Slashdot

There was a Microsoft podcast, where some Microsoft programmers were being asked about the future of the API they developed and one thought was that every DCOM/COM/kernel object would have its own lock, as the attitude was "Hey, you will have 80 cores on every machine, you will be able to afford it!".

But will it run Vista?

you tell me [cray.com]

Because by saying it runs Windows, they are implicitly defining the development tools and APIs that it supports.

So an organization that has Windows devs but needs more horsepower is likely to turn to this before looking at a Beowolf cluster.

Now, writing massively parallel code is admittedly a different skill set than writing ordinary desktop or web development, but starting with the same tools and environments gives them at least a head start.

A supercomputer turns all tasks into IO bound problems.

A mainframe turns all tasks into a CPU bound problem.

A microcomputer just runs awhile and crashes.

not trolling boys, so relax, its an OPINION.

For many of us coders, geeks and otherwise technically inclined here on Slashdot, this issue is one where for some, it is an emotional outlet, where few others exist. Others have issues pertaining to Sex, Families, LIFE, and other things to massage our emotional minds over.

To many of us, Microsoft represents something we love to hate, because we can. There is a disconnect between what works in technology, and what works in business. Many of us downplay the importance of Marketing, Leverage, Tie-in, Competition Analysis, and other stuff you don't learn in your CS program, but only in Business school.

We have a hard time seeing Microsoft as a business, responsible to its shareholders above all else, we embrace those orgs who see themselves as some kind of technical crusader, ready to right the wrongs in our industry, using truth, justice, and the American way.

It is the rare geek who can get beyond the technical arguments and embrace the quite logical reasons for why Microsoft has so much marketshare today. The concept of "Barriers to Entry" is rarely discussed when pushing an alternative to MS Office, Exchange Server, or other Microsoft tools.

Instead, we choose to blame the stupid CIO, who in a moment of insanity, decides to go with the Microsoft solution, like 90% of his peers, when he could be that brave, intrepid warrior for good, by going with Linux Servers, Open Office and more.

I mean, who actually uses those integrated Calendar/Scheduling thingies anyway, dammit? If I want to book a conference room 2 weeks in advance, I'll hang a post-it note on the damn door! Easy, and I dont have to deal with integrity testing that blasted Exchange database!

You see, there is nobility in suffering.

If it takes me a week to get my DVD-RW to burn disks under Linux, who cares, if I am a better person for the effort?

It is simply a case of the quest for perfection acting as an enemy of the "good enough".

This is a highly simplistic argument, tonque in cheek, and all that, but true.

And, as always, I got karma to burn bitches, so if you disagree, give it your best shot!