Search Results

Search found 110 results on 5 pages for 'myth busting'.

Page 1/5 | 1 2 3 4 5  | Next Page >

  • Myth Busting the Duplicate Content Myth

    Using previously published articles such as you find on article sites does not mean you are going to suffer the wrath of search engines and suffer the "Duplicate Content Penalty" death sentence. If you respect your readers, your guest bloggers and article authors, then you should not worry. If you are trying to deceive readers or search engines then you will get in trouble.

    Read the article

  • Are outdated comments an urban myth?

    - by Karl Bielefeldt
    I constantly see people making the claim that "comments tend to become outdated." The thing is, I think I have seen maybe two or three outdated comments my entire career. Outdated information in separate documents happens all the time, but in my experience outdated comments in the code itself are exceedingly rare. Have I just been lucky in who I work with? Are certain industries more prone to this problem than others? Do you have specific examples of recent outdated comments you've seen? Or are outdated comments more of a theoretical problem than an actual one?

    Read the article

  • Is there any evidence that lisp actually is better than other languages at artificial intelligence?

    - by Joe D
    I asked this question on SO but it was closed fairly promptly (within 3 minutes) because it was too subjective. I then thought to ask it here on Programmers, a site for "subjective questions on software development". Quoting from the original question: There seems to be a long-held belief (mainly by non-lispers) that lisp is only good for developing AI. Where did this belief originate? And is there any basis in fact to it?

    Read the article

  • BitTorrent Myth

    - by Moon .
    In BitTorent Statistics there is a field "Total Ratio" that is the ratio between total downloads and uploads. i have heard that this ratio affects BitTorrent'ss performance. If the ratio is better then BitTorrent Network provides you services on priority. And If the ratio is down (less uploads) then the BitTorrent provides you services on average or below average priorities. Is there something like that.....

    Read the article

  • Is Your Website Booming Or Busting?

    How long has it been since your website's home page has been updated with fresh new text and images? How about your blog? Has it been weeks... months even... since your last entry? What about the last time you sent out a newsletter?

    Read the article

  • Decompilers - Myth or Fact ?

    - by Simon
    Lately I have been thinking of application security and binaries and decompilers. (FYI- Decompilers is just an anti-complier, the purpose is to get the source back from the binary) Is there such thing as "Perfect Decompiler"? or are binaries safe from reverse engineering? (For clarity sake, by "Perfect" I mean the original source files with all the variable names/macros/functions/classes/if possible comments in the respective headers and source files used to get the binary) What are some of the best practices used to prevent reverse engineering of software? Is it a major concern? Also is obfuscation/file permissions the only way to prevent unauthorized hacks on scripts? (call me a script-junky if you should)

    Read the article

  • Cache Busting and Include Files for Nginx

    - by Vince Kronlein
    In Apache you can use the following to cache bust css and js files and server them as a single file with Apache's Include mod: <FilesMatch "\.combined\.js$"> Options +Includes AddOutputFilterByType INCLUDES application/javascript application/json SetOutputFilter INCLUDES </FilesMatch> <FilesMatch "\.combined\.css$"> Options +Includes AddOutputFilterByType INCLUDES text/css SetOutputFilter INCLUDES </FilesMatch> <IfModule mod_rewrite.c> RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule ^(.+)\.(\d+)\.(js|css|png|jpg|gif)$ $1.$3 [L] </IfModule> I know this is possible with nginx but I can't seem to get the syntax correct. -- EDIT -- Adding some code The only piece I have thus far is: location ~* (.+)\.(?:\d+)\.(js|css)$ { ssi on; try_files $uri $1.$2; } What I'm looking for is to be able to combine all js and css files into single files using the combined keyword with a number for cache busting: style.combined.100.css javascript.combined.100.js

    Read the article

  • VB Myth - Case Insensitivity is Awesome!

    - by Damon
    I was reading Andy Brown's article 10 Reasons Why Visual Basic is Better than C# and the first claim is that VB is superior because of case insensitivity.  I think the reasons he outlines are basically as follows: Your fingers get tired finding the shift key (e.g. typing PascalCase and camelCase members) You are much more likely to make mistakes while typing names When you accidentally leave caps lock on, it really matters These three arguments culminate in the conclusion: "It doesn't matter if you disagree with everything else in this article: case-sensitivity alone is sufficient reason to ditch C#!" Righto.  I've been using Visual Basic since version 5.0, I wrote a book about ASP.NET in Visual Basic, so I want everyone to know I'm definitely not a VB.NET hater.  I had to converted to C# because it was the language of preference at the places I've worked, so I'm used to both languages.  I love me some case sensitivity.  So first, let's debunk the claims. First, your fingers do not get tired of finding the shift key unless you are writing code in notepad and compiling everything on the command line.  Visual Studio pretty much takes away the need to use the shift key at all. For the most part, any programmer worth a damn doesn't have to type more than about 3-5 characters of any variable or method name before IntelliSense kicks in to help.  VB or C#, if you are not using the tab key for autocomplete then you are typing too much anyway, regardless of whether the shift key is involved or not.  Also, you've got to be a pretty hard-core candy ass if you're complaining at the end of the day that your little fingers are hurting from hitting the shift key. Second, I cannot logically refute the fact that if there are more stringent rules about case sensitivity it will lead to more mistakes.  As such, know that you will be more prone to mistakes in C#.  However, lets talk about the magnitude of the problem.  If you are using IntelliSense then you have auto-correction built in so you probably won't have much of a problem in the first place.  If you manage to bypass IntelliSense and type something wrong you normally are immediately presented with a red-squiggly to let you know something is amiss.  Normally, a person would look at the problem, figure out what the heck went wrong, and then avoid that problem again in the future.  Granted, I have met people who seem to lack this capability, but their problem is deeper than a decision between VB.NET and C#.  So let's make sure that we're all on the same page about this problem.  If you have two teams of developers, one that uses VB.NET and one that uses C#, do not expect to see the VB.NET team drinking beer at the end of the project in festive revelry while the C# team is crying over what the hell to do because their code is riddled with case-sensitivity problems that nobody can resolve. Lastly, if you leave your caps lock key on, turn it off.  Really, what kind of ass-hat would write an entire VB.NET application ENTIRELY IN CAPS?  I happen to be a fan of case sensitivity because it encourages precision and uniformity.  The last thing I need is a code base that looks like it was ransacked by LeEt HacKors wHo Can uSe wHateVer cASe tHey wanT.  I mean really, if you saw someone write this: PuBLIc Sub MyMethod . End Sub And upon asking them why BL was upper case, they responded "Oh, I accidentally hit the shift key there.  Fortunately for me VB.NET is a case insensitive language so I saved a couple of keystrokes by leaving it in there."  Or if you saw: PUBLIC SUB ANOTHERMETHOD . END SUB And the response to why it was uppercased was "Yeah, I accidentally had caps locks on, fortunately for me VB.NET doesn't care.  Really dodged a bullet there, glad I wasn't using C#."  Would you not think that a bit ridiculous?  If you want to convince C# developers that C# sucks, go for it.  But the case insensitivity argument is crap.

    Read the article

  • How can I test caching and cache busting?

    - by Nathan Long
    In PHP, I'm trying to steal a page from the Rails playbook (see 'Using Asset Timestamps' here): By default, Rails appends assets' timestamps to all asset paths. This allows you to set a cache-expiration date for the asset far into the future, but still be able to instantly invalidate it by simply updating the file (and hence updating the timestamp, which then updates the URL as the timestamp is part of that, which in turn busts the cache). It‘s the responsibility of the web server you use to set the far-future expiration date on cache assets that you need to take advantage of this feature. Here‘s an example for Apache: # Asset Expiration ExpiresActive On <FilesMatch "\.(ico|gif|jpe?g|png|js|css)$"> ExpiresDefault "access plus 1 year" </FilesMatch> If you look at a the source for a Rails page, you'll see what they mean: the path to a stylesheet might be "/stylesheets/scaffold.css?1268228124", where the numbers at the end are the timestamp when the file was last updated. So it should work like this: The browser says 'give me this page' The server says 'here, and by the way, this stylesheet called scaffold.css?1268228124 can be cached for a year - it's not gonna change.' On reloads, the browser says 'I'm not asking for that css file, because my local copy is still good.' A month later, you edit and save the file, which changes the timestamp, which means that the file is no longer called scaffold.css?1268228124 because the numbers change. When the browser sees that, it says 'I've never seen that file! Give me a copy, please.' The cache is 'busted.' I think that's brilliant. So I wrote a function that spits out stylesheet and javascript tags with timestamps appended to the file names, and I configured Apache with the statement above. Now: how do I tell if the caching and cache busting are working? I'm checking my pages with two plugins for Firebug: Yslow and Google Page Speed. Both seem to say that my files are caching: "Add expires headers" in Yslow and "leverage browser caching" in Page Speed are both checked. But when I look at the Page Speed Activity, I see a lot of requests and waiting and no 'cache hits'. If I change my stylesheet and reload, I do see the change immediately. But I don't know if that's because the browser never cached in the first place or because the cache is busted. How can I tell?

    Read the article

  • Idiots Guide to Setting Up Myth TV?

    - by Jared
    I want to build a MythTV back end. I don't want to compile things if I can help it, and I'd like to know what hardware will work with the cable system in the US. Are there any guides to building a MythTV box? I've found several but they all appear to be three or so years out of date and I have no clue how Linux hardware support has changed since then.

    Read the article

  • myth about factory pattern

    - by leiz
    This has bothered me for awhile, and I have no clues if this is a myth. It seems that a factory pattern can ease the pain of adding a dependency for a class. For example, in a book, it has something like this Suppose that you have a class named Order. Initially it did not depend on anything. Therefore you didn't bother using a factory to create Order objects and you just used plain new to instantiate the objects. However, you now have a requirement that Order has to be created in association with a Customer. There are million places you need to change to add this extra parameter. If only you had de?ned a factory for the Order class, you would have met the new requirement without the same pain. How is this not same pain as adding an extra parameter to the constructor? I mean you would still need to provide an extra argument for the factory and that is also used by million places, right?

    Read the article

  • Yes, you can benefit from both data and backup compression

    - by AaronBertrand
    Earlier today, MSSQLTips posted a backup compression tip by Thomas LaRock ( blog | twitter ). In that article, Tom states: "If you are already compressing data then you will not see much benefit from backup compression." I don't want to argue with a rock star, and I will concede that he may be right in some scenarios. Nonetheless, I tweeted that "it depends;" Thomas then asked for "an example where you have data comp and you also see a large benefit from backup comp?" My initial reaction came about...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Mythbusters- Programming/hacking myths [closed]

    - by stephen776
    Hey guys. I am a big fan of the Discovery show Mythbusters, as Im sure some of you are as well. I have always wanted them to do an episode on programming/hacking. They get a lot of their show ideas from fans so I though we could compile a list of possible myths to bust. Lets hear your ideas! (sorry if this is not appropriate, close if necessary) Edit: I am not necessarily looking for subjective "This is what I want to see" answers. I am talking more along the lines of interesting computer/programming/hacking stories that would appeal to a general audience. I do not expect them to do a show on "Whats faster i++ or i + 1".

    Read the article

  • Have you worked with a well designed application?

    - by Vilx-
    Inspired by this question, I started wondering - is there or has there ever been such a thing as a "well designed application"? One where the architecture would be perfect and no refactoring would ever be needed; code would be easy to read and understand even for someone new to the project; changes could be done with a 100% certainty that they won't break anything; etc? I must admit that whatever codebases I've worked with, they've all been more or less a mess. Even code that I start myself only stays organized at the start, and then slowly deteriorates as the time passes. I'm even starting to accept this as part of life and can't figure out whether I should be worried about that or not. So... is there such a thing as a "well designed application"? Or is all our code so shitty that there isn't even a point in trying to make it better, because it will never be good anyway?

    Read the article

  • Cost Comparison Hard Disk Drive to Solid State Drive on Price per Gigabyte - dispelling a myth!

    - by tonyrogerson
    It is often said that Hard Disk Drive storage is significantly cheaper per GiByte than Solid State Devices – this is wholly inaccurate within the database space. People need to look at the cost of the complete solution and not just a single component part in isolation to what is really required to meet the business requirement. Buying a single Hitachi Ultrastar 600GB 3.5” SAS 15Krpm hard disk drive will cost approximately £239.60 (http://scan.co.uk, 22nd March 2012) compared to an OCZ 600GB Z-Drive R4 CM84 PCIe costing £2,316.54 (http://scan.co.uk, 22nd March 2012); I’ve not included FusionIO ioDrive because there is no public pricing available for it – something I never understand and personally when companies do this I immediately think what are they hiding, luckily in FusionIO’s case the product is proven though is expensive compared to OCZ enterprise offerings. On the face of it the single 15Krpm hard disk has a price per GB of £0.39, the SSD £3.86; this is what you will see in the press and this is what sales people will use in comparing the two technologies – do not be fooled by this bullshit people! What is the requirement? The requirement is the database will have a static size of 400GB kept static through archiving so growth and trim will balance the database size, the client requires resilience, there will be several hundred call centre staff querying the database where queries will read a small amount of data but there will be no hot spot in the data so the randomness will come across the entire 400GB of the database, estimates predict that the IOps required will be approximately 4,000IOps at peak times, because it’s a call centre system the IO latency is important and must remain below 5ms per IO. The balance between read and write is 70% read, 30% write. The requirement is now defined and we have three of the most important pieces of the puzzle – space required, estimated IOps and maximum latency per IO. Something to consider with regard SQL Server; write activity requires synchronous IO to the storage media specifically the transaction log; that means the write thread will wait until the IO is completed and hardened off until the thread can continue execution, the requirement has stated that 30% of the system activity will be write so we can expect a high amount of synchronous activity. The hardware solution needs to be defined; two possible solutions: hard disk or solid state based; the real question now is how many hard disks are required to achieve the IO throughput, the latency and resilience, ditto for the solid state. Hard Drive solution On a test on an HP DL380, P410i controller using IOMeter against a single 15Krpm 146GB SAS drive, the throughput given on a transfer size of 8KiB against a 40GiB file on a freshly formatted disk where the partition is the only partition on the disk thus the 40GiB file is on the outer edge of the drive so more sectors can be read before head movement is required: For 100% sequential IO at a queue depth of 16 with 8 worker threads 43,537 IOps at an average latency of 2.93ms (340 MiB/s), for 100% random IO at the same queue depth and worker threads 3,733 IOps at an average latency of 34.06ms (34 MiB/s). The same test was done on the same disk but the test file was 130GiB: For 100% sequential IO at a queue depth of 16 with 8 worker threads 43,537 IOps at an average latency of 2.93ms (340 MiB/s), for 100% random IO at the same queue depth and worker threads 528 IOps at an average latency of 217.49ms (4 MiB/s). From the result it is clear random performance gets worse as the disk fills up – I’m currently writing an article on short stroking which will cover this in detail. Given the work load is random in nature looking at the random performance of the single drive when only 40 GiB of the 146 GB is used gives near the IOps required but the latency is way out. Luckily I have tested 6 x 15Krpm 146GB SAS 15Krpm drives in a RAID 0 using the same test methodology, for the same test above on a 130 GiB for each drive added the performance boost is near linear, for each drive added throughput goes up by 5 MiB/sec, IOps by 700 IOps and latency reducing nearly 50% per drive added (172 ms, 94 ms, 65 ms, 47 ms, 37 ms, 30 ms). This is because the same 130GiB is spread out more as you add drives 130 / 1, 130 / 2, 130 / 3 etc. so implicit short stroking is occurring because there is less file on each drive so less head movement required. The best latency is still 30 ms but we have the IOps required now, but that’s on a 130GiB file and not the 400GiB we need. Some reality check here: a) the drive randomness is more likely to be 50/50 and not a full 100% but the above has highlighted the effect randomness has on the drive and the more a drive fills with data the worse the effect. For argument sake let us assume that for the given workload we need 8 disks to do the job, for resilience reasons we will need 16 because we need to RAID 1+0 them in order to get the throughput and the resilience, RAID 5 would degrade performance. Cost for hard drives: 16 x £239.60 = £3,833.60 For the hard drives we will need disk controllers and a separate external disk array because the likelihood is that the server itself won’t take the drives, a quick spec off DELL for a PowerVault MD1220 which gives the dual pathing with 16 disks 146GB 15Krpm 2.5” disks is priced at £7,438.00, note its probably more once we had two controller cards to sit in the server in, racking etc. Minimum cost taking the DELL quote as an example is therefore: {Cost of Hardware} / {Storage Required} £7,438.60 / 400 = £18.595 per GB £18.59 per GiB is a far cry from the £0.39 we had been told by the salesman and the myth. Yes, the storage array is composed of 16 x 146 disks in RAID 10 (therefore 8 usable) giving an effective usable storage availability of 1168GB but the actual storage requirement is only 400 and the extra disks have had to be purchased to get the  IOps up. Solid State Drive solution A single card significantly exceeds the IOps and latency required, for resilience two will be required. ( £2,316.54 * 2 ) / 400 = £11.58 per GB With the SSD solution only two PCIe sockets are required, no external disk units, no additional controllers, no redundant controllers etc. Conclusion I hope by showing you an example that the myth that hard disk drives are cheaper per GiB than Solid State has now been dispelled - £11.58 per GB for SSD compared to £18.59 for Hard Disk. I’ve not even touched on the running costs, compare the costs of running 18 hard disks, that’s a lot of heat and power compared to two PCIe cards!Just a quick note: I've left a fair amount of information out due to this being a blog! If in doubt, email me :)I'll also deal with the myth that SSD's wear out at a later date as well - that's just way over done still, yes, 5 years ago, but now - no.

    Read the article

  • Reimage PC: Myth or Fact to speeding up a slow PC?

    - by sunpech
    I have a 4-5 year old PC running Windows XP for software development at work. It struggles to run all development tools I need at the same time. Management feels I need to reimage my computer to "speed it up". The last time it was imaged was about 3 years ago. What resources books, websites, blogs, articles, etc are out there that supports/debunks this well known belief that reimaging an old PC running Windows XP will make it faster once again? A resource I remember reading is from Lifehacker.com: Windows Maintenance Tips: The Good, Bad And Useless

    Read the article

  • Less reboots on Windows Server Core, is this true or just a myth?

    - by Peter Hahndorf
    Because there are less components installed on a Windows Server core OS, it needs less patches than the full OS. I read in several places that therefor it needs less reboots after patching. I'm running Server 2012 core in production since September 2012 now and I don't remember a single patch-Tuesday when I did not have to reboot the server after installing Windows updates. Are there any hard numbers out there that compare the required reboots for core vs. Full OS? Less reboots may be the main reason why people choose to go with Server core. If it actually requires just as many reboots as the full OS install, they may think again the next time they set up a server.

    Read the article

  • C drive should only contain OS. Myth or fact?

    - by Fasih Khatib
    So, I have a 500GB HDD @7200RPM. It is split as: C: 97GB D: 179GB E: 188GB My belief is to keep OS ONLY in C:\ and any adamant programs that won't go anywhere apart from C:\ [because this speeds up the PC during startup process] and install programs in D:\ so that in case I have to reinstall the OS, I will have the programs readily available after reinstall. But I have begun to think this approach is flawed because if C:\ is formatted, I will lose registry values and stuff that goes in %appdata% and so it is no use keeping programs in D:/ drive because they will be useless after all. Should I go ahead and install ALL of my programs in C:\ and then use D:\ and E:\ for storing my data like photos, text files, java files n all? How will this impact the performance of the HDD? I only have 3 programs in D:\Program Files so it will be easy to reinstall them :)

    Read the article

  • VM Virtual guest machine disk defrag improves performance, myth or reality?

    - by jafin
    In operation of a virtual Vmware or Hyper-V guest typically advice is given to defrag the host and virtual disk images so to result in improved performance. Something like a cmd: vmware-vdiskmanager -d <file.vmdk> works great. Yet I can't find any qualitive evidence that suggest defraging inside the guest VM improves performance. Does anyone have advice or evidence that doesn't come from a commercial defragger's whitepaper that suggests inside guest defragging helps?

    Read the article

  • Frame Buster Buster ... buster code needed

    - by Jeff Atwood
    Let's say you don't want other sites to "frame" your site in an <iframe>: <iframe src="http://yourwebsite.com"></iframe> So you insert anti-framing, frame busting JavaScript into all your pages: /* break us out of any containing iframes */ if (top != self) { top.location.replace(self.location.href); } Excellent! Now you "bust" or break out of any containing iframe automatically. Except for one small problem. As it turns out, your frame-busting code can be busted, as shown here: <script type="text/javascript"> var prevent_bust = 0 window.onbeforeunload = function() { prevent_bust++ } setInterval(function() { if (prevent_bust > 0) { prevent_bust -= 2 window.top.location = 'http://server-which-responds-with-204.com' } }, 1) </script> This code does the following: increments a counter every time the browser attempts to navigate away from the current page, via the window.onbeforeonload event handler sets up a timer that fires every millisecond via setInterval(), and if it sees the counter incremented, changes the current location to a server of the attacker's control that server serves up a page with HTTP status code 204, which does not cause the browser to nagivate anywhere My question is -- and this is more of a JavaScript puzzle than an actual problem -- how can you defeat the frame-busting buster? I had a few thoughts, but nothing worked in my testing: attempting to clear the onbeforeunload event via onbeforeonload = null had no effect adding an alert() stopped the process let the user know it was happening, but did not interfere with the code in any way; clicking OK lets the busting continue as normal I can't think of any way to clear the setInterval() timer I'm not much of a JavaScript programmer, so here's my challenge to you: hey buster, can you bust the frame-busting buster?

    Read the article

  • An XEvent A Day: 31 days of Extended Events

    - by Jonathan Kehayias
    Back in April, Paul Randal ( Blog | Twitter ) did a 30 day series titled A SQL Server Myth a Day , where he covered a different myth about SQL Server every day of the month. At the same time Glenn Alan Berry ( Blog |Twitter) did a 30 day series titled A DMV a Day , where he blogged about a different DMV every day of the month. Being so inspired by these two guys, I have decided to attempt a month long series on Extended Events that I am going to call A XEvent a Day . I originally wanted to do this...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Upgrade to 0.25, files served to uPNP devices cannot play

    - by David Buttrick
    I have a Sony BDP-S390 bluray & network player. I upgraded my Myth server to 0.25. When I browse to the Myth server, and try to play a recording, I get an error message about the file not being payable in the player. Interestingly, the files that i have recorded, and the videos that I have loaded into my Video volume group are .mpg or .mp4. The player shows the filetype that it thinks the file is in it's list, and it claims that these files are AVI files, however none of them are. They are all .mp4 or .mpg files. Thinking that that was just an optical illusion, I went ahead and tried to play a file, but I get an error about the file not being playable. First of all, is there something that I need to do to make the uPNP server know about different filetypes? Is it reporting AVI because it hasn't been told about MPG or MP4? Second, I'd like to help out some more here and collect some logging about the uPNP server in the myth server. I cant seem to find information on how to turn on logging, and there is no mythbackend settings file int /etc/default. Thanks very much.

    Read the article

  • Windows Azure Myths

    - by BuckWoody
    Windows Azure is part of the Microsoft "stack" - the suite of software and services we offer. Because we have so many products in almost every part of technology, it's hard to know everything about all parts of what we do - even for those of us who work here. So it's no surprise that some folks are not as familiar with Windows and SQL Azure as they are, say Windows Server or XBox. As I chat with folks about a solution for a business or organization need, I put Windows Azure into the mix. I always start off with "What do you already know about Windows Azure?" so that I don't bore folks with information they already have. I some cases they've checked out the product ahead of time and have specific questions, in others they aren't as familiar, and in still others there is a fair amount of mis-information. Sometimes that's because of a marketing failure, sometimes it's hearsay, and somtetimes it's active misinformation. I thought I might lay out a few of these misconceptions. As always - do your fact-checking! Never take anyone's word alone (including mine) as gospel. Make sure you educate yourself on your options. Your company or your clients depend on you to have the right information on IT, so make sure you live up to that. Myth 1: Nobody uses Windows Azure It's true that we don't give out numbers on the amount of clients on Windows and SQL Azure. But lots of folks are here - companies you may have heard of like Boeing, NASA, Fujitsu, The City of London, Nuedesic, and many others. I deal with firms small and large that use Windows Azure for mission-critical applications, sometimes totally on Windows and/or SQL Azure, sometimes in conjunction with an on-premises system, sometimes for only a specific component in Windows Azure like storage. The interesting thing is that many sites you visit have a Windows Azure component, or are running on Windows Azure. They just don't announce it. Just like the other cloud providers, the companies have asked to be completely branded themselves - they don't want you to be aware or care that they are on Windows Azure. Sometimes that's for security, other times it's for different reasons. It's just like the web sites you visit. For the most part, they don't advertise which OS or Web Server they use. It really just shouldn't matter. The point is that they just use what works to solve a given problem. Check out a few public case studies here: https://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/home/case-studies/ Myth 2: It's only for Microsoft stuff - can't use Open Source This is the one I face the most, and am the most dismayed by. We work just fine with many open source products, including Java, NodeJS, PHP, Ruby, Python, Hadoop, and many other languages and applications. You can quickly deploy a Wordpress, Umbraco and other "kits". We have software development kits (SDK's) for iPhones, iPads, Android, Windows phones and more. We have an SDK to work with FaceBook and other social networks. In short, we play well with others. More on the languages and runtimes we support here: https://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/develop/overview/ More on the SDK's here: http://www.wadewegner.com/2011/05/windows-azure-toolkit-for-ios/, http://www.wadewegner.com/2011/08/windows-azure-toolkits-for-devices-now-with-android/, http://azuretoolkit.codeplex.com/ Myth 3: Microsoft expects me to switch everything to "the cloud" No, we don't. That would be disasterous, unless the only things you run in your company uses works perfectly in Azure. Use Windows Azure  - or any cloud for that matter - where it works. Whenever I talk to companies, I focus on two things: Something that is broken and needs to be re-architected Something you want to do that is new If something is broken, and you need new tools to scale, extend, add capacity dynamically and so on, then you can consider using Windows or SQL Azure. It can help solve problems that you have, or it may include a component you don't want to write or architect yourself. Sometimes you want to do something new, like extend your company's offerings to mobile phones, to the web, or to a social network. More info on where it works here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/buckwoody/archive/2011/01/18/windows-azure-and-sql-azure-use-cases.aspx Myth 4: I have to write code to use Windows and SQL Azure If Windows Azure is a PaaS - a Platform as a Service - then don't you have to write code to use it? Nope. Windows and SQL Azure are made up of various components. Some of those components allow you to write and deploy code (like Compute) and others don't. We have lots of customers using Windows Azure storage as a backup, to securely share files instead of using DropBox, to distribute videos or code or firmware, and more. Others use our High Performance Computing (HPC) offering to rent a supercomputer when they need one. You can even throw workloads at that using Excel! In addition there are lots of other components in Windows Azure you can use, from the Windows Azure Media Services to others. More here: https://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/home/scenarios/saas/ Myth 5: Windows Azure is just another form of "vendor lock-in" Windows Azure uses .NET, OSS languages and standard interfaces for the code. Sure, you're not going to take the code line-for-line and run it on a mainframe, but it's standard code that you write, and can port to something else. And the data is yours - you can bring it back whever you want. It's either in text or binary form, that you have complete control over. There are no licenses - you can "pay as you go", and when you're done, you can leave the service and take all your code, data and IP with you.   So go out there, read up, try it. Use it where it works. And don't believe everything you hear - sometimes the Internet doesn't get it all correct. :)

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5  | Next Page >