Slashdot Mirror

It's "script manipulation" in the same sense that writing Python would be "script manipulation". TouchStudio contains a turing-complete scripting language that's tailored to working with/on a touchscreen phone.

eg. A screenshot I found on Microsoft Research.

It's "script manipulation" in the same sense that writing Python would be "script manipulation". TouchStudio contains a turing-complete scripting language that's tailored to working with/on a touchscreen phone.

eg. A screenshot I found on Microsoft Research.

Can I sue the state of Tex-ASS for damages?

As they say, things are always bigger in Texas, including STUPIDITY

( from using MICROCRAP )

Yours In Ashgabat,
Kilgore Trout

It's impossible to turn it on programmatically for a single process via setlocale for reasons beyond my comprehension. MSDN docs word this limitation as follows:

The set of available languages, country/region codes, and code pages includes all those supported by the Win32 NLS API except code pages that require more than two bytes per character, such as UTF-7 and UTF-8. If you provide a code page like UTF-7 or UTF-8, setlocale will fail, returning NULL.

Sounds like there is some ancient code in there written under the assumption of a max of 2 bytes per character for multibyte encodings.

However, this is a limitation of VC++ C library only - indeed, even from the text above, it is clear that "Win32 NLS API" supports UTF-7 and UTF-8. So the problem is with the compiler (or rather the accompanying libraries), not with the OS - and, of course, VC++ is not the only C/C++ implementation for Win32.

Note also that you can always set the non-Unicode locale globally, system-wide, rather than programmatically. I'm actually curious about what VC++ C library is going to do if that is the case, and the program does setlocale(LC_ALL, "") - on one hand, it's required to use system locale, but on the other, it's explicitly documented as not supporting UTF-8...

I would expect the app to simply use the stock APIs to register as a default opener and previewer for PDF filetype, same as Adobe Reader does today when you install it on Windows. Probably also a search filter to index contents of PDF files - also public API.

On a side note, even the much-touted IE "integration" into Windows is largely overblown. IE engine is really just a bunch of COM components for the data model (can be instantiated standalone), and an ActiveX renderer control. Most Windows apps that need an embedded browser for any reason - including stock apps - just instantiate those. Now, this being COM, this is usually done via CLSID (a class GUID). From there, the OS looks up the ID in the registry to find the corresponding DLL, and loads it. Since the table is public, you can easily change the corresponding entry to point to your own DLL instead of the stock IE one. Furthermore, the COM interfaces implemented by those components are also public and documented.

So, in theory, it's quite possible to tear IE out and replace it with your own. The big problem there is not technical ability to do so, but ensuring compatibility. Many programs that use IE rely on its non-standard way of rendering HTML, especially in the absence of doctype declaration (usually not deliberately - it's just that few people validate HTML when it's embedded in the app, and all testing is of course done on a non-hacked system where embedded browser is always IE). So you'd need to have your rendering engine be bug-for-bug compatible when it comes to rendering - and given that non-standard IE behavior is usually poor documented, this would be a major undertaking.

I would expect the app to simply use the stock APIs to register as a default opener and previewer for PDF filetype, same as Adobe Reader does today when you install it on Windows. Probably also a search filter to index contents of PDF files - also public API.

On a side note, even the much-touted IE "integration" into Windows is largely overblown. IE engine is really just a bunch of COM components for the data model (can be instantiated standalone), and an ActiveX renderer control. Most Windows apps that need an embedded browser for any reason - including stock apps - just instantiate those. Now, this being COM, this is usually done via CLSID (a class GUID). From there, the OS looks up the ID in the registry to find the corresponding DLL, and loads it. Since the table is public, you can easily change the corresponding entry to point to your own DLL instead of the stock IE one. Furthermore, the COM interfaces implemented by those components are also public and documented.

So, in theory, it's quite possible to tear IE out and replace it with your own. The big problem there is not technical ability to do so, but ensuring compatibility. Many programs that use IE rely on its non-standard way of rendering HTML, especially in the absence of doctype declaration (usually not deliberately - it's just that few people validate HTML when it's embedded in the app, and all testing is of course done on a non-hacked system where embedded browser is always IE). So you'd need to have your rendering engine be bug-for-bug compatible when it comes to rendering - and given that non-standard IE behavior is usually poor documented, this would be a major undertaking.

WebKit was only reopened for Apple to receive development and testing from other companies and organizations. Going over the logs it seems that Google submits more changesets than Apple does these days. WebKit was not a contribution from Apple; the move was purely motive-based.

Apple and open source reminds me of this: http://www.microsoft.com/opensource/. "We value openness as a company...."

Decoupling of the GUI from the os

The only thing they would gain here is the ability to run an systems without any video chip, which they have no hope in hell of winning. If you refer to the ability to manage them via serial console *in addition* to video, they do have serial console support to do some basic things including starting CMD/PowerShell. Sure, we love our VTs on occasion, but a very small minority of people use them except when they *have* to. Perhaps inherent capability to ssh in and get cmd/powershell would be nice, but getting rid of the GUI on VGA console won't really win them anything in the market.

Really? Microsoft think they've already got a version of Windows that doesn't depend on the GUI.

Granted, it opens a command window complete with all the window decorations you'd expect, but I can't imagine it'd be that difficult to turn it into nothing but a serial console.

No automated system to sync two Windows computers? That's simply not true.
Ever heard of Sync Toy? http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=c26efa36-98e0-4ee9-a7c5-98d0592d8c52&displaylang=en

In terms of the most known security vulnerabilities left unpatched (Linux has more + even a remote vulnerability unpatched also), & for months now, no less? Linux has been lagging lately... see here:

---

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Windows 7:

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/27467/?task=advisories

Unpatched 10% (6 of 59 Secunia advisories)

---

vs.

---

Vulnerability Report: Linux Kernel 2.6.x:

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/2719/?task=advisories

Unpatched = 7% (19 of 260 Secunia advisories)

---

That's 3x++ as many KNOWN vulnerabilities unpatched in Linux (keep in mind, that's the KERNEL ONLY, mind you (not the rest of what a full Linux distro entails, which only compounds that number further) than there is in Windows 7 (which IS a "full distro" in essence, with GUI shell, Window mgt. subsystems, an internet browser & FAR more)...

(And the "Std. 'Pro-*NIX' mantra" around here on /. for a decade++ or more has been "Linux is more secure than Windows is"... well, take a read up there, & "READ 'EM & WEEP"...)

APK

P.S.=> Bear in mind also, that Microsoft is about to close @ least 3 of those 6 remaining unpatched security vulnerabilities issues in Windows 7 too (IF not more, because 64 fixes are issuing in total summation across their product lines), on next Tuesday 04/12/2011, per this bulletin as "proof thereof" -> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms11-apr.mspx , which will mean that Linux will be even farther "ahead" (behind is more like it actually) in terms of unpatched security issues... apk

well, there's this and this.

That is true for MS Windows batch files, but is most assuredly not the same with MS Windows PowerShell scripts. Microsoft has finally "gotten" the power and strength of true scripting, and current iterations of Active Directory and Exchange both use PowerShell objects as the preferred administration control methods. To help with the transition, there are even aliases for commonly used UNIX commands. Just check out the capabilities and functionality described in the free Mastering PowerShell E-Book

Crap, wrong SP2. That 2nd link should have been:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyId=4F97AB2F-1F7D-49A3-9123-7CA3E703B916&displaylang=en

Or you could just install the patches for Office XP/2003 ...

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=941b3470-3ae9-4aee-8f43-c6bb74cd1466&displaylang=en http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=B444BF18-79EA-46C6-8A81-9DB49B4AB6E5

Or you could just install the patches for Office XP/2003 ...

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=941b3470-3ae9-4aee-8f43-c6bb74cd1466&displaylang=en http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=B444BF18-79EA-46C6-8A81-9DB49B4AB6E5

Office 2007 and 2010 support creating PDFs natively.

Here's the 2007 download:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=4d951911-3e7e-4ae6-b059-a2e79ed87041&displaylang=en

In 2010 it's an option on the install media:

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word-help/save-as-pdf-HA010354239.aspx

Office 2007 and 2010 support creating PDFs natively.

Here's the 2007 download:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=4d951911-3e7e-4ae6-b059-a2e79ed87041&displaylang=en

In 2010 it's an option on the install media:

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word-help/save-as-pdf-HA010354239.aspx

Microsoft has the official Windows checksums for the images on their website. Look no further. It's also listed in 1,000 places over the web. Apply some common sense. Only idiots install unverified images.

Hell, I believe you can still download pre-Ultimate Win7 FREELY directly from Microsoft.

It does if you're trying to compile with /clr:safe, which is required for Xbox 360 and Windows Phone 7. Native pointers (the *) cannot be used; only handles (^) can. From the Wikipedia article: "the .NET reference types are accessed through a 'handle', with the new syntax ClassName^ instead of ClassName*." Using a pointer in /clr:safe will prevent compilation, and using a handle in a standard C++ compiler will prevent compilation.

Although it allows for "assembly line programming", that doesn't necessarily make it worse for innovation.

I would argue that .NET has allowed for quite a lot of innovation such as Singularity, which if you didn't know is actually faster than Linux and even faster than *BSD due to it removing the overhead of task switching.

What innovation specifically does it not allow for?

What, exactly, is hard in repositioning the same UI element to a different place if screen width, say, exceeds 1000px?

In my experience about 20-70 lines of code for each 'movable' UI element.

It gets complicated when you have to deal with a dynamic layout for good amount of widgets as it requires a decent amount of design work to do it in a way that looks sane for the user. In Android, you're better off painting your own UI in the case of having many UI widgets because rewriting something like 'coolbar' is pretty asinine using the existing widget system. Neither method I would consider "easy".

See SUBJECT-LINE ABOVE, first:

"Much better solution is to simply blacklist the Comodo certs if you aren't on Windows, and if you are on Windows you should have already been given the cert blacklist update" - by hairyfeet (841228) on Wednesday March 30, @12:31PM (#35667932)

Second? POST A LINK NEXT TIME, ITT Tech Boy!

In fact, THAT is one of your "other problems" in most of your posts here!

I.E./E.G. - You RARELY backup what you state, & don't give enough detail or locations of fixes! You're no expert, and you've NEVER even accomplished a FRACTION of what I have shown I have in this exchange in response to your trolling & libelling myself.

(Even I back myself up - it pays off, & validates your words)

I'll do it for you, since you omit detail & are RARELY complete:

---

Here is/are the fix(es), from MS, directly, & by Operating System type:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=2a2e5a30-bd96-4dc6-9c45-7eac1b4e0ad8

("Get them while they're HOT" - because they'll be "forced off the page" to the next one (not a HUGE problem, but worth being thorough & noting, imo @ least!)).

---

"checkable by going MMC...add snap in...certifications and looking under untrusted certificates." - by hairyfeet (841228) on Wednesday March 30, @12:31PM (#35667932)

That's "a way", & a valid one (for once out of you, lol)... I will "give credit where it's due", YES, even to YOU..

HOWEVER, I would like to see the person I replied to's take on HOSTS usage, and some more detail via discussion w/ he on HIS method... as it too, like MY method (which you NEVER SAID WILL NOT WORK, because it does, AND, that I posted a reputable source to a GOOD HOSTS FILE FOR, unlike you)?

Sounds pretty good!

YES - I am fair, & give credit WHEN it's due!

---

Even though you tried these trolling & libelling me here & trolling me, 1st:

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2061048&cid=35667932

---

Which I then "shot you down" here for, 'point-by-point' & INVALIDATED your CRIMINAL SOURCES (yes, really criminal in both Computer Associates & Arstechnica):

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2061048&cid=35668740

---

AND, where I shot you down even further for trolling me, by pointing out your screwups in the past & big mouth (saying how "easy it is to automate McDonalds" when "the likes of YOU" haven't ever even DONE such a job & I HAVE):

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2061048&cid=35681430

---

ALSO, where you FAIL on REMOVALS LESSENING THE # OF KNOWN BAD SITES/SERVERS & WHY (on accounting for the removals of "bad sites" because they DO get cleaned up, OR go down (sometimes only TEMPORARILY, domain name based ones)):

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2061048&cid=35679634

---

ADDITIONALLY where I show the "tools you merely USE" techie user (ITT TECH BOY, lol) are NOT perfect & are shown FAULTY (just like you much of the time, shown above here no less):

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2061048&cid=35679938

---

LASTLY (& this one "takes the cake" & LITERALLY IS THE "ICING ON THE CAKE" here for your trolling & libeling me here first?) Here:

I'm out 95+% of the time and been so for years. I actually never had a Windows machine as my main machine. My computers are a MacBookPro and a datacenter of a few hundred Linux machines.
Unfortunately there is always that service here and there that is from Microsoft such as Exchange and Sharepoint. I'm not going to quit my job just because this.
Actually my keyboard is the only thing from Microsoft that I like and voluntarily use.

MonoTouch for iOS, and MonoDroid for Android.

Those might be suitable for an established company, but both appear costly for someone trying to build a business with sweat equity by running it as a hobby until the first product is finished. Even if you already own a Mac and a copy of Windows to run in a virtual machine, the price per seat for MonoTouch, MonoDroid, and their dependencies appears very expensive. From the MonoTouch web site:

1 Named User: $399

From the Mono for Android web site:

Visual Studio 2010 Professional, Premium, or Ultimate. Mono for Android for Visual Studio 2010 will not work with Visual Studio Express.

From the Microsoft Visual Studio pricing page:

Professional with MSDN Essentials: $799

What's the best way to justify this cost to other people in the same household before a hobby-turned-business starts to have some sort of revenue?

not allowing advertisers to use their own data about customers garnered from Google on other sites, such as those owned by Microsoft

Sort of doubt Google is the only company to be restrictive about data usage. One could look at the BING Maps Platform API License as restrictive too.

making it expensive for potential competitors to Google to advertise online

Not sure what to make of this statement since it lacks a lot of detail. Is Google doing anything to actively make it more expensive or have they simply streamlined the process for advertisers?

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/downloads/default.aspx

MS provides SHA1 checksums for all their ISO images. Grab a torrent of what you need, preferably containing "MSDN" in its name, and compare hashes.

Obtaining MS software is nothing special anymore. It's all in the licenses. And even those are easier to fake than ever. Google "Daz Loader": Voila, 100% original software passing all genuineness tests. Yeah, MS want to crack down on those pirates real hard o.O

They want you to use their shit, for free if it needs to be.

Not that confused

I live in NYC (yes, the place so nice they named it twice) and according to Microsoft, the closest store to me is in Chicago. For you geographically challenged types, that's 790 miles

That's one hell of drive to the mall! Assuming I even own a car (which I don't).

Not that confused

The bad news (for MS) is that I think the user base currently engrossed in tablet world are destined to ultimately go to cell phones and set-top boxes, not the directions MS are particularly strong in relative to the desktop/laptop world.

Guess who wrote the operating system that's running on my Motorola DVR from Verizon FiOS? Hint, it's a rather large company located in the Pacific Northwest.

MS has been involved in the set-top market for a decade or more. The XBox is one result of those efforts. Just because you don't see a Windows sticker on your DVR doesn't mean MS had nothing to do with it.

Here's an article from 2005 on Microsoft's efforts in the set-top market. How about an article from 1999 on its efforts to port CE to the set-top?

Microsoft released an advisory about this subject, which also included an update to blacklist those Comodo certs (the blacklisted code-signing certs from Microsoft are from a separate incident from 2001). It rolled out over Windows Update as a critical update several days ago.

This shouldn't really be necessary, as the certs were also revoked by Comodo, and are available through their CRLs (which aren't queried by default) or by OCSP (which is). Nevertheless, the browser vendors (Microsoft in this case) are being a bit more thorough.

However, people are now discussing removing the Comodo root certificates, as they feel that Comodo has been too irresponsible in their issuing policies (or in their RA security policies) to warrant any trust at all.

Microsoft released an advisory about this subject, which also included an update to blacklist those Comodo certs (the blacklisted code-signing certs from Microsoft are from a separate incident from 2001). It rolled out over Windows Update as a critical update several days ago.

This shouldn't really be necessary, as the certs were also revoked by Comodo, and are available through their CRLs (which aren't queried by default) or by OCSP (which is). Nevertheless, the browser vendors (Microsoft in this case) are being a bit more thorough.

However, people are now discussing removing the Comodo root certificates, as they feel that Comodo has been too irresponsible in their issuing policies (or in their RA security policies) to warrant any trust at all.

Microsoft released an advisory about this subject, which also included an update to blacklist those Comodo certs (the blacklisted code-signing certs from Microsoft are from a separate incident from 2001). It rolled out over Windows Update as a critical update several days ago.

This shouldn't really be necessary, as the certs were also revoked by Comodo, and are available through their CRLs (which aren't queried by default) or by OCSP (which is). Nevertheless, the browser vendors (Microsoft in this case) are being a bit more thorough.

However, people are now discussing removing the Comodo root certificates, as they feel that Comodo has been too irresponsible in their issuing policies (or in their RA security policies) to warrant any trust at all.

You mean like this?

http://office365.microsoft.com/en-US/online-services.aspx

The whole publishing/CMS/business intelligence/groupware/database stack in the cloud. Not -exactly- what you meant...but freagin close.

When has Microsoft demonstrated any vision beyond marketing? Microsoft makes profit out of their monopolies (Windows and Office) only. Everything else loses them money. Check out their annual reports if you don't believe me.

I wrote a blog-entry about this.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/products/features/tablet-pc

Seems like a waste of development effort on a fad.

Once a CA loses trust, it can't be restored. And it shouldn't

How about Verisign?

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms01-017.mspx

Verisign owns Thawte, Geotrust (which owns RapidSSL).

Well sounds like you are doing everything you need to. Other than you might want to take a look at windows services for Unix since it sounds like you need Unix stuff on a PC and this is kernel level:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=896c9688-601b-44f1-81a4-02878ff11778
http://www.suacommunity.com/SUA.aspx#bundles

Your second point, when using Linq or Linq-to-SQL, if you have a complex SQL statement (i.e. it creates a temporary table) it balks and refuses to accept it, claiming the temporary table is illegal. I had to re-write a stored procedure so that parameters and results are returned to VS and afterwards change it back so that it uses the temporary table in order for it to work. I had better experiences with Entity Framework, but then, I haven't yet done any serious work with it.

Oh, L2S, and frankly I think even EF, don't play all that well with stored procedures, but then stored procedures and ORM are inherently conflicting approaches (ORM implies logic in the model layer, which is then separate from data layer, otherwise why bother with objects?). Yeah, I know that EF advertises stored procedure support. I've never tried it personally.

If your system is mainly SP-centric, and on app side all you need is data that is already processed on the database, you will probably do far better with plain ADO.NET (+ typed datasets for Intellisense convenience) over L2S/EF. You can still do small in-memory LINQ queries over them, too.

Then, working with two or three servers (development, sandbox and production) is a nightmare. The dataset gets thrown out of kilter and refuses to load in VS (not work, it does compile and work) making further development harder. If I change the body of ConnectionString (not the Name or other attributes, just the server name and log-in parameters in the connection string) the dataset refuses to load in the development environment, until the conn string is returned to the original condition.

This sounds tricky to help with (since it wouldn't be easily reproducible), but it would still help if you log it as a bug.

Let me tell you a good one. In .NET 4 (yes the bleeding edge!) and previous incarnations, if you put a DatePicker in your forms (.aspx, WinForms. etc.) and the target is say, Spanish, when you tab from one DatePicker to another, the cursor goes to the month (remember, in Spanish we are talking about dd/mmm/yyyy) instead of the day field; if you try to put in 31 in the day field (first one) when the month is, say, September, it will not let you. So this makes it clear that internally the framework is still working with MONTH first, even when it doesn't make sense. One would think a multi-national company as MS could get this right after so many years, but no; we still have to struggle with small shit like this day in and day out. So much for internationalization.

This is curious, because WinForms Calendar and WebForms DatePicker are completely different controls, and validation sequence logic is obviously also separate for both. I suspect it's not really an issue of working with "month first", though; more likely, the validation in both cases is a simple DateTime.Parse and see if it throws; and it probably auto-tabs away from the month field as soon as you type two digits, which triggers validation. So any invalid date input would trigger this, it's just that it's much easier to run into it with a day-first date format.

Anyway, this is a UX defect, and also worth logging on Connect as such. Worst case, it doesn't get fixed, but someone will keep it in mind for future UI frameworks.

As far as internationalization goes... Microsoft actually spends a lot of resources there (for some entertaining stories, read Michael Kaplan's blog - he's the MS guru when it comes to internationalization issues, particularly text and input related). Still, keep in mind that most of its workforce is in Redmond, and the majority of those are Americans. Awareness of the sheer scope of internationalization aspects only truly comes when you're from a non-majority culture, and run into various minor but annoying nits in your daily use of the products that

IE9 actually includes ad blocking, it's just renamed such that you wouldn't know what it does. It's called a "tracking protection list", and is described primarily as a privacy tool, but in practice it can (and is) used to block ads as well.

Aw hell, if you can't beat them, join them:

Hotmail is one of the first "cloud" applications ever. Microsoft's experience with "cloud computing" is therefore top-notch! I'm sure HTTPS being shut off had more to do with ongoing enhancements to the Azure platform than anything else. Even Gartner Group agrees that Azure marks Microsoft's beginning of their inevitable cloudscape dominance.

It's possible that Microsoft is working on a replacement for HTTPS, and that the Azure platform is being rolled out in these despotic nations as a humanitarian gesture. Microsoft's committment to Open Source Software and top-notch development tools really overcomes any possible negative press or stock valuation that might arise from this minor mishap.

Aw hell, if you can't beat them, join them:

Hotmail is one of the first "cloud" applications ever. Microsoft's experience with "cloud computing" is therefore top-notch! I'm sure HTTPS being shut off had more to do with ongoing enhancements to the Azure platform than anything else. Even Gartner Group agrees that Azure marks Microsoft's beginning of their inevitable cloudscape dominance.

It's possible that Microsoft is working on a replacement for HTTPS, and that the Azure platform is being rolled out in these despotic nations as a humanitarian gesture. Microsoft's committment to Open Source Software and top-notch development tools really overcomes any possible negative press or stock valuation that might arise from this minor mishap.

Aw hell, if you can't beat them, join them:

Hotmail is one of the first "cloud" applications ever. Microsoft's experience with "cloud computing" is therefore top-notch! I'm sure HTTPS being shut off had more to do with ongoing enhancements to the Azure platform than anything else. Even Gartner Group agrees that Azure marks Microsoft's beginning of their inevitable cloudscape dominance.

It's possible that Microsoft is working on a replacement for HTTPS, and that the Azure platform is being rolled out in these despotic nations as a humanitarian gesture. Microsoft's committment to Open Source Software and top-notch development tools really overcomes any possible negative press or stock valuation that might arise from this minor mishap.

is Microsoft.

Thanks in advance.

Yours In Krasnoyarsk,
K. Trout

Yes, there is. OEM sales must be to unrelated parties. Windows OEM licensing changed a lot with 7, they have a whole page on it for hobbyists.

http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/pages/licensing_for_hobbyists.aspx

If your phone doesn't support it, there are lots of phones available that do. Take a look here - especially the HTC phones look great!

Yep agree with what you wrote. The guy is clueless. As an aside, I should mention you can actually use those unixy tools on windows:

http://www.cygwin.com/
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=896c9688-601b-44f1-81a4-02878ff11778
http://sourceforge.net/projects/unxutils/

You are indeed correct, and I confused two similar but different things - my apologies. C# and CLR are covered by Microsoft Community Promise. The difference between OSP and CP is described as such on the latter's FAQ:

Q: How is the Community Promise (CP) different from the Open Specification Promise (OSP)?
A: The CP requires that implementations conform to all of required parts of the mandatory portions of the specification.

http://www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/default.mspx

Here is what I hate about C#, and I think it is JavaScript infection (they're doing the same to VB, which is pretty much now C# without braces): implicit and anonymous types. That shit is gross.

Ok, so I went and looked up implicit types in .NET, and it turns out that they're nothing like Javascript. Javascript is a dynamically typed language; .NET languages are statically typed, but the compiler can infer the correct type of the variables.

I also went and looked up anonymous types, and they clearly seem to help in writing database-oriented applications. Object-oriented code that's written to use an object-relation mapper very often suffers from the defect that it has to pull all of the columns of a table to construct the objects, even when the caller may only need a subset of those columns. By writing the clients so that their type specifies only the table attributes that they actually need, that allows for performance optimizations.

The .NET implementation doesn't look like it goes all the way in this regard, but hey, they're trying—something that can't be said for any other mainstream language with their crappy "SQL is just strings and prepared statements" nonmodel.

So again, WTF does any of this have to do with Javascript?

Here is what I hate about C#, and I think it is JavaScript infection (they're doing the same to VB, which is pretty much now C# without braces): implicit and anonymous types. That shit is gross.

Ok, so I went and looked up implicit types in .NET, and it turns out that they're nothing like Javascript. Javascript is a dynamically typed language; .NET languages are statically typed, but the compiler can infer the correct type of the variables.

I also went and looked up anonymous types, and they clearly seem to help in writing database-oriented applications. Object-oriented code that's written to use an object-relation mapper very often suffers from the defect that it has to pull all of the columns of a table to construct the objects, even when the caller may only need a subset of those columns. By writing the clients so that their type specifies only the table attributes that they actually need, that allows for performance optimizations.

The .NET implementation doesn't look like it goes all the way in this regard, but hey, they're trying—something that can't be said for any other mainstream language with their crappy "SQL is just strings and prepared statements" nonmodel.

So again, WTF does any of this have to do with Javascript?