Comment On No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

"Having used a calculator to double check," Stephan writes, "I can confirm that the SQL 2008 R2 database will have to live without tuned indexes. Unless anyone happens to have a 64 zettabyte disk I can borrow?" [expand full text]
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2Next »

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-02 07:18 • by Rodnas (unregistered)
More comments on the previous page ...

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-02 14:33 • by My name. (unregistered)
And this is a comment.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-02 17:09 • by Your Name (unregistered)
382495 in reply to 382493
/* No, THIS is a comment */

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-02 18:39 • by Coyne
Well, what did you expect, Stephan? Next time don't ask for a 29 dimension hypercube index.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-02 20:56 • by Luiz Felipe (unregistered)
382498 in reply to 382439
Ralph:
Wait a second.

Someone thought it would be a good idea to run Windows on an airplane???!!!! And you said "yeah, sure"?

Did you not read the fine print? Did you skip over the part where they disclaimed all liability for "unexpected errors" (because when you sell crapware, many errors are expected)?? Did your eyes glaze over when they talked about the possibility of system crashes, and you didn't get that the "system" is your deathtrap plane???

What about the paragraph where it said you can't sue them for faults no matter how negligent they were? Didn't it worry you when you had to initial the sentence saying this contract is binding on your heirs??

Windows on an airplane. Humppphhh! More dangerous than a terrorist.


Its obvius that windows will not run the plane, only the videos screens and entertainment, you will not die if it crash, only will be bored.

I think that neither linux is secure for a plane, only deterministic processors with real time SOs, linux is not real time enough. I think they use custom made real time SO. When you need something good, better to make you own, you can never trusth third parties, even open source.
Open source software takes no warranty also, they are not liable, same as windows.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-03 06:55 • by Hans (unregistered)
382501 in reply to 382457
MS:
Jack:

You realize Windows is only controlling the entertainment system, right?


I didn't see anything in the original post about an "entertainment system". I saw "private plane" and "in-flight navigation".


There is a new trending activity. It's the latest thing (yadda, yadda), but you really should try it out. It's called: THINKING.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-03 10:00 • by Ralph (unregistered)
382503 in reply to 382501
Hans:
MS:
Jack:

You realize Windows is only controlling the entertainment system, right?


I didn't see anything in the original post about an "entertainment system". I saw "private plane" and "in-flight navigation".


There is a new trending activity. It's the latest thing (yadda, yadda), but you really should try it out. It's called: THINKING.

which, if anyone did that, we wouldn't have Windows. Q.E.D.

You are in for a rise punk

2012-06-03 18:10 • by BushIdo (unregistered)
Yeah, we have this a lot "Don't have my Kroger card with me", "Lost my Kroger card", even "Never ever had a Kroger card. Honest!". Yeah sure. From now on its new-gen Kroger cards with RFID.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-03 21:13 • by Meep (unregistered)
382507 in reply to 382501
Hans:
MS:
Jack:

You realize Windows is only controlling the entertainment system, right?


I didn't see anything in the original post about an "entertainment system". I saw "private plane" and "in-flight navigation".


There is a new trending activity. It's the latest thing (yadda, yadda), but you really should try it out. It's called: THINKING.



Trending down, of course.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-04 06:57 • by Dave (unregistered)
382510 in reply to 382475
Matt Westwood:
You're one dead homophobic prick.


Sounds like we have an Internet Hard Guy here.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-04 07:02 • by Dave (unregistered)
382511 in reply to 382486
Marke:
511tactical . com


The Real WTF is the underendowed, didn't-quite-make-the-grade-for-the-army guys who need to buy that crap in order to feel less worthless.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-04 11:41 • by Ryan (unregistered)
382536 in reply to 382427
I forget:
All of Windows 8 is a WTF.

AMEN

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-04 12:33 • by sod (unregistered)
382540 in reply to 382464
Nagesh:
Set:
Matt Westwood:
Nagesh:
My first smartphone I purchase called Samsung DUOS. That crack after I put it in my pant pocket and went to drive motorcycle.

New rule of Nagesh: No driving motorcycle with phone in backpocket. Always put phone in front-pocket or use clips to store it in shirt pocket.


Get yourself one of those snazzy leather cases for it. Mwah!


Leather? As in, Cow Leather?


True Fact: Number of buffalo in India exceed number of cows by fare margin.


False Fact: You are from India.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-04 12:36 • by AN AMAZING CODER (unregistered)
382542 in reply to 382457
MS:
Jack:

You realize Windows is only controlling the entertainment system, right?


I didn't see anything in the original post about an "entertainment system". I saw "private plane" and "in-flight navigation".

For those not familiar with the highly technical terms, "navigation" is how you know where you are and how to get where you are going. It's not "entertainment".


Navigation versus navigation display. Your windows machine running software that wraps the output of a navigational instrument to give you some cool interactive maps is not the same thing as windows powering your navigation instruments.

MS:

Windows is the de-facto standard for navigation software for small boats, so I would not be surprised to find it in small planes.


Planes have higher standards than boats, being that if the computer on your boat craps out you'll just float there until your S.O.S. is responded to, versus eventually plummeting to your death in a plane. Boat captains can also use more traditional forms of navigation like the stars, since they don't have to worry about keeping a reference to the horizon while looking up. Maybe pilots can do the same, but again, they have more to worry about.


MS:



I'm sure the flight systems use an RTOS, and probably a proprietary one.


Maybe aircraft flight systems are exclusively some RTOS, but there are Windows-based ECDIS systems for use in commercial shipping. So, next time you see a container ship, wonder if it is using Windows to navigate.

(I'd say "next time you see a supertanker, but most of you aren't likely to be anywhere that a supertanker can go...)


Your assetion was "if windows crashes then I can't navigate". ECDIS makes it easier for you to navigate, it's not the only way to navigate.

By the way, ECDIS entails GPS, which is still probably not powered by Windows itself.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-04 13:31 • by Shark8 (unregistered)
382549 in reply to 382442
[quote user="Jack"][quote user="Ralph"]
I'm sure the flight systems use an RTOS, and probably a proprietary one.[/quote]

And there's a VERY high chance that OS is written in Ada.
http://archive.adaic.com/projects/atwork/boeing.html

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-04 17:41 • by ammoQ
Samsung sold more than 7 million Galaxy Notes within 6 months, making it nearly as successful as the Galaxy S II. In hindsight, this explains why the Pointy Haired Boss is the boss and Dilbert isn't.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-05 09:51 • by Luc (unregistered)
You shouldn't see this comment.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-05 15:58 • by Strolskon
382595 in reply to 382580
Luc:
You shouldn't see this comment.

Good, I don't.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-06 11:43 • by Morris (unregistered)
382635 in reply to 382432
Dilbert is an illustration of how excessive cynicism can destroy creativity.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-07 23:26 • by George Boole (unregistered)
382783 in reply to 382451
n_slash_a:
Jack:
Ralph:
Wait a second.

Someone thought it would be a good idea to run Windows on an airplane???!!!! And you said "yeah, sure"?

Did you not read the fine print? Did you skip over the part where they disclaimed all liability for "unexpected errors" (because when you sell crapware, many errors are expected)?? Did your eyes glaze over when they talked about the possibility of system crashes, and you didn't get that the "system" is your deathtrap plane???

What about the paragraph where it said you can't sue them for faults no matter how negligent they were? Didn't it worry you when you had to initial the sentence saying this contract is binding on your heirs??

Windows on an airplane. Humppphhh! More dangerous than a terrorist.

You realize Windows is only controlling the entertainment system, right?

I'm sure the flight systems use an RTOS, and probably a proprietary one.

As some who programs the GPS part of flight control systems, I can assure you that no, we don't use Windows. It is a propriety RTOS that tests the functionality of EVERY line of code and EVERY true/false conditional statement.

Primary flight navigation equipment must conform to DO-178B Level A, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DO-178B


You mean you use conditional statements that AREN'T true/false? Dear God.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-08 20:34 • by rohmell brills (unregistered)
382898 in reply to 382413
You may be frist, butIU am firts.

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-09 10:47 • by not frits either (unregistered)
382909 in reply to 382439
Ralph:

Windows on an airplane. Humppphhh! More dangerous than a terrorist.


One could call Microsoft a terrorist organisation, as they try to convince people Microsoft’s stuff is best by suggesting bad things will happen to people using competitors. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear%2C_uncertainty_and_doubt. This means you cannot trust Microsoft!

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes

2012-06-18 09:42 • by Micky (unregistered)
383327 in reply to 382542
AN AMAZING CODER:
Planes have higher standards than boats, being that if the computer on your boat craps out you'll just float there until your S.O.S. is responded to, versus eventually plummeting to your death in a plane. Boat captains can also use more traditional forms of navigation like the stars, since they don't have to worry about keeping a reference to the horizon while looking up. Maybe pilots can do the same, but again, they have more to worry about.


The fallback navigation for pilots tends to be a map and/or compass and/or nav beacons and/or ground help.

People flew planes well before GPS was invented. Pilots are all initially taught how to fly planes without the aid of GPS. Even a 747 pilot can descend to a map for navigation if its GPS fails.

In low visibility, maps don't work (but neither does navigation by stars...), but then they can use either nav beacons (if they're in an area which still has them), or triangulation by ground equipment can find them (we're all taught how to ask 121.5 for a location fix).

Any pilot who would crash if their GPS failed really shouldn't be flying a plane...

Re: No One Should Need More Than 64 Zettabytes - Galaxy Note

2012-07-11 16:56 • by arifsaha
I don't have a Galaxy Note, but if need to buy a phone today, it very likely be a Galaxy Note. There are nothing wrong with its size, it actually what make it better than other phones.
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2Next »

Add Comment