Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Yahoo Becomes Apache Platinum Sponsor

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the confluence-of-interests dept.

Yahoo! 110

jschauma writes "Yahoo published a press release announcing that it has become a platinum sponsor of the Apache Software Foundation. In their company blog, Yahoo points out their particular interest in the Apache projects Lucene and Hadoop, and that they have hired Doug Cutting, creator of both projects and VP at Apache. (Lucene powers the search on Wikipedia; Yahoo also provides hosting capacity to Wikimedia.)"

cancel ×

110 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

zonk is a homo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722090)

first post !1 zonk is a homo

Re:zonk is a homo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722106)

DUDE SWEET.

Re:zonk is a homo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722204)

SWEET DUDE.

Re:zonk is a homo (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722424)

I'm going to put this in for my GNAA Corporate application form: http://www.animenfo.com/irc/cgi-gnaa// [animenfo.com]
(I wish i knew how to make the link work when you click GNAA and not show the full url for appearance sake)

Re:zonk is a homo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722612)

DUDE YOU SUCK!

Re:zonk is a homo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722902)

DUDE YOU'RE GETTING A DELL

If Everyone (3, Insightful)

gbulmash (688770) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722236)

I wonder what would happen if everyone who was using FOSS software like Apache actually supported it? I'm not talking sending your favorite Linux distro the cost of Vista Home Basic, but like $20 spread across your four or 5 favorite projects. I donated to OCAL [openclipartlibrary.org] earlier this year, but I really need to send a Christmas present to the guys at Inkscape. This story's a good reminder.

- Greg

Re:If Everyone (1)

JPriest (547211) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722350)

Good point, I couldn't afford to donate to every project I use, but I do try to give $10 here and $20 there to the projects that I think are useful. I call it "microfunding".

Re:If Everyone (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722440)

Replying to a first post! Come on! Mod parent && this post down.

Re:If Everyone (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722814)

You're just jealous because you didn't think of it.

Re:If Everyone (1)

dedazo (737510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722708)

If everyone donated to the FOSS projects they use commercial software would have been surpassed long ago. Think about the value that something like Apache or MySQL provides and monetize it. Vim? Emacs? That's a lot of money.

Human nature being what it is however, donations are a revenue system that generally does not work well (with few exceptions like WP), and probably never will.

Re:If Everyone (1)

cyphercell (843398) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722740)

I want to know if this stuff is tax deductible? If so, how can I prove it? Working as a consultant I wouldn't mind at all donating a tax deductible portion of my services back to the vendor of the software I use.

Re:If Everyone (1)

encoderer (1060616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21724548)

If it's registered as a US-based non-profit then absolutely. The easiest way to keep "proof" would be to just mail them a check and keep a copy of the canceled check. It's not as easy for the non-prof as an online donation, but it'd probably be the best way to show proof of your donation.

Otherwise, I'd just print-out whatever receipt you get after donating, and maybe a copy of your CC statement showing the transaction.

I've never been audited, but this is what my CPA has told me. canceled checks are best, but in lieu, be certain to get a receipt.

Re:If Everyone (1)

jrp2 (458093) | more than 6 years ago | (#21725362)

"If it's registered as a US-based non-profit then absolutely."

Not quite. In the US it needs to be a "charity", not simply "non-profit". I think 501(C)(3) is the designation. If they are (and Apache is) they will make it VERY CLEAR on their donations page as it obviously helps their fund-raising efforts.

Bottom line, IANATL, but I know that simple "non-profit" status is not enough to make a donation deductible on your US taxes. Most non-profit FOSS projects probably are NOT tax deductible. My personal opinion is for small donations, it is not a big deal. I do not let that stop me from dropping $20 to a project I find useful. I also find a thank you note, or a wish-list gift, goes a long way too, especially for the smaller projects with only one or two developers. Folks like to know their hard work is appreciated.

Your suggestion on cancelled checks, though, is likely good advice (again, IANATL).

Re:If Everyone (1)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723452)

Correct, more people should donate, especially to software they use (of course it has to be said that the greatest donation is your time in writing code). I am trying to bootstrap a project (AlgoLibre [algolibre.org] ) modelled after philanthropy giving circles to enable people donate services (eg free email, web space, svn, cvs etc) to free software developers (the idea is, whoever manages Internet servers to take a small slice of each server, VPS or not, and give it gratis for use by free software developers, then my idea is to extend this somehow and I specifically want to create the impetus for the creation of various benefits for free software people, like some form of health insurance scheme). There is Advogato [advogato.org] as well.

Tax Break? (3, Interesting)

ookabooka (731013) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722114)

I was curious, can you deduct money you give to the apache foundation as a charitable donation? They are a not-for-profit organization aren't they? It certainly would be an interesting way for companies to mess with their books.

Re:Tax Break? (2)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722150)

No, unless they have incorporated as a charitable organization and not just a not-for-profit corporation. I don't believe the Apache Foundation qualifies to be a charitable organization, but that's for lawyers to argue.

Re:Tax Break? (2, Insightful)

gbulmash (688770) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722186)

If you can justify that you got something of value for it, you can deduct it as a business expense, which is as good as a charitable donation, when it comes to its impact on their taxes. I'd guess Yahoo! would classify it as a PR expense, but they might also classify it as R&D. Depends on what their tax lawyers say to classify it as.

- Greg

Re:Tax Break? (5, Informative)

jaaron (551839) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722414)

We have incorporated. Please see my other comment [slashdot.org] . Apache is a legal US charity.

Re:Tax Break? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722892)

I agree.. you can also find more information here Incorporated [myminicity.com]

Re:Tax Break? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722914)

How long till Apache meets the security record of IIS 7?

Re:Tax Break? (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723398)

IIS? Why would they ever want to be that buggy?

Re:Tax Break? (4, Informative)

explosivejared (1186049) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722174)

WP [wikipedia.org] says they are a 501(c)(3), meaning they solely exist to promote science. So any donation to them would be a tax exemption just like a regular charity.

IMPORTANT SLASHDOT QUESTION (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21723268)

Why is it that whenever I add a relevant tag to a story, it is ignored and never added, yet when only one really self absorbed douchebag put in an assinine tag like "yahoosyourdaddy" it is added immediately? Is some editor abusing the system and just forcing his own unfunny bullshit into stories wherever he can?

Re:IMPORTANT SLASHDOT QUESTION (0, Offtopic)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723934)

Possibly because you aren't actually being relevant.. certainly aren't in this case anyway, hijacking some other thread with your 'important question'. And yahoosyourdaddy, that's freakin hi-larious! :D ho ho ho. Merry Christmas.

Re:IMPORTANT SLASHDOT QUESTION (1)

tyrione (134248) | more than 6 years ago | (#21724178)

Responding to the right parent poster makes it much easier on the reader.

Re:IMPORTANT SLASHDOT QUESTION (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#21724214)

I was responding to the 'right' poster? Or are you referring to his post? Tbh I dunno what appropriate place there is for his rant.. probably should just go in his sig or journal..

Yes, Apache is a legal US charity (Re:Tax Break?) (5, Informative)

jaaron (551839) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722396)

Yes. Apache is a US charity under Section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. See the donation FAQ [apache.org] .

Furthermore, Apache is still almost completely a volunteer organization. The board members, officers and members do not take a salary from the donations. The only paid staff the ASF now has include a PR person, a system administrator, and a part-time secretary.

Disclaimer: I'm an Apache board member [apache.org] .

Re:Yes, Apache is a legal US charity (Re:Tax Break (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722550)

What's the need for the disclaimer? Or is this just a case of e-penis sizing up?

Re:Yes, Apache is a legal US charity (Re:Tax Break (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21723046)

so...who/what does the donated money go towards?

Re:Yes, Apache is a legal US charity (Re:Tax Break (1)

lukas84 (912874) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723844)

Me.

Re:Tax Break? (5, Funny)

wdr1 (31310) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722780)

Rumor spreads that Google is helping an open source project & Slashdot falls over with praise [slashdot.org] .

Yahoo helps open source & the first question is "Hey, are they cookin' the books?"

Go figure.

-Bill

Re:Tax Break? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21724762)

Google employees are good at this Web2.0 game. They get here quick to get their positive spin and mod points into any Google article. Slashdot is just a drop in the bucket compared to the number of posts all over the web by Google employees.

Go Yahoo (5, Insightful)

cumin (1141433) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722126)

I gave up on Yahoo many years ago and moved to Google in preference. More and more lately, with improved search results, useful information, less restrictive email, and now support for one of my favorite OSS projects, they lure me back.

Keep up the good work Yahoo.

Re:Go Yahoo (1)

Tatsh (893946) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722636)

I'm starting to like Yahoo again too, but can they make a really clean homepage like Google? That's one of the reasons my homepage has been google.com.

Re:Go Yahoo (5, Informative)

wannabgeek (323414) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722788)

You mean something like this http://search.yahoo.com/ [yahoo.com] ?

Re:Go Yahoo (1)

Matt Perry (793115) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723130)

While your link is informative, he asked why their home page isn't clean. Their home page [yahoo.com] still looks like something from 1998.

Re:Go Yahoo (1)

caluml (551744) | more than 6 years ago | (#21725312)

That's because it's a portal.

Re:Go Yahoo. Hardware is king. (1)

milsoRgen (1016505) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723630)

I used Yahoo! for years. Only in the last couple did I switch to Google. The A-One reason being the front page. Thank you very much! ps the reason I used yahoo was the simple fact, back in the day (dunno if this holds true anymore) i used to be able to type in the serial numbers of long forgotten hardware and get back somewhat relevant results. Google I'm sad to say, has failed each and every time I've tried to hunt down old school and obscure hardware. Pretty much the reason I don't bother trying to help people with older computers. I just don't have the resources to track down old drivers, patches, updates, information for old hardware these days.

Re:Go Yahoo (2, Insightful)

Yetihehe (971185) | more than 6 years ago | (#21724008)

I like clean start pages too. So I'm using this [about]

Re:Go Yahoo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21726096)

Who here actually goes to a search site before searching for something? The search feature of firefox is really nice. Multiple search engines at your fingertips. You can also configure the address bar in many browsers to do a default search somewhere if it cannot locate a page.

Re:Go Yahoo (5, Informative)

Temporal (96070) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722738)

Err... It's great of Yahoo to do this and all, but as others have pointed out, Google was already a platinum sponsor of Apache, and until now was the only platinum sponsor.

Google also contributes directly to the Linux kernel, GCC, Mozilla, and many other projects, funds tons of open source development via the Summer of Code program, releases many of its own projects open source (from small things like its Java collections framework to huge things like Android), provides free hosting for open source projects, etc.

Not trying to diminish Yahoo's contributions -- they release plenty of code too -- but just saying that you can hardly claim Google doesn't do enough for OSS.

Re:Go Yahoo (0, Redundant)

thelamecamel (561865) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722742)

Well let's just hope they don't adopt Wikipedia's pathetic search engine...

Re:Go Yahoo (Their webhosting still sucks) (2, Insightful)

Z80xxc! (1111479) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722930)

I agree that it is great that Yahoo is supporting Apache in this way. However, their webhosting (which uses apache, by the way) is still miserable. I'm not talking geocities, I'm talking their Small Business hosting that they tout as being so great. One of the websites I maintain is hosted by Yahoo Small Business. It is possibly the most restrictive host I have ever had to use. The user has very little control over apache settings, and in fact cannot even edit the .htaccess files. The strange, unintuitive, dumbed-down interface is so annoying that working from a computer without ftp access is excruciating. So, yes this is a step in the right direction, but their web hosting services still leave much to be desired.

Re:Go Yahoo (Their webhosting still sucks) (1)

ynohoo (234463) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723870)

well I'm still complaining about how they crippled Geocities. They crippled the access to try to bleed money out of the community, then after they destroyed the community they stopped caring, and made their ads more intrusive. If they opened it up again it could still be a useful service, but it has been bypassed by the blogging generation.

Re:Go Yahoo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21723806)

Keep up the good work Yahoo

Just don't be too hasty in giving up Chinese journalists' identities...

Truly do no evil? (2, Insightful)

Veroxii (51114) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722194)

Is it just me, or is Yahoo really what Google purports to be these days?

Mmmmmm....

Re:Truly do no evil? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722302)

Yahoo donates money to a foundation that Google has already donated tons of money to somehow makes Yahoo what Google purports to be? Yahoo's open source contributions are a tiny fraction of Google's. With the exception of Domain Keys, Yahoo hasn't really made much of an effort to contribute any meaningful tech back to the community over the last several years.

Re:Truly do no evil? (0, Flamebait)

peektwice (726616) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722344)

Right, and Yahoo has never turned any Chinese [cnn.com] dissidents over to the Chinese government either...

Google is also an Apache Sponsor (4, Informative)

jaaron (551839) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722422)

Google is also an Apache platinum sponsor. [apache.org] We're happy to have both of them involved!

Re:Truly do no evil? (Google -- Summer of Code) (1)

otisg (92803) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722664)

Google sponsored several Summer of Code .... summers and good things came out of it. Some of the SoC projects actually ended as Lucene contributions, too.

Hah! That's NOTHING! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722220)

Today my application got accepted to become a 4chan GOLD ACCOUNT [4chan.org] holder. I'd like to see yahoo try to get one of THOSE!

In before newfags yelling "rule 1 & 2" -those only apply to /i/invasions, gaiafags!

Re:Hah! That's NOTHING! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722386)

Fail. I have a platinum account.

Re:Hah! That's NOTHING! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722458)

Fail. You have an account on 4chan.

Re:Hah! That's NOTHING! (1)

NosTROLLdamus (979044) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722598)

How many tacos did that cost you? Also, in after newfag.

Lucene and Wikipedia (2, Interesting)

Blue Trapezoid (978067) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722258)

I hope Yahoo taking an interest in Lucene involves them making heavy improvements to it. Wikipedia's search is the worst.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722362)

Definitely true, I always find myself using the google option or even just
doing my search in google and adding the work wiki or using the site tag.
Its really amazing how bad Lucene is at searching.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (1)

otisg (92803) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722622)

Are you sure it's Lucene and not Wikipedia's use or Lucene? (I never use Wikipedia's internal search, so I really don't know)

Did you know that Amazon uses Lucene for "search inside the book", for example? Does that suck, too?

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (1)

QMalcolm (1094433) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722370)

I find myself just using google to search inside of wikipedia.org instead of using the actual wikipedia search. It really is quite bad.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (3, Insightful)

Titoxd (1116095) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722410)

Wikipedia's search is crapola, and everybody and their dog knows that. However, It is not because of limitations with Lucene; it is more caused by limitations with MySQL. The MediaWiki database backend stores the text of pages in an InnoDB database, and InnoDB was used because it provides more robustness during simultaneous read and write operations (or at least that is what I understood). However, InnoDB does not allow for the creation of full-text indices, like those needed for Lucene search; MyISAM databases are required for that. So, there is an expensive replication task from the text table to the search tables in MediaWiki.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (1)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722616)

What database does google use?

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722676)

GoogleFS

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722750)

You're about 20% right. INNODB doesn't support full text searching, which is why wikipedia uses Lucene.

Luecene, however, has no relationship to mySQL at all. It's a totally separate entity that stores its indeces on the *file system* in its own binary format.

You can use lucene to index myISAM, innodb, Oracle, or just a bunch of text files you have sitting around. In no way is it dependent upon the existence, or capabilities, of mySQL however.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (1)

RiyazShaikh (1133497) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722832)

FYI, there is a way to search InnoDB tables - Sphinx Search [sphinxsearch.com] , and it's pretty fast too.

Parent is WRONG, not "Insightful". (3, Informative)

Eivind Eklund (5161) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723308)

Lucene is a full text indexer. It does NOT need MySQL full text indexing; it does full text indexing all by itself. This is a primary point.

If Wikipedia had used MyISAM (or MySQL hadn't tied full text indexing to their storage engines), Wikipedia could have used MySQL full text searches instead of Lucene. That is a completely different matter, though.

So, please, mod parent to oblivion. (And when do we get a "Wrong" moderation? It could be a warning to moderators to look before they mod things up again...)

Eivind.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (2, Informative)

vhogemann (797994) | more than 6 years ago | (#21724074)

I guess that there's two search mechanisms in place at wikipedia, one search for the exact title of the article, and anoter is a fuzzy full text search. The first one is provided by MediaWiki, and the second one is powered by Lucene.

The title search takes only exact matches, and probably that's the crappy one.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (1)

nostriluu (138310) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722402)

I was surprised to hear they used Lucene.. I don't think Lucene is bad, I've checked it out and it has a nice feature set (as well as being robust), but Wikipedia's search is awful.

This whole thing is also interesting from the Google Knol vs Wikipedia angle.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722442)

I'm glad that Yahoo! is funding a search technology I'm familiar with. Lucene is actually a fairly decent technology. I just wouldn't suggest that Wikipedia's implementation of it is the best example out there to showcase its features. It's fast enough that people aren't bothered by lag. However, Wikipedia search lacks some essential features such as Google's typo correction feature. Google also has the advantage of access to massive amounts of data to draw up statistical insight upon.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (1)

arotenbe (1203922) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722474)

Wikipedia's typo-correction project [wikipedia.org] recommends using Google when searching for common misspellings of words, because Wikipedia's built-in search is so terrible by comparison.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (2, Interesting)

otisg (92803) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722600)

Wikipedia search may not be great, but Lucene itself is an amazing toolkit. I tend to think that without Lucene half of the companies that have some kind of a search companies (think Web2.0) wouldn't know what to do.
Lucene is great and free. FAST, Autonomy, Google Appliance, Endeca, etc. are all *massive* and *expensive*. Compare that to the free and super-flexible Lucene! Oh, and it's not like there is no professional support and services around the Lucene stack! Just look at http://sematext.com/ [sematext.com] and its client list and you'll see some big names.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (1)

xant (99438) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723224)

Wikipedia's search may or may not be terrible (I've never had any problems..) but I doubt it's Lucene's fault. I've written a pylucene-based application, and I found the search results to be outstanding.

That said, Lucene really does need lots of help. It's terrible to compile, the bindings leave something to be desired, it seems to be a resource hog and it needs built-in numeric range search ("find me all typewriters costing more than $100 and less than $400").

I hope Yahoo! is actually interested in helping there.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21724126)

It doesn't make sense to call out Lucene because Google does a better job on Wikipedia. There are a couple of good reasons for this.
Lucene is a Java library designed for embedding in many contexts. Google is a massively parallel computing platform which has access to vast amounts of data such as :
1) The web's link structure, used to compute PageRank and therefore better rank authoritative Wikipedia pages
2) A large proportion of the user searches conducted on the internet - used to inform spelling correction.

Smart systems are increasingly about software algorithms augmented with huge amounts of data.

If you happen to crawl the web (or at least the bit of it that links to Wikipedia and isn't black hat SEO) and compute a PageRank then you could use Lucene's "document boosts" feature to store and use this ranking. If you have billions of user searches you can add some spelling correction on top of Lucene.

However, computing PageRank and offering Spelling Correction are deliberately not part of Lucene's "lean and mean" feature set (and rightly so).

If you want to improve something here perhaps it is the functionality Wikipedia have built on the Lucene core that needs addressing.
What Lucene sets out to solve, it actually does very well.

Re:Lucene and Wikipedia (1)

risk one (1013529) | more than 6 years ago | (#21724418)

Wikipedia's search is bad because the implementation blows. It not Lucene's fault, it's the fault of the mediawiki devs. Lucene has implementations ready for every kind of search improvement trick you can think of. Simple example, you can boost the importance of different fields. Mediawiki could easily boost the influence of the title field, but I'm pretty sure that they don't. When I search for UDP, the first hit is about UDP ports, the second is the disambiguation page for UDP. Lucene allows for all sorts of improvements to your search strategy, MediaWiki just doesn't use them.

anal sex (1)

Asshat_Nazi (946431) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722266)

it won't do anything but make your dick stink...

Another Yahoo! open source story (1)

netdur (816698) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722274)

They released Flickr Uploadr under GPL (2 only)

http://flickr.com/tools/uploadr/ [flickr.com]

The interesting thing here, it is using xulrunner from Mozilla && there no Linux binary!!!

Re:Another Yahoo! open source story (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722580)

I'm still waiting them to go all the way and add local photo album support to it. Looks like they're getting there. I really need to be able to organize stuff offline a-la picasa, only with an easy to upload interface. Kind of like the api they added to picasa for smugmug.

Google donates too (4, Informative)

Dashcolon (946284) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722390)

All you gents lauding Yahoo for being a platinum donor in comparisons to Google should take a look at Apache's donation thanks page [apache.org] , where google is also listed as a platinum donor

So now Chinese blood money (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722484)

is being used to support FOSS. So what. ALL money is blood money nowadays :-(

Yahoo and Microsoft not in the same tree (1)

eebra82 (907996) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722660)

I guess this puts Microsoft and Yahoo further apart. Not too long ago, it was speculated that Microsoft would make a move to buy Yahoo. Now Yahoo's sponsoring .NET's biggest competitor.

Re:Yahoo and Microsoft not in the same tree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722992)

Or gives Microsoft more incentive to buy them and cut off funding.

Re:Yahoo and Microsoft not in the same tree (1)

etnu (957152) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723592)

Java and web tech (HTML, CSS, Javascript) are .Net's biggest competitors, not ASF. Tomcat and Apache WS compete with IIS, but that's about the extent of the overlap.

eat it yahoo (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722668)

Fuck Yahoo. Look at all these paid posters. Yahoo sucks!

Wikipedia, eh... (4, Informative)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722702)

Lucene powers the search on Wikipedia...
This is not meant to be a troll, though many may take it that way, but if Lucene is what Wikipedia uses, than either Lucene needs a lot of work, or Wikipedia just isn't implementing it right. Wikipedia's search is just about one of the most unforgiving search functions on the web; unless you hit the spelling perfectly, you often simply will not find what you're looking for, and better not have any extraneous words in the search string either. Which is why I use Google to search Wikipedia...

Re:Wikipedia, eh... (1)

garbletext (669861) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722938)

The reason I still generally use WP's search function is the fact that it will take you directly to the article if you get the title correct, and to the results otherwise; quite useful in conjunction with smart keywords, where I can type wp Penguin to get directly at that article. This can be approximated with google's browse by name and I'm feeling lucky functions like:

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=site:en.wikipedia.org %s
and

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&btnI=&q=site:en.wikipedia.org %s
, respectively. Both versions are more powerful than the wikipedia search function, but WP's is good enough for me, for the main reason that I'd rather not give google a list of every wikipedia article I look up, given that wikipedia lookups account for at least a third of my searches. I'm still searching for a replacement for 'I'm feeling lucky' un the URLbar, as it and GIS are the only things keeping me using Google; all normal searches go through the Scroogle Scraper [scroogle.org] , which is easy to setup with firefox and prevents most of the profiling google does. If only google would provide a way to opt out of storing search data, I'd happily go back, but ATM I'm wary.

Re:Wikipedia, eh... (1)

Eighty7 (1130057) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723720)

Which is why I use Google to search Wikipedia...
Yeah, everybody does. I have the firefox extension googlepedia [mozilla.org] installed so I always get wiki results when searching google.

Re:Wikipedia, eh... (1)

ONU CS Geek (323473) | more than 6 years ago | (#21725942)

Sourceforge.net uses Lucene for searching, I believe. They seem to get it right.

Re:Wikipedia, eh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21726014)

Do you even know what Lucene [apache.org] is for?

Last I knew, it is built to be the base of other search technology, so it does a fine job of text indexing and searching, but not guessing you meant "Paris Hilton" when you search for Pares Hiltone.

It is not trying to compete with google, but rather make a base for others, such as Nutch [apache.org] , to compete.

Re:Wikipedia, eh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21727150)

Which is why I use Google to search Wikipedia...
Hell, I use google to search MSDN. Off-topic, I know.

Like a new drug? (2, Interesting)

RealGrouchy (943109) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722744)

One of the theories of why violent crime spiked in the late '80s is that crack cocaine was new on the market, and so the territories among the drug lords had to be established and drawn--often through violent means. After the dust had settled and the lines were established in the early-to-mid '90s, violent crime came down somewhat (both in cities like New York that had spent oodles of money on "tough-on-crime" measures, and in places where no additional resources had been allocated).

Every time I see things like Google latching on to Firefox, or the ones referenced in TFA(S), I can't help but think that Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, IBM, etc. are simply snatching up open-source "territory".

I wonder what it means and where it will lead...

- RG>

Re:Like a new drug? (1)

mysticgoat (582871) | more than 6 years ago | (#21724892)

One of the theories of why violent crime spiked in the late '80s

Well, you can have all kinds of theories about anything, I guess.

Violent crime in the USA was increasing from around 1910 onward, until around 1990, then it began to decrease.

The rapid decrease in inner city crime since around 1990 correlates well with the increased use of cell phones in these areas. This is probably causal rather than coincidental. The combination of cell phones and rapid response to 911 calls appears to be an effective deterrent to assaults, robberies, breaking and entering, and other crimes that would be obvious to an unseen observer.

Well DUH. (1)

WarlockD (623872) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722792)

I work on their servers, they all run either FreeBSD or RedHat. (FYI those were the only choices as of a year ago in PXE reimage boots) Its not like they have many robust other hosting choices

Its good that they are support Apache, but really, they should of just did a joint statment with Goggle when they signed on. Sounds to much like a one-up manship.

linux needs sponsors (1)

chrisranjana.com (630682) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722796)

If Major sponsors like yahoo adopt linux and opensource. It is going to be great for the opensource community as such.

Shame on Apache. (1)

salparadyse (723684) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723244)

And there was me thinking that the tendency of Yahoo to cooperate with the Chinese Gov in tracking down "dissidents" would have made anything they did repulsive in the eyes of anyone with a heart. Accepting money off them comes under this assumption.
Such optimism, when will I ever learn? We're in the West where anything goes and the consequences, as long as they happen to others elsewhere, are of no concern to us. Who cares if we do business with those who have no conscience?

Wikipedia Search Sucks (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723374)

The Wikipedia search sucks. It's case sensitive (but not always), doesn't use word stems (though it seems to sometimes), and has other inconsistent results that mix lexical and semantic matches with underwhelming effectiveness.

Now Yahoo wants the same "quality"? Their creating their most successful competitor in Google has really maimed their senses over there.

Yahoo has become Apache's platinum sponsor (1)

joaommp (685612) | more than 6 years ago | (#21723462)

And Microsoft will become someone's palladium sponsor

Re:Yahoo has become Apache's platinum sponsor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21724192)

Palladium? Or Plutonium?

Re:Yahoo has become Apache's platinum sponsor (1)

joaommp (685612) | more than 6 years ago | (#21726478)

No, Palladium, really... you'll figure it out eventually...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?