Oracle has been messing up everything else they have acquired that they haven't had time to get around to Virtualbox yet. Don't worry, they'll eventually get around to it - they are fucking up the products in the order of most users to fewest users.
I thought maybe it was alphabetical
FUDspeak aside, I would imagine they would go here to ask for help.
Good luck with those web forums when your millions-of-dollars-an-hour-in-lost-revenue business is down beyond it's maintenance window while you wait for those web forum responses for your obscure edge case you ran into during $someMaintenanceTask. Even better luck with that once the response comes back 'RTFM noob!'.
Real IT checks their pride at the door and pays the man for proper mission critical support when you're dealing with enterprise infrastructure.
So 38% of virtualization customers are planning on switching, but 2/3 of all virtualization customers are VMWare with the other 1/3 being somebody else. There's a lot of floating data points here.
We can come up with lots of fun theories...
Maybe VMWare numbers will drop to 30% of the market and those will all get sucked up by Hyper-V.
Maybe everyone using Hyper-V thinks it blows and are going to Xen, leaving 22% of the original survey to allocate to leaving either VMWare and Xen for one of the two they're not using.
Connect the dots any way you want, but without knowing which camps the answers come from, this is a non-story. You probably see a lot of churn in the minds of decision makers, but nothing gets done anyway once they get to planning strategies, or crunching the numbers, as another commenter here said.
VMware has a couple of really BIG problems in their platform.
1. Their management tools are windows centric and so is Virtual Center for that matter
2. Their licensing model is confusing as hell and requires a spreadsheet to figure out what you need without overpaying
3. They have so many products that it gets downright confusing to determine which one works for your purpose.
4. They use "old school" sales tactics that just don't work for more modern companies.
Your first point is slowly becoming less of an issue. With vSphere 5 you can now run a Linux appliance for Virtual Center which will do for starters, and it doesn't even require (or support) an external database. Hopefully this will expand to be the only way to get VC, but they'll expand it to use a DB when you get big enough, and make plugins work with it. There's also supposed to be a '75%' web client, e.g. good enough for 75% of tasks and a full web client in the next major update, (5.5?) That's how VMView has been for at least the last major release too, the previous might have been web too, I can't remember.
They have a lot of products because they do a lot of things... regular old server virtualization, enterprise grade server virtualization with HA, desktop (I want a test box), desktop (VDI), disaster recovery (with a replicating san), disaster recovery (without a replicating SAN)... If you don't know what you want to do, looking at their product sheet won't help you any.
I'll give you that vRAM is evil and sales people are douches, but isn't that one a given?
They don't need to "grasp for straws". Last time I checked iphones were selling quite well compared to Androids.
You must not be reading the marketshare numbers. They are still selling quite well, by themselves... but not compared to anything. There are still tons of iPhones selling but if you add up the numbers of all manufacturers of Android phones you see they aren't in the lead any more.
"It's actually illegal to drive above the speed limit or below the speed limit in the US"
This is incorrect for two reasons.
1. The US doesn't have uniform driving laws
2. I don't know of any state with such a law.
I'll give you point 1, but point 2 means you must live under a rock. Given that limits can be upper and lower, you must never have seen a minimum speed sign. Let me provide one: http://www.flickr.com/photos/thetruthabout/2727717062/
I don't know how wide spread these are, but they definately have them across the river from me in Minnesota.
Mod parent up!!!
Also worth noting that this can easily affect a decently sized business for internal communication unless worked around. To quote that same page:
Note For distribution groups stored in the shared address book, the group is counted as one recipient. For distribution groups stored in the Contacts folder of a mailbox, the members of the group are counted individually.
For example, we have 60ish branches, each has it's own group. Often when we send out company wide stuff, or 'everybody but the corporate office' notices, the message will get sent to 60+ internal groups. Granted we should have an 'all' group, with tight restrictions, but we don't. Imagine if our helpdesk has a critical system they're notifying everyone about or like happens today, branch down notifications... or if HR gets busy some day, that's 10 job posting notices and/or anything else that person sends out. Yes there are better ways to do this, but that's how it is done today on 'not the cloud.' If we move to the MS cloud somebody's going to get a nasty surprise on message 10 and have to re-think their workflow.
Again, I know we're doing it wrong, but I guarantee we're not the only ones
From TFA
Separately, the court clearly noted the "non-practicing entity" part of the business in pointing out that, "As a non-practicing entity, Eon-Net was generally immune to counterclaims for patent infringement, antitrust, or unfair competition because it did not engage in business activities that would potentially give rise to those claims."
By this ruling, It would seem that all companies that are just patent holding companies are not allowed to do anything with them unless they produce a product. That would appear to be too good to be true, so going to just file this article away in the "yeah right, that's a good one" file.
Depending on your jurisdiction and the implementation of $myShotgun->magazine, your while loop may lead to a condition where fire() fails due to insufficient resources in $myShotgun->ammo. To be proper you probably want there to be either a break (which is usually frowned upon) or another conditional on the while loop. Alternatively, or also, a call to $myShotgun->loadAmmo(); if $myShotgun->ammo == 0 wouldn't be a bad idea.
Just sayin... you need to be complete with your intentions.
There are several cars on my street that have wi-fi. Whenever they go buy, it impacts the signal. now it's just a couple of cars, but what about when its 30 cars, most of which will be on the same channel? Or hundreds of cars going buy n the free way?
Cars that have wifi?
In what capacity, pray tell? I'm honestly curious. Wifi syncing for music (can't be that bad, just another client on the periphery of your network)? Or do they take your cell phone and make it a wifi network? If so, wouldn't that need to be turned on?
Dodge and I think it was BMW made lots of noise about this being a built-in option a few years ago. I know I could get a module in my Ram that made it a wifi hotspot for a cell phone on data, just like my Thunderbolt does today. I'm sure others have quitely added it as well since then.
This was a big deal for people that had too much expendable income a few years ago, but now you can just do it with your own Droid/iPhone probably for less than the car data option. Add in the Verizon MiFi (and if anyone else makes something similar... I don't know) and this is now a product searching for a market.
I'm curious to see what their SnS cost is now. If you've ever seen year 2 of licensing you know that it's nowhere near the purchase cost for that year of support. Honestly though, they had to do something even though this is waaaaay off the deep end.
Compared to capacity 3 years ago, we could have dropped 30%CPU lics around this year after a major blade hardware refresh from many mixed dual socket 2-4 core, 16-48GB blades to a few dual socket 6 core 96GB blades. Increased capacity and cpu on new sockets is ridiculous and a lot of places probably dropped their support contracts by insane margins. VMWare was going to take it in the shorts due to reduced license needs (CPU) this way they'll get eaten due to walking customers. Maybe they could have found a middle ground... maybe the discounts start off at anything over the old 2CPU threshold and go up steeply after that, after all nobody pays list price
We didn't drop our support at all simply because if we had to re-buy a blade or two of license for any random huge project (which were on the verge of getting approved, and all of them did) it would have stolen all the benefit of dropping those lics for a year. That decision would look to be paying off in spades now since our memory footprint is going to expand HUGE but we're still over-licensed.
I wonder how MS(Sync) and Google will coexist in the same car. Will Sync go ahead and call AAA for you in an attempt to smear the Google provided route? Will Google go ahead and terminate your Bluetooth connection for you because it thinks you shouldn't be on the phone? Will they both attempt to buy out the ECU for the marketshare of the computer network in the car?
Could be fun, to watch, not to drive.
Who knows if he (patient 1) got the disease from a mosquito as he claims or another way, but it wasn't his PhD grad students he was screwing around with, it was the paper's co-author (patient 3) as his wife (patient 2) now knows.
Lets put 1 and 2's illnesses together, with this statement in mind:
and moreover, the virus has to complete a 2-week life cycle within the insect before it can infect the next human; Foy's wife fell ill just 9 days after his return
So given that both 1 and 2 became ill in roughly the same time, 5 days after their return, it's unlikely that one became infected and then infected the other that close to the 'bite'.
letting gays serve openly is just one lever to alleviate pressure before having to reinstitute the draft, something which would instantly invert popular support for the wars.
Invert eh? So there would someone supporting for the wars? I think you mistake supporting the troops for supporting the wars. We support the people doing their job, even if the job sucks and we can't get enough elected officials to stop it.
The responsibility absolutely is VMWare's. Large software companies generally have access to early releases of the Microsoft patches, specifically so they can perform whatever testing they need.
Sounds like in this case, VMWare didn't bother doing their testing (or that testing was too costly), and is now trying to blame Microsoft for their fuckup.
Lets try to RTFA before assuming...
However, Lee said the Patch Tuesday security updates included the "early release of updates anticipated in" the Service Pack, which is due out Feb. 22. Lee said VMware provided its own VMware View update to customers "within 24 hours of the Microsoft security patch, in an effort to minimize customer impact."
Sounds like MS did an early release of things VMWare knew was coming, but not expected until later. You're right that they were testing, hence the speedy update. Sounds like MS just released early and didn't communicate the release, so shift that blame back to MS.
Work without a vision is slavery, Vision without work is a pipe dream, But vision with work is the hope of the world.
