Hello. My card. Did somebody say 'Lawyers'???
Mood:
hug me
Now Playing: 'Letters From The Fan Base' Rock star's mail make great origami chickens. (Crafts / Culture)
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY
And now it's that time in the Funny Funk Frickaseed playhouse to read a few letters from you all out there. Here's one from a little fricknseed.... in west Orange, Texas... and she writes...
Dear Mister Frickaseed,
My sister Jilly says Bill Gates can't hook up one computer with another because he don't know how to virtualize because he got that shot off in the war. Can you virtualize? What did you get shot off in the war?
Yers Truly, Darlene
PS - Love what you done with the new playhouse.
Hey mama! They's reading Darlene's letter on Mister Frickaseed!
...heh heh I think I got my social security bennyfits shot off in the war... heh heh heeeee... But that's right boys and girls. Computers need to be connected to make more computers. It's a process called virtualization. Mister Gates had a computer company back in 2001 to 2004 that could virtualize pretty well, but, lately, as it is with most aging codgers, Mister Gates company can't virtualize nothing.
Rumors are it got stepped on by a longhorn but some say that's a lot of bull. Some say the longhorn is a lot of bull and the virtualization venture went off track back in 2004 when Mister Ballmer, who is one of Mister Gates' best friends, threw a chair and punched a hole in his office wall. Well, after that, the saying around the company was the wall is 'probably the ONLY thing that got poked hard enough at Microsoft to make a hole'... heh heh heh... just a little grown up humor kids. You shouldn't know what that means. heh heh heh
Anyway... Mister Frickaseed has read the New Nork Times and come to the conclusion that if Sun can virtualize with their Indiana and Yahoo can virtualize with their Panama and Apple can Virtualize with their Leopard and Microsoft just can't virtualize to save their life, I would say somebody must of cut off Microsoft's virtualizer for everybody because without that, Microsoft computers will be just like the man in this article here says; either a whole lot of servers you can pop in and out of your server needs in a jiffy or a whole lot of boxes you're supposed to hook up with each other and they sit and use not very much when nobody needs them. What that means is you either have your stuff virtualized or you have to have special programs to translate what the other computers are trying to do with you... the other ones that are already virtualized, that is, and here you go sitting there dumb like a pumpkin...
Here's one way to say it here: "The “one box per application” mentality—along with continuous hardware upgrades with greater computing power—has driven a proliferation of diverse servers that are increasingly underutilized." You can read the rest of what this guy says in this article called:
By Andrew Hillier, CiRBA, Special to ZDNet
Published on ZDNet News: May 10, 2007, 11:20 AM PT
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6182873.html
Here's one excerpt from that:
Most organizations don’t have a strong enough discipline around purchasing or asset management, making it difficult to inventory servers. Once organizations move into the virtual world—where you can create a logical machine without having any paper trail—this problem grows exponentially. Organizations will be caught in the same trap as they currently are with physical servers: not knowing which servers exist, who created them, which applications they support and whether or not they need them.
What that means is it's not enough to simply have a way of enabling your proprietary data into a deterministic form to exchange with other XML-based virtualized services. You can get that in the VCSY patent 7,076,521
But it doesn't do you any good if you have no way to manage all these virtualized services like 6,826,744 does. Of course, you'll have to have other things too to make your computers do what you really want them to do real architected managed services, but you AT LEAST have to have these two basic frameworks in XML services to make a web services system really work. Sure you can go parading around town in your momma's high heels, but that don't mean your momma's walking the skreet. Sure, you can go waltzing around town in your dady's boxers, but that don't mean you got the factory for making bread and butter in there.
In the computer world isn't like the theatrical world. See what you're looking at? All this you're looking at really doesn't exist. It's all in front of your head. Stick your hand out and touch the screen, little heathen, and now THAT is real... and so is the operations and work being done inside that thing. THAT's real. But, you want to talk REAL reality, it's sitting on your lumpy ass writing children's pap when you could be authoring web systems that would change the wor...
Hello again, boys and girls... remember, the things that do what you're looking at are real and the news events are real and with computers the people that sell those things to your mommies and daddies are taking real bucks and bingos from your little faces and it's up to you whether the company that SAYS it can but can't SHOW it can is the one that's taking more bucks and bingos than you should allow... as a mob..
I think Mister Gates' company doesn't have the where-with-all to virtualize so they're finally saying to hell with it. We'll sit on our islands of automation and live with it.
I do think somebody told Mister Gates' the words he never really thought he would hear from anyone... no matter how big. No. Go away and crawl under a rock and die.
In this business, boys and girls of all ages, it's either do it yourself or pay for it or find somebody kind enough to give it to you. Paying for it is embarrassing but sometimes that's the way life is. If you don't pay for it... you get a reputation as somebody who takes without following the rules everybody else laid down.
And THEN, if you get caught trying to sneak a peak or leak the teak, oil the boil, get the let, or any of a hundred other ways to say 'I'm above the law', you get nailed because nobody wants to let their reputation and company and family names lean on your shed.
When your farm gets prospected and surveyed and turned into a parking lot, you have only yourself to blame for not following rules that are so clear, they are written down in the office of every politician we give enough money to to get an office. THOSE are the people who should know. But how can they know if the subject uses the same names and tactics of those who HAVE to be a HAVE NOT YET LOOK LIKE?
Remember the server center in a container Sun put out last year. Weirdest piece of genius I've ever seen. I have to say I myself didn't get it until a couple days ago when somebody jogged my memory. OF COURSE. Brilliant use of putting a computer where the computer NEEDS to be with ALL the power of every computer in the world. I wonder if Ray Noorda got to see a real NOW? A NOW that can span the globe to bring all the computing power available IN the world in for consultation when needed.
It's going to take an awful lot to astound me at this rate. OKAAAAYYYY can I bring this rocket ship in for anything more than a crash landing? I can guess every parent out there is horrified and the kids are out making soda-straw villages with the fire ants.
The point? Microsoft version of the server center in a box doesn't fair too well.
Certainly you can transact between disparate software bodies, but the interaction will be a poor imitation just as the 'server in a container' idea is... for controlling distributed commerce. For doing commerce at the local place, it is applied as a proper use of the island of automation theory. What am I talking about? Read this and do some noodling with crayons on your momma's living room walls and see what kind of attention you get for the weekend:
Document Type and Number:
United States Patent 20040039800 Kind Code: A1
Link to this page:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20040039800.html
Abstract:
Systems and methods for providing interoperability of systems are provided. One embodiment may be seen as instantiating a server in a container having instances of Enterprise Java.TM. Beans (EJB), and accessing the EJB through the local interface of the EJB. Since the EJB is accessed from within the container, the need for translation of messaging protocols at a bridge is removed. The server components are provided access to the EJB logic through the local interface of the EJB.
No matter how the struggle ends, the fact remains today that Microsoft is having to gut (again) their vaunted .Net platform to make it more... what? for the future? More compact? Hardly. More flexibile? Maybe if you don't mind buying different servers anytime you want to do the laundry. Heck, they're virtual right? So the only real thing is the money! Yeahhh... great idea. Gut em.
You still have to provide the management to govern all these conglomerated islands of automation. I mean YOU will have to with your littlecadre' of gnome developers using 20th century tools work on 21st century metal. Hack hack hack.
It's like what we found out when we were standing out in the skreet when the nice Amazon people paid the nice IBM lawyers for 'services rendered' this past Toosday. There's always something else when it comes to software. And, if you don't have it, you can always say you do and you can fake it in a demo, but, when it comes to standing up in front of people and telling the truth, you know Mister Frickies motto: tell the truth even if it hurts because the lie will hurt a lot more for a longer time. You parents can get that saying bronzed on your own shoes one day for $39.95.
HA Mister Frickaseed don't need to tell you kiddies what happens if a computer can't virtualize. HA "Can Bobby come out and play?" "Jimmy, you know Bobby lost both arms and legs in that train accident." "Yes ma'am, but we need something for third base. You got any seat cushions?" Even if a server is special enough to end up being used for home plate, everybody's still either running away from it or running towards it but nobody makes any points just standing there. You gotta PLAY and virtualization makes it easier to play with anybody for any pretend or real game...
chat chat chat chat chat... chat chat chat... chat chat chat...chat chat chat...chat chat chat....chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.chat chat chat.. ka-ching
Woops... here's a Frickofeed from the old Frickophone that says.... mmfmfffm fmff fmffmmf fmfmffmf fmfff ffhsuihefffmmmttlll mfmfmfmf ffm fffmm fapapaaa fmmmmmss shshss ... hole $#!@!
Boys and girls THIS is so big old Lawrance Frickaseed just HAS to put this up on the screem for you to get it:
By Ina Fried, and Stephen Shankland, CNET News.com
Published on ZDNet News: May 10, 2007, 10:46 AM PT
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6182873.html
REDMOND, Wash.-Microsoft said on Thursday that it is pulling features out of the initial version of its "Viridian" hypervisor to avoid having to delay the virtualization technology.
The company is changing three key features of the hypervisor technology to try to stick to its schedule of releasing the technology within 180 days of completing its Windows Server "Longhorn" operating system, due to be finalized before the end of the year. The features will be included in a future version of Viridian, formally called Windows Server Virtualization, the company said.
The first feature that is being taken out of the initial Viridian release is so-called live migration, which enables people to move a running virtual machine from one physical server to another. The initial release of Viridian also won't support on-the-fly, or "hot," adding of memory, storage, processors or network cards. And it will only support computers with a maximum of 16 processing cores--for example, eight dual-core chips or four quad-core chips.
The move limits Viridian's initial scope and gives more breathing room to competing projects--most notably Xen and VMware.
"Those guys just can't get a product out the door to save their lives. Not having live migrate a year from now--talk about 'behind the times.' Windows development is just broken," Illuminata analyst Gordon Haff said. "For a (version) 1.0 virtualization offering to be missing critical features a year hence puts Microsoft in a truly bad market position, perhaps to the point where they should seriously consider partnering with VMware."
In a blog posting, the general manager of virtualization strategy at Microsoft, Mike Neil, said the company is making some "tough decisions" to meet its schedule.
"Shipping is a feature too," Neil said.
In April, Microsoft delayed the first beta version of Viridian from the first half of this year to the second half. The company said on Thursday that a public beta of Viridian will be introduced with the release to manufacturing of Longhorn Server.
"We had some really tough decisions to make," Neil said. "We adjusted the feature set of Windows Server virtualization so that we can deliver a compelling solution for core virtualization scenarios while holding true to desired timelines."
With no live migration support, Viridian will be useful for a common early use of virtualization, replacing several underutilized servers with a smaller number of more efficiently used ones. But it means that Viridian won't be immediately useful for a more sophisticated virtual-computing environment in which tasks are shuttled from computer to computer to adjust to changing work priorities or faulty hardware.
VMware, the leading x86 virtualization company, has supported live migration since 2003 with its VMotion software. And the EMC subsidiary's Virtual Infrastructure 3 software--available for more than a year--enables much of the higher-level incarnation of virtualization that treats multiple servers as a pool of computing power.
Xen supports live migration with versions of Linux that have been specifically adapted for the virtualization software. The next version of the Xen hypervisor, 3.1, due within days, will add live migration support for Windows and unmodified Linux, said XenSource Chief Technology Officer Simon Crosby.
Capping Viridian support at 16 is a less significant change because the vast majority of x86 servers don't exceed that limit. That reality is likely to prevail, even after the second half of this year, when 16-core servers will become more common by virtue of new Intel and Advanced Micro Devices quad-core chips for servers with four processor sockets.
Being able to add new resources to servers as they run through "hot-add" capability significantly improves a server's reliability. However, it's not common for most administrators today.
Live migration can help reduce the need for hot-add technology because customers could move virtual machines to a second system while the first is upgraded or repaired.
Xen today supports hot-add capability for memory, disks, network cards and processors.
Why heck! Whadya think of THEM rode apples, folks?
Wow.
"We had some really tough decisions to make" What were they 'Who gets fired for incompetence?' 'Why can't we use the old stuff?' 'Why can't we use the new stuff?' 'Why can't we get anything right the first... or second or third time?'
Tell me just one thing... were there LAWYERS involved in any of these tough questions? Now, THOSE become tough questions. Sometimes TOO tough and the poop hits the props, as it were, and then 'show's over'. Who wants to watch a production what's got poop on the props. The curtains... the set... the actors... the makeup... god what a mess. Maybe somebody can come up with a way to virtualize a mess and then you can at least sell something out of the pile. They did it with crappy rubber and fake doggy poop. But, then, THAT's an example of something 'real' a company can produce.
Like I said... "it's not real until it runs on Mister Frickaseeds' computer."
click
Posted by Portuno Diamo
at 12:54 PM EDT
Updated: Friday, 11 May 2007 4:43 PM EDT
chatty
Apple is expected to launch its next generation Leopard operating system (OS) in April, but according to industry sources, the release of the new OS will be postponed to October to allow Apple to make Leopard support Windows Vista through an integrated version of its Boot Camp software.
Apple has informed the Securities and Exchange Commission that both the iPhone and Leopard have achieved “technological feasibility,” meaning they are near ready for a public release; is Apple planning a surprise full release of its groundbreaking operating system?
chillin'
sharp
accident prone
smelly