Posts by j88per

it burns it burns

one of these days these goofy scientists are gonna make some plasma at 10 million degrees C and it'll get out of control and fry the atmosphere - I hope I sleep in on that day.

and

I think its funny that the tech world is going absolutely crazy over HTML5, what it is, what it isn't, and how it's not really what its advertised as. The reality is that the world doesn't give a rats arse one way or another. All the 'world' cares is can they see the sites they visit. Do the news sites work? does it look ok?

Outside of tech, and specifically web tech, no one cares. The nightly news isn't covering HTML5, magazines aren't writing in depth articles about it unless they are web tech rags.

I suppose irony could be called out that we have wars going on around the world, people dying for a cause and the US still as an invasion force in a foreign nation. We have a huge oil slick in the gulf of Mexico that's still effing leaking.

But, holy shit, HTML5 is ONLY supported by who? I'm sorry, it just doesn't seem all that important.

el reg digs a deeper hole for itself

Ok, I'm probably more than a little ignorant, but why do these articles always take the stance that it was Jobs who decreed that an app doesn't meet the app store's policies. He's the CEO, I would think and hope that he has slightly more critical responsibilities than deciding who to piss off by what apps are approved or dis-approved. I would think that could be delegated to a few underlings. And what about published policy? I know they've gone against their own policy a few times, its expected, but in this case? Probably not.

My take on this article, follows the typical rant that once again the Reg has tried to create news where there isn't any. You're trying to start an anti-apple bandwagon by putting up article after article about how apple is evil. Yet lacking any real news, its just pure fail and makes you look stupid.

I just don't see this as news - the GNU Go game was already licensed under the GPL2 license, that conflicted with apples app store license - GNUGo informed apple of this conflict, apple did what they were supposed to do, remove the conflict. GNUGo didn't say 'lets send this to apple and see if they revert their policy'.

Its like copyright violation, if I find a photo I snap on the Register and you don't have permission, I have to inform you that you do not have appropriate permission. You then remove the offending photo or come to some term(s) of agreement.

This is news like telling me that its sunny and 85 out, when I'm already outside. C'mon el reg, you used to be good! Don't get me wrong, the pro apple articles from Orlowski(?) make me just as sick.

(A stupid yank from across the pond)

don't forget the host platform

Funny that monitoring the host platform isn't mentioned at all, everyone's head must be stuck in a cloud. While the settings of a specific app on a monolithic server will read one thing, your new virtual platform should have multiple cpus and wads of ram to support those virtual servers. Exceed its capabilities and more than just a single application could go down.

I run 14 VMs on 1 quad core with 8GB of ram. While any one of the individual VMS won't impact load, gradually all of the systems tend to eat up ram and swap, eventually leading to system thrashing. A simple reboot of the host system takes care and gradually I'll move some of those systems to a new vm host. hopefully...

Interesting article

Having worked for one of the HPC storage companies for a year and a half, (Crosswalk, which failed for other reasons.) And in SANS at Mcdata, this seems to hit the mark. In crosswalk's situation we couldn't maintain a solid stable platform enough to satisfy our customers. The system worked well enough, provided the speeds our customers demanded, its just that it was built on a standard redhat linux system with little attention paid to the various packages installed, services running, etc. Those inhibited the filesystem performance and detracted from the product overall.

Our customers seemed generally excited by the performance, but yes it was entirely a niche product. Had there been enough success on the sales side we might have remained in business, but in today's market I doubt it. The virtualization product we had hoped to developed also had high hopes but never seemed to materialize.

As for storage being a problem, I don't think it is - many products offer search capabilities to find your file(s) for you or handle duplication. And people don't really care all that much that a file is duplicated.

I've built several systems on Linux using MD and LVM to create raid 1, 5, and 6. Yet when people can buy a 1TB external drive, or IBM, EMC, HDS can come in and just add more capacity - customers prefer that. Perhaps the industry expected or hoped to create demand where it didn't exist?