Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Definitive obituary for OS/2 (from Gordon Letwin) (Score 1) 342

by mr_majestyk (#39550673) Attached to: 25 Years of IBM's OS/2
The definitive obituary for OS/2 was written in 1995 with this long USENET post fro Gordon Letwin, who was the lead architect of OS/2 on the Microsoft side.

Excerpt: "What was OS/2's problem? Why was it doomed? Because it's main attraction was as an engine to run MS-Windows applications. The problem is one of standards, and one of critical mass. Standards are of incredible importance in the computing world. They're critical in other domains that folks don't often think about. Your HiFi CD player, for example. It plugs into your preamp. And that plugs into your amp. And that connects to speakers. Each of those can, and usually does, come from a different manufacturer. The RCA connectors, and the signal levels themselves, are standardized. Standardization is a big plus in the computer field. You're much better off having thousands of products and vendors compatible with a single standard, even a mediocre one, than having dozens of products, one or two each for each of a dozen fragmented standards."
Cloud

+ - How to Compare Costs of Replacing Physical Servers->

Submitted by mr_majestyk
mr_majestyk (671595) writes "Every cloud service has its own metrics to charge for computing resources, so how can you accurately compare what it would cost to move a physical server to different public clouds? The Register has this article about a new free online tool for comparing the cost and performance of physical servers with different cloud services."
Link to Original Source

Comment: PBS video on network neutrality explains it best (Score 4, Informative) 604

by mr_majestyk (#34619564) Attached to: Al Franken Makes a Case For Net Neutrality
Conservatives are superficially lumping network neutrality in with the rest of the anti-Obama/government/socialism rhetoric, but the issue is far too complex to capture in partisan soundbites. This Bill Moyers broadcast from a few years ago (well before Obama arrived on the scene) explains the network neutrality issue extremely well, representing multiple viewpoints, including business, politics, consumers etc. The broadcast is about an hour long, but I have yet to come across a better way to get the complete picture of what network neutrality is all about (each of these videos gives a useful illustration of a key tradeoff): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmlpfXzSfhg>Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 4 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 Part 9
Software

+ - Hypervisors Compared w/Collaborative Web Interface

Submitted by mr_majestyk
mr_majestyk (671595) writes "This online Collaborative Product Evaluation from the IT research firm Ideas International compares the functional capabilities of three x86 server virtualization platforms: Microsoft Hyper-V, VMware Infrastructure 3, and Citrix XenServer 5.0. The comparison is based on a scorecard that compares those products across 60 functional details in five categories, which IDEAS claims is the most comprehensive functional comparison yet of the leading x86 hypervisor technologies. The CPE interface allows visitors to weight any functional level by priority to get a customized ranking of the products. Also, if they want, visitors can add their own ratings of specific product attributes if they agree/disagree with the "expert" assessment of IDEAS analysts."

Comment: Re:"Microsoft doesn't make machines." (Score 1) 219

by mr_majestyk (#25885787) Attached to: Groklaw Says Microsoft Patent Portfolio Now Worthless
Your link didn't make it, but it's a good find. I didn't know the Smithsonian collected computer documentation. As the description of this item points out: "Although Windows 3.0 proved to be successful, Microsoft wished to continue developing a 32-bit operating system completely unrelated to IBM's OS/2 architecture. To head the redesign project, Microsoft hired David Cutler and others away from Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC).".

Comment: Re:"Microsoft doesn't make machines." (Score 1) 219

by mr_majestyk (#25880455) Attached to: Groklaw Says Microsoft Patent Portfolio Now Worthless

NT was a rename of the OS/2 3.0 development snapshot which Microsoft ended up with after their spat with IBM in the early 1990's and continued to evolve into the NT kernel

That's not entirely correct. Microsoft did use some OS/2 technology in the development of Windows NT, but the NT kernel itself was based on a rewrite of VMS, which was performed by one of the key developers of VMS, Dave Cutler. The OS/2 technology built into NT was primarily included for compatibility with earlier versions of OS/2.

The reason NT started at version 3 is because versions 1 and 2 were already released as the collaborative effort and named OS/2 versions 1 and 2.

Actually, from what I understood, the reason that NT started at version 3.1 is because it matched the release level of the existing (16-bit) version of Windows at the time, and Microsoft wanted to emphasize NT's compatibility with 16-bit applications in the hopes of upgrading mainstream users to NT as quickly as possible. Of course, delivering acceptable compatibility for 16-bit Windows applications in NT turned out to be a lot harder than expected, and most mainstream users did not migrate to the NT kernel until Windows XP was released in 2001.

Unix

+ - UNIX Functions Compared w/OpenSource Web Interface->

Submitted by
Loge
Loge writes "The IT research firm Ideas International has released a detailed comparison of the functional capabilities in the leading UNIX operating systems, including AIX 6.1, HP-UX 11i v3, and Solaris 10. Unlike previous studies of UNIX functions that were published in the form of written reports, the results of this evaluation have been released with a new methodology called Collaborative Product Evaluation (CPE), which uses a transparent research process with a web-based interface that allows the community to participate in the evaluation. On the CPE web site, users can customize the comparison of the products based on their own requirements by adding weights to individual functions reflecting their importance. Also, if visitors want to, they can contribute their own ratings for specific functions when they agree or disagree with the "expert opinion" of IDEAS analysts. Submitted ratings are qualified with a distributed moderation process similar to the Slashdot system. You can try out the interface and see the results of the evaluation at http://ideasint.eval.com/unixos."
Link to Original Source

The more cordial the buyer's secretary, the greater the odds that the competition already has the order.

Working...