Posts by HangingOnAnotherDay

New solvent might end winter charging blues for EV owners

Re: Tesla owners complained....

My research resulted in "not enough data" to make a determination on this. So until we have enough data, it is flawed (or misleading, or both) to make such an assertion. What we do know is that we see spontaneous combustion of EVs - that's a problem that I seriously doubt happens with any measurable frequency with ICE vehicles but I have zero data to support that - it is simply an educated opinion. We do know that EVs have caught fire inside garages and all but destroyed entire homes. We know that insurance companies are totaling EVs after a minor accident, undoubtedly (although I don't have any data!) because the battery pack MAY be damaged and MAY combust thus they don't want the risk. So if and when EV batteries are more reliable, less expensive than replacing the entire car (see Hyundai), faster to charge, capable of using their full capacity to service my transportation requirements, and all but void of fire risk, then, and only then, will I consider a full EV or a plug-in Hybrid. Everyone has to decide the risk factors for themselves and more power to you if you want to take that on. But continued high risk means higher insurance premiums that, again, I'm not willing to take on.

For a moment there, Lotus Notes appeared to do everything a company needed

Re: CRUD (almost) to the masses

"Home" applications are never a good comparison for a business application. Ever. End users might complain but the business requirements are so far over their heads they just don't get it. Thus, they must be properly educated by IT to understand the reason why any given application is being used. For example, compare any Accounting business software to what most use at home and it will be a huge groan! But there are reasons!!

You have apparently been subjected to some extremely bad systems. Don't blame the underlying product! I've used Notes/Domino in a medium sized company environment - certainly as big as a typical hospital - and "mainframe" applications. Both are very responsive and as fast as can be expected. We are super aware of user productivity but we don't dump money into hardware unnecessarily but we still have great response time.

Re: I hate Notes

Clearly you don't know today's Notes/Domino. None of that is true. I use the desktop client for days or weeks on end without any issues.

Re: Did he jump or was he pushed?

I would add to Philip's logical and realistic argument that new IT Directors often come in with their own preconceived ideas of what is "best" and force the change for the sake of change. They think their whole charge in life is to make changes so they can prove that the last Director was wrong! No change is acceptable if it does not promise a better business product. If it doesn't improve productivity it doesn't have a place there! The described change was "because I said so" and no other reason. There definitely was not a lower cost! MS products, due to the simple fact of how many products it takes to replace anything (but most especially Notes/Domino) are not less expensive nor do they add business value. They are the most popular but that rarely makes something the best choice for every business. And, by the way, replacing Notes/Domino is much more difficult than one would think (as has been documented by others here) because it has an integrated programming/development component. In fact, "replacing" is often just "keep both" (thus more costly) because the effort to reprogram everything is just too costly.

Re: The problem with Notes

I disagree. Users want immediate gratification. IT needs to train them and encourage patience. Once someone learns the new interface (and there is no such thing as a "standard" GUI - that's the whole point of GUI) it becomes accepted and very usable. Unless, of course, it is just a bad overall flow. But Notes was never as bad as some here have stated. Different than what? Notes was first! And today the user interface is as easy to use as any other product. And with so much function integrated into the product as a whole, they are all integrated with each other and work quite well.

Re: Have fun with the Exchange server that can't manage more than 500 accounts.

Ummmm ... Notes email existed LONG before Outlook so exactly how do you perceive that Notes "ripped off" Outlook?

Postgres pioneer Michael Stonebraker promises to upend the database once more

IBM i RDBMS is "integrated" but your context seems to imply it is a separate product. It is not. It is built into and along with the OS. Integrated including into the native languages with full support for SQL. More "integrated" therefore than any other system on the market today or ever. And as a result the RDBMS is "down to lower levels of the stack" as you described as being desirable. Note that IBM refers to the RDBMS as DB2 but that is a marketing game. It is not a separately installable product because it is part of the OS. And has been since System/38 delivered in 1980.

As for "But the Single Level Store isn't typically addressed relationally by most applications" that would be because addressing objects relationally would be silly. Objects are referenced by name - as is true on any system except the most arcane that required direct addressing - and the OS handles locating the named object via it's object directory (not a directory file system). All data (whether true relational or, in some cases, flat files) is stored in the RDBMS in a table - with a few optional exceptions for small volumes of non-relational data.

All entities (tables, views, indexes, executable programs, etc.) on the system are objects and all have an object type that defines their behavior and characteristics. Unlike uncontrolled directory file systems, such as in Windows, an object cannot be forced to do something it is not defined to do and cannot be changed to a different object type, as can be done in Windows.

Most who have not learned the system simply do not understand it. I wish more IT professionals would take the time to understand IBM i and it's capabilities. We get so caught up in "open" systems and what we already know that we don't often spend time learning other systems.

When does tackling pandemic misinfo become censorship? US courts argue it out

Slippery slope indeed. Your reasons for banning speech are no more valid, in mast cases, than the government's and social media's excuses. "incites hate ..." is not a product of the speech rather of the reaction/behavior of the reader; one always has the choice of how to react. If I say "I believe in God" will you get mad, invade my home and kill me? I trust not yet that statement could be interpreted as inciting hate and the resulting violence, thus attempting to put the blame on the speaker, whose only offense was stating an opinion. Free speech is a difficult thing to regulate as any ban makes the assumption that the speaker is ultimately responsible for the outcome while having zero control over the behavior of the one who hears/reads the speech. In the USA the Constitution clearly protects free speech and, thus, prohibits us from banning the same.

We all agree we cannot tolerate someone yelling "fire" in a large group inside a building as it may cause harm if a stampede results. Determining where to draw the line is the challenge. Calling statements "misinformation" is a slippery slope as there are many ways to interpret any piece of information. Is it untrue? Then ignore it. Is it an intentional lie? Then ignore it. Does it cause harm? Therein lies the challenge! How do we determine "harm"? An example; a Democrat may say that any speech from Trump causes "harm" because it offends them and they consider his speech to be misinformation because he sometimes exaggerates his point and he's just a - a - a bad man! But who does it harm? Often there is no "harm" rather "offense" and the line is hard to define! This doesn't even touch on the laws to punish the speaker related to slander, for example. Those laws are in place to protect us from truly harmful speech, so there are limits.

Re: Fairly obvious answer.

But you don't - or should not - force vaccines on the entire population because you are concerned about the number of patients in the hospital! Especially when you have no evidence that the vaccines actually work! And, all of the statistics indicate that the younger, healthier population were far less likely to become infected and to have fatal or even significant symptoms. You don't (shouldn't) treat an entire population with an experimental drug just because you want to protect the elderly!!! We have zero evidence the vaccines prevented one from being infected nor that they prevented the spread of infection (same with the silly masks). True, there were a lot of deaths caused by this virus. Equally true is that the numbers were intentionally skewed by listing those that died WITH the virus versus those that died OF the virus. Also true is that several commonly used drugs were available day one, drugs that were at least as likely to have a positive impact (and are super cheap), yet the government railed against them. Why? Why did our medical community in Washington reject options? With all of this you can find the answers in one word - money. We are expendable to them.

Re: Fairly obvious answer.

Not exactly. Look up Stephen Colbert and the use of those 7 words. Clearly the FCC (which is the Federal government) has such a list and it contains exactly 7 words. The FCC may not publish those words anywhere in the regulations - in fact, they rather obscurely refer to offensive language - but since they do and will take action against broadcasters there is, without question, a list.

Last rites for the UK's Online Safety Bill, an idea too stupid to notice it's dead

"Too stupid to notice"

Yet, here we are, reading an article / editorial you wrote to "notice".

HCL proves Lotus Notes will never die by showing off beta of lucky Domino 14.0

Very disappointed in The Register

The tone and content of this article was very disappointing. While you may have been aiming for humor (sarcasm?) IMHO you totally missed the mark. I suspect you haven't used or even seen Domino in many years, if ever, thus making your criticism and apparent disdain totally unfounded and, frankly, irrelevant.

While no software product is perfect, and all can be criticized for some fault, it is quite a different item to disparage a product as if it were unworthy of any consideration. Domino was designed to be a workflow application development platform, document storage, email, etc. It was not attempting to be everything to everyone (not a word processor, not a spreadsheet, etc.) rather to be a robust email and business application development platform. Email is naturally a part of the workflow design as that is the primary form of communication to the business user. Expecting Notes/Domino to be as simple and focused as Exchange Server is simply not a fair assessment of the products. Both serve a purpose. Notes/Domino was designed to provide a broader range of capability and delivers that elegantly and reliably. With the innovation brought by HCL we have seen a greatly improved product and new feature/function has been delivered rapidly. To dismiss Notes/Domino simply based on ancient history is a mistake.

Re: If you persist in calling the software Lotus

I think the point is that calling Notes/Domino "Lotus" is as incorrect as calling Hotmail "Outlook". It simply isn't! In spite of your technicality about number of years, the comparison is still valid.