironic that there are so many dipsticks out there who choose to slam Neville, yet turn a blind eye to Preston Bush who was happily appeasing Hitler to the tune of $millions while arguing against the US entering WW2... Why aren't you slamming the tools who buried news of concentration camps and ethnic cleansing because US high society were so anxious to avoid fighting the Nazis ?
Re: does this fix anything?
"Microsoft have, however, acknowledged that there is a problem. That's flabbergasting. They had fought tooth and nail against admitting there was an issue here since Vista came out.
...could we finally be making a dent?"
At last ! We have discovered a link between roasting shills & change for the better ! We should roast shills more often and more thoroughly for better results, roast on folks... :)
Re: does this fix anything?
"Licencing departments come up with the most stupid convoluted unnecessary restrictions. What's wrong with one Windows licence per system (physical or virtual) running Windows???????"
That's easy to answer: a simple one license per box doesn't extract as much money from the customers.
If a simple cost-effective licensing regime is a necessity you need to migrate away from Windows, it will never be in Microsoft's interest to make it cheap & easy for a faithful^Wlocked-in customer. :)
"Why would the UK DVLA need to be represented at this meeting?"
I'd love to know the reason, it must be awfully important for a high-paid exec type to be excused work in order to fly out to LA. We count as 'the public', and we are interested, so I think that means we're entitled to find out what the reason is under the Freedom of Information Act. :)
"Do you call SPARC M7 vaporware?"
Until it's shipping and Oracle have deigned to publish CINT & CFP for it, I call it vaporware because it is vaporware.
"Well, the M6 server today has 32TB RAM. The largest on the market, by far. The competitors largest servers has half of the memory, and half the number of sockets."
On the other hand you can fit several of these flash cards into a Xeon, for a fraction of the power budget, cost and space, which is handy if you are running a crowded datacentre... Oh and the card would add NON VOLATILE memory, which solves a lot of real problems that folks have right now. Of course the card may suck, and it is also vaporware (like the M7) until it's shipping...
Who knows maybe the lead time will be so huge that the customers will have chosen to spunk $M on M6 & M7s instead of a $K on a few cards. Seems unlikely to me, given that they can slot in FLASH memory cards from other vendors into their Xeons and use several of them if they need more density (system bandwidth constraints are likely to bite)... ;)
I would love the M7 to be a great product, but in my view, given the history of SPARC, the M7 won't be good enough bring in new customers. In other news I've seen some cute figures for unoptimised tight loops running on a POWER8, I think John Cocke would be very proud.
"If we talk about TB sized RAM caches, what is better than real RAM (which is faster) and more of it than 4TB cache?"
I'm sure people would talk about TB sized RAM caches if they had an application for them...
OTOH there seems to be a lot of people who want to store lots of data and not pay the seek penalty, which is precisely what this card does...
You are making the M7 vaporware look like a solution looking for a problem by trying to scare people off buying a PCI Express card in favour of a few tons of vaporware.
Re: large POWER8 servers are out:
"Bye, bye POWER and AIX. HP has also left the high end server segment. Left is Oracle who is betting
more money than Sun ever did on large Unix servers. "
Hmm, article about IBM going fabless (like SUN, Oracle, MIPS and ARM) and you post the same old FUD about the death of POWER... Are you trying to tell us that fabless = death of an architecture ?
A cynic could be forgiven for concluding that Larry has forgotten to give you new instructions over the past 12 months. I wonder if you will get a new shilling to go with the "Oracle loves Clouds" message ?
Re: Microsoft loves linux
One of my favorite cartoon moments, thanks for the memory launcap. :)
That said, I think Nadella reminds me more of Skeletor.
Re: Such hatred
"Why do I get the feeling that a lot of the people that want to keep sysvinit have never tried to read a service script, let alone write one."
Speaking for myself I have read a fair few of them and written a couple and I didn't find it very hard the first time around when I was a PFY either, they're just shell scripts after all. The nice thing is with init.d/* is that you could swap the shell scripts for something else if you really hate them, binaries, makefiles, or even roll your own special init.d shell if that is too easy.
Sigh, DOS as a security feature...
I can see how Vodaphone came to make the schoolboy error of locking accounts after N failed attempts. Microsoft made DOS by login failure a feature on nearly every workplace desktop and people have copied it ever since...
It would be nice if some big names made some moves to fix this particular misfeature.
Re: Embrace. Extend. Extinguish. from 20 years ago. Do get with the times.
"No need - current versions will still open files even as far back as Word 6!"
Try opening a Word 6 document written on a Mac way back when see how far you get. :)
Re: @AC - Windows 10 vs. Linux
"Or at least PCs not infected with SecureBoot, I would still be happy with that."
That doesn't seem like an unreasonable request, yet we have some down voters who are against other people having a choice of what they run on the hardware they paid for.
"Well, one of the WinNT features from the early days is the POSIX and OS2 subsystems (the latter being removed finally). The mechanism is already there. MS could add a full on Linux subsystem to run existing Dockers."
1) The POSIX support wasn't actually POSIX compliant.
2) Containers are totally different in their scope, design and application.
Re: Embrace. Extend. Extinguish. from 20 years ago. Do get with the times.
"I'm sure we could find some VM running Office '95, then open/save the file through each version until we get to now."
Naw, you'd need to start with MS-DOS 5, and find a licensed copy of Word on media that hasn't turned to compost.
"The biggest surprise is how you still seem to comment on something you know nothing about..."
That barb can't be taken seriously when posted by someone called "Anonymous Coward"...
Re: Contempt for UK law
"These people clearly have something to hide. They are ducking and weaving around the law put in place to protect us."
Sounds like the perfect assignment for PC Simon Harwood. He has a cracking track record of protecting the public from protesters too, so I am sure that he will help them make their way home safely if they have nothing to hide.
Finally, a decent replacement for SliTeX & WTF is with the down vores for Matty B? (was Re: Terry 6)
"Hmmmm, I think the intended market is the real "99%", as in the 99% of smartphone, tablet and PC users that aren't power-users, that don't want or know how to use PowerPoint or Photoshop, but want to quickly be able to put a 'slideset' together for a limited audience"
I know this is a Matt Bryant post, but it makes sense, it isn't insulting anyone and I can even agree with it. I really can't see any point in down voting it which makes me wonder WTF the down voting clowns are up to.
Kinda weird seeing MS produce a SliTeX for the smartphone generation. :)
"In my old age you just shake your head & remember what on-line games were like back in the 90's. Oh the same! People trolling, just not as much of it due to the number of players online back then?"
Trolling has always been an integral part of games (and sport) both online and offline, Aussie cricketers like to call it sledging.
Re: Trolling for suckers
My personal favourite was posted to alt.flame, it went something like this:
"Hi, my name is Mel, can I be your friend ?"
It generated a *lot* of traffic. :)
Re: Best case
"It's been happening for the past 2 decades with the OS, too."
Fair point, and probably a better (if inflammatory) example. Have an upvote. :)
Re: Best case
"The other option is so poisonous that the entire software industry will fail, leaving at best, a weak freeware / open source model since there isn't anyone worth a lawsuit. I really doubt that will be allowed to happen."
Doubtful. I suspect that a few big players & trolls will survive in the US/European markets, everyone else will be sued to oblivion, customers will pay a lot more for a lot less and the industry will stagnate. Meanwhile in places where the choke hold of IP lawyers is less pronounced (e.g. Russia,India,China) the software biz will thrive while the IP titans of the West will continue to produce overpriced crap that fails to sell in the global marketplace, WTO@USofA notwithstanding.
There would be second order effects too, Western businesses being forced to use uncompetitive crapware will not be as productive relative to the places that allow competition in the market place.
We've seen that happen with the hardware business already...
Re: Oracle are most definitely evil
"Google have been making money from the innovations of others for far too long wihout paying adequate compensation. I hope The Borg gets badly burnt!"
You must find it a delicious irony that the plaintiff in this case ships a clone of RedHat Linux, and actually makes it a selling point that it's a total rip off with the stated intention of driving the original developer out of business. They make Google look like cuddly kittens by comparison.
Re: God, keep me from harm and working on FPUs
"The problem lies in guys like me having to make transistors give you an answer in a small amount of time and guys like him expecting results regardless of how long it would take."
No, the problem here is the quality of Intel's documentation.
In the 80s at least one chip vendor managed to come up with formal specs for floating point instructions and then prove that the hardware meets them so no one gets any unpleasant surprises. By contrast Intel's published documentation has a habit of specifying complex behavior using ambiguous waffle, so it's hardly a surprise that the hardware fails to match expectations of software developers.
"“Better products will do better because buyers will quickly be able to determine that they’re better,” he said."
Kinda weird seeing such a naive comment emerge from Bruce. He must have been asleep in the 80s, 90s and 00s.
"For all your snarky sniping and your dedicated vitriolic fanboy bullshit, Mr Anonymous Shill, you never do address these issues. And at the end of the day, I'm just tired of fighting the battle. Against Microsoft, against you, against the legion of paid "evangelists" that make truly obscene money to "control the message"."
That's the point really. It's wasted energy, which is better directed towards using gear that works for less headache and expenditure. The shills had already lost this debate in 1992, the current crop are too dumb to know it or too scared to admit it.
Re: Calm The F**k Down!
""Isn't that how we've been treating Windows for years?"
Until we recently realised that Open Source is probably even worse...."
Naw... At it's worst Open Source is as bad as payware, because the payware makes liberal use of Open Source code anyway... The TCP/IP standard was initially defined by a 'libre' style code base for starters...
Payware has done good stuff too. :)
Re: How long before....
"To fix that, one had to set the file to 'read only.' Not sure if that still works. Anyway, that was back in the days of dial-up."
Even in those gnarly old days OpenBSD firewall FTW... Mainly because it was the smallest download, but in practice it turned out to rock solid and mostly excellent in day to day usage too... :)
Re: All the more reason...
"In essence their addressable market consists of Windows fanbois who don't like Microsoft..."
Hmm, down vote. Is that because they don't like the truth or is it because they disagree ? They haven't posted a rebuttal, which suggests that they don't like the truth.
Personally, I'm quite happy to see ReactOS thrive and do well. More OSes, more choice is a good thing. Maybe the effort will yield something new and useful - I just think it's a very very very long shot with ReactOS.... :)
Re: All the more reason...
"How come no one is giving ReactOS any love at all?"
Err, because it's pitched as a clone of Windows and you can get the real thing without the threat of MS cutting you off at the knees for *£0 when you buy a new computer. * = the MS Tax.
Even if you ignore the competing with the superficially free real deal, their blurb about how much UNIX sucks suggests that they are doomed to repeating the same mistakes that Microsoft made 20 years ago, which is also a big turn off if you're looking for something similar but better.
In essence their addressable market consists of Windows fanbois who don't like Microsoft...
“Full encryption of communication and storage online will make life very easy for the criminals and terrorists and very difficult for law enforcement and law abiding citizens."
Making the failure to hand over passwords/keys on request a criminal offence covers that one (lucky us in the UK).
Surprised that he stopped at private comms & data, he will be asking us to leave the keys in the ignition of our unlocked cars on the grounds that it'll make policing car crime a bit easier next.
"Technically, at least according to the Department of Defence and the Executive Branch, the FBI could be an accomplice to acts of war against foreign nations. "
Starting wars is BAU for the US government agencies, and as most of the death and destruction happens elsewhere and no one is prosecuted for their criminal behavior there is no incentive for them to cease being criminals.
No, it's the other way around. Sabu was committing those offences at the behest of the FBI in return for more lenient treatment. Would be nice to see his handlers pay for the damage they have willfully caused out of their own pocket. IIRC in McKinnon's case the US Navy assigned a value of ~$250K per login with default password, and inflation has happened since then, so I think the FBI handlers could be on the hook for a few $m a piece, perhaps more if Sabu had to apply a bit more effort than using the default password to crack those machines & accounts.
Re: Get back into the HPC market
"Synchronization messages over a cluster are slow, to nodes far away in the cluster. A tight SMP server is much much faster...""
For a small subset of definitions of "cluster" "tight" and "SMP" that is true (specifically the non-standard hand-wavey definitions you use). Meanwhile in the real world where people pay real money for stuff to go faster, I have spent over 20 years migrating workloads from monolithic DB centric designs to federations of SMP boxes. People pay me (and lots of other people) real money to help them do these migrations because there isn't a "tight SMP" box fast enough to handle their growing workloads.
By and large any application that uses a DB as a central point of synchronization simply can't play in the big leagues anymore. Sure, there are a bunch of folks out there with more modest requirements, and maybe a SPARC box that doesn't set the SPEC world alight will suit them fine, but that is a pretty tiny and shrinking market - as you well know, most *new* customers will go the x86 route in this day and age.
Re: Lot of ignorance from the IBM crowd here
"I answered and wondered why you compare a 2-socket POWER7 server to a 1-socket Oracle SPARC server in terms of SPEC benchmarks."
Those two bits of kit were the closest I could find in terms of specification and shipping date. My intention was to illustrate that POWER boxes have quite a big margin over SPARC T5s per core when running highly parallel compute intensive workloads.
"Is that fair you think? Let me compare a 32-socket SPARC M6 server to a 1-socket POWER6 server - would that be fair you think?"
If they were shipping at the same time cost a similar amount and take up a similar amount of power and space, I figure it's a fair comparison... I found that Oracle are quite cagey with their SPEC results, and that is ultimately what drove me to choosing those particular machines for comparison.
"In short, it is you that FUD about me, trying to imply that I avoid SPEC posts."
Naw, there's no FUD, all I do is repeatedly point out that you compared single core results for POWER boxes to multi-core results for SPARC boxes.
I accept your quibble about 2 sockets being better than 1, the extra pin count gives those POWER boxes more memory bandwidth and more I/O bandwidth - and that is a USP for many of the folks who buy POWER boxes.
"This is supposedly "proving" that SPARC is much slower on SPEC, because I avoid those posts. "
What actually happened is that I spent a bit of time to find SPEC submissions of comparable age and hardware config which happened to show that the POWER7 system with a similar number of cores beat the SPARC box by a big margin in a set of compute throughput benchmarks. In case you hadn't noticed the POWER box was using SLES + GCC, while the SPARC box was running Solaris + Oracle's amazing SPEC pwning compiler. If I was a mean bastard I would have posted the AIX figures.
"Why stop there, why not compare four POWER8 to one SPARC instead, while you are at it?"
That's an easy one: Because it would be as pointless and ridiculous as your comparison of SPEC to SPEC_rate results.
Re: Get back into the HPC market
"HPC is fast growing out of their niche market. Oracle should try and get back into the HPC market...look beyond just running their suite of software on SPARC."
Exactly... Fujitsu have done it, with SPARC, repeatedly, so it's clearly possible. But then you look at the state of the art and you are left wondering whether Snoracle have the stones to leap frog stuff that is currently shipping, sadly I think the answer is no. I wish it were otherwise, more competition would be good in the marketplace, but the last time we saw a quantum leap in performance was the DEC Alpha, I suspect that kind of leap in scalar performance isn't repeatable (and in fairness Intel got pretty damn close to it fairly soon after with the Pentium Pro). :)
Re: Lot of ignorance from the IBM crowd here
"trying to trash talk and spread negative rumours of the SPARC M7 cpu. For instance, say that the M7 memory protection new functionality is nothing more than an ordinary MMU"
In fairness the quote from Larry didn't exactly spell out what was new or different from anything that had gone before. If you understand the difference you could spell it out for the folks who want a bit more substance than Larry's content free blather.
"let us see IBM POWER8 do 120GB/sec querys."
Nah, let's wait and see if M7 boxes actually show up and do this first in independently conducted repeatable and verifiable tests, after all Larry has incentive to lie and exaggerate his product's performance, and we can't trust anything you say because you keep comparing SPEC to SPEC rate figures... Come to think of it you keep ignoring any SPEC rate figures that beat the SPARCs as well.
"Well designed specialized hardware accelerators are typically >10x faster or so."
You really shouldn't have bothered making that comment, it's content, context and fact free.
"For instance, compare GPU vs CPU."
GPU = executes thousands of short lived threads with very few branches/conditionals, extremely regular memory access patterns, low-medium single thread clock rate...
CPU = executes code with a branch/conditional every 3-6 instructions, highly irregular memory access patterns, very high single thread clock rate.
"And the SPARC M7 is 4-5x faster than the SPARC M6. Let us see the benchmarks, until then you can continue spread the FUD and negative made up rumours."
While we're waiting for some independently verifiable benchmarks, it would be great if you could pop over to spec.org and learn how their benchmarks work so you don't make the mistake of comparing the rate figures to the single core figures again. It shows a lack of professionalism that reflects poorly on you and the products you push so vehemently.
- Product round-up Coming clean: Ten cordless vacuum cleaners
- Product round-up Too 4K-ing expensive? Five full HD laptops for work and play
- Review We have a winner! Fresh Linux Mint 17.1 – hands down the best
- 'Regin': The 'New Stuxnet' spook-grade SOFTWARE WEAPON described
- Worstall @ the Weekend BIG FAT Lies: Porky Pies about obesity