He is probably confusing lines of code with value.

I couldn't agree more about Apple abandoning perfectly fine, expensive hardware. My 8-core, 3GHz MacPro2,1 can still run circles around most of Apple's current lineup and yet it won't run Mountain Lion. I specifically waited for "64-bit" hardware so it would last longer. If new MacPros weren't so damn expensive or offered something more than compatibility in return it wouldn't be quite as annoying.

Google and Apple should respond with "We will if you will."

SPDY solves *a* problem, but not *the* problem. The root of the problem today is that loading a simple web page requires 20 or more separate connections: images, ad networks, tracking systems, social network links, 3rd party comment systems, javascript libraries, css, etc. Somehow all of that content needs to be coalesced into fewer connections.

Programmer productivity will suffer.

In general that is how it works, but Bloomberg is more of a nanny billionaire.

As an old guy, I am not looking forward to a future with servers named after Harry Potter characters. If Trek was good enough for us, it's good enough for our kids!

Now all we need is polarized contact lenses so you don't look silly.

If you had to destroy hard drives regularly, the Pure Leverage hard drive crusher looks like a nice way to do it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY3ZssxkcsQ

But it's a bit expensive for only 10 drives -- $325.

Yes, I've cursed them for more than 25 years because trying to fit desktop application storage into relational models nearly always creates more work than necessary.

Except that the column types are fixed. What happens if keys point to different types of data (images, text, movies, urls, other tables)? Do you create one column for every type of data that may be used into the future? One table per data type? Do you misuse blob columns? One of the nice things about sqlite is that it doesn't force developers into such a restricted world view.

Just because you can haul anything in a semi truck doesn't mean that a semi truck is the optimal vehicle for hauling everything. Sometimes it's better to use 5 minivans. Do you seriously think that Google Maps are implemented in BigTable because the folks at Google were too stupid to use a relational database?

The OOP to Relational mismatch is described at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_impedance_mismatch

Relational databases work well for certain types of data but to assume that tables of rows and columns work for every need is silly.

Relational databases are inherently hard to scale because they mix data together that doesn't necessarily need to be together. If there's no reason why Bob and Alice's records should be in the same table or on the same machine then they shouldn't be. You can avoid all contention by distributing each individual's records on unique or underutilized machines.

Relational databases do not work well for storing hierarchical data like a file system or an object-oriented data store. They do not work well for large blobs like movie files or for unstructured documents like medical records. Because of their rigid structure, they do not version well because copying records to older versions of the schema loses data - if the column doesn't exist there's no place to put the data (imagine if application versions 1 and 2 have to read and write to the same database).

Relational databases have their place and I completely agree that transactions are vital to data integrity, but the fixed column data model is way too limited to store all of the kinds of data used in the real world.

"The bitterness of poor quality is remembered long after the sweetness of meeting a deadline is forgotten." -Charles Kettering

Don't post it to IEEE. That will guarantee that 90% of people interested in your paper won't ever be able to read it. Just put in on your blog with a note here in SlashDot.

Are you trying to monetize it? If so, you need to file for a patent instead. Naturally everyone here would prefer you publish it for free on the internet instead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_knocking
http://www.portknocking.org/

Ann Arbor's Hands-On Museum has at least two interesting computer displays:

1. Colorful visual effects via a computer projection system which the kids can control by moving in front of a video camera. You really have to see it. Found a photo at: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/57/175283594_e5a67d0221.jpg

2. Green screen chroma key area where kids can fly, swim, deliver the news, etc, while other kids act as TV news directors at a control panel