The software is by SPB, B for Brilliant Winmo Software house
NOT SPD, D for Dumbass reporter
29 publicly visible posts • joined 30 Apr 2007
I used to work for a UK software company, when I first started they had just landed a large american company as a rather big client.
One of the first things in the project we had to do?
Change all the refences to slave-master relationships in the legacy codes to say parent-child, just in case it offended someone.
Intelligence, as the article suggests, is only intelligence, it is not action and it is not decision making.
There are plenty of un-employed or poorly paid PHD holders out there who are certainly intelligent, just seem to have made some poor choices in life.
Similarly with BI, you can give a company all the facts and information in the world but if its not what they need or can use then its next to useless.
The first step always needs to be a decision on what decisions the company needs to make. Business Intelligence can then be used to cut the proverbial wheat from the chaff.
Its a tool, nothing more nothing less.
"An average 1 query a second, results in timeout errors?"
This was an estimation by another commenter (not a respected database benchmark tester) based on a performance of a single website, not inspection of the database itself and certainly not taking into account how badly the database was configured.
And what's more even 1 query a year can still result in a time out error if a badly written query meets a badly designed and un-optimised database.
You seem to have completely missed the point that you cannot slate a product by one person highlighting one bad implementation.
yes the products should be benchmarked, but at the same time, database installations and configurations are not always straight forward and it would be fair to invite all vendors to send representatives along to assist with the testing.
And as for JD Power... a completely different method of assessing product function/performance through user surveys. Not really benchmarking now is it
"So the best, most scientific testing methodology is to find a random website that uses product X, get it to produce an error message and assume"
"Read comment 3 to understand why."
er no, any badly designed and configured database is going to result in errors, especially time out errors. That's not the product at fault, its the admin/designers/developers fault.
Next you'll be blaming every broken down car on the manufacturer regardless of how conscientious or not the owner is regarding routine servicing and checking.
Mike Repacholi did not dismiss the claims presented to him, he merely said that individual studies are meaningless, they need to be repeated and correlated by other independent scientists.
Whether he's in the pay of the mobile phone companies or not, that point he raised was perhaps the only scientifically strong answer given in the entire programme.
The point I was making is that the energy (as calculated by 0.5mv^2) does not factor into calculating impact forces. The starting point is always momentum. This is why light, which has zero mass, can apply an impact force as it does have momentum.
Basic physics (obviously standards are still slipping)
Marvin the martian wrote"
Kinetic energy (m*V^2) scales quadratically with speed, so a head-on 20mph-vs-20mph crash is half the energy of a 40mph-vs-0mph crash."
Not true, momentum is calculated as m*V - ie directly proportional to velocity.
The severity of the impact depends on the differential change of momentum not the amount of energy expended.
So a 40-0 crash is (for the sake of the argument) the same as a 20-20 crash
...and not every child is starving, contrary to obviously popular belief many children in Africa live in houses, go to school and get regular meals but are missing out the technological revolution. The OLPC project gives them a foot hold in IT.
Other charities are already looking after those children who are starving, feel free to give them a donation if you feel your money would be better spent there.