Now you've done it
You posted something positive about Windows 8. The anti-Microsoft brigade will be along shortly to correct you.
835 posts • joined 4 Jun 2007
You posted something positive about Windows 8. The anti-Microsoft brigade will be along shortly to correct you.
The article says that the *architecture* requires 3U. Of course, it also says that the architecture costs just $43,000 for a blade chassis, six blades, and the Nimble storage device, which seems unbelievably cheap. I'm forced to believe that the $43,000 is just for the storage device, and that the cost of the entire reference architecture would be somewhat more than that, making it far from an apples-to-apples comparison with Tintri.
In keeping with current El Reg editorial standards, shouldn't the headline say "Apple BREAKS GROUND on MASSIVE Oregon Data Center"?
Max Gill says: "With persistent desktops you are now using an unproven storage provider to store what is now critical data."
Of course, with his solution, you're now putting an unproven storage provider *in the way of* critical data, which is not much better.
Another piece of the environment is non-VDI workloads. With the Tintri or other storage solutions, you can put virtual server workloads on them as well; can the same be done with Atlantic's solution? The "unnamed IT Manager" says that Tintri is a point solution, which is true insofar as it can only be used for VMware, but at least you can put both desktop and server VMs on it.
I can think of three possibilities:
Right, I'm going . . .
It's true that *non-persistent* linked clones lose state between reboots, but persistent ones do not. There are use cases for linked clones that extend beyond space savings, such as the ability to refresh a bunch of VMs from a source image while retaining user data (maybe there's a way to do that with standard clones that doesn't hose user content, but I'm not familiar with it). The dedupe ratio is impressive if borne out by experience, but I imagine that once users start pumping their own preferences into those cloned VMs, the dedupe ratio will drop significantly.
Honestly, I'm always a little dubious about relying on deduplication and compression for space savings. All it takes is a few corner cases with data that's hard to compress or dedupe, and suddenly you're scrambling for space or performance. Admittedly, VDI is the low-hanging fruit in this regard, with a generally large amount of static data relative to overall capacity, so perhaps GreenBytes can carve out a niche for themselves in that space.
They're behind the fnords.
"Well for a start, things default to a set of groups that do have a rationale behind them."
Wrong. Things that *Microsoft already knows about,* such as Office, do so. Most of the programs I have installed, which are *not* Microsoft products do not default to any sort of rational order. Also, it may be an infrequent operation, but it's a crappy implementation, and it ensures that I spend as little time in the Start screen as I can humanly manage.
"The Start Screen on my Desktop easily accomodates fifty programs and with column spacing between groups, it's very easy to know immediately where they are."
That's great if I want to visually sort through 50 totally disorganized icons to find the one that I want. Again, I don't spread fifty different folders across my desk so that I can pull the one out that I want; I have them filed and organized so that I can locate them. Also, why can't I grab a bunch of tiles at once and relocate them? Why do I have to pick through each tile of dozens and relocate it? That's poor UI design, and I defy you to argue otherwise.
"You can still type and search."
That much is true, and it is faster on Windows 8, so kudos for that.
"Not all programs are placed on the main Start Screen. You have to go into extended mode with an extra click to see all installed programs."
That's true. All the useless crap that Microsoft wants me to see, like Shopping and Weather, are on the main screen by default. Things that I might want to use, like the Command Prompt or Control Panel, are hidden away. But, typically, when a program is installed, it puts itself on the main screen in some totally arbitrary location.
"With Win7, many people end up with program shortcuts all over their Desktop. In Win8, it's far more likely to be clean and free because program start icons all go onto the Start Screen."
Again, wrong. I have put *more* stuff on my desktop and taskbar so that I don't have to use the Start screen, and I even wind up using the command line more frequently.
Anyway, I'm glad that Metro works for you. For the majority of desktop users, I suspect it's at best a useless change and at worst a significant impediment to productivity.
Actually, the funny part is that the "tiles" UI bears the greatest resemblance to the Lotus Notes desktop, an interface which is devoutly loved by a few fanatical fanboys and loathed by the majority of users.
Or, in addition to being a pompous, self-satisfied douchebag, you have the mind of a child.
"But how did things work better on the Windows 7 start menu?"
Since you've apparently ignored everything anyone has ever written on the subject, I don't expect that you'll actually read this post either, but here you go:
The W7 Start Menu bubbles to the top commonly-used programs, so if I open my Start Menu on W7, I get the applications I use the most. It is also easy to pin individual program icons so that they permanently live there. In short, it becomes very easy to see at a glance everything I care about most of the time; everything else gets popped behind All Programs. In W7, I have the choice of scrolling through All Programs, *which is alphabetized*, and finding my program *or* typing in the search box.
In Windows 8, every single program installed on my computer is shat all over the Start screen in an unorganized mess, and to organize them, I have to drag and drop *every single fucking icon* into order. Much as I do not spread every single physical document I have in life across my desk, I don't necessarily want every single application displayed at all times. Obviously, it's possible to hide applications, but having some sort of organization would be infinitely preferable to the big pile o' crap that is the Start screen. On top of that, things I might actually like to access by default, like the Control Panel, are hidden.
Also, the W8 start screen is hideously ugly. On the one hand, that a personal judgement based on my dislike of a bunch of bland, giant squares; on the other, many people prefer a less-cluttered desktop, and Microsoft has basically told all of us to go fuck ourselves.
@blackjesus: The point is that you have to individually drag each tile into place, which is a colossal hassle. On a classic desktop, you can select multiple icons and manipulate them, but with Metro, it's a tedious process of dragging and rearranging them, one by one, which is frustrating and inefficient.
Just started playing with Windows 8 in earnest yesterday, and there are some expected issues with software and environmental compatibility, but mostly I love it . . . except for the Modern (TIFKAM) interface. Overall, the OS is much more responsive, and the Explorer tweaks are minimal enough to easily adjust to. The Start screen, though, is a complete nightmare. By default, it's populated with loads of crap, which, fortunately, is easy enough to remove, but grouping applications (excuse me, tiles) is such a PITA as to be a total ordeal, there's no logic in how the tiles are laid out, and getting to many of the system settings takes at least three more actions than in previous Windows versions. It is utterly worthless as a desktop interface, although it might be slightly less awful on a tablet.
Nevertheless, I'm going to press on without using one of the third-party products which brings back the Start menu, just to see how long it takes me to adjust. I've been using the command line a lot more than I used to, since it's now easier to bang out a command to launch a Control Panel applet or other system command than it is to dig the location out of the GUI.
The other thing which leaps out at me about the Notro interface is how hideous and bland it is. Even a novice user would probably be turned off by it if they'd ever been exposed to iOS, Android, or, really, any other touchscreen interface. There are lots of third-party tools out there already to take care of the aesthetic issues, but the usability ones will be harder to overcome.
In short: nice OS, shame about the GUI.
Of course it's sustainable! Just look at Sony!
And people wonder why there aren't more women in IT . . .
Seriously! And what are you doing working in the first place? Take off those shoes, get back in the kitchen, and make your husband a damn sammich!
. <- the point
| <- you
You are correct insofar as you have identified the very obvious point that musicians are free to stay away in droves. They are also free, as it turns out, to castigate Amanda for raising a ton of money for her tour and then demanding that they work for beer. Their reward, as you would have it, is to bet their time and training on an "increasingly high-profile act" (who no one has heard of and whose main qualification appears to be having a famous husband) doing well enough that they get some sort of reputational boost as a result of playing with her, when what they need is rent money right now.
I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I'd bet on Amanda fading into even greater obscurity, so working for her for free on the hopes of future employment seems a foolish choice.
The Kansans were all over it the moment they heard the network was intelligently designed.
The problem with the Tiles/Notro/Modern/WTF interface is that it is, in a word, fugly. No matter how good the underlying technology may be, no one wants to haul out their phone, look at the interface, and die a little inside because it's so hideous, which is pretty much my reaction whenever I see the Windows 8 UI.
"hate your smug, self aggrandising, pompous attitude."
Clue meter reading: 0
Irony meter: exploded
@Michael H.F. Wilkinson:
I believe you have just described--and explained--Dick Cheney! Well done!
That's it, really.
The low-end stuff usually ends up in Reg Hardware from what I've seen, but I think Chris Mellor has written up some of the midrange systems as well.
I'll bite. From a layman's perspective, there are two problems:
1) The inside investors have already paid for their stock; that's why they're called investors. You can't short-sell what you've already bought. However, even if you could . . .
2) Regulators probably tend to take a dim view of shorting (or trading of any sort in the stock) by an inside investor due to it being--wait for it--*insider* trading. The minimum penalty would probably be significant fines plus disgorgement of profit; the maximum probably involves Federal PMITA prison.
No one buys NetApp (or EMC or IBM) because the products are low-cost; they buy them because they're reliable and have a rich feature set. If you want cheap, buy a Linux server, run Samba on it, and throw a big wad of direct-attached storage at it.
Not only that, but Mao never said "People like me sound like a lot of big cannons." That was actually Winston Churchill.
Probably the same amount that Moore and Lloyd are paying to the descendants of Guy Fawkes.
It's also known as Sysadmin Appreciation Day. How's the acronym for *that*?
<--Beer, because . . . yeah.
Typical Zynga gameplay mechanic:
10 Click on something
30 GOTO 10
I can't imagine why people are losing interest.
One of the biggest turn-offs about working in IT is the prevalent my-sideism, especially the recurring assertion of personal superiority based on how one uses technology. Explanations to fanboys of various stripes that one has an actual need for a technology or approach which is not the one they prefer tend to fall on deaf ears.
Newsflash: your choice of technology or how you use it does not make you a superior being.
You may also be aware, since you know so much, that the 9th Circuit is also the *largest* of the circuit courts, having the most judges and hearing cases from almost 20% of the US population (source: http://judgepedia.org/index.php/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit).
Of course, yes, the composition of the court probably is from a more enlightened populace than you'll find in flyover land, the Rust Belt, or the boondocks, whichever of those you happen to hail from, you provincial bumpkin.
Big Dumb Guy 555, is that you?
Consider me corrected. In fairness, that's the rule I was taught, but it wouldn't be the first time my teachers were wrong. Here's a slightly more authoritative take on it: http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/01/can-i-start-a-sentence-with-a-conjunction/. Taking Wikipedia's word for the "rule" would seem inappropriate in this context.
Ahem . . . a few corrections.
* "Wikipedia" is a name, so the Wikimedia Foundation can spell it however they want. Also, Wikipedia was founded in America, where the root word of Wikipedia is spelled "encyclopedia," so your "correction" is wrong on two counts.
* One does not start a sentence with a conjunction.
* I think you mean "its incorrect former state."
* I also think you mean "spelling and grammar on wiki-paedia (sic) *are* appalling."
I just can't *imagine* why your edits aren't held up as exemplars of perfection!
Do tell: why is Pillar a joke?
Back in the day, there was the WWW Grudge Match site (still up, much to my surprise: http://www.grudge-match.com), which famously pitted a rottweiler vs. a rottweiler's weight in chihuahuas: http://www.grudge-match.com/History/rott-chi.shtml. Not sure what the point is, except that Lester's poster made me reminisce longingly for the Grudge Matches.
Ah, that would explain those "loosers" that people talk so much about.
Was going to suggest that Kitsap County is the Florida of Washington.
WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW, ORLOWSKI?!
Not the best troll I've seen, but what the hell, I'll give you an upvote.
Have you *met* the BOFH?
No, but at least they were willing to try; I have a hard time envisioning most corporate executives even being *able* to do this, much less willing.
"Cupertino locals had complained that the 13,000 employees who will work in the glowy doughnut office will bring traffic and noise into the area without adding any amenities for locals. "
I'm forced to ask, who cares? It's *Cupertino*. There's nothing worthwhile there *now*; it's an endless sprawl of at-best modestly-wooded strip malls and suburbs. I believe the town motto is "Cupertino: At least we're not Sunnyvale."
Sounds like someone set off a Genesis device. Look for the planet to explode in the not-too-distant future.
Yes, because when I think of Microsoft, I immediately think "networking." Why, I've got a Microsoft switch sitting right here . . . no, wait, I don't.
You seem to have mistaken "server" for "network." Sun made the same mistake, and now look where they are.
Years ago, I received a report that we had a faulted UPS at our data center, which, as it failed, would take out half the power supplies in one of our production racks. I duly headed down to investigate, saw that the fault light was on and the battery drained. Assuming that it might just be a temporary glitch, I hit the reset button on the UPS. The next thing I heard was a great, terrible silence as all of our production systems, including our core switches and SAN, went offline due to every single UPS in the data center shutting down. After I changed into my emergency pair of brown trousers, I called the most senior manager I could get hold of and explained that we were dead in the water, resulting in an "all hands on deck" call.
The scenario which emerged was as follows:
Due to a lack of confidence in the data center's UPS/generator system, we had installed our own UPS units. Fire safety laws mandated that all power in the facility be able to be shut down, so the UPS units were wired into an emergency power off circuit: one, single emergency power off circuit. When I reset the faulted UPS, it shorted back into the EPO circuit, which caused every other UPS in our cage to receive an EPO signal and shut down. The led to a bunch of us standing around the back of the culprit UPS with an electrician, trying to safely remove the EPO wire, which would not come out due to being physically fused to the plug. Eventually, we got to a Mission Impossible/James Bond-style scene where the wire cutter came out and we had to make the call to just cut it and hope that nothing worse happened.
One crispy-fried electrician later . . . (I jest, of course)
With the EPO circuit cut off, all the other UPSes came back on line, powering everything back up. We took out the offending UPS and began the cleanup process. Fortunately, it only took us about four hours from initial failure to final confirmation that our production systems were back up.
The UPS manufacturer's response to this behavior by their faulty hardware amounted to "bummer, dudes." A few weeks later, we pulled them all out, having decided it was better to rely on the datacenter's power backup instead.
Don't you mean "hop and hop"?