Search Results

Search found 33496 results on 1340 pages for '32 vs 64 bit'.

Page 92/1340 | < Previous Page | 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99  | Next Page >

  • How to detect Windows 64 bit platform with .net?

    - by Marc
    In a .net 2.0 C# application I use the following code to detect the operating system platform: string os_platform = System.Environment.OSVersion.Platform.ToString();<br/> This returns "Win32NT". The problem is that it returns "Win32NT" even when running on Windows Vista 64bit. Is there any other method to know the correct platform (32 or 64bit)? Note that it should also detect 64bit when run as 32bit app on Windows 64bit.

    Read the article

  • OpenCV application, moving from 32bits OS to 64 bits, any known issues ?

    - by Spredzy
    Hi all, I was developing an C++ application using OpenCV2.0 under Windows 32bits OS, I recently moved to a Windows 64 bits OS and now it's not working anymore. Compilation does not recognize the *.lib set in the project properties Then when I change their name - what I think I should not be supposed to do - It crashed at my first assignment : Vector.push_back(tmp) Does anyone has an idea ?

    Read the article

  • How to get LSB bit in MIPS?

    - by israkir
    Is there a short way to check/get for least significant bit in a 32-bit integer, in MIPS? It is obviously set for the odd numbers and an algorithm which checks for the whole number is odd or even can decide for this. But I just wonder is there a better way to do this...

    Read the article

  • Enable 8th bit as Meta in zsh without a warning

    - by Bostonvaulter
    In my quest to configure my shell to work exactly how I want it with respect to the alt/meta key I am having some trouble. Recently I added "bindkey -m" to my .zshrc and now whenever I start a zsh shell (ie open a terminal window) I get this error "warning: `bindkey -m' disables multibyte support". Now since I don't care much about multibyte support atm, is there a way I can disable just this warning? Even better would be a way to use 8th-bit meta as well as multibyte. Also note that this happens on a clean zsh install on 4.3.9 and 4.3.10 My reasoning for wanting bindkey -m vim: alt mappings (my own personal commands/mappings) zsh: alt mappings (such as Alt-. to recall the last argument of the previous command) emacs: alt mappings (lots of built-ins) So, is there any way to disable this warning or otherwise accomplish what I'm trying to do?

    Read the article

  • How slow are bit fields in C++

    - by Shane MacLaughlin
    I have a C++ application that includes a number of structures with manually controlled bit fields, something like #define FLAG1 0x0001 #define FLAG2 0x0002 #define FLAG3 0x0004 class MyClass { ' ' unsigned Flags; int IsFlag1Set() { return Flags & FLAG1; } void SetFlag1Set() { Flags |= FLAG1; } void ResetFlag1() { Flags &= 0xffffffff ^ FLAG1; } ' ' }; For obvious reasons I'd like to change this to use bit fields, something like class MyClass { ' ' struct Flags { unsigned Flag1:1; unsigned Flag2:1; unsigned Flag3:1; }; ' ' }; The one concern I have with making this switch is that I've come across a number of references on this site stating how slow bit fields are in C++. My assumption is that they are still faster than the manual code shown above, but is there any hard reference material covering the speed implications of using bit fields on various platforms, specifically 32bit and 64bit windows. The application deals with huge amounts of data in memory and must be both fast and memory efficient, which could well be why it was written this way in the first place.

    Read the article

  • What alternatives to __attribute__ exist on 64-bit kernels?

    - by Saifi Khan
    Hi: Is there any alternative to non-ISO gcc specific extension __attribute__ on 64-bit kernels ? Three types that i've noticed are: function attributes, type attributes and variable attributes. eg. i'd like to avoid using __attribute__((__packed__)) for structures passed over the network, even though some gcc based code do use it. Any suggestions or pointers on how to entirely avoid __attribute__ usage in C systems/kernel code ? thanks Saifi.

    Read the article

  • Laptop held hostage by administrator domain and Bit locker

    - by user144780
    I have a laptop computer that I had when I was working at an IT company. I don´t work there anymore but I could keep the computer (Lenovo) Suddenly my wireless internet didn´t work anymore showing error "insert SIM into the mobile broadband device" and month later connectiong to internet with cable got disabled I don´t know the password to sign in as an administrator on domain and whatever I try to do/install/change settings... everything needs admin rights. To surf the internet again with the computer I tried to install a new Windows but it´s seems to be protected with Bit Locker, asking for recovery key. I´ve googled and googled bunch of CMD tricks but most of the shows "system error 5 has occured" Is there anyway to get the wireless internet to work, change the admin or install new Windows? - or should I rather enjoying throwing it of the balcony or set it one fire? :)

    Read the article

  • Converting higher bit rate songs to 128 kbps AAC

    - by danny wilson
    i was updating my ipod classic tonight when for some stupid reason i checked the box which says "convert higher bit rate to 128 kbps aac". straight away it changed my audio amount from 67gb to 79gb and then started to sync, i stopped it right away as i thought the whole reason was to reduce space not add anymore to it. everytime i try to sync up now it keeps going back to try this same task and i dont know how to stop it apart from the obvious and cancelling the sync but then i cant update my ipod then? anybody got any ideas for me please? thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to treat 64-bit words on a CUDA device?

    - by pikkio
    Hi, I'd like to handle directly 64-bit words on the CUDA platform (eg. uint64_t vars). I understand, however, that addressing space, registers and the SP architecture are all 32-bit based. I actually found this to work correctly (on my CUDA cc1.1 card): __global__ void test64Kernel( uint64_t *word ) { (*word) <<= 56; } but I don't know, for example, how this affects registers usage and the operations per clock cycle count.

    Read the article

  • How to run Tomcat 6 on WinXP 64 bit ?

    - by Srg
    Installed Tomcat 6 on WinXP 64. It installed just fine. But when I try to launch it ( from Windows Services) I get the following error : "Can not start an the Apache Tomcat Service on Local computer." error 216:0xd8

    Read the article

  • Speedup of fixing an openssl bug with 8192 bit key [on hold]

    - by rubo77
    This is related to this Bug-Report https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=747453 OpenSSL contains a set of arbitrary limitations on the size of accepted key parameters that make unrelated software fail to establish secure connections. The problem was found while debugging a XMPP s2s connection issue where two servers with long certificate keys (8192 Bit RSA) failed to establish a secure connection because OpenSSL rejected the handshake. This seems to be a small problem to be fixed but although there is an easy patch available to fix the issue in that bug report, no reactions are noticed so far.. The last patch that broke the 2048 barrier took 2 years to be implemented and only resulted in an increase to 4096bit, which seems to be a bad joke. Where would we have to report this to speed up the implementation for such an issue?

    Read the article

  • VS 2010 SP1 installation error: Generic Trust Failure

    - by guybarrette
    I tried to install VS SP1 from the ISO (not the Web Installer) on a machine and ended up with a non successful install with the following error: Generic Trust Failure.   The log file said: Possible transient lock. WinVerifyTrust failed with error: 2148204800 [3/9/2011, 10:6:29]Possible transient lock. WinVerifyTrust failed with error: 2148204800 [3/9/2011, 10:6:30]C:\Dev\VSSP1\VS2010SP1\VC10sp1-KB983509-x86.msp - Signature verification for file VC10sp1-KB983509-x86.msp (C:\Dev\VSSP1\VS2010SP1\VC10sp1-KB983509-x86.msp) failed with error 0x800b0100 (No signature was present in the subject.) [3/9/2011, 10:6:30] C:\Dev\VSSP1\VS2010SP1\VC10sp1-KB983509-x86.msp Signature could not be verified for VC10sp1-KB983509-x86.msp [3/9/2011, 10:6:30]No FileHash provided. Cannot perform FileHash verification for VC10sp1-KB983509-x86.msp [3/9/2011, 10:6:30]File VC10sp1-KB983509-x86.msp (C:\Dev\VSSP1\VS2010SP1\VC10sp1-KB983509-x86.msp), failed authentication. (Error = -2146762496). It is recommended that you delete this file and retry setup again. Since I didn’t want to download the 1.5GB ISO a second time, I tried the Web installer and this time it worked like a charm.  Was the problem with a corrupt download or a file missing a signature I can’t say. var addthis_pub="guybarrette";

    Read the article

  • Deferred vs Immediate execution in Linq

    - by Jalpesh P. Vadgama
    In this post, We are going to learn about Deferred vs Immediate execution in Linq.  There an interesting variations how Linq operators executes and in this post we are going to learn both Deferred execution and immediate execution. What is Deferred Execution? In the Deferred execution query will be executed and evaluated at the time of query variables usage. Let’s take an example to understand Deferred Execution better. Example: Following is a code for that. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; namespace ConsoleApplication1 { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var customers = new List<Customer>( new[] { new Customer{FirstName = "Jalpesh",LastName = "Vadgama"}, new Customer{FirstName = "Vishal",LastName = "Vadgama"}, new Customer{FirstName = "Tushar",LastName = "Maru"} } ); var newCustomers = customers.Where(c => c.LastName == "Vadgama"); customers.Add(new Customer {FirstName = "Teerth", LastName = "Vadgama"}); foreach (var c in newCustomers) { Console.WriteLine(c.FirstName); } } public class Customer { public string FirstName { get; set; } public string LastName { get; set; } } } } More on my personal blog @www.dotnetjalps.com

    Read the article

  • Progressive Enhancement vs. Single Page Apps

    - by SeanPlusPlus
    I just got back from a conference in Boston called An Event Apart. A really popular theme amongst the speakers was the idea of progressive enhancement - a site's content should go in the HTML, and JavaScript should only be used to enhance behavior. The arguments that the speakers gave for progressive enhancement were very compelling. Not only is it a solid pattern for supporting older browsers, and devices on a network with low bandwidth, but HTML fails much more gracefully than JavaScript (i.e. markup that is not supported is just ignored, while if a browser throws an exception while executing your script - you are hosed). Jeremy Keith gave a particularly insightful talk about this. But what about single page web apps like Backbone and Angular? The whole design behind these frameworks seems to push the developer toward moving content out of the HTML, and into something like a JSON API. I can not seem to gel these two design patterns: progressive enhancement vs. single page web apps. Are there instances when one is better than the other? Or are they not even antagonistic technologies, and I am missing something here with my mental model?

    Read the article

  • xVelocity engines compared: VertiPaq vs ColumnStore #ssas #vertipaq #xvelocity #sql #tabular

    - by Marco Russo (SQLBI)
    During the last months I and Alberto worked in several projects using Analysis Services Tabular and we had to face real world issues, such as complex queries, large data volume, frequent data updates and so on. Sometime we faced the challenge of comparing Tabular performance with SQL Server. It seemed a non-sense, because even if the same core xVelocity technology is implemented in both products (SQL Server 2012 uses ColumnStore indexes, whereas Analysis Services 2012 uses VertiPaq), we initially assumed that the better optimization for the in-memory engine used by Analysis Services would have been always better than SQL Server. However, we discovered several important things: Processing time might be different and having data on SQL Server could make ColumnStore way faster for processing. Partitioning in SQL Server might be much more effective for query performance than Analysis Services. A single query can scale easily on more processor on SQL Server, whereas in Analysis Services the formula engine is single-threaded and could be a bottleneck for certain queries. In case of a large workload with many concurrent users, storage engine cache in Analysis Services could be a big advantage over SQL Server, especially for scalability As you can see, these considerations are not always obvious and you might be tempted to make other assumptions based on these information. Well, don’t do that. Before anything else, read the whitepaper VertiPaq vs ColumnStore Comparison written by Alberto Ferrari. Then, measure your workload. Finally, make some conclusion. But don’t make too many assumptions. You might be wrong, as we did at the beginning of this journey.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Difference between COUNT(DISTINCT) vs COUNT(ALL)

    - by pinaldave
    This blog post is written in response to the T-SQL Tuesday hosted by Jes Schultz Borland. Earlier today, I was presenting a 45-minute session at the Community College about “The Beginning SQL Server Database”. One of the students asked me the following question. What is the difference between COUNT(DISTINCT) vs COUNT(ALL)? I found this question from the student very interesting. He seems to have read the documentation (Book Online) and was then asking me this question. I always carry laptop which has SQL Server installed. I quickly opened it and ran the following script. After looking at the result, I think it was clear to everybody. Here is the script: SELECT COUNT([Title]) Value FROM [AdventureWorks].[Person].[Contact] GO SELECT COUNT(ALL [Title]) ALLValue FROM [AdventureWorks].[Person].[Contact] GO SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT [Title]) DistinctValue FROM [AdventureWorks].[Person].[Contact] GO The above script will give me the following results. You can clearly notice from the result set that COUNT (ALL ColumnName) is the same as COUNT(ColumnName). The reality is that the “ALL” is actually  the default option and it needs not to be specified. The ALL keyword includes all the non-NULL values. I know this is very simple and may be it does not change how we work; however looking at the whole angle, I really enjoyed the question. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQLAuthority News, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – ORDER BY ColumnName vs ORDER BY ColumnNumber

    - by pinaldave
    I strongly favor ORDER BY ColumnName. I read one of the blog post where blogger compared the performance of the two SELECT statement and come to conclusion that ColumnNumber has no harm to use it. Let us understand the point made by first that there is no performance difference. Run following two scripts together: USE AdventureWorks GO -- ColumnName (Recommended) SELECT * FROM HumanResources.Department ORDER BY GroupName, Name GO -- ColumnNumber (Strongly Not Recommended) SELECT * FROM HumanResources.Department ORDER BY 3,2 GO If you look at the result and see the execution plan you will see that both of the query will take the same amount of the time. However, this was not the point of this blog post. It is not good enough to stop here. We need to understand the advantages and disadvantages of both the methods. Case 1: When Not Using * and Columns are Re-ordered USE AdventureWorks GO -- ColumnName (Recommended) SELECT GroupName, Name, ModifiedDate, DepartmentID FROM HumanResources.Department ORDER BY GroupName, Name GO -- ColumnNumber (Strongly Not Recommended) SELECT GroupName, Name, ModifiedDate, DepartmentID FROM HumanResources.Department ORDER BY 3,2 GO Case 2: When someone changes the schema of the table affecting column order I will let you recreate the example for the same. If your development server where your schema is different than the production server, if you use ColumnNumber, you will get different results on the production server. Summary: When you develop the query it may not be issue but as time passes by and new columns are added to the SELECT statement or original table is re-ordered if you have used ColumnNumber it may possible that your query will start giving you unexpected results and incorrect ORDER BY. One should note that the usage of ORDER BY ColumnName vs ORDER BY ColumnNumber should not be done based on performance but usability and scalability. It is always recommended to use proper ORDER BY clause with ColumnName to avoid any confusion. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Style bits vs. Separate bool's

    - by peterchen
    My main platform (WinAPI) still heavily uses bits for control styles etc. (example). When introducing custom controls, I'm permanently wondering whether to follow that style or rather use individual bool's. Let's pit them against each other: enum EMyCtrlStyles { mcsUseFileIcon = 1, mcsTruncateFileName = 2, mcsUseShellContextMenu = 4, }; void SetStyle(DWORD mcsStyle); void ModifyStyle(DWORD mcsRemove, DWORD mcsAdd); DWORD GetStyle() const; ... ctrl.SetStyle(mcsUseFileIcon | mcsUseShellContextMenu); vs. CMyCtrl & SetUseFileIcon(bool enable = true); bool GetUseFileIcon() const; CMyCtrl & SetTruncteFileName(bool enable = true); bool GetTruncteFileName() const; CMyCtrl & SetUseShellContextMenu(bool enable = true); bool GetUseShellContextMenu() const; ctrl.SetUseFileIcon().SetUseShellContextMenu(); As I see it, Pro Style Bits Consistent with platform less library code (without gaining complexity), less places to modify for adding a new style less caller code (without losing notable readability) easier to use in some scenarios (e.g. remembering / transferring settings) Binary API remains stable if new style bits are introduced Now, the first and the last are minor in most cases. Pro Individual booleans Intellisense and refactoring tools reduce the "less typing" effort Single Purpose Entities more literate code (as in "flows more like a sentence") No change of paradim for non-bool properties These sound more modern, but also "soft" advantages. I must admit the "platform consistency" is much more enticing than I could justify, the less code without losing much quality is a nice bonus. 1. What do you prefer? Subjectively, for writing the library, or for writing client code? 2. Any (semi-) objective statements, studies, etc.?

    Read the article

  • 2 year degree plus experience vs 4 year degree

    - by CenterOrbit
    Alright, I have searched around a bit on this site and found two somewhat similar questions: Computer Science Programming Certificate vs. Computer Science Degree? Is it possible/likely to be paid fairly without a college degree? But these do not provide an answer specifically to what I am seeking. I have my 2 year A.A.S. Degree in computer programming, along with a networking certificate from a technical college. I also have been working at a small educational game development company for 3 years now in various positions, but steadily moving up and now as a lead programmer on a few projects. Some of the higher programmers I work with claim that no matter how much experience I develop it still will not mean as much as someone with a 4 year degree. Their argument is that most employers will look over my resume because of the common '4 yr' minimum requirement. I have also heard people state (not as many though) that experience is everything and that an employer would rather have someone that has worked in the field instead of a rookie fresh out of college. I have heard both sides of this argument, but am looking for a general consensus, or more arguments from both sides from the people who have been there, or are there.

    Read the article

  • OpenGL CPU vs. GPU

    - by Nitrex88
    So I've always been under the impression that doing work on the GPU is always faster than on the CPU. Because of this, in OpenGL, I usually try to do intensive tasks in shaders so they get the speed boost from the GPU. However, now I'm starting to realize that some things simply work better on the CPU and actually perform worse on the GPU (particularly when a geometry shader is involved). For example, in a recent project I did involving procedurally generated terrain, I tried passing a grid of single triangles into a geometry shader, and tesselated each of these triangles into quads with 400 vertices whose height was determined by a noise function. This worked fine, and looked great, but easily maxed out the GPU with only 25 base triangles and caused a very slow framerate. I then discovered that tesselating on the CPU instead, and setting the height (using noise function) in the vertex shader was actually faster! This prompted me to question the benefits of using the GPU as much as possible... So, I was wondering if someone could describe the general pros and cons of using the GPU vs CPU for intensive graphics tasks. I know this mainly comes down to what your trying to achieve, so if necessary, use the above scenario to discuss why the "CPU + vertex shader" was actually faster than doing everything in the geometry shader on the GPU. It's possible my hardware (newest macbook pro) isn't optomized well for the geometry shader (thus causing the slow framerate). Also, I read that the vertex shader is very good with parallelism, and would love a quick explanation of how this may have played a role in speeding up my procedural terrain. Any info/advice about CPU/GPU/shaders would be awesome!

    Read the article

  • OpenGL CPU vs. GPU

    - by Nitrex88
    So I've always been under the impression that doing work on the GPU is always faster than on the CPU. Because of this, in OpenGL, I usually try to do intensive tasks in shaders so they get the speed boost from the GPU. However, now I'm starting to realize that some things simply work better on the CPU and actually perform worse on the GPU (particularly when a geometry shader is involved). For example, in a recent project I did involving procedurally generated terrain, I tried passing a grid of single triangles into a geometry shader, and tesselated each of these triangles into quads with 400 vertices whose height was determined by a noise function. This worked fine, and looked great, but easily maxed out the GPU with only 25 base triangles and caused a very slow framerate. I then discovered that tesselating on the CPU instead, and setting the height (using noise function) in the vertex shader was actually faster! This prompted me to question the benefits of using the GPU as much as possible... So, I was wondering if someone could describe the general pros and cons of using the GPU vs CPU for intensive graphics tasks. I know this mainly comes down to what your trying to achieve, so if necessary, use the above scenario to discuss why the "CPU + vertex shader" was actually faster than doing everything in the geometry shader on the GPU. It's possible my hardware (newest macbook pro) isn't optomized well for the geometry shader (thus causing the slow framerate). Also, I read that the vertex shader is very good with parallelism, and would love a quick explanation of how this may have played a role in speeding up my procedural terrain. Any info/advice about CPU/GPU/shaders would be awesome!

    Read the article

  • Automatic TRIM vs. manual TRIM

    - by Eike Cochu
    I am currently trying to find out how to trim with my new TP and was wondering about the difference of manual/online trimming. Here is my setup: ThinkPad T430s with SSD Samsung 830, 128GB and Xubuntu 12.10, here are some outputs to check if trim will work on my system (got these from here: http://wiki.ubuntuusers.de/SSD/TRIM) root@eike-tp:~# sudo hdparm -I /dev/sda | grep -i TRIM * Data Set Management TRIM supported (limit 8 blocks) First, I tried the online trimming: How to enable TRIM? my fstab with discard inserted: UUID=d6c49c17-a4f1-466c-9f7e-896c20db3bba / ext4 discard,noatime,errors=remount-ro 0 1 # swap was on /dev/sda5 during installation UUID=a0322f5f-c6c1-4896-863f-668f0638d8cf none swap sw 0 0 tmpfs /tmp tmpfs defaults,noatime,mode=1777 0 0 I tried to test if it works (but I don't get any zeroes when I try it with /dev/sda), but found out that this method is only possible with SSD type 2 and I seem to have type 3. So I don't know if it works or not. The Ubuntuwiki (first link) recommends manual trimming, so I set up a daily cronjob instead of discard: #!/bin/sh LOG=/var/log/batched_discard.log echo "*** $(date -R) ***" >> $LOG fstrim -v / >> $LOG the wiki article suggests weekly or daily. Now to my questions: How often executes the automated trim? How often is recommended? Online vs. manual trimming? Thank you for your help

    Read the article

  • Fixed-Function vs Shaders: Which for beginner?

    - by Rob Hays
    I'm currently going to college for computer science. Although I do plan on utilizing an existing engine at some point to create a small game, my aim right now is towards learning the fundamentals: namely, 3D programming. I've already done some research regarding the choice between DirectX and OpenGL, and the general sentiment that came out of that was that whether you choose OpenGL or DirectX as your training-wheels platform, a lot of the knowledge is transferrable to the other platform. Therefore, since OpenGL is supported by more systems (probably a silly reason to choose what to learn), I decided that I'm going to learn OpenGL first. After I made this decision to learn OpenGL, I did some more research and found out about a dichotomy that I was somewhere unaware of all this time: fixed-function OpenGL vs. modern programmable shader-based OpenGL. At first, I thought it was an obvious choice that I should choose to learn shader-based OpenGL since that's what's most commonly used in the industry today. However, I then stumbled upon the very popular Learning Modern 3D Graphics Programming by Jason L. McKesson, located here: http://www.arcsynthesis.org/gltut/ I read through the introductory bits, and in the "About This Book" section, the author states: "First, much of what is learned with this approach must be inevitably abandoned when the user encounters a graphics problem that must be solved with programmability. Programmability wipes out almost all of the fixed function pipeline, so the knowledge does not easily transfer." yet at the same time also makes the case that fixed-functionality provides an easier, more immediate learning curve for beginners by stating: "It is generally considered easiest to teach neophyte graphics programmers using the fixed function pipeline." Naturally, you can see why I might be conflicted about which paradigm to learn: Do I spend a lot of time learning (and then later unlearning) the ways of fixed-functionality, or do I choose to start out with shaders? My primary concern is that modern programmable shaders somehow require the programmer to already understand the fixed-function pipeline, but I doubt that's the case. TL;DR == As an aspiring game graphics programmer, is it in my best interest to learn 3D programming through fixed-functionality or modern shader-based programming?

    Read the article

  • TCO Comparison: Oracle Exadata vs IBM P-Series

    - by Javier Puerta
    Cost Comparison for Business Decision-makersOracle Exadata Database Machine vs. IBM Power SystemsHow to Weigh a Purchase DecisionOctober 2012 Download full report here In this research-based  white paper conducted at the request of Oracle, The FactPoint Group compares the cost of ownership of the Oracle Exadata engineered system to a traditional build-your-own (BYO) solution, in this case an IBM Power 770 (P770) with SAN storage.  The IBM P770 was chosen given it is IBM’s current most popular model, based on FactPoint primary and secondary research and IBM claims, and because at least one of the interviewed customers had specifically migrated from a P770 to Exadata, affording us a more specific data point for comparison. This research found that Oracle Exadata: Can be deployed more quickly and easily requiring 59% fewer man-hours than a traditional IBM Power Systems solution. Delivers dramatically higher performance typically up to 12X improvement, as described by customers, over their prior solution.  Requires 40% fewer systems administrator hours to maintain and operate annually, including quicker support calls because of less finger-pointing and faster service with a single vendor.  Will become even easier to operate over time as users become more proficient and organize around the benefits of integrated infrastructure. Supplies a highly available, highly scalable and robust solution that results in reserve capacity that make Exadata easier for IT to operate because IT administrators can manage proactively, not reactively.  Overall, Exadata operations and maintenance keep IT administrators from “living on the edge.”  And it’s pre-engineered for long-term growth. Finally, compared to IBM Power Systems hardware, Exadata is a bargain from a total cost of ownership perspective:  Over three years, the IBM hardware running Oracle Database cost 31% more in TCO than Exadata.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99  | Next Page >