Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Java > no! you idiots at Oracle

Reply
Thread Tools

no! you idiots at Oracle

 
 
BGB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-10-2010
On 11/9/2010 2:56 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 19:39:44 -0800, Roedy Green
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
> someone who said :
>
>>
>> The important thing is there is NO pattern to this. Every one of
>> thousands of links out there in the world to the Sun site will
>> eventually have to be manually updated. ARRGGH!

>
> I have discovered another distressing thing about the Sun->Oracle
> website transition. Oracle's temporary redirects don't necessarily
> take you to the specific page. They often just take to you a generic
> menu page. All the links have to be researched afresh. Spidering is
> more difficult than one might think, because of varying dynamic
> content, and sheer size of the Oracle/Sun websites. Further, it would
> only work properly if Oracle's temporary redirects were correct, so
> there is no point in spidering the entire Oracle website, just your
> own.
>
> What were these people thinking? I think they totally forgot that
> there are extensive links to the Sun site out there. On my website
> alone there are 2465 links.
>
>



depending on others' URLs is inherently unsafe anyways...

but, yes, it is annoying some, as it makes looking for info related to
my own VM effort more difficult.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ClassCastException
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-10-2010
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:11:12 -0800, markspace wrote:

> On 11/9/2010 12:56 PM, ClassCastException wrote:
>>
>> That's not gonna work if they've rebranded all the pages with Oracle in
>> place of Sun, Oracle navbars at top/left instead of Sun's, etc.
>>
>> Just the replacement of all the internal link URLs will suffice.
>>
>> So you have to do a Bayesian match based on word frequencies instead.
>>

>
>
> The two pages appear to be identical, including the targets for anchors.
> I didn't actually do a diff.


I meant site-internal links, not page-internal links. I doubt they'll all
tend to be relative URLs with the relative directory structure unchanged.
Not to mention changing the navbars, or even just changing an <img
src=sunlogo.jpg> to <img src=oraclelogo.jpg> somewhere near the top of
the page, will change the hash of a page dramatically.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
The Frog
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-10-2010
FWIW this seemingly moronic approach to handling technology that
Oracle is displaying here with the rebranding process seems typical of
their entire philosophy IMO. I have only ever seen one other group
take something that should be actually quite simple and screw it
systematically so badly - oh wait, thats Oracle again.....

The Frog
 
Reply With Quote
 
Arved Sandstrom
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-10-2010
Roedy Green wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 19:39:44 -0800, Roedy Green
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
> someone who said :
>
>>
>> The important thing is there is NO pattern to this. Every one of
>> thousands of links out there in the world to the Sun site will
>> eventually have to be manually updated. ARRGGH!

>
> I have discovered another distressing thing about the Sun->Oracle
> website transition. Oracle's temporary redirects don't necessarily
> take you to the specific page. They often just take to you a generic
> menu page. All the links have to be researched afresh. Spidering is
> more difficult than one might think, because of varying dynamic
> content, and sheer size of the Oracle/Sun websites. Further, it would
> only work properly if Oracle's temporary redirects were correct, so
> there is no point in spidering the entire Oracle website, just your
> own.
>
> What were these people thinking? I think they totally forgot that
> there are extensive links to the Sun site out there. On my website
> alone there are 2465 links.


Maybe it's time for a URL subscription protocol. Without speculating on the
fine details, rather than put an essentially dumb link in one of your own
pages, you embed a smart link which is a subscription to a URL service. The
service can either provide a constantly updated "hard" version of the
correct URL, or service providers can undertake to proxy you when you click
on the link and go to _them_...your choice when you configure. Like I say
I'm doing a bit of handwaving here, at this stage. Web pages that are
interested in playing nice as sources also register with URL subscription
services, so that they can provide notifications of changes such as what
just now disrupted you.

Just a thought. There may even be stuff like that out there, but I've never
heard of any.

AHS
--
Hanging one scoundrel, it appears, does not deter the next. Well, what
of it? The first one is at least disposed of. -- H.L. Mencken


 
Reply With Quote
 
Tony Proctor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-12-2010

"Roedy Green" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Oracle is "reforming" the Sun website.
>
> Changes look like typically this:
>
> from:
> http://java.sun.com/products/plugin/...e-javaplatform
>
> to:
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/ja...sp-141438.html
>
> The important thing is there is NO pattern to this. Every one of
> thousands of links out there in the world to the Sun site will
> eventually have to be manually updated. ARRGGH!
>
> I do some of my links manually and but most are computer-generated
> from patterns. These nincompoops have destroyed all sense of order and
> made all the links unmemorisable.
>
> It is one thing to create an incompetent system, but quite another to
> break a reasonable system to make it deliberately incompetent.
>
> I guess I will have to automate the process by at least mechanically
> preparing a CSV file of old and new URLS for individual links, and
> writing a global search/replace. But I am not the only one with a
> website with many Sun links.
>
> It will all go pear-shaped over time.
>
> On top of that, response time is WORSE. What the Bleep? There are now
> more servers. Response should be better.
> --
> Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
> http://mindprod.com
>
> Finding a bug is a sign you were asleep a the switch when coding. Stop
> debugging, and go back over your code line by line.


This type of re-branding is surprisingly naive by Oracle! They would be
better off giving Java it's own "brand" (possibly even resurrecting
something like javasoft) so that all this Web collateral can remain constant
in the future.

As it is, if Oracle gets hard-up and needs to flog Java to someone else,
this tight branding will reduce the value because any enlightened company
will know how much of a PITA undoing-it or changing-it will be

Tony Proctor


 
Reply With Quote
 
Thomas G. Marshall
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-12-2010
On Nov 12, 11:38*am, "Tony Proctor" <tony@proctor_NoMore_SPAM.net>
wrote:
> "Roedy Green" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
>
> > Oracle is "reforming" the Sun website.

>
> > Changes look like typically this:

>
> > from:
> >http://java.sun.com/products/plugin/...e-javaplatform

>
> > to:
> >http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/ja...sp-141438.html

>
> > The important thing is there is NO pattern to this. *Every one of
> > thousands of links out there in the world to the Sun site will
> > eventually have to be manually updated. ARRGGH!

>
> > I do some of my links manually and but most are computer-generated
> > from patterns. These nincompoops have destroyed all sense of order and
> > made all the links unmemorisable.

>
> > It is one thing to create an incompetent system, but quite another to
> > break a reasonable system to make it deliberately incompetent.

>
> > I guess I will have to automate the process by at least mechanically
> > preparing a CSV file of old and new URLS for individual links, and
> > writing a global search/replace. *But I am not the only one with a
> > website with many Sun links.

>
> > It will all go pear-shaped over time.

>
> > On top of that, response time is WORSE. *What the Bleep? There are now
> > more servers. *Response should be better.
> > --
> > Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
> >http://mindprod.com

>
> > Finding a bug is a sign you were asleep a the switch when coding. Stop
> > debugging, and go back over your code line by line.

>
> This type of re-branding is surprisingly naive by Oracle! They would be
> better off giving Java it's own "brand" (possibly even resurrecting
> something like javasoft) so that all this Web collateral can remain constant
> in the future.
>
> As it is, if Oracle gets hard-up and needs to flog Java to someone else,
> this tight branding will reduce the value because any enlightened company
> will know how much of a PITA undoing-it or changing-it will be
>
> * * Tony Proctor


I'm disheartened about all this. Frankly, Java (as a concept and
anthropomorphised) has taken it on the chin for a little too long
now. As soon as I learned of the sun purchase, I knew that the Not-
Invented-Here mongers were going to take over and @#$% up quite a
bit. I'm finally caving in and viewing Java as unstoppably headed for
footnote status.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Arne Vajhøj
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-12-2010
On 12-11-2010 16:39, Steve Sobol wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:38:21 -0000
> "Tony Proctor"<tony@proctor_NoMore_SPAM.net> wrote:
>> This type of re-branding is surprisingly naive by Oracle! They would be
>> better off giving Java it's own "brand" (possibly even resurrecting
>> something like javasoft) so that all this Web collateral can remain constant
>> in the future.

>
> There is no reason they couldn't have kept java.com, java.net and java.sun.com.


They want maximum benefits for the Oracle "brand".

And since they paid a lot of money for SUN, then it seems
fair to me.

Arne
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lew
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2010
Tony Proctor wrote:
>>> This type of re-branding is surprisingly naive by Oracle! They would be
>>> better off giving Java it's own "brand" (possibly even resurrecting
>>> something like javasoft) so that all this Web collateral can remain
>>> constant
>>> in the future.


Steve Sobol wrote:
>> There is no reason they couldn't have kept java.com, java.net and
>> java.sun.com.


Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> They want maximum benefits for the Oracle "brand".
>
> And since they paid a lot of money for SUN, then it seems
> fair to me.


Oh, no, Arne - we may only come to bury Oracle, not to praise them. We cannot
go around saying things that give them a fair shake! Gods forfend! We must
perpetrate the Oracle-hating idiocy.

I don't suppose anyone thinks of taking some action to keep Java viable, like,
oh, writing for the open source version or something. It so much easier to
sit on the sidelines and opine about how Oracle is "ruining" Java.

What did Thomas G. Marshall say upthread? Oh, yes, "I'm finally caving in and
viewing Java as unstoppably headed for footnote status."

What an incredibly useful and forward-thinking attitude! Not.

--
Lew
 
Reply With Quote
 
Thomas G. Marshall
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2010
On Nov 12, 7:16*pm, Lew <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Tony Proctor wrote:
> >>> This type of re-branding is surprisingly naive by Oracle! They would be
> >>> better off giving Java it's own "brand" (possibly even resurrecting
> >>> something like javasoft) so that all this Web collateral can remain
> >>> constant
> >>> in the future.

> Steve Sobol wrote:
> >> There is no reason they couldn't have kept java.com, java.net and
> >> java.sun.com.

> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> > They want maximum benefits for the Oracle "brand".

>
> > And since they paid a lot of money for SUN, then it seems
> > fair to me.

>
> Oh, no, Arne - we may only come to bury Oracle, not to praise them. *We cannot
> go around saying things that give them a fair shake! *Gods forfend! *We must
> perpetrate the Oracle-hating idiocy.
>
> I don't suppose anyone thinks of taking some action to keep Java viable, like,
> oh, writing for the open source version or something. *It so much easier to
> sit on the sidelines and opine about how Oracle is "ruining" Java.
>
> What did Thomas G. Marshall say upthread? *Oh, yes, "I'm finally caving in and
> viewing Java as unstoppably headed for footnote status."
>
> What an incredibly useful and forward-thinking attitude! *Not.


Didn't mean it to be useful, nor should I have to. Didn't mean for it
to be forward thinking, nor should it be. Misplaced or not, argue
away, but it's just a lament. I suppose you've never expressed a
lament before?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Joshua Cranmer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-13-2010
On 11/12/2010 04:39 PM, Steve Sobol wrote:
> There is no reason they couldn't have kept java.com, java.net and java.sun.com.


From what I have heard, it seems that Oracle bought Sun solely for
Java, presumably to capitalize in on its success. In order to best
capitalize on it, they want you to always think of Oracle when you use
Java, so rebranding everything works to their favor.

--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Science Discovery: Perl Idiots Remain Idiots After A Decade!New Xah Lee Python 16 03-12-2012 07:00 PM
New Science Discovery: Perl Idiots Remain Idiots After A Decade!New Xah Lee Perl Misc 15 03-12-2012 07:00 PM
You World Trade Center conspiracy idiots need to READ THIS The Truth Digital Photography 127 04-23-2007 09:23 AM
install_driver(Oracle) failed: Can't load 'C:/Perl/site/lib/auto/DBD/Oracle/Oracle.dll' for module DBD::Oracle: load_file:The specified procedure could not be found at C:/Perl/lib/DynaLoader.pm line 230. Feyruz Perl Misc 4 10-14-2005 06:47 PM
Some of you test takers are idiots ! ! ! Rocker MCSE 15 06-14-2004 09:36 PM



Advertisments