Slashdot Mirror
Windows Cheaper When Studied by MSFT Analysts
richdun writes "Here is a study done by an independent research firm which claims that under certain circumstances, it is cheaper to develop applications and enterprise solutions for Windows than for Linux. They cite costs from more education, time developing, etc. Of course, the story is quick to state that the whole study was funded and commissioned by our favorite Redmond, WA based software giant. "
There needs to be an organization that establishes a set of standards about how these kinds of comparisons are made with a detailed list of what needs to be disclosed in the report. Similar to how TPC defines what has to be disclosed for a benchmark to be valid. It's about time the industry come up with a solid set of standards on how these things are measured.
When using the Q-Toolkit. The commerical licence costs $1,500 per developer. Multiply that by a team of 20 developers and thats $30,000! Thats enough money to employ at least another 3 developers. The GTK+ toolkit may be cheaper, but it lacks a lot of features such as the C++ superset that Qt uses and the lack of the more powerful widgets such as Databases, Advanced File selection dialogs. So you have a choice, you either pay through the nose for the Qtoolkit, Use the less advanced GTK+, or write your own, which will be more expensive anyway.
A better test would be .Net vs J2EE/JDO.
You have intellesense statement completion, automatic code formatting and highlighting, and intelligent help that will pull full documentation on any statement you are typing with one click.
You have the same thing with Java IDE such as Eclipse (free) or WSAD ($$$) or JBuilder ($$$). The Java IDE that cost $$$ will have the additional benefit of having wizards and views that speed up the creation and configuration of EJBs and other J2EE stuff (Eclipse has some of these too, but they still have a some way to go).
I used to develop on J2EE and now develop for C# and ASP.NET and think both are very impressive patforms. Apart from one only running on Windows, there's little to choose between them and the only reason I prefer .Net is simply becuase I prefer the development tools for it but I certainly cannot say a bad word about Java. I am amazed you think it's slow and cumbersome, but that is more likely that you do not like or understand OOP.
.NET are able to do far, far outstrips what you can do with PHP. We can argue the details, but with J2EE/.NET you are able to scale from small websites with limited functionality right up to sites running on many app servers, database servers, you name it - they are both Enterprise level systems.
.NET is cross train far more easily between making web and desktop based apps - again something you cannot do in PHP. For example, load up Visual Studio.NET and I guarantee that ANY ASP.NET programmer will be able to make desktop apps very quick, and the same for Java.
.NET doesn't end up on most desktops, to say it's a dead end is frankly plain stupid. I guess you've never done a stroke or work on the framework otherwise you'd be able to understand why those who have used it think it is probably the best thing MS have done for a long while.
.NET or J2EE. I really suggest you have a look at both products, get hold of Visual Age for Java or Visual Studio, get a book on OOP and don't look back! :)
However, what both J2EE and
What you can also do with both J2EE and
I will be very surprised if
I don't dislike PHP at all, it has it's uses, but put simply, it's not in the same league as
Some tools just make developing certain kinds of applications more efficient, take VisualBasic for example. There's not much else that can compare to the RAD capabilities of VB.
That just show how far from reality M$ as dragged you. Delphi is a lot better at this than VB and you can have the same on Linux with Kylix
By the way, they even have a free version with about the only requirement is that you release your program under the GPL.
And don't get me started on why VB is bullshit, regardless of being an M$ product.
If you had told me back in 1982, when I was programming in M$-BASIC on my first computer (COCO2) that I would still be coding in BASIC 20 years later, I would have laugh to death
BASIC whas a shitty language in 1982. Thanks to M$, is still is today ;-)
Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
Seriously, I developed programs under many Unix flavors, and enjoyed developing solutions with Linux. But, when we needed to interface our software with Word for mail merges, or Excel for spreadsheet drop-ins, then (at least at the time) Windows programming was a necessary evil. Development of databases was done on Unix for stability, web applications using PostgreSQL and Perl, but front ends were usually Access or some VB application.
There was also a problem hiring programmers. Salaries asked for by experienced programmers were much higher (IMHO rightfully so) than salaries demanded by Windows programmers. While the Windows programmers in general were less flexable to learn new languages or stray from mainstream programming, they were quite efficient. And, the tools they were using allowed them to create and alter code quicker than us Unix-folk. That having been said, we never had to cuss-out our monitors because of a blue screen...
If I were a shop doing custom programming, it would be a mix of Windows and Unix, and Windows programmers would be about 2/3 or 3/4 of the programming population in the office. It is simply good business to sell a comfortable solution, and businesses are comfortable with Microsoft. Now, you don't have to disclose that MS-SQL will not be on the back end of that Access application...
Click here or here.
I don't agree with you because windows is as standard to most people as how to operate a car. Say a company called Mazdafordix came out with a car that used hand movements picked up by lasers and infrared sensors to operate a car. The public would imediatly think it was more difficult to use and their argument of "well you're just used to a steering wheel so you're wrong" wouldn't hold up. I don't think this analogy is that much of a stretch when you see windows users try to do the same thing they're used to on a linux machine.
As someone who codes every day in version 6 of Visual Studio, I'd just like to say...
/. isn't either. So there goes the other half of the day.
Damn Bill Gates and his buggy, unstable, unpredictable, bloated, non-ANSI IDE to hell!
And spending half the day accounting for Visual Studio's antics isn't my idea of productivity. But then, browsing
"There's not much else that can compare to the RAD capabilities of VB."
Oh yes there is. It's called Delphi. Delphi beats VB in every way: language, speed, price, etc. And Delphi is available for Linux too (Kylix).
All of these features are present in eclipse (www.eclipse.org) with Java.