Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 ... Last
[#] Sun Sep 13 2009 11:38:59 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Yeah, sure, helping yourself to existing open source software is exactly what made linux possible because it increased the base of would-be developers. This is all well known and straight out of Raymond. However. It doesn't work unless a significant portion of those would-be developers decide to stop freeloading and start contributing. Which doesn't happen, unless a large percentage of them are insane. I mean think about it, you could fork over $150 or $300 or so to Microsoft. Which is CHEAP, compared to the weeks of lost manhours that you could pay when you decide to contribute to Linux just to fix a couple of small issues like sound drivers or power management.


That's the equation on a personal indivudial-user level: the economics don't add up, and your time is worth more than that. If you're a Google, maybe the economics are a little different and it's helpful to have something customizable.



[#] Sun Sep 13 2009 19:37:32 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If you go with that logic, a big open source ecosystem and/or a 100% open source operating system cannot happen and will never happen. But it did happen.

[#] Sun Sep 13 2009 21:46:04 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

open source operating system cannot happen and will never happen. But

it did happen.

you missed the part where I worked insanity into the equation ;)

[#] Mon Sep 14 2009 07:39:31 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

While your time is a fixed cost so the more work you do the cheaper linux becomes is true, most companies aren't as tech heavy as yours.

People are expensive, and it's not just salaries. Add in benefits and hr costs and you have to do a LOT of supporting to make paying a local person cheaper than paying an outside company,
And then you have the problem that you can quit at any time whereas support is continuous and isn't affected by individual staff action.
Depends on the size of your company too.
If you have a huge company, yeah, you';re going to have a big IT staff and since they're there anyway it works.
At my place we have one of the saddest things I've ever seen
They can't justify an entire salary to IT becuase our office is only 60 people or so, but they need SOMEBODY here to install software and replace machines, so they hired a guy with the role of "IT and facilities."
Yes, this highly trained IT guy has to fix computers and clean out the fridge. Fix or find the building maintenance guy to fix the toilet, make sure the cleaning staff doesn't throw out the recycling...
I know I'm a snot about this, but it seems a little degrading. I didn't go to school and bust my ass to learn really complicated shit to change toilet paper rolls.

[#] Mon Sep 14 2009 07:42:03 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Of course if I were hungry and needed a job I'd be happy to ask you if you wanted fries with that.
Working at the video store was one of the most mindless and relaxing jobs I've ever had.

[#] Mon Sep 14 2009 12:39:27 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Sep 14 2009 7:39am from Ford II @uncnsrd
While your time is a fixed cost so the more work you do the cheaper

linux becomes is true, most companies aren't as tech heavy as yours.


N.b. The more linux machines you deploy, the cheaper linux becomes. What's economical for Google to support THEIR use cases is not economical for me and mine. Because ultimately, with Linux, nobody will support your use case but YOU. Unless you pay red hat...

[#] Mon Sep 14 2009 13:53:17 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That's another thing: google, for all it's complexity does something really simple. They look up stuff in a database based on search terms.
Now obviously google does it the most complex way possible, but in trade they get speed, but the thing itself, once written is really not that complex management wise.
There's probably a farm for each of the
1) find ANYTHING with the search terms
2) find likely typos and come up with suggestions for "did you mean..."
3) find news
4) find ads
and a few other things, but really, it's not a multi-step user interactive process. Aside from the fact that they break each task up into little bits, each task isn't really that multi-step of a process.

[#] Mon Sep 14 2009 14:04:34 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Now obviously google does it the most complex way possible, but in
trade they get speed, but the thing itself, once written is really not

that complex management wise.

More complex then you seem to be aware - for many years, their setups were all deployed on 32-bit commodity x86 hardware, even as competitors like AltaVista were designed around 64-bit platforms like DEC Alpha and had lots of memory to work with. In order for Google to get the performance they needed and make full use of the RAM and address space, I believe they were making a number of Linux kernel customizations. Maybe this has gone away with the emergence of x86_64. I don't know.

[#] Mon Sep 14 2009 14:50:58 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

that's what I'm saying, their steps are implemented in a complex way, but there just aren't that many steps.

I'd certainly like to, okay, I'll admit it, I've love to sit down with a few me's at google and just listen to how they do what they do.

[#] Mon Sep 14 2009 19:51:14 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Everyone knows that Google's biggest customer-facing innovation was PageRank, but behind the scenes ... I think the real innovation was the way they learned how to apply supercomputing methodologies to boring tasks such as searching the web. Google's global server farm is, essentially, a supercomputer, but it's the first time someone thought to use a supercomputer to massively parallelize a knowledge management application instead of a scientific application.

MapReduce only seems "obvious" in retrospect.

[#] Mon Sep 14 2009 20:28:22 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The other thing is that there aren't really THAT many applications for such massive parallelism.
I thought it was gung ho cool that make has a -j parameter.
But processors are so fast, that there's few things you can compile that take more than a few minutes anyway...

[#] Tue Sep 15 2009 07:53:03 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

"make -j" can definitely be abused to write distributed programs that have nothing to do with compiling code. Fun stuff. :)

[#] Tue Sep 15 2009 11:24:54 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Try BOINC -- massively parallel computing projects at home. :) http://boinc.berkeley.edu/

[#] Wed Sep 16 2009 12:34:37 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Right ... all scientific apps. Google's innovation was to apply supercomputing technology to ordinary information apps.

[#] Wed Sep 16 2009 17:54:34 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If I have a machine from 2005 and it boots CD's in the DVD drive okay, but it won't boot DVD's is that a BIOS thing that I'm shit out of luck on?
I looked, there's no bios flash for the machine.

[#] Wed Sep 16 2009 22:27:18 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Normally if it supports one, it supports the other ... but maybe your DVD is written in UDF format instead of ISO, and your bios doesn't support that?

[#] Fri Sep 18 2009 16:27:01 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Well, I downloaded a ubuntu DVD to test it out and it won't boot that either. Sigh.

[#] Sat Sep 19 2009 12:59:12 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Are you trying to boot it in a VM, or on the bare metal?  If it's in a VM then this is a problem with the virtual BIOS provided by VMware (or whatever hypervisor you're using).



[#] Mon Sep 21 2009 09:39:08 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

nope, bare metal machine.
Got all my vm's and linux machines working.
Now I'm trying to take the old machine and make it a hackintosh.
There's definetly something wrong with the IDE controllers on that board though. I got a p4 on ebay for $25 so I'll see how that goes.

[#] Mon Sep 21 2009 11:54:40 EDT from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

seems as if it soon may become an expensive thing to offer SSL encryption inside the US:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/09/18/apple_other_retailers_target_of_patent_infringement_suit.html



Go to page: First ... 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 ... Last