Comments for jutopia http://jutopia.tirsen.com some like it jutopic! Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:43:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 Comment on Why Ruby on Rails? by Binil Thomas http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2005/10/28/why-ruby-on-rails/#comment-82 Binil Thomas Fri, 21 Mar 2008 00:22:03 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2005/10/28/why-ruby-on-rails/#comment-82 I saw this image while browsing for something else today, and it reminded me of this post of yours. http://antoniocangiano.com/ruby-and-rails-recommended-books/ :-) I saw this image while browsing for something else today, and it reminded me of this post of yours.
http://antoniocangiano.com/ruby-and-rails-recommended-books/

:-)

]]> Comment on Threads don’t scale? They might do now! by Dhanji R. Prasanna http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/threads-dont-scale-they-might-do-now/#comment-79 Dhanji R. Prasanna Fri, 14 Mar 2008 04:45:28 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/threads-dont-scale-they-might-do-now/#comment-79 I read this post too! As we were talking about the other day (over beers =), select/poll i/o for threads is about more than scaling. In a pre-forking setup (synchronous thread-per request), a clever DoSer could open slow connections and eat up the maximum thread limit without putting any real computational load on the CPU(s). The more threads you open the more expensive the context management and held resources can. Even though switches may be faster now, switching hundreds or thousands of zombied threads is itself a drag in this kind of setup. Note that java.nio's async I/O is also highly dependent on the OS and machine impl of select/poll. Mac OS has a weaker impl of this than Solaris for e.g. (atleast it used to sometime ago). I wouldn't be so quick to write off select/poll-driven non-blocking web servers =) I read this post too!

As we were talking about the other day (over beers =), select/poll i/o for threads is about more than scaling. In a pre-forking setup (synchronous thread-per request), a clever DoSer could open slow connections and eat up the maximum thread limit without putting any real computational load on the CPU(s).

The more threads you open the more expensive the context management and held resources can. Even though switches may be faster now, switching hundreds or thousands of zombied threads is itself a drag in this kind of setup.

Note that java.nio’s async I/O is also highly dependent on the OS and machine impl of select/poll. Mac OS has a weaker impl of this than Solaris for e.g. (atleast it used to sometime ago).

I wouldn’t be so quick to write off select/poll-driven non-blocking web servers =)

]]> Comment on Apple doesn’t get it by Pito’s Blog » Blog Archive » 30% to Apple for folks selling iPhone apps?? - Welcome! If you’re interested in the same kind of things I am, consider adding this site to your favorites, or better yet, you may want to subscribe to my http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-78 Pito’s Blog » Blog Archive » 30% to Apple for folks selling iPhone apps?? - Welcome! If you’re interested in the same kind of things I am, consider adding this site to your favorites, or better yet, you may want to subscribe to my Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:16:15 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-78 [...] : Seems like I jumped the gun a little. Such are the risks of blogging I guess. If you look at the comment thread to the post I referenced I would have to say that Apple’s position is fairly reasonable. 30% for hosting apps, credit [...] […] : Seems like I jumped the gun a little. Such are the risks of blogging I guess. If you look at the comment thread to the post I referenced I would have to say that Apple’s position is fairly reasonable. 30% for hosting apps, credit […]

]]> Comment on Apple doesn’t get it by tirsen http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-74 tirsen Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:09:16 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-74 Wow, what an onslaught! :-) Actually, thinking things through my main annoyance is that this seems to be the *only* way to get an app on to the iPhone. Stevey wants complete control of what gets on it and even worse, what does NOT get on it. He could've adopted the model of normal personal computers: The user gets to decide what they want to install and how they get hold of it. Instead he chose to go down the closed route which already permeates the corrupt mobile industry. Personally I believe an open approach is better not only for the customer but also for the vendor. At least in the long term. I guess only the future will tell how this plays out. Wow, what an onslaught! :-)

Actually, thinking things through my main annoyance is that this seems to be the *only* way to get an app on to the iPhone. Stevey wants complete control of what gets on it and even worse, what does NOT get on it. He could’ve adopted the model of normal personal computers: The user gets to decide what they want to install and how they get hold of it. Instead he chose to go down the closed route which already permeates the corrupt mobile industry.

Personally I believe an open approach is better not only for the customer but also for the vendor. At least in the long term. I guess only the future will tell how this plays out.

]]> Comment on Apple doesn’t get it by Luca http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-71 Luca Sun, 09 Mar 2008 16:09:38 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-71 well, to tell the truth i was surprised too, by this percent. But then i considered few facts, taken exactly from the windows mess of applications: 1. AppStore is not only a way to reach the users, it's a filter service from porn, dialers, virus, trojan, and malicious app. So it's a service to protect your iPhone, from the chaos which is dominating in windows. This is an advantage for your application too, not to be flood by thousands of useless applications and even clones of your same app. 2. Apple will earn money from your app, yes, but you will earn money by Apple too. They publish your App in the most visible place where you can be to sell your application. Have you ever tried to find an application in snap-files or other app portals, it's a mess! So you will get visibility, and your app will 'marked' and approved by Apple, it's really a marketing bootstrap. I think 30% is stil a bit high, but i would accept 20% for example, because i can advantage seeling my apps in this way. well, to tell the truth i was surprised too, by this percent. But then i considered few facts, taken exactly from the windows mess of applications:
1. AppStore is not only a way to reach the users, it’s a filter service from porn, dialers, virus, trojan, and malicious app. So it’s a service to protect your iPhone, from the chaos which is dominating in windows. This is an advantage for your application too, not to be flood by thousands of useless applications and even clones of your same app.
2. Apple will earn money from your app, yes, but you will earn money by Apple too. They publish your App in the most visible place where you can be to sell your application. Have you ever tried to find an application in snap-files or other app portals, it’s a mess! So you will get visibility, and your app will ‘marked’ and approved by Apple, it’s really a marketing bootstrap.
I think 30% is stil a bit high, but i would accept 20% for example, because i can advantage seeling my apps in this way.

]]> Comment on Apple doesn’t get it by DAVE http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-70 DAVE Sun, 09 Mar 2008 14:19:58 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-70 So you expect Apple to pay for hosting, VISA and the balance of the expenses any developer wishing to sell his product would pay? Here's the catch. People use on iPhone at a time. Apple can't sell the same person an iPhone every month! A software developer can sell a different software every month and sell updates. The price is all up to the developer. Considering most talented developer I know (and no I did not say business men) end up keeping their software to themselves because they dread the whole marketing, selling, billing bit, such folks love the opportunity to do what they love and let Apple do the "dirty work". 30% sounds pretty sweet to them. Just my 2 cents worth. So you expect Apple to pay for hosting, VISA and the balance of the expenses any developer wishing to sell his product would pay? Here’s the catch. People use on iPhone at a time. Apple can’t sell the same person an iPhone every month! A software developer can sell a different software every month and sell updates. The price is all up to the developer. Considering most talented developer I know (and no I did not say business men) end up keeping their software to themselves because they dread the whole marketing, selling, billing bit, such folks love the opportunity to do what they love and let Apple do the “dirty work”. 30% sounds pretty sweet to them. Just my 2 cents worth.

]]> Comment on Apple doesn’t get it by axl http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-69 axl Sat, 08 Mar 2008 23:06:30 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-69 So just because they make a lot of money on the iPhone the should host the apps for free? Do not make any sense. No more than any other mobile app dist out there. Get real. So just because they make a lot of money on the iPhone the should host the apps for free? Do not make any sense.
No more than any other mobile app dist out there. Get real.

]]> Comment on Apple doesn’t get it by Aaron Blohowiak http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-68 Aaron Blohowiak Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:03:14 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-68 They take care of all of the accounting, collection, upgrade distribution, and provide a unified portal. No bandwidth costs, no merchant accounts, no worries about "the google effect" / SEO, and on. Now, I do agree that you should be able to chose *NOT* to use them, but as it stands, it isn't a bad deal. "Retail? Maybe 50%. Amazon Advantage? 55%. Typical book publisher? 90%. Record industry? (Is there a number higher than 100%?)" http://phonedifferent.com/2008/03/about_that_7030_split.html They take care of all of the accounting, collection, upgrade distribution, and provide a unified portal. No bandwidth costs, no merchant accounts, no worries about “the google effect” / SEO, and on.

Now, I do agree that you should be able to chose *NOT* to use them, but as it stands, it isn’t a bad deal.

“Retail? Maybe 50%. Amazon Advantage? 55%. Typical book publisher? 90%. Record industry? (Is there a number higher than 100%?)”

http://phonedifferent.com/2008/03/about_that_7030_split.html

]]> Comment on Apple doesn’t get it by bongoman http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-66 bongoman Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:18:05 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-66 Oh, and Handago takes 40%... Oh, and Handago takes 40%…

]]> Comment on Apple doesn’t get it by bongoman http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-65 bongoman Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:15:59 +0000 http://jutopia.tirsen.com/2008/03/07/apple-doesnt-get-it/#comment-65 Yeah, but look what they're getting for that 30% and I quote tidbits here: "...processing, bandwidth, hosting, and marketing; in the traditional book world, for instance, the split between publishers and bookstores is often 50:50. Many ecommerce providers charge 10 to 15 percent for less than Apple will be providing via the App Store's directory and interface" So it's not all bad. Yeah, but look what they’re getting for that 30% and I quote tidbits here:

“…processing, bandwidth, hosting, and marketing; in the traditional book world, for instance, the split between publishers and bookstores is often 50:50. Many ecommerce providers charge 10 to 15 percent for less than Apple will be providing via the App Store’s directory and interface”

So it’s not all bad.

]]>