Posts by HmmmYes 862 publicly visible posts • joined 20 Apr 2010
Yes. Anyhting can be emulated. Wether someone can be arsed to do it is another thing.
Yes. Have a go at running containers.
Have a go at Docker.
Also have a go at installing OpenInidanna and giving Zones and the network spoofing a spin.
Docker will get more like (Solaris) Zones and crossfire as it evolves.
Daft really. They should have just ported ZFS, Zones + Crossfire.
I did have an early version of NT - pre 4.0 - and I did go through the Inside NT books as they evolved.
The NT kernel is pretty well designed.
Its a bit slow on spawning processes but Id guess thats due to where it comes from.
I just have a problem with the services that run on top of he kernel.
I know it was possible to strip stuff away but these days I cannot be arsed.
As I backed away, I did not keep the license.
However, a quick googles comes up with:
Java can be freely used for General Purpose Desktop Computers and Servers.
Thats what I stumbled on. I was looking to do something on a specific lights out box. I did not want to enter the Sun (at the time) legal vortex to work out General Purpose meant.
One of the non-technical reasons I have for not using Java is that I could never work out the revenue model.
I did dig thru the license and found some weasel words about 'only being free on desktop computer'.
The fact that I had to wade thru a large license document and sill not come away with a clear idea what or who Id be paying put me off totally.
I think MS thinks that the there is a very large market for DBs operating in the cloud.
I think the cloud will be dominated by Docker - or something like Docker - i.e. cluster of disconnected apps. Each cluster needs a DB.
At the moment, MS is nowhere to be found.
MS has 0% of doing something Docker-like. You may not have noticed, but MS struggle to recruit and maintain SW bodies. Just like everyone else.
Port SQLserver to Linux is a relatively pragmatic idea.
Was there a time limit on not slagging them off?
IBM used to be a good a employee, at least up until the 80s.
It paid slightly above average. Benefits were good - providing you jump through the hoops. And if you did jump through the hoops they would make sure you were not out of pocket or uncomfortable.
Those days are long gone.
Its just one embarrassing episode after another.
I guess there's a bit of pragmatism involved here.
MS cannot get a lot of people to fork for both the WSOS, which no-one is that fussed about as a service, and the DB, which people are - DB run enterprises. So, they just go for selling the DB as the $1 kiddy bag with the hope of the OS business later.
It will also tie in with running Linux on Azure, hosted on WSOS.
Youd think that but you'd been wrong.
One, systems are getting bigger and more complex. Test complexity is shooting off the scale. Its s very hard to verify large systems. Chuck in working on a system thats been kicking around for 20 odd years and has been passed around more contractors than a fat ginger girl at a party ...
Two, testing/QA can become political. Worked on a new system in the early ISO9000 days. Some iditio had staked his large salary on it being a quality product. Problem was the device caught fire after 4 hours. All tests were desgiend to finish and the machine turned off at 2hours. VW appear to have a similar thing 15 years down the line.
I think SFC are wrong here. Linux is GPLv2 rather than GPLv3 (isnt it?)
The ZFS port to BSD was easy Solaris and BSD share the same low-level disk interface.
Linux is different. I've not looked at the Linux port - I avoid looking at Linux kernel code, it hurts my eyes - but I would guess it would need an adaption layer to run ZFS - assuming they've lifted the ZFS code 'asis' and are adapting the Linux low-level disk interface to allow ZFS to run.
Like all filesystems, the ZFS code ought to be kept separate from the main Linux kernel - which is pretty small anyways.
As the ZFS module is built as a kernel module ought to put a license firewall between it and the kernel.
Never understimate how dodgy,cliquey and dumb the Police can be.
Brother managed 5 years as a copper before he jacked it in as he did not like his work mates. Before you ask, his wife made him leave the army and this was all he could think of.
Constant dodgy and idiotic behaviour, topped off by an entire heating system - boiler, pipes, radiators - going missing from the evidence room.
Thats over a ton of metal and would need a couple of people and a lot of time to move. esp. as the room was a fair distance from the entrance.
Just disappeared. Nobody saw anything!
I like C# as a language.
I've done some odds + sods with it and it really well thought out.
However ....
I'm fcked if Im going to invest much in a MS-only technology.
MS have changed - they've gone from screwing you over to just plain fkcing up.
Come back when C# is available on LLVM with no hidden surprises.
I'd hesitate on using 'agile' - with all that word involves these.
But, yes, big companies seem to have got into the state where they are paying people $$$$$$ to go around penny pinching and nickel diving rather than growing new business.
It is a shitty situation - for both IBM and the company.
The problem for both is that the core of most companies is software and the companies own data.
Any company, large or small, can only drop a bollox or two with it software. Start constantly dropping bolloxes and the company fails.
IBM has been digging its grave for a number of years now.
More than ever, large companies need what IBM pre -1994 did - a steady, full service IT company that delivered.
What companies have is IBM and other outsources who try and write clever SLA which extract as much money in as short amount of time, blowing any chance for repeat business.
I can see two major failures.
One, not giving up low-level hardware soon enough and moving to software-only.
Sure, keep the big iron but they never had the margins to run with Dell.
Just buy the hadrware of someone dumb enough to compete on price and put all the value in the software.
Two, playing the EPS game.
I have a more cynical explanation of the rise of DevOps.
Most large orgs Ops have been outsourced, to India, to IBM, to fcknows.
Ops have changed from supporting internal IT to doing as little as possible, for as much as possible, for another company. It does not help that the outsourcer may not be staiing the Ops with competent people.
DevOps has come as as the only people with computers and the ability to change and commission new software based services are the developers - assuming theyve not been outsourced too.
So, you are sitting in an org where the IT/software - the core of most companies these days - has been outsourced to a 3rd party who will only do something different and/or new if both CEOs sign off and pays ££££££s.
Fcked arnt we?
No sure on this.
Lets narrow this down to people who write software. I dont care what you want to call them - programmers, developers, software engineers.
Writing software did not exist in any large number until the late 80s, when two major events happened - ANSI C and 80386 with an MMU.
Before then, software development consisted of lots of proprietary hardware platforms (bit sliced CPUs anyone?) and languages (pick your shit).
During the 90s you saw people who had transferable skills.
With the advent of Linux + OSS in the 90s you no longer needed a company to stub up for the tools + platform. The company I worked for in the early 90s forked out several 100K on a set of Vaxes and Sun workstations + compilers + source control tools.
Now, I can buy an Intel i7 for 500ish and put a free Unix on it and free tools.
so, going back. Most of the people who started out when software and hardware became more standard and tradable will still only be in their 40s - just.
Chatting to a few ICL people who I knew in the mid-90s, nobody in ICL management could predict shit even it the future was written down and nailed to their foreheads.
ICL - the attempt to answer 'Why does the UK not have an IBM' brought to you by UK middle-managers and art-graduate civil servants.
Never read that, interesting article.
I think its less that Java is easier than languages like C, or does not force you to work on your abstractions and design like Scheme and Lisp, its more that Java offers a number of supposedly pre-rolled solutions that have *huge* *fcking* *holes* in them.
Java makes easy stuff hard - all that syntax fluff! And makes hard things less obvious until you go lve and discover its does not work.
I studied software eng at Uni. There was a balance of theory and practical to it.
Like earlier posters have said, there's a world of different between doing 10-15h of tutorial/week at Uni and working where where your shovelling crap 40h/week in a business environment where there a large number of plates spinning.
For me, the most formative experience of my early Uni life was a summer internship at IBM in the late 80s. It was set as as a sort of introduction to IBM and the many levels. I managed to get a loan of a PS/2 on a 386 and a C compiler and assembler. I gave myself a rapid introduction to the PC hardware architecture, C and 32 bit assembler (Id already done a lot of 8 bit assembler) - my first MMU page fault handler!
Never took up the offer from IBM - Im glad I didnt! But, bar the different OSes and the like, my life and work has stayed pretty much the same since those days.
Again, as the Joel bloke says in the article - handling pointers, which actually means being able to debug code which use pointers - is a a good filter. Not sure what the filter to use for someone who's been taught Java - realising they need to do the implementation in Erlang/OTP instead?
Sod the red fags for MS Access + Excel being used in business - they are! By idiots.
There's lot of money to be made de-MS businesses at the mo. Most have not grasped that MS are going to screw them over rotten soon.
The huge red flag for me would be mentioning Richard Branson as means to impress someone with their business + financial acumen.
The only difference between Branson and some tramp under the bridge is that loads of thick people think Branson has money.
Agree with Model M keyboards.
I've just flipped mine over to check the date - the pen (yes, made in the UK, QA checked by hand, QA recorded in pen) has rubbed off. From memory I think the date was 1990.
QNX 4 is worth an honorable mention.
I did some some work for an org (who I cannot mention) for purposes (that I cannot talk about) to sit a various rooms. 486, 2G M flash system, ISA bus cards. 1998-ish.
Was still running last time I asked a person who I cannot name,
I know I'd got there as I could understand his English and he knew about the cmd console.
A better class of remote scammer.
This sort of stuff puts me off giving my (remote) mother a computer. My inheritance will be down the Ghanges in flash.
Why IFFS does BT not have a number to ring so they can record where the call originated from? Monitor that and shutdown down and fine the ingres number when you get 100 occurrences.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
