Archive for the 'Internet' Category

Plurk.com Review

Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008

What is it?

In short, it’s a twitter clone, a time waster, with a little more thought into it. Is it more complex? Maybe not, sometimes the right added functionality makes life easier for people.

Why you should try it?

I tried Jaiku, Pwnce, FriendFeed and Twitter, and stayed with Twitter. I’m actually proud to say that I’ve sent 6,801 Twitts that have landed me 390 twitter followers, and this is probably the hardest thing about switching from Twitter to another competitor, as good as it may be.

But from last week I’ve been hearing about Plurk, and today after some good web-reputable friends joined I decided to give it a try (see the power of web-prestige?), before they joined I just thought… “another twitter competitor”.

The added functionality might make things better, it’s probably the evolution of micro-blogging happening, and twitter needs better competition in order to get better.

Scribd.com - The YouTube of Books

Wednesday, April 23rd, 2008

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out scribd.com has something big in their hands:
- Flash based document viewer (for any document format)
- Unlimited uploads

The result, what I call a “YouTube of Books”.

Just check this out, and see why Amazon has a little bit of market to loose (those who don’t really care about reading books on screen, and having the ability to search a book in seconds…)

Look for yourself

Read this doc on Scribd: Python Cookbook

I foresee these guys being bought by Google sometime within the next two years, they certainly provide with the vision of Google, that of organizing information, and what not, and they have the same copyright issues as YouTube did, something which didn’t stop google from acquiring them at the time.

All we need now, is to be able to use that Scribd viewer with PDFs hosted anywhere, I would love to have that document viewer installed in MyBloop.com

Philip Antoniades from Sun-MySQL presents at NYPHP.org

Wednesday, March 26th, 2008

Last night I had the opportunity to attend to my first NYPHP.org meetup. In this ocassion, Philip Antoniades formerly MySQL’s Sales Engineering Manager, now Sun-MySQL’s Sales Engineering Manager gave a talk related to Sun’s recent purchase of MySQL for USD $1,000,000,000.

Project Indiana
I must say at the beginning of the presentation he switched from talking about the MySQL acquisition to selling us a new version of Open Solaris called Project Indiana, which seems to be led by no less than Ian Murdock creator of Debian. I suppose its his job now to sell sun and he had to do it, but things got a lot more interesting specially in the Q&A.

So for Project Indiana, as you can imagine having someone like Ian Murdock there means Open Solaris will have apt capabilities (like Debian or Ubuntu).

The other thing that caught my eye about Project Indiana (coming from the Linux world) is that Sun will require all drivers to be open sourced, otherwise they won’t be accepted to the distribution. I’m not sure if this has done anything for projects like Debian where they’re really strict, but Sun is a monster with a lot of corporate influence, maybe their new Open source approach will help things change (manufacturers releasing drivers with open licenses), and finally we’ll get lots of drivers available for Linux as well.

They also mentioned an “open source” license called CDDL (”cuddle” as they call it), no clue about its differences, if its good or bad, it seems to me there might be something weird behind it, but I’m just talking out of my ass here, I’ve not read it yet. It’d be good if someone could complement this article with their thoughts on CDDL vs GPL2 vs LGPL vs others…

How things have changed

Quoting Antoniades:

“Basically we have an influx of cash”

MySQL AB went from a 400 employee company to being part of an organization of about 34,000 employees, and now they have a lot more cash, the purchase according to Antoniades was mostly paid in cash (and you know cash is king baby!).

Entrance of IBM New York, where the meeting was held for NYPHP.orgPhilip even mentioned they’re hiring 2 SysAdmins for their New York office, (contact him if you’re interested), also, when they need a feature, they just don’t put it in the wish list, if its important enough they get 30 engineers from Sun to help them.

He made a lot of emphasis about how they already got a guru focused on optimization of MySQL and how they’re pushing for more threading (parallel programming) on MySQL. He said that Sun has a lot of DB experience, that they basically helped Oracle in getting their DB to run spotless on Solaris and they have the knowledge about DB development problems as well as a lot of smart people to help them.

On the Q&A session I finally learned that Yes there’s plans between Java/MySQL integration (stored procedures in java could be a project to come, and they mentioned that a couple of the MySQL AB engineers had already done something along those lines, and as the acquisition was happening the people from Sun brought up the fact they knew about such efforts. MySQL AB has always been a good Java shop, and they claimed their jdbc driver was always one of their best products). MySQL basically wants to learn a little more of that engineering discipline from Sun, and it seems like a nice blend between 2 very different cultures.

Other interesting topics of conversation during Q&A were about using Memcached as a storage Engine, so that you can use MySQL as a client for Memcached, maybe it sounds as an extra layer with a certain overhead, but you could certainly do a lot of more complex stuff just by using SQL, seems interesting, didn’t know you could actually do that (actually opens a lot of possibilities in my mind for stuff we need in MyBloop.com that we were planning to use raw key-value-approach on memcached)

Also learned about a new storage engine called Maria, that will be the successor of Innodb.

So I think that now, we can be sure that MySQL will be churning out a lot more fixes (in shorter periods, maybe MySQL 6.0 will come out sooner now) given the cash and new added man power, probably the folks using MySQL enterprise will be even more benefited by this, they talked about a lot of enterprise tools to optimize queries, analyze queries, very interesting stuff.

Safari 3.1 Benchmark part II - VS Firefox 3.0b4

Thursday, March 20th, 2008

This is the Part II of Benchmarks between Safari 3.1’s JavaScript engine and Firefox. Last Benchmark was done against Firefox 2, and Safari destroyed Firefox’s Javascript engine, in some aspects being up to 7 times faster.

So I was curious and I downloaded and tried the benchmark on Firefox 3.0b4. to see how much Firefox 3.0 will improve its Javascript performance, key to today’s web applications and the future of the web.

After seeing the results, I say Kudos to the Firefox 3 team, they’ve improved considerably their JavaScript engine and that only makes me glad cause I won’t have to switch to Safari. :)

I will not make any tests on HTML rendering, if you find any benchmark results on HTML rendering, please leave links on the comments section.

Once again, here are the results side by side:

FIREFOX 3.0b4
========================
RESULTS
(means and 95% confidence intervals)
-----------------------------------------
Total:                 3876.6ms +/- 0.9%
-----------------------------------------

  3d:                   489.0ms +/- 1.3%
    cube:               193.8ms +/- 1.2%
    morph:              138.2ms +/- 1.5%
    raytrace:           157.0ms +/- 3.8%

  access:               594.2ms +/- 5.6%
    binary-trees:        57.4ms +/- 5.9%
    fannkuch:           246.0ms +/- 0.8%
    nbody:              219.8ms +/- 13.6%
    nsieve:              71.0ms +/- 2.1%

  bitops:               470.4ms +/- 0.7%
    3bit-bits-in-byte:   67.8ms +/- 1.5%
    bits-in-byte:        90.8ms +/- 1.8%
    bitwise-and:        177.4ms +/- 1.1%
    nsieve-bits:        134.4ms +/- 0.5%

  controlflow:           42.4ms +/- 1.6%
    recursive:           42.4ms +/- 1.6%

  crypto:               257.2ms +/- 1.2%
    aes:                 87.4ms +/- 1.3%
    md5:                 83.8ms +/- 4.0%
    sha1:                86.0ms +/- 0.0%

  date:                 412.0ms +/- 0.4%
    format-tofte:       251.6ms +/- 0.6%
    format-xparb:       160.4ms +/- 0.4%

  math:                 502.0ms +/- 2.2%
    cordic:             188.0ms +/- 0.5%
    partial-sums:       231.2ms +/- 5.2%
    spectral-norm:       82.8ms +/- 3.6%

  regexp:               275.6ms +/- 1.0%
    dna:                275.6ms +/- 1.0%

  string:               833.8ms +/- 0.7%
    base64:              98.6ms +/- 1.4%
    fasta:              228.8ms +/- 3.2%
    tagcloud:           166.2ms +/- 0.6%
    unpack-code:        218.6ms +/- 0.5%
    validate-input:     121.6ms +/- 0.6%
SAFARI 3.1
========================
RESULTS
(means and 95% confidence intervals)
-----------------------------------------
Total:                 3368.8ms +/- 1.0%
—————————————–

  3d:                   414.8ms +/- 1.9%
    cube:               132.2ms +/- 2.4%
    morph:              144.6ms +/- 4.1%
    raytrace:           138.0ms +/- 0.6%

  access:               520.4ms +/- 4.1%
    binary-trees:        78.6ms +/- 11.3%
    fannkuch:           231.4ms +/- 2.0%
    nbody:              149.2ms +/- 8.1%
    nsieve:              61.2ms +/- 3.9%

  bitops:               449.6ms +/- 2.4%
    3bit-bits-in-byte:   69.8ms +/- 9.6%
    bits-in-byte:        99.2ms +/- 4.6%
    bitwise-and:        167.2ms +/- 2.3%
    nsieve-bits:        113.4ms +/- 6.7%

  controlflow:           91.2ms +/- 4.7%
    recursive:           91.2ms +/- 4.7%

  crypto:               247.2ms +/- 2.3%
    aes:                 81.2ms +/- 2.5%
    md5:                 83.8ms +/- 4.6%
    sha1:                82.2ms +/- 2.0%

  date:                 306.4ms +/- 0.5%
    format-tofte:       146.6ms +/- 1.4%
    format-xparb:       159.8ms +/- 1.0%

  math:                 454.8ms +/- 1.3%
    cordic:             174.4ms +/- 1.6%
    partial-sums:       193.8ms +/- 1.2%
    spectral-norm:       86.6ms +/- 4.4%

  regexp:               209.6ms +/- 0.7%
    dna:                209.6ms +/- 0.7%

  string:               674.8ms +/- 2.2%
    base64:             103.8ms +/- 9.0%
    fasta:              177.0ms +/- 1.0%
    tagcloud:           136.0ms +/- 4.6%
    unpack-code:        136.0ms +/- 1.7%
    validate-input:     122.0ms +/- 2.6%

Almost there. Only in Flow control and recursion it beats Safari, the rest needs to improve, however, it’s improved a lot comparing to the previous version of Firefox.

The machine used for this test is a MacBook Pro running Mac OS X Version 10.4.11 with a 2.33 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo and 2GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM.

New Safari’s JavaScript engine Kicks Ass!

Wednesday, March 19th, 2008

So I downloaded yesterday the latest Software Update for Mac OSX and it included an update of the Safari Web Browser, which I had taken for dead ages ago, I’m a hardcore Firefox user.

Today I read about the new updates, and I read something that caught my eye at Mackinando.com.

it executes JavaScript six times faster than the rest

I go to the Safari Site, and they compare themselves with a previous version, Firefox, and Opera (not IE, not even worth mentioning)

I couldn’t believe my eyes, so I googled for “JavaScript Benchmark“, and tried the SunSpider JavaScript Benchmark onboth Firefox 2.0.0.12 and the shiny new Safari 3.1.

The machine used for this test is a MacBook Pro running Mac OS X Version 10.4.11 with a 2.33 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo and 2GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM.

Here are the results side by side:

FIREFOX 2.0.0.12
========================
RESULTS
(means and 95% confidence intervals)
-----------------------------------------
Total:                 15365.4ms +/- 1.7%
—————————————–

  3d:                   2386.6ms +/- 7.9%
    cube:                733.0ms +/- 20.8%
    morph:              1269.8ms +/- 9.4%
    raytrace:            383.8ms +/- 37.1%

  access:               1386.2ms +/- 4.8%
    binary-trees:        201.6ms +/- 0.6%
    fannkuch:            294.8ms +/- 5.4%
    nbody:               691.2ms +/- 8.9%
    nsieve:              198.6ms +/- 1.5%

  bitops:               3461.2ms +/- 0.4%
    3bit-bits-in-byte:   275.8ms +/- 0.6%
    bits-in-byte:        248.2ms +/- 0.7%
    bitwise-and:        2765.2ms +/- 0.5%
    nsieve-bits:         172.0ms +/- 4.7%

  controlflow:           153.4ms +/- 0.7%
    recursive:           153.4ms +/- 0.7%

  crypto:                527.2ms +/- 0.5%
    aes:                 230.8ms +/- 1.2%
    md5:                 147.4ms +/- 0.5%
    sha1:                149.0ms +/- 0.6%

  date:                 2551.8ms +/- 0.3%
    format-tofte:       1449.6ms +/- 0.3%
    format-xparb:       1102.2ms +/- 0.8%

  math:                 1312.6ms +/- 12.8%
    cordic:              497.4ms +/- 12.0%
    partial-sums:        501.6ms +/- 1.6%
    spectral-norm:       313.6ms +/- 36.1%

  regexp:                501.0ms +/- 0.2%
    dna:                 501.0ms +/- 0.2%

  string:               3085.4ms +/- 10.3%
    base64:              914.6ms +/- 3.4%
    fasta:               676.0ms +/- 35.4%
    tagcloud:            441.4ms +/- 0.6%
    unpack-code:         846.8ms +/- 25.4%
    validate-input:      206.6ms +/- 1.1%
SAFARI 3.1
========================
RESULTS
(means and 95% confidence intervals)
-----------------------------------------
Total:                 3368.8ms +/- 1.0%
—————————————–

  3d:                   414.8ms +/- 1.9%
    cube:               132.2ms +/- 2.4%
    morph:              144.6ms +/- 4.1%
    raytrace:           138.0ms +/- 0.6%

  access:               520.4ms +/- 4.1%
    binary-trees:        78.6ms +/- 11.3%
    fannkuch:           231.4ms +/- 2.0%
    nbody:              149.2ms +/- 8.1%
    nsieve:              61.2ms +/- 3.9%

  bitops:               449.6ms +/- 2.4%
    3bit-bits-in-byte:   69.8ms +/- 9.6%
    bits-in-byte:        99.2ms +/- 4.6%
    bitwise-and:        167.2ms +/- 2.3%
    nsieve-bits:        113.4ms +/- 6.7%

  controlflow:           91.2ms +/- 4.7%
    recursive:           91.2ms +/- 4.7%

  crypto:               247.2ms +/- 2.3%
    aes:                 81.2ms +/- 2.5%
    md5:                 83.8ms +/- 4.6%
    sha1:                82.2ms +/- 2.0%

  date:                 306.4ms +/- 0.5%
    format-tofte:       146.6ms +/- 1.4%
    format-xparb:       159.8ms +/- 1.0%

  math:                 454.8ms +/- 1.3%
    cordic:             174.4ms +/- 1.6%
    partial-sums:       193.8ms +/- 1.2%
    spectral-norm:       86.6ms +/- 4.4%

  regexp:               209.6ms +/- 0.7%
    dna:                209.6ms +/- 0.7%

  string:               674.8ms +/- 2.2%
    base64:             103.8ms +/- 9.0%
    fasta:              177.0ms +/- 1.0%
    tagcloud:           136.0ms +/- 4.6%
    unpack-code:        136.0ms +/- 1.7%
    validate-input:     122.0ms +/- 2.6%

Comparing with Firefox, the overall result of this test was that it’s 4.56 times faster.

However, if we look test by test, there are areas where I feel embarrassed for Firefox.

Bitwise Operations
For example, Bit-Operation tests in Safari 3.1 are 7.7 times faster in Safari, being the case of the bitwise-AND (&) operator the worst of them, Safari performed bitwise-and’s 16 times faster than Firefox

OUCH!!

String Operations
So you’d be curious now about String operations, which is probably a lot of what goes on with Javascript, and Ajax, parsing those XML results and what not, maybe the bitwise & won’t hurt us that much given that not many programmers today are smart enough to use them for web programming.

When it comes to String operations, Safari 3.1 was 4.5 times faster than Firefox 2.

Kudos to the Safari Team, I thought there was no point in having Safari until I did this benchmark. I guess they don’t want to let go of Web Browser users, maybe they make millions every month with ad-clicks on Google generated with the search field they have at the top of the browser which is set by default to do Google search.

Once again the saying proves it self

“Competition is good”

Let’s hope this will make the Firefox team think more on Javascript improvements with the upcoming Firefox 3. Once it’s release ready, it’ll be worth it running this benchmark again and see where it stands.

Update (March 20th, 2008)

I’ve made tests on Firefox 3 beta 4, You can see the results here. Tests have been made again on the same Macbook Pro. The improvements of Firefox 3 are notable, however, on the mac, Safari still wins.

Kawasaki calls Arrington a hyprocrite.

Saturday, March 15th, 2008

Guy Kawasaki recently came up with a new social bookmarking site called AllTop.com. It seems he didn’t like the way Arrington reviewed it on Techcrunch.

Specially the part where they said that it didn’t really add any innovation that it didn’t do anything you couldn’t with Digg.com. Then he said it surprised him coming from Arrington, a person who copied VentureBeat.

The video comes from Qik.com a new service which allows you to stream videos right from your cellphone.

It seems to me that Sillicon Valley has caught on the Rappers trend to start grudges in public to raise record sales.