* Posts by MrHorizontal

78 posts • joined 9 Jul 2009


HP spreads wings with 'butterfly' data centers


Good idea but...

Try flogging that to someone needing to put a DC is a vaguely close proximity to an urban area or even in the city...

There are 2 flaws to this DC: first that the DC wings can't be attached together to create a larger floor area for servers (having several buildings is very wasteful), and second that they're not multi-storey. I know there are 2 problems with that, the air intakes and heat extraction through the roof, but while it's a worthy goal to reduce the cost of a DC, HP also need to minimise the area of ground the DC covers. Solve that, and I can bet you that they will sell several high-rise DC's almost instantly.

TalkTalk turns StalkStalk to build malware blocker


My god...

Sniffing URL's is one thing, and a bad one at that, furthemore blocking IP addresses that StalkStalk deem inappropriate is a huge issue - virtually everyone knows that blacklists being created and used to block IP's is a very harmful method.

I'll chime in also with calling for Talk Talk to disclose how they farm the URLs in the first place. That's the illegal part IMO.

What I don't understand, if Talk Talk actually wanted to protect customers is implement network-wide IPS, using something like Snort. It's open source, and it's far more sensible than this sniffing, and will only block reactively when an attack is happening. It's also far more cost effective to harden these network wide servers than all consumer's routers too...


Daily Star is sorry for Grand Theft Auto Raoul Moat blunder



The Daily Star couldn't have got more owned than even if Murdoch saw reason to get involved with them.

I do wonder what kind of figure these 'substantial damages' are...

However, given how many submissions the Press Complaints Commission have had just in 2010 regarding virtually all of Mr Desmond's papers let alone the Star, I do wonder how this fool, Jerry Lawton, can even continue to have licence to practice any form journalism at all! Lies != Journalism. It's not even sophisticated enough to call it libel, it's just LIES!

Sky in talks to sell Easynet, claim insiders


Seems weird to me...

A little birdie who works in Sky told me when they bought easynet that their satellites are way past their sell-by date to fall out of the sky, and are in fact also renting an extraordinary amount of bandwidth from other satellite providers.

When Sky bought easynet, it was believed that this wasn't just a way to get into the triple-play market and one-upmanship against Virgin Media, but in fact an absolute necessity for Sky in order to use the broadband infrastructure and get enough broadband penetration so as to transfer the TV broadcast signal from satellite to IPTV. Needless to say, Sky already have IPTV services (evidence the Xbox 360 Sky player), and of course TV on the web sites... I guess the broadband speedup isn't fast enough yet, but that's all the more excuse for us to pan the current state of broadband provision in this country and open up Openwoe's stranglehold on charging us arbitrary 50p tax hikes at BT's bequest and OFinCOMpetence.

@lotuswolf: while I don't really know Thus, I do know Demon and I more than certainly know of Cowboy & Witless from the infamy that made CWCommunications (pre Virgin Media, pre ntl) and Bulldog (the original fast ISP) into impotent nothings and still embroil themselves in scandal and debt without any help from acquisitions. See Cowboy & Witless come, and do yourself a favour: run away!

How can UK.gov spend £35m on a website?


It's all gone to me mwahahaha

As a developer of similar sites, the actual technology costs and costs of the developers building the thing for a project for govt is probably around 10% of the actual bill. Add in another 15% for creatives to fanny about and you still have 75% of the cost to account for.

What that's spent on is quite literally doing all the requirements gathering, research, planning, strategy, risk mitigation, strategy and all the other bumph, documentation and guarantees that adds a huge amount of man-hours and must be delivered alongside the site itself. Add into the fact that govt insists a small web business of 50-odd people has maximum indemnity insurance and you've got yourself the cost of a site.

That all said however, even a big CMS-driven site shouldn't really cost more than £100-120k to build, even with all those factors taken into account. Add in about £5k per year for hosting charges from even the most expensive (but best) ISP, Rackspace, and that's all I can really see as costs.

Invariably though there's some sort of integration or training issue to get these idiots to use it, and that also costs, but the main cost to building a site is quite literally getting the client to a) understand the business case of running a site and b) us learning how they run their business so we can consult and improve it for them.

After all, doesn't SAP, PeopleSoft and all that crap all cost *even more*?

Google seeks interwebs speed boost with TCP tweak


Rather than change TCP, upgrade HTTP

HTTP is a hack of FTP basically, specifically tailored to ASCII content. For what it's designed for, ie transferring ASCII HTML pages over the network, HTTP is very good. About the only 2 advanced features of HTTP 1.1 that it can do is compress content with deflate and resume downloads. And that's it. For binary transfer it's useless, and while FTP is better, it's issues with NAT and firewalls with Passive / Active transfers don't make it compatible enough.

However nowadays, with so much crap (I'm looking at you, Flash, MP3 streamers, etc) also streaming over HTTP, it'd be far, far better to introduce a whole new transport protocol for the web, that allowed the usage of both UDP (for streaming) and TCP (for transacted items), then with the JPEG progressive format even images could be speeded up considerably by 'streaming' them over UDP.

Furthermore, multicasting would also be particularly useful for services like iPlayer as well - all of which HTTP can't actually do itself but has been hacked to do.

Then you could look at multiple connections built into the protocol so that a browser can open multiple concurrent connections.

Then the web server requires a Session cookie to track a user's path through the site however, that's used because HTTP doesn't maintain a connection. So make it keep the state and channel open to the server and the session can be built in to the protocol as well, thus saving the need for cookie support.

Lastly, a good, hard look at HTTP headers is desperately needed as the invasion of privacy and browser fingerprinting is at an all time high.

The problem is that by taking a good hard look at cookie support and HTTP headers, Google is possibly the most polarized WRONG sponsor of such a protocol as a result...

ToryDems add up bill for Labour's ID scheme


Young people

As the cool uncle, I'm always talking with my nephew about various things, and the topic of underage drinking and he showed me his latest 'fake ID'.

It turned out that it was one of these all-singing all-dancing ID cards that Labour were trying to push on us - and overage people were being paid by underage people to buy the ID card for them as a good proof of age.

So with all that news that young people found favour in these ID cards, it's true, but not for the legal and above-the-line reasons. It just goes to prove how out of touch the ex government was with society's feelings toward the matter. Well done Labour, and good riddance!

Flash and the five-minute rule


ZFS with multiple subsystems then?

Really this 'insight' is just ZFS but reincarnated with several subsystems working together in a higgledepiggledy way rather than one homogenous technology.

ZFS has it's famous ARC RAM cache. It can then be configured to use 'L2ARC', using the same ARC algorithm on SSD devices, and finally the actual data held on the disks itself. Add in extra features such as RAID-Z eliminating the RAID 5 goal, snapshots and the like, and it's a far, far more elegant solution than this...

Ten free apps to install on every new Mac



El Reg is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.


OpenVPN client for Mac OS X, allows you to use an OpenVPN server without knowing anything about OpenVPN and just double-clicking on the .ovpn config file provided by VPN providers. In the days of increased spying activity - which even though Labour are out of government will still linger for too long, privacy is important.

TunnelBrick is free, while the better Viscosity (http://www.viscosityvpn.com) is $7.

Lost iPhone 4G vendor loaner outed



[quote]For the record, if Hogan or any of his friends called The Register, we were too drunk to remember[/quote]


Small and mobile ISPs may avoid new filesharing laws


What's a 'small' ISP?

This is need to know knowledge for anyone who cares about their privacy, more in response to this fine article than P2P snooping: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/21/google_data_censorship/

I think you'll find these 'small' ISP's will have a rather interesting proliferation of customers.

Brown creates one UK.gov website to rule them all



I have a couple of mates who work at direct gov, and their problem is nothing technical, it's just they've never had the mandate to force other government departments to transfer content to Direct Gov.

Regardless, this is a futile exercise that just won't work. Why?

The public sector is not a single institution, and there's no real cohesiveness to it - it is a sector of an entire economy. You would never get any site that is a hybrid of other sites in the private sector because of competition. In the public sector you don't so much have that kind of competition but you do have a huge variety of very, very different camps.

Given that Direct Gov has failed even to merge in 'soft' parts of the public sector - like the NHS - and really only has a bit of Home Office information and a bit of DVLA stuff, it proves that without coercion or mandarin support, such an exercise is entirely futile.

Furthermore, as many others have said above, while it's a pain for us as citizens to have to replicate information when applying to various different government bodies, at least it maintains control for everyone's information. Government departments were never usually allowed to share much information, and that right has been eroded heinously since 1997.

I think the real underbelly of this whole 'My Gov' lark is that Martha Lane-Fox after being appointed by Herr Brown as 'Internet Czar' or whatever pompous dictate he's bestowed on her has convinced Brown of the need to have a single sign-on, and merging of services altogether.

The problem is while Google and Microsoft provide single-sign-on across their broad array of services for practical reasons, there are services like OpenID already available that provide this without much work or expense to the taxpayer.

With all this in mind, I would continue to request the Register to contact friends at Outlaw.com and other sources to an investigative piece about the relevance of the Data Protection Act in 2010, as it seems to me that virtually every announcement this government puts out is in breach of one or other clause of the DPA. Furthermore has the Information Commissioner got any teeth or has he been blighted by the Number 10 Scurvy infecting any civil liberties part of government that doesn't toe the line of the Great Brown Puppetmaster?

PayPal restores Cryptome for real


Doesn't PayPal have a Banking license?

I'm not 100% sure whether PayPal is or isn't classified as a bank, but I believe it is so in the EU but not in the US.

If indeed PayPal does have a banking license, then I don't think any bank can really do very much with your account, least of all deny you access to your money. I assume they could cease to do business with you, but only after refunding your entire monies back. PayPal failed to do this, and I believe you'll find that they are simply not allowed to freeze assets without a court order authorising them to do so.

Anti-binge drinking ads add to binge drinking



I think this has to go to the top of the FAIL charts... lol

That said, anyone who has seen an proper alcoholic will know that alcohol is actually the most dangerous narcotic on the planet - far more dangerous than any Class A even. Of course governments and the booze industry don't want you to realize that, as they're snouts are far too deeply entrenched in the trough... or should I say glass.

Apple is suing HTC


Writing was on the wall...

I was wondering when this was going to happen, the writing's been on the wall for ages now, with Schmidt being booted off Apple's board, Jobs telling Google's 'No evil' mantra being BS, Google making a phone to compete with the iPhone, and what I believe seems to have been the straw that broke the camel's back: a software update enabling pinch-to-zoom multitouch on Android devices.

Apple is going after HTC as the largest handset maker as well as the maker of the Nexus One to set the precedent that Android (which is open source and thus not sue-able) is fine, except that it can't be used in it's current guise on a smartphone. Basically, Apple are saying 'Use Android for nettops, not smartphones'.

Succeeding here causes the precedent to build an insurmountable wall in front of Motorola (Droid) and Sony Ericsson (Satio etc) with their Android-based devices. Furthermore it may also cause Microsoft to tread carefully with Windows Phone 7 too, but since there's no Winmo7 phone on the market there's nothing there to sue against, as will Palm with WebOS (again too small a company to be of a threat to Apple).

While a lot of bickering is going on understandably about who invented what, what Apple did with the iPhone is invent/combine* (delete as appropriate) a variety of technologies and get them working together to create what we now know as the iPhone OS as a whole. Nokia famously said at the time of the iPhone's introduction 'We could do all the stuff the iPhone does on a phone, we just didn't think about it', and that's basically what Apple is trying to protect in both its suit against HTC and Nokia.

This is one of the issues with patents, that the whole ethos/usage model of an entire system like the iPhone OS can't be protected, only the specific cogs within it...

I can tell you right now, Android won't die as a result of this. What the best Apple can hope to achieve (and what they want I guess) is for Android to develop it's own UI and semantics that doesn't follow the iPhone OS as closely as it does... which IMO is entirely justifiable on Apple's part.

The suit also says something about using a DSP (in relation to a camera I think), which is probably the digital image filtering to clean up a photo image since the iPhone has such a terrible camera. This is in relation to Winmo6.5 devices, but Apple have been so behind on the mobile phone camera technology I believe this is just a smokescreen to portray the suit as not being out-and-out against Android, but a general one against HTC. Regardless, this part of it is IMO baseless and irrelevant.

PS: El Reg, can we have Google Demon/Angel icons as well as changing Bill Gates to Steve Ballmer? A Google demon image should be tagged to this post ;)

Music biz unites to save 6Music


6Music needs to be unleashed, not gagged

Here's a controversial statement: what really is the difference in the audience of Radio 3 and 4? One is classical music and the other is talk. Radio 1 is general rubbish and Radio 2 the rocker generation plus Wogan.

6Music is the only station that actually appeals to a wide audience and it's limited numbers are purely down to the fact that DAB is a stillborn technology.

My opinion? Think of merging more of Radios 3 and 4 together, and use those savings to keep 6Music and pump it out on FM. That said, Auntie will see Radio 1 figures decline, but 6 Music increase, which may lose Radio 1's influence over the commercial stations like Capital, but in doing so Auntie will get a big boost in their moral currency and relevance, both of which have waned drastically in recent years.

Mozilla orders Jäger shot for Firefox engine


Precompiled executables cached from trusted CDNss

Mozilla has spent a good deal of time and effort with their add-ons database all provided under a Mozilla SSL cert and with full security checks. As such, with JS libraries like jQuery, prototype and MooTools as well as commonly used helpers like swfobject or scrip.aculo.us all hosted on a variety of Content Download Networks (CDNs, ie like google's: http://code.google.com/apis/ajaxlibs/documentation/ or the MS equivalent: http://www.asp.net/ajaxlibrary/cdn.ashx).

Given the above, then why doesn't Mozilla host precompiled executables of 'approved' common javascript library 'stacks' so that when referenced, they execute fully compiled bytecode instead of parsing the whole lot through an interpreter - especially since the 'custom' code usually involves just a few URL pointers and meta information commanding the stack to show the mojo it needs to. They could work like SSL CA's are managed in the browser, so that trusted libs, like trusted CA's are automatically updated.

O2 claims win in UK mobile broadband speed test



You try and use your iPhone in Soho on a Friday evening rush hour, it won't even setup a call let alone download email, and yet I supposedly have the full 5-bar reception.

It's not mobile download speeds or coverage that affect O2 - when it actually can connect, it's OK - it's purely the IP-based data backhaul bandwidth and contention during congested periods where the issues lie squarely.

Let me remind you in Greece, Panafon (now Vodafone), lost it's market leadership because the only network to stand up and continue working after an earthquake was the state-owned CosmOTE. Point is, it's the performance under extreme stress and emergency situations that networks, mobile or fixed are judged.

O2 may be OK on a normal day to day basis, but clearly it's a network that has never been properly stress-tested, and it's for that, they FAIL.

Adobe sounds off on iPad's Flash slap



HTML5 is coming and provided the codec argument is sorted with Mozilla and H.264, Flash vids will only be used by ads and people will begin to remove the plugin making their machine magnitudes more secure in the proces. Sorry crap coded plugins from Adobe, but I can't wait to get rid of you.

New SGI chases new partners


Apple should buy it...

I was discussing this on Ars Technica about it given Apple has hired an ex JPMorgan guy to find and buy companies with it's $40b cashpile. Personally I've always thought that Apple should've stepped in and bought SGI even when SGI first started experiencing trouble.

Anyway, I thought it'd be an interesting discussion to repost here:

I think there are 2, possibly 3 good options for Apple: SGI ($280m) and Autodesk ($6b). So for $6.25b, they get a metric sh*t ton of capability, and *still* have $34b in the bank!


- Apple would inherit the architecture (AutoCAD) and 3D (Maya, 3DS Max) markets overnight and complement their market leadership in video (Final Cut Pro, Quicktime) and audio (Logic, Digidesign) production software.

- Mac OS X would benefit immeasurably to the point it would probably be respected as the best UNIX OS out there. SGI's IRIX has XFS, far better than HFS+ (and given time can probably better ZFS), invented OpenGL which will complement Apple's OpenCL efforts, and if Grand Central Dispatch is the best threading optimisation Apple can do, the mind boggles at what SGI can do

- SGI know big iron. A Mac Pro is a nice machine but if you're in the market for a $25k workstation, a Mac Pro is a little anaemic. SGI's latest Octane is an enclosure housing 10 dual socket blades: 8 cores in a Mac Pro versus 80 cores in an SGI Octane. Think that's funny, you then have the servers: Try comparing an 8 core XServe with a 2,048 core Altix UV supercomputer! And they both use Intel.

- SGI know all about graphics. Both companies have a good relationship with Nvidia, but if Apple wanted to, SGI know how to make GPUs, especially pro ones. Apple of course probably wouldn't want to, but developing game-friendly hardware as a side-effect wouldn't be a big deal either. Did I mention SGI invented OpenGL? Needless to say it might be the right way to give Apple the kick it needs to provides decent graphics iron in their hardware. I mean A GT120 even being offered in a Mac Pro is just embarrassing!

- SGI has the envy of the geek in the same fashion as Apple is the envy of the consumer. While SGI's supercomputer business is totally irrelevant to Apple, supercomputers are profitable and the R&D windfall is worthwhile. Think of supercomputers as a racing team to a car manufacturer... let alone getting intimate knowledge of how spooks work (and helping the Apple secrecy cat and mouse chase And remember, Apple are developing OpenCL, and the primary beneficiaries of the unleashed GFLOPS from GPUs are precisely the same as supercomputer customers...

- Corporate IT depts would take ages (like a decade) to be convinced of using Apple hardware, even with SGI's credibility in big iron. But if Apple can sustain a business providing big iron regardless, then corporates might begin to swing in their direction over time. Instead of actively chasing it, Apple should nurture an ecosystem for corporate software to flourish on a combined SGI-Apple platform. They'd need virtualization (partner with Parallels or VMWare already closely here). They can offer storage through SGI, (but EMC who owns VMWare is better as a friend than an enemy), and they need to have hardware credible for a database. From those a corporate IT agenda might develop.

- In buying SGI, Apple would make me want to buy even more of their hardware :(

Steve Wozniak, your time is up


Two sides of the coin

On the one hand, Steve Wozniak did actually do something, and all credit to him for being a 'tech celebrity' despite the fact he's not done much since he left Apple. Unlike an infinite list of other celebrities (Uri Geller? Paris Hilton?) who have done absolutely diddley squat, he has got the decency to have at least one bit of credibility that he's done something.

On the other hand, the reason I love The Vulure is because it has the balls to do this, and fire up a discussion that may cause acidic hatemail from companies, readers and press and who ever else, and for that reason - even if it's unjustified in the court of public opinion - thank you for raising it as a debate.

No one's guilty here, neither Woz or El Reg. It's a discussion that had to be put out there regardless.

But the real wrath should be directed to the complete airheads, not people who do have even a hair of credibility, because even that's more than most.

Masses marvel at 'Most Useless Machine'


Of course it has a use!

It's the ultimate eco-friendly device!

A huge amount of marketing money should be spent on selling it to the tree hugger geeks around the world concerned about their power usage.

Come on Vulture, your wit factor can do better than this ;)

O2 grovels for London network failure


Outright Incompetence

O2 seem to be quite happy hoarding iPhone users vast subscription fees without realising that they have to actually invest in their network and adapt their entire business model to cope with the sea change that Android, WebOS and iPhone OS's are able to do. These devices are by all intents and purposes extremely portable computers that only require data access to the mobile internet, with only a few concessions to existing services like GSM calls (instead of VoIP) and SMS instead of IM.

It is time that O2 and all the other mobile networks actually realise the day and age of everything-over-IP is here already.

With Sky having to ditch their satellites (that are overdue to fall out of the sky anyway) in favour of delivering content over IP (hence the real reason behind Easynet's acquisition), with BT already offering a rather feeble IPTV service in BT Vision, Virgin Media having the infrastructure but too stupid to take advantage of it, and needless to say VoIP being a mature technology already adopted by just about everyone except possibly your nan.

Mobile networks have to realise that they are effectively mobile ISPs now, and that all service plans should be based around unmetered data plans.

Point is O2 have failed to realise the sea change they need to do in regards to changing their mentality, business plan and adapting their network infrastructure to support the new age of mobile ISP. The concept of pence-per-minute call costs and the ridiculous charges for sending a few characters in SMS is over, and the networks have to realise this.

No amount of grovelling will help here, because at the end of the day, failure to adapt will result in no O2 at all due it becoming bankrupt.

DVLA data powers likely to be abused by foreign officials


As usual, the left arms doesn't know what the right is doing...

Cross-reference to the Data Protection Act, and see the repercussions of any personal data being sold for marketing purposes. This elephant won't fly.

BT could jack up line charges to fill pensions hole


Point blank no!

Why Openwoe should get more money because BT was decidedly generous with it's pensions has and should have absolutely no repercussion on Openwoe's charges. If BT has a pension shortfall, with or without the Openwoe branch, then it is BT Retail and other divisions that need to fork out the money to pay it.

Openwoe is by all intents and purposes nothing to do with BT, though due to Ofcom's toothless and incompetent nature, BT still maintains a monopoly on the communications world.

If Openwoe has a problem with pensions, then simply make it more efficient by replacing staff with less costly ones, and until Fibre is installed throughout the land (not just highly populated centres) with the *average* broadband speed across the nation able to confidently stream HD media (TV over IP), while simultaneously guaranteeing VoIP and low latency data services, then Openwoe isn't justified to a single penny.

Needless to say, given that the wholesale price of a line is £7.80 if we change provider away from BT, but in the process also introduce migration issues (Ofcom incompetence again), then we have to continue to pay the £11-odd and ~£3 rip off to BT for the privilege of having a voice service no one uses in order to use ADSL, which isn't good enough to support the broadband infrastructure going forward anyway.

Fail, fail, fail and no chance of extra cash for more fail. Fix the comms infrastructure first, then we might be a bit more leniest to paying you a bit more cash. In the meantime no chance.

iFarter begs Apple for rational App Store

Jobs Horns

Apple antitrust

Sooner or later (you can probably set a stopwatch going), Apple is going to be hit with a massive antitrust suit, by playing the ringfencing game.

The limit I'd expect that is acceptable in law is Mac OS X's locking to Apple hardware - beyond that, the development of a platform and allowing 3rd party applications means by it's very nature that Apple can't and shouldn't be able to control what goes on it.

At the end of the day, with the iPhone OS 3.0 supporting age restrictions and parental controls (something Apple needs to beef up a bit on the Apple ID, ie having a more stringent age verification, possibly using credit card data to do so), so that underage users cannot get access to adult-rated software. Then all Apple needs to do is simply force all apps to be rated by the ESRB in the US and institutions like the BBFC here, in precisely the same vein as games go through.

That is all Apple needs to do, and if it resists, it should be forced to.

SGI births smaller baby super

Jobs Horns

I always said...

that Apple should've bought SGI, especially when Mac OS X was being developed. Instead of having a completely new platform based on BSD, Apple could've inherited an old, but extremely well polished and highly optimised UNIX in the form IRIX, and also moved into the server / mainframe territory with an extremely enviable reputation from SGI's history.

In addition, with Apple's 'Pro' products, what will the difference really be between SGI's new workstations and Apple's Mac Pro? Not much. Furthermore, on the software side, with Apple's Final Cut Pro, Logic and so on, using SGI's workstation prowess, these products would have allowed Apple to have an even more awesome product capability in digital content creation - what's more with the really hardcore 3D and complex imaging background of SGI, Apple would've probably taken the entire 3D market by storm, and things like AutoCAD might still exists and flourish on the Mac-SGI.

Furthermore this joke of a server in the form of XServe versus the monsters SGI produces would mean that Apple would have not just a serious, but a very serious big iron business.

Given it's so cash rich anyway, if I were Apple, and not Steve Jobs with his nepotism toward ex-companies he's worked for (ie NeXT), then this would be a serious proposition, and an end to what really is one of the greatest tragedies of one of the world's most innovative companies in SGI.

Orange UK exiles Firefox from call centres


Hear hear!

Thanks to both the technician reporting this and to El Reg for exposing it.

I'm a web developer and supporting IE has been the bain of my work - not that IE is terrible software, but because no version of IE till IE8 has supported web standards properly meant I had to specifically hack all CSS and JavaScript to get IE to work with its proprietary techniques instead of just writing the code once, or even sometimes forcing IE users to view a cut-down version of the site since IE can't support some things at all.

In the days that Windows XP is now officially on 'extended support' by Microsoft in that they hope to kill off all support of the 2002 OS, any business relying on IE-only web apps really are being dunosaurs. First, they should really should start considering accessibility and the far, far better support for richer interfaces in modern browsers, because it'd only take one disabled employee to complain they can't use the systems for the company to be in trouble with the DDA. Second as noted by you, the security flaws of IE are just insane, and corporates really should wake up and smell the coffee regarding this.

So El Reg! Can I call on you to start an anti-IE campaign and name and shame companies that continue to use IE? Because you'd be doing an immense amount of good if IE can be reduced to below 5% market share, as that's a fair threshold at which point the effort of support versus extending development and testing schedule simply becomes a not worth it. With a continued 20% market share, unfortunately that's still 1 in 5 people and we have to support it in the mean time...



Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021