Re: Why break things with gratuitous change ?
While that is to be applauded, it still could all easily go under microsoft.com. This is just rebranding for rebranding BS sake.
497 publicly visible posts • joined 3 Apr 2010
"At this point, readers might wonder if, in that context, HPE's planned acquisition of Juniper Networks is such a good idea."
Truth, and not just for the reasons discussed in the article. Problem is, and I mean this with all goodwill to Neri, that he literally can't say anything else. The doublespeak in the call (networking is soft/buying jnpr will fix it) means nothing and we still have to draw our own conclusions.
I'm bemused by this quote. I think it's pretty clear that browser market share is just market distortion.
Whatever comes pre-installed (historically IE, now Edge, Chrome, Safari) gets used the most. Whatever gets advertised as the thing you should definitely use instead (Chrome, and to a lesser extent Edge) often replaces the pre-installed thing.
There's no competition here based on what people want.
I don't run into many at all that won't work on FF - and the response for me is that the site is not incompatible with Firefox, it's incompatible with the supposedly open and well-documented standards that these bloody browsers are supposed to render.
I remember IE6, the stuff that was written for it's extended ecosystem, then the abandonment of that browser and multiple, very expensive websites that didn't work in anything else, even when IE itself was long dead, and the support, migrations of browser and application platforms, and the extreme expense involved. That should be a history lesson that's recent enough for all in IT to remember, or have the story passed on as recent enough to be vivid.
Demand the website, webapp or whatever the hell else is supposedly written for the web - whatever that means anymore - works in _all_ the browsers. One of the easiest ways is to obstinately continue to use FF, even if just for that one reason.
"HPE seems to have so many different switching platforms under their roof, hopefully they can consolidate the user interfaces at least"
There's no chance of that. Comware was on the block 7-8 years ago, and yet go on their site today and you can see their "new" (and recently re-renamed) Comware range. ProVision-based hardware is still sold and recommended on the website even tho that was getting retired 3-4 years ago. Under HPE's tenure another two breeds of switch were invented. Integration on the control plane side has been inexplicably poor - try to determine which of the CX range of switches can be managed in Aruba Central? Who can tell? The only switch range they've properly EOLed is the Aruba MAS, which is probably because the 3 people in the world didn't get upset too much.
HPE has no strategy, leadership or anyone with any gumption or skill in this area, and so it will continue.
Indeed yes. And wondered at the time (and still do, just less regularly) who the hell thought squishing the entire set of functions of the computer down into one button bottom left was a good idea in the first place.
Perhaps it wasn't and it was just "another thing we can try to protect by patents". And the computer-user world lapped it up.
... overprovision the room, beds and staff a bit, and in particular let the staff have some downtime, R&R, look after their own health and not feel like they're running off their tits for 14 hour shifts.
I'm absolutely convinced the cost will be about the same, or perhaps in the (very big) round, less, and the department will be able to cope with the peaks when they come just by having slack.
The obsession with JIT is pretty flaky in industry. It doesn't need to be the case in things like healthcare.
I agree with you entirely. A fact I was introduced to a couple of years ago, and have had cause to check again recently that I wasn't horribly mistaken is that the NHS costs, from the public purse, per person, LESS than healthcare in the US.
Again: from public funds in both cases. That's before any insurance, deductibles, bankrupcies, gofundmes and ofc loads of people actually not being entitled to treatment in the states.
They're paying more per capita in taxation for healthcare than we are, and ours is ostensibly "free" at the point of use.
If one sits and thinks about that and what it means is going on, it's utterly mind boggling.
Or brand spanking new. I used to deal with early Cisco callmanager stuff that couldn't do a lot of what long discontinued PABXs could handle fine.
It was like some dudes had just hacked together some code that was a bit like a PABX, bigged it up massively, and then sold the company to Cisco to handle the fallout.
Also time critical shizz on windows 2000? Do me a favour!
"Far be it from us to wonder exactly what sort of software stack requires such power in order to populate that 84-inch screen"
And of course you'll still occasionally spot animated stuff running at 2fps, cos the software devs have been racing hard to keep up squandering all that hardware horsepower for the past 30 years!
I think quite the opposite.
Yes they've perhaps made some bad choices, and when they discovered and decided to move on from those bad choices, they didn't move quick enough to remove anything that still leans on the bad choices (the well documented power inadequacies, the "DC" made out of storage containers)
However if I have a service that is basically one set of stuff on one server, I always run the risk that if it breaks, gets nicked, goes on fire, or a plane crashes into the building, it's gone. 100% gone. Not that it might come back or is backed up somewhere by someone who's not me, or will get restored in good time. That it's gone.
That OVH is doing all this crazy reclaiming/cleaning/rehousing is - in most cases I understand - beyond what they're on the peg to do, and that's good for those that bought a service that might evaporate into thin air, crossed their fingers it wouldn't when they really ought not to have, and then their thing did indeed evaporate into thin air.
That there's people with services - critical or not - that they've not been able to yet rebuild elsewhere is striking. Not even a backup?! In fairness I have a service like this, and should it go pop it will be proper inconvenient, but I will cry to myself not to the provider.
That there's a high %age chance their data at least will be available once again to do something with seems to me to be very good service. I could easily see something like 1&1 or HostEurope going "ahh well there's that lot gone, sorry about that" and inviting you to start afresh with perhaps a few days of contractual service credit at best.
I agree but I don't think that lesson is for OVH tho. They have another 24 DCs around the world in 10 locations. If you're hosting your stuff in one of their locations, your DR is automatically in another location, possibly not even with OVH, in case they have some kind of business-oriented problem.
Or... you don't have DR, which in itself is a DR strategy.
Does make me wonder though about all this "dual power supply this" "UPS that" "multiple internet feeds the other". Maybe that's all really really pointless, and host your stuff in at least two different places with as least commonality as possible is the only strategy.
Put your money into making the code handle it, and have bits of the back end infrastructure die regularly as a matter of course, because it has and will be affected by single points of failure relatively regularly. So when the big disaster happens, your code is used to it.
...just on a standalone client basis it STILL can't even work out if it's successfully delivered a message to the other end. I just can't wrap my head around how the code could be so bad as to not be able to definitively work it out 100% of the time.
I think us geeks here are guilty of mixing up businesses with tech businesses.
Most (small) non-tech business I know couldn't give the slightest shit about computers, phones, internet connections, domains, websites and all that malarky. They absolutely know they need such evil things but look elsewhere for that stuff to get sorted out, to enable them to concentrate on what they do & the reason they're in business - plastering walls, preparing food, whatever. For the same reason they're likely to call a plumber if the sink breaks, they're likely to rely on other people or business to sort their tech.
Even though *I* have long held it makes loads of sense to have a domain and at the very least forward your mail to somewhere so the address people know never evaporates, why on earth should we expect a business owner to understand, nay second-guess that this might happen? Or even that it "looks bad" just cos _we_ all know that @talktalkbusiness looks bollocks (and even then, not for any good reason other than we know TalkTalk is bollocks).
Going to someone that holds themselves out as SomethingSomething *business* seems like a perfectly good idea on the face of it. If I'm a business, I've bought a business service from a big place that provides business services. It even has business in the name. Sounds good to me. The likes of us and/or regulation should be holding the likes of TalkTalk to a higher standard.