Slashdot Mirror
The Competition for Developers
Ray Cromwell writes "Software competition a concern is a major concern, according to Steve Ballmer.
Amongst other things, Steve says
that the growing amount of development done for the Linux operating system by the work of volunteers developers worldwide is "scary."
Ballmer also characterized the free-form Linux community as "somewhat crazy," but said Microsoft now has "a real server competitor."
"
Just step back for a second, even if you ARE a big fan of NT and other MS products. What does it mean when every time a software company releases a new product they claim that THIS time they got it right?
Sorry, but NT has been the so-called long-awaited unix-killer for ages. Oh, but wait.. they were just kidding. They meant W2K.. W2K is FINALLY gonna blow everyone out of the water.
Well, not quite. What you REALLY want is Janus. It's coming soon! Boy.. THAT is what EVERYONE has been waiting for.
Excuse me.. why wait when there are already solutions out there? Why wait for the UNIX killer that will never come? "Where do you want to go today? Oh, really, ok, we'll work on that. It'll be ready by Q4 99... err.. make that Q1 2000. Hmm.. no.. wait.."
its scary, how are programmers going to make any money if everyone just uses free software.
What do you expect from him? While he's busy stuffing his pockets, we're producing real software running on a real operating system. We have pride and achievement - he has some cash and a job he could lose tomorrow. Hmmm, what with all the job offers I've been seeing for programmers from the Linux pool, I think we have the better end. Yep, it's crazy alright, and it certainly isn't stagnating or boring. Life is good...
:)
BTW, if I hit the submit button fast enough, I'm first - nyah nyah nyah...
Good God, what a bunch of feed crazed sharks.
BTW - Hey, thank Microsoft for giving us good coverage. The more they say we're crappy, the more people are going to be curious and check us out - then the light shall shine... Let's see, on the latest round of (biased?) benchmarks, we were lumped in with M$ NT and Solaris. Not bad, even if they tried their best to make Linux look bad. What I see it a growing awareness of Linux from a crowd of people that recognize the benchmarks as largely biased and proprietary bullshit anyway. So, let them pay for Linux advertising (what some of you call FUD) and prove them wrong on their stupid tests and statements... the audience isn't that gullible.
Pretty interesting article, although it would of course be nice to know why he thinks developers are leaving the MS camp for other areas. And not just, "because they are there."
Also, that was a pretty good line he slipped in about the MS/IBM split over OS/2 causing the PC revolution - I needed a good laugh. In hind sight yes it was good for MS, and they may have even expected the same at the time, but the PC revolution is due to the hardware getting faster, not the software.
I absolutely agree with a few of the comments above. Does anyone really think that, even for a minute, Microsoft would normally actually admit this? Perhaps the DoJ is squeezing a bit hard on the ole sensitive areas of Microsoft. For example, years of shifty and anticompetitive practices, some perhaps illegal.
all Microsoftians are).
His comment re "we finally have real server competition" is a rediculous insult to Novell, Sun, IBM, etc.
Those guys really need to be taken down a notch or two. I hope the DOJ levels Microsoft and puts those cocky buggers in their place.
But they're not on trial for having a monopoly on servers; they're essentially on trial for dumping a web browser, more generally for abusing a desktop monopoly. How is this supposed to help them?
Plus, is it only now that Microsoft has a real competitor in the server market? Who's Ballmer trying to kid?
Plus according to that website their stock dropped ~10% today. There goes $50B!
Perhaps people who are currently "Cobol Crankers" will be able to get some satisfaction in their life by not working on the 10,000th reimplementing of an insurance policy administration system. I know quite a few programmers who have no love for the job, but enjoy making the money. One question I would ask any prospective programmer is "Would you still write code if you wern't getting paid for it?".
If Open Source becomes they 'one way', I can see programming becoming like all the other arts - programmers will become the equivilent of any other person making money by the applications of technical and artistic skills. After all, what are programmers than interior designers for computer hardware?
Paid programmers will still exist, but in lesser numbers. People who desire customisations will sponser them, people become 'patrons' of skilled practitioners, and people will pay for more experienced people to install, organise and support open source software.
And there will always be the 'way out there' guys that nobody understands, but who manage to redefine the industry.
Just think of what would happen after a whole lot of people (and associated resources) are released to add more value to society as a whole!!!!
Ballamer's a FUD monger. Windows has always had competition in the server arena; in fact, Unix has always been superior to NT. What's new is that there is finally competition in the client arena.
I recommend Java and/or GTK to anybody interested in developing the applications the future. They are both free and infinitely better and easier to use than Microsoft's "solutions". Your code will never escape from MFC if you embrace it.
MFC may not be the best, but even coding in traditional C for win32 GUI etc... is damn easy/nice. If you must use mfc if its your flavour, its only an option.
But GTK an alternative? please... it is very young and is lacking in lots of good bits, besides , its no more than a layer on Xlib really. Show me a real easy to use and logical API set. Gtk is hardly what I call an advance on GUI apis worth $500million.
Its still barely as good as even 1991 amiga/riscos apis, it offers nothing that has been done before, and even then it does it the hard way.
You want to know what ms could do to linux. Try patents. Read the halloween docs. Microsoft is waiting for this kind of thing as a last minute solution if nothing else works but as a hobbyist programmer I do not have enough money to defend myseff in court.
After samba is broken down, unix will began to choke on sales of department servers and workstations where interconnectivity is esential. Perhaps ms will even make the backoffice security protocols patented so only NT machines can participate in a kerbos security/NT network (Ms practically bought the kerbos technology for w2k).
If this happens then linux will turn into minix and only be used in special university classes and BIll will just eat up the internet because all the windows clients will only read sites on ms Kerbos which is patented by ms and no one will use unix anymore if it cant connect to windows95 or NT servers. Unix will only be used for high end databases and huge factories but that will be it.
This is all theoritical of course but they could easily succeed as long as they sue individuals and not companies like redhat. Ms loves power and it will give them the power to controll linux.
Its an acronym for the Terminator robots sent to the past from the future.
Its Cybernet I tell you.
Wheres John Conner??
STEVE:
Special Time Enhancement Vehicle Entities
Among certain species of whale, an interesting mating phenomenon occurs. When a female indicates she is ready to mate, all the males in the vicinity take their turns copulating with her. The result is 'sperm competition', i.e. the male with The Most wins. This has placed evolutionary pressure on this type of whale to get bigger testes - the typical whale in this species has testes that weigh ONE TON apiece - that's 3% of the body weight, it'd be like an average human male having 2 pound testes!
What's my point? Well, I think I speak for everyone here when I say that it would be really fun to take turns copulating with nearby females. Maybe if we all use Linux, this will happen.
He is dead right. In March I began searching for a new contract. I got calls from Microsoft in the bay area, Redmond, Isaquaa, and New York. Their best offer was $90k/yr + options for 1000 shares ($156 at the time). I ended up turning them down for a more lucrative offer.
Uh, hello?
...they would give away Visual C++ and Visual Basic for nothing (or next-to nothing).
Microsoft does give away VC++ and VB for $1000/seat, which is next to nothing if you are doing real work.
...Then again, Microsoft does love it's cash cows!
Microsoft is a B-U-S-I-N-E-S-S that exists to make M-O-N-E-Y, something they do rather well.
http://www.fearby.com/marc/
For heaven's sake remove that hideous picture from your web site!
I disagree. Unix has always been better (more reliable, easier to program, better support) than anything from Bill Gates (that includes SCO products).
The rise of Unix on the desktop in the form of Linux is for real. Don't beleive me? Bang out a trivial app in gtk or java. Now try it with MFC. Notice the difference?
Short Microsoft, the party in Redmond is over.
A lot of Linux-heads don't see any world outside of Windows 95 and Microsoft Office, which is typical of those with a seige mentality.
If every stand-alone computer worth less than $50K vanished tomorrow in a puff of smoke, plenty of "real programmers" would still have to get out of bed and go to work. Most of the GPL's shock troops would need to get a new hobby, though.
I agree that C programming in WIn32 is pretty easy -- I find it easier than MFC personally, and it's heck of a lot easier than Xlib programming.
But why are you so down on Gtk? It's incredibly easy to program in, and it's led to a big boom of GUI programs for Linux.
What features does Gtk lack, that Win32 has -- as a GUI library?
Remember conner harddrives?! He got bought over.
Yeah but their method seems to work doesn't it? The only reason that Linux is suceeding is because it's not a company it's about 30+ companies, don't know how many programmers, and a ton of die hard fans/users/whatever who saw the light and realized that windoze just plain == yucky.
Now that my 'on topic' stuff is over and done with, what'd you say about Canada? Dare you to say that in person (if you could). I'd kick your ass - eh.
People think Microsoft is huge. But just check out Fortune magazines list of global companies buy revenues. Microsoft is number ~280 on the list below companies like Albertson (Grocery store)!
So, basically they offered you $90,000/year + $156,000 of shares, so what was the better offer? Seems a little odd that you didn't mention that.
Yep. Phrickin blue screen o'death. The SOB won't boot. Let's see, that's NT 4.0, NT 4.0 SP4, NT Options Pack ... see you in a couple of hours.
I started my own company just so I could
be sure of not having to develop any
software for Microsoft operating systems.
I'd rather stick knitting needles into my eyes.
Let's see you talk 'binary compatibility' with your legacy Win16 apps under NT 2000...what a joke.
Or perhaps binary compatibility with DOS? Oops, NT 2000 fails at athat too.
Of course, this is from the company that introduced the evils of segmented architecture programming at the C level into their API...long jumps? Long pointers?? In C? Christ.
1) Apple is not listed as a threat.
2) OpenSource isn't the threat...just (GNU/)Linux
3) Taken from EULA.txt from my NT 4.0 CD Rom
(f) indemnify, hold harmless,
and defend Microsoft and its suppliers from and
against any claims or lawsuits, including attorneys' fees,
that arise or result from the use or distribution of
your Application.
A lot of Microsoft's "wealth" comes from their highly priced stocks. If Microsoft posts a couple of quarters in a row with falling revenue those stock values will plummet as people dump their MS shares, since they no longer appear to be a sure bet. If Linux (and other OS's) can build up enough momentum to make a mark on the MS bottom line, then they will feel an economic hit far greater than the actuall change in revenue.
Bill Gates may be the richest man in the world, but I'd be very surprised if MS was even on the US top 200 list for revenue.
Don't you mean sent from the past to the future... ;-)
Cowardus Anonymous - The Roman who brought down the Empire.
Mmmmmfff...mmmmfff..mmffff...L..N....X....
-Microsoft Customer
Cowardus Anonymus - The Roman who brought down the Empire
now THAT'S scary.
Right on the spot!
Thanks for this insight and no, I'm not being sarcastic.
I seem to recall that Ballmer was dissing on us not too long ago. I think this is more about Microsoft posturing for the inevitable antitrust verdict rather than what Microsoft thinks of Open Source developers.
Operating system competition has always been about how many people are developing for the platform. Without developers and the programs they bring, even the best OS will stagnate and die. It's been proven time and again.
What's probably "scary" to Microsoft is that for the first time in... well... time itself, a significant number of commercial companies are viewing another OS as a viable development platform. No other Microsoft competitior has been able to attract the number of companies that Linux has. Microsoft probably has no idea how to deal with it. It wouldn't suprise me if at some point they start trying to punish developers who leave the fold to write code on another OS.
*laughs*
You've taken the poor guy way out of context. The article wasn't written for people who knows the ins-and-outs of 'open source' software, and
said 'so called open source' to simply imply that is what it is referred to as. Sheesh.
"some cash and a job he could lose tomorrow"???
I'd guess his job is pretty secure, but Ballmers sure doesn't have to worry about money and wouldn't have to ever work again if he so chose. He probably gets the same satisfaction out of running a big operation that provides a lot of income to a lot of people that hackers get out of writing good code.
That's not $156k worth of shares, it's options. Meaning it's 1000*($some_future_share_price - $156) (they just give you the difference when you exercise options).
If you stick to standard C++ and POSIX or SVID, you really shouldn't have any problems moving programs around like that (even after compilation). I can do it just fine, so maybe you should read up on what really is the standard, and what's the useless or experimental fluff.
I have a better idea for how to do you UI: make the C++ stuff components, and stick them together with a glue language. This is absolutely trivial with TCK/Tk, and adds total scriptability as well as easy GUI development to your program. I don't know how VB compares.
So if I write a program in VC++ and due to a bug in the MS libraries my program crashes and billions of dollars are lost because of it and knowing that it was a MS Library problem and not your code they sue Microsoft, you might be obligated to defend Microsoft against the suit?
You can't (k)telnet (or ssh) into a crashed machine. Instead you put a terminal server with one-time password authentication on its serial console, and dial in.
I'm sorry.
I have a patent on the idea of a 'loop' and also
that of 'if', and all other forms of logic, maths,
general research and anything else mankind has
thought of over the last 20 billion years or so.
Please remove this comment or I will be forced to
sue.
btw. I have a patent pending on software patents.
Yours Truly
Willy Window
I settled for $85/hr on a 6 month contract. The MS options vested over 5 years, which I thought was too restrictive. I also enjoy contract work vs. being a salaried employee.
Here in the US, the guys who have Comp Sci degrees usually don't get the good jobs. It's the other guys who do. The Comp Sci guys are usually the ones that sit in a closet and do bizarre stuff for extended periods of time for little money.
But how likely is that? I highly doubt anyone will ever develop a cleanroom replacement for the huge monstrosity that is MFC.
I love the win32 api and the classes and vb. Microsoft is just trying to save us the hassle of re-inventing the wheel each time we write a new app. I can write a dbase app in vb in just 25 mins. Could you do this with emacs and gcc?
Microsoft is just giving people what they want wether you hate them or love them. Development time is money and it doesnt matter if vb and vc is dumbed down because at 45$ an hour this is very important and windows apps will intergrate better with windows and other windows apps then unix apps with cobra. Activex is clearly better. I hate the pthread stuff in linux and the glibc libraries change compadibilities each time a new version comes out. Just ask ziod at idsoftware why he wont support smp in the linux version of quake3. He said the pthreads and the old glibc conflicts are the reasons.
Linux is more stable but bussiness users care more about ole and active x controls interacting with each other so they can drag excell spreadsheets in custom apps.
Steve Balmer is right on the server arena but I will quite if I have to use unix. I just use linux as a web server but I do not want to program apps for it.
What, no one has anything good to say about Gtk? The _only_ complaints I can imagine someone having about Gtk are:
1) it has to do dynamic type checking, rather than static type checking.
2) writing your own widget tends to be a little involved.
3) the code tends to be wordy.
But writing GUI apps in it is really easy, and it's really easy to learn. It has terrific features that both Win32 (okay, "user32", for the bureacrats among you) and MFC lack, like the packing widgets, and the widespread ability to stick one widget inside of another.
I don't know anything about Qt, so I don't know how it compares to that.
For being Linux nerds who want the chance to compete with MS, you certainly do seem to go whining to mommy a lot (the DoJ).
Aren't most of you nerds Libertarian, too? Seems a little contradictory to root the DoJ on in their ridiculous attempts to harm Microsoft.
Yeah, I've heard that one before. Let's release the common worker so he can go do something of VALUE for humanity.
Meanwhile, the auto worker labor market was shattered by the introduction of replacement labor (robots).
Let's be realistic here, people are not going to magically stop programming and suddenly help find the cure for cancer. They will be too busy working at McDonalds.
Fortunately, this will never happen. Open Source is INFERIOR and less CHOICE exists in relation closed source products. Like Socialism...looks nice to the stupid people on paper, but the smart people know it for what it really is.
I think that has already been proven in the marketplace. If it wasn't true then there would be no market for closed source.
I think you have lost your mind. Microsoft has lost the mindshare of developers???
What data do you have that supports this? I think you are confusing slashdot with the real world.
How about MS Mouse?
Whats the difference between Win32 and various Unices at the application level? Not much.
Besides, what you study in school and what you do for work are not the same. Most schools introduce their students to programming using a Unix environment. It doesn't matter because you just learn superficial programming skills in school anyhow.
These people are quickly converted to Win32 programmers with no problem. I know, I do this all the time at work with new recruits.
yeah, lets have government interference in the marketplace because they are "cocky".
You Socialists are so stupid.
Wow, they changed ONE API to IMPROVE it. Is your stance that everything should be as stagnant as OS/2?
The Win32 API is remarkably stable
Regardless of the fact that the commercial unixes are holding their own in the very limited hi-end server market, and Linux is doing very well in the mid to low end of the server market, the growth of Windows continues - and it has effectively destroyed the potential that unix had 10 years ago.
In other words, during the last 10 years the growth in home computers, client machines for miscellaneous professional, engineering and small business needs, and servers has been dramatic, and most of that growth has been going to Microsoft, not unix or anything else. So, Windows NT, Windows 9x and even Windows 3.x have blown everyone out of the water. Where have you been?
Windows 2000 is no joke. It's not vaporware. Yes, the product is late, it's buggy and it attempts to do too much and requires too much hardware and still doesn't really meet the needs of many home and small busienss users, but so what?
It remains to be seen whether or not Linux can compete with Windows 2000 in the home user/small business client market, which is the key to everything else in the worldwide economy which is now consumer-based. Most people who own a computer tend to buy a new one every two or three years. Will home users and small business operators stick with Windows, or switch to Linux or another OS? ( Right now, you can forget anything except Linux for attracting current Windows users for general computing needs. Not Beos, not BSD, not Mac. To explain why would require an essay - but in brief none of the others have the momentum at this time to beat Windows 2000 to the punch ).
Remember, people will be buying new hardware with more memory and storage. Also, the consumer / client version of Win2k will be released even later than the server version. Once a consumer takes the plunge and "upgrades" to Win2K, he will have to endure some *VERY* negative experiences to switch to something else. Peoople do not like to admit that they have made a mistake, especially if that mistake costs them money. Go figure.
There is no evidence that Linux is attracting much interest among non-technical users as a client machine, despite a great many accomodations to non-technical users being made by various distributions and a very functional and attractive desktop. But my perspective could be warped by geography. Linux may be more of a hot item for consumers in Japan and Austalia and Eurpose, for example. Here, in America, 95% of consumers want Windows and AOL.
All the rest is speculation. The fact remains that Windows NT has taken almost *ALL* of the new business that could have gone to the unixes (not that the elitist unix crowd really ever cared to interest such growing markets in their software).
Hehe you have never written any REAL software have you? Seems like Win32 is a much easier and more stable target than most UNIX APIs, which are archaic and have taken 20 years to start getting revamped.
When you get an IQ, please give us an intelligently formed and informed post.
I've worked with a lot of OS's and they ALL have their problems.
Have you ever bought a UNIX compiler you blow hard? MSVC is $400. Sun's C compiler is $1500. MipsPRO C compiler is $2000. And that's just for the compiler. If you want the IDE, debugger, etc. it'll run you ANOTHER $500.
Whine all you want, but until you know what you're talking about keep your posts shut.
True that they could try this, but they will not. Then the DOJ has a case...
You have it in a nutshell. Forget the virtues of OSS. Look at what Oracle and the others are doing. Releasing nonOSS products for Linux. Why? Simple MS is constricting the third party market. And that will hurt them. Step by step...
Aside from Wozniak, they're all evil... And have you noticed how many evil Bills there are? Gates, Clinton, etc?
exactly HOW many people named Steve are there in powerful computing positions?
ballmer, case, jobs, wozniak.. i count at least four.
i think there's some kind of conspiracy here.
[/score: 0, flamebait]
the only reason MS sees linux as a 'threat' now
and say 'they have a real competitor' now, is
because they want one. if they don't have one
the DOJ is going to rake them over the coals.
isn't it obvious how bad they want us/Linux to
be competitors? maybe i'm just nuts, but that
is the way i see it.
Sources say Linux 2000 (formerly known as kernel version 2.4) is due out Q3 or Q4 1999.
;)
"We're very excited about this," Linus Torvalds was quoted as saying. "We firmly believe that this may very well be the most advanced operating system ever designed for the personal computer."
Industry analysts predict that Linux 2000 will clobber any hope Redmond WA software giant Microsoft ever had of winning the software war.
"This is what everyone has been waiting for. Linux is finally ready to tackle the most advanced tasks anyone could ever possibly imagine. It is bug free and will seemlessly integrate into embeded systems such as the central computer on the USS Enterprise."
C'mon man. Admit.. admit. This DOES sound like MS, it DOESN't sound a bit like the Linux community. We may go on and on about how superior to Windows Linux is, but that's just because it IS superior. (no arrogance there.
Someone above asked "how are programmers going to make any money if all software is free??"
People responded with stuff like "programmers will still have to write internal apps...thats what most apps are anyways, etc, etc..."
I thought it important to once again direct everyones attention to the fact that this movement is about Free as freedom not free beer. This doesn't mean that the applications have to be distributed for free. It just means that either the source code is distributed for free and with no ristrictions or i can obtain the source code with minimal hassel(ie download it). Remember the majority of consumers aren't going to care about having the source to Word. But if someone thought they could take the source to Word and make a better product and support it and market it, then they may very well do so. It forces the entire industry to innovate. If a company like microsoft gets stagnant (releasing the same crap over and over with minimal modifications and calling win2k) then another company grabs the source, fixes it/introduces new and fresh innovation and releases a *real* product.
To me this isn't about "can i download the source to Word compile it nad have a free word processor." Indeed, if a company and its developers put in the effort to create a decent product they should be compensated for their service. Its about avoiding industry stagnation. Its about innovation. Its about the source wanting to be *Free*.
What you fail to realize is the price you pay for happily being fed the microsoft version of "these aren't the droids you're looking for". You want to talk development cost? Tell me about the development cost when bugs crop up and your only response is "gee, I just did what the wizard told me to do". There is an advantage to re-implementing the wheel: you implemented it, you can fix it. Open Source however, is the next best thing.
To put it another way, anything worth doing is worth doing right; most importantly when it comes to software. Microsofts MSDN-style development culture is a snake-oil salesman that convinces you to trust it and treats the symptoms of your ills SO WELL you forget that the CAUSE is still there. This is NOT "doing it right". Anyone who wakes up in a cold sweat at night over Y2k should take a look at the way the "Rapid Application Development" concept is bought, sold, and out there running goods and services.
Already happened. Check out the April 1999 issue of Windows NT Magazine.
I know it isn't a white paper, but all these Windows _x_ Magazine publications are stools for Microsoft.
"I've never had a customer mention Linux to me"
(Bill Gates, a couple of years ago)
--
I was a VC++ programmer for a couple of years before someone finally convinced me to have a look at Delphi.
And when I did, man, I was flabbergasted.
Programming for Windows was actually *FUN*, courtesy of Borland's excellent VCL.
If you've gotta write for Windows, use Delphi. There's not much you can do in VC++ that you can't do in Delphi, and Delphi is a hell of a lot cosier.
At times, it feels almost as fun as it does to write apps for BeOS...
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
No, they don't have infinite resources (but they do have a lot). Lets say MS gives each and every free software developer 100k incentives. It won't take long for MS to completely drain their funds. I wouldn't be supprised if there's ~1 million free softwaree developers out there (Linux, *BSD, HURD, DJGPP (yes, that's dos/windows, but many djgppers seem to move on to Linux) etc), so that 100e9 dollars in MS's bank will go bloody fast. Of course, my numbers are most likely way out, but still, Their money levels can't be sustained if they try something like that.
Bill - aka taniwha
--
Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak
Someone hires you to write stuff for them. Most software is not written for the purpose of distributing binaries.
--
South Park reference. Haven't you seen it yet?
--
Despite the fact that this is largely a bogus argument in the here and now (that Microsoft is not a monopoly because of this *potential* threat), over the long term, I think this is Microsoft's greatest fear, and constitutes a threat that is very, very real.
I think this article indicates that it is currently "top of mind" at Microsoft.
I don't know how they are going to keep developers away from Linux/BSD/etc., but they sure as hell are going to try.
--
It's funny that Microsoft wants us to believe that Linux and NT are the only real competitors in the server market. They're trying to defeat IBM, HP, and Sun (their real competitors in the high-end market) by excluding them from the contest.
The next step is to publish white papers like "Linux or Windows 2000, which is better for your enterprise?". Lets face it, neither Windows nor Linux is ready for seriously massive enterprise deployment today. But if MS can make it seem like these are the only choices they might take market share away from the companies that really have viable products.
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
1. MSDN CD's cost $500 per year last time I
subscribed. Linux API docs and source are free.
2. Visual C++ subscriptions costs $250 last time
I bought it (circa 1996). Linux dev tools are free.
3. Microsoft constantly assures developers that their
new XYZ API is the way of the future "Port all
your code to XYZ now before it's too late!"
then a few months later they either abandon
XYZ or change the rules of it completely. How
long do you expect me to tolerate that?
4. Microsoft constantly competes with it's own
3rd party developers and beats them senseless.
5. With the Open Source paradigm it's not about
selling software anymore -- it's about *using*
the tools available to build entire systems
and content. If you you reach the limits of the
software then open your code editor and dig in.
6. Geeks are leaving Windows because it's not
interesting anymore. Linux, BSD, Apache, Perl,
GNOME, KDE, GIMP, etc.. those things are
interesting. News things are happening everyday
in those areas and people are contributing code
because it's useful, interesting, challenging,
and other programmers are actually listening
to their suggestions rather than letting a group
of marketing droid design the software using
zombie focus group of morons.
Pretty much. Right now, since MS is being forced to play nice, is the window of opportunity for Linux for sure, but also for companies to really place solidly a business alternative to MS products. Otherwise, I believe your scenario is quite correct. I don't think you sound paranoid - just realistic.
"shop smart:shop s-mart" ash
The enterprise editions are priced somewhat high, but you can get around this with an MSDN subscription (doesn't save you money, but gets you just about every Microsoft product made along with access to betas).
What are you paying for? Guaranteed documentation and support. Media. Stable libraries. Bill's new house. The list goes on.
Why do I pay? Because I like Visual C++. I like MFC. They have their bad points (just like anything else) but it's a great development enviornment for getting things running up and running quickly and smoothly.
Would I rather develop on Linux? You bet. And I do, for fun. But just because Linux is experiencing phenomenal growth and press coverage does not mean that Window is going away anytime soon. There are plenty of jobs for Windows programmers, very few Linux/Unix.
--
It does not, and never has. Open a new project (blank) and add some files (cpp/c/h). 50% of the application I've developed in VC++ (console and windowed) have started their sad little lives this way.
I hate posting these message. I don't like Microsoft. I'm much happier at my bash prompt. FUD flies both ways however, and if there's one thing we should stamp out it's FUD.
Oh, and teletubbies. Two things we should stamp out.
--
More FUD! MFC is not a neccessity to write a Windows application, and it actually limits you quite a bit if you want to do anything out-of-the-box (overrides are a pain in the arse). It's no more difficult to write a nonMFC application than it is to write a GTK application. If you can't figure either of these out, you need a) more practice, or b) Visual Basic or Glade.
Not only is this lame, but who knows how many bugs are in that AppWizard code? Knowing MS, probably tons. If I'm on a development team, the last thing I want is to track down bugs in M$ code :)
That's funny (really!) but also untrue. The AppWizards give you a skeleton application - there isn't much room for error. I've never found one in appwizard generated code, and I've never heard of anyone else finding one. All my errors are mine! Mine alone I say!
--
Well, Linux does fit the bill of a server much better than a desktop environment for the masses. I personally use Linux full time on my own desktop and I love it, but I would hesitate to recommend it to all of my friends because it's not entirely intuitive to use yet. I know some people think that learning to use a command line interface is no harder than learning to use a GUI, but a GUI offers the advantage that you can often figure out how to do something from contextual clues and that's infinitely more difficult to do from a command line. GNOME and E look 10 times cooler than Windows (that's one of the big reasons why I permanently switched to Linux) and they offer far more functionality than Windows in terms of what I find useful, but every once in awhile I find myself having to drop into an xterm to do something that I can't do (or isn't obvious how to do) with the GUI. I imagine this would be much, much harder for somebody with minimal computer experience.
Then again, Windows isn't exactly intuitive either even with the contextual clues you get from the GUI. But the worst thing is, if you can't do something from the GUI you probably can't do it at all - you don't even have the option to drop into a CLI to do what you want (you can drop into DOS, but it most likely won't help).
So maybe Linux would make just as good of a desktop as Windows for Newbies. It's already blatantly more stable and less expensive than Windows - I guess it would feel more right recommending it as a desktop if it were obviously more intuitive to use than Windows.
-----
Free P2P Backup, Windows & Linux
Kick down the stable door and run free with Linux!
Not having managers, beurocracy, formality, and business suits impede your decision making allows a lot more opportunity outside the workplace. Unfortunately, everyone has to pay for their own development.
Seems to me that Ballmer wouldn't say this if it were not for the current situation with the fine folks over at the DoJ. I just dont see it as Microsoft's style to purposely point that stuff out on their own...
-----
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed...
If you want something that gives you endless opportunities to hear the Windows Startup sound all the time (that's such a lovely WAV, don't you think?) then NT is THE thing for you!
There's nothing like a fresh start to get you all motivated - it's almost like a baptism! Windows emerging from the blue waters to a nice new start!
If crashes don't really pump your nads, then Linux or BSD is the one for you!
If Microsoft really wanted to attact developers to their shitty platform, then, apart from actually making it stable, they would give away Visual C++ and Visual Basic for nothing (or next-to nothing).
:-)
Then again, Microsoft does love it's cash cows!
Pity, when Linux has eaten all the grass, their cows will starve to death
Thanks Bill!
We're not talking about UNIX, we're talking about Linux!
The tools provided for the UNIX platform are vastly superiour to that MFC shite we all *love*
working on a platform with a somewhat obtuse API and dealing with it's inconsistencies. At the same time he can make his job MUCH easier by using Microsoft's wonderful classes, thereby tying his soul forever a Windows platform.
A Class Library can always be duplicated (aka the whole QT thing) so that it may be possible in the future to recompile your windows application under linux by using a API compatible FreeMFC.
Ex-Nt-User
It even got so bad that at one point I heard a Microsoft developer say, "the source code is the documentation." What kind of bullshit is that?
Now I work on BIOS's, which are OS independent, for the most part. And at home I work on OS/2, which has an API that hasn't changed in 10 years (and still works great!)
Timur Tabi
Remove "nospam_" from email address
Microsoft is worth the gross national product of Spain. Is Linux a threat? Technologically, yes. Economically? Not yet. Not for a while.
Mr. Ballmer's comments are aimed squarely at the DOJ. Unfortunately, this ploy will probably work to some degree.
OSS is the sand which will eventually erode the mountain that is microsoft to nothing. Redmond can do little but look majestic during this blast of a thousand programers.
I think that in this event, Linux companies would step up to the plate to challenge MS legally. They'd have to. Anything less might lead to your doomsday scenario.
--Mark
Microsoft certainly has a legitimate concern when it comes to attracting developers. Let's take a common scenario: your average Genius Hacker gets a brilliant idea for an application/utility/tool that no one else has written yet.
Assuming he can scrape together the money to get himself a good Windows development environment (a few boxes running both 95 and NT, various Microsoft developer products - Visual C++, etc) he then has to face:
- working on a platform with a somewhat obtuse API and dealing with it's inconsistencies. At the same time he can make his job MUCH easier by using Microsoft's wonderful classes, thereby tying his soul forever a Windows platform.
- but because he's developing on Windows he'll immediately have access to millions of PC users, right? Well, in actuality no. The costs for getting "certified" to run under Windows and getting a PC distributor to give him a chance are pretty slim.
- and most importantly, once the product is developed he needs to stave off Microsoft from developing a competing product. Microsoft has gone from sucking up companies to taking "embracing and extending" to an all new level. Let's take this weeks headlines - Microsoft Messenger not only supports ICQ and AIM, but Microsoft's own messaging protocol. What a shocker! While it was once viable to start a company with the hopes of being bought out by MS, now they can play 500 lb gorilla and simply overwhelm the distribution channels any small developer could hope to use.
Compare that to developing on Linux:
- free development environment
- you no longer have to "hack" your program to accept the OS's limitations - you can actually contact other developers with patches to make their code work properly
- multiple toolkits are available - including those that also support Windows
- friendly distribution channels
Unfortunately you won't be able to take as many coffee breaks when coding - the OS won't crash during compiling/debugging.
----- obSig
What, no one has anything good to say about Gtk? The _only_ complaints I can imagine someone having about Gtk are:
I'm afraid I'm guilty of unintentionally damning with faint praise... GTK is actually my favorite toolkit of the two, but I didn't want to deviate from the Win32 versus Linux+X11 discussion into a GTK advocacy discussion. I don't think it worked out to well.
1) it has to do dynamic type checking, rather than static type checking.
In the C binding. That's not an issue in the C++ binding.
2) writing your own widget tends to be a little involved.
Enh... I dunno. Not more than it has to be. I do a good deal of OO programming in C (unrelated to GTK), and I would have to say that that's just a result of having to do so much more of the OO stuff explicitly in C.
3) the code tends to be wordy.
WRT the C binding, yes. The wordiness is half the "evil" of it that I referred to. The C++ binding isn't bad at all.
GTK is actually my toolkit of choice, although I do like Qt's design better in some areas (not the ones I criticized).
---
DNA just wants to be free...
> "and it's led to a big boom of GUI programs for
...
..)
> Linux. "
> Mostly frontends to "whois" etc...
Check freshmeat; wrappers for existing commandline software are a minority. 80-90% of GTK apps are "original" in design and often functionality. (you'll see similar numbers for Qt; I'm not making comparisons with other widget sets)
> By the way, you shouldn't compare Win32 API to
> Xlib - those are on completely different
> levels. It is more like Win32 API = GTK
That's not actually an appropriate comparison either; GTK (or Qt for that matter) covers a very small subset of the functionality of the Win32 API (the remaining functionality is supplied by the POSIX stuff).
> And I agree with previous poster - GTK is ugly
> and simply not pleasant to program in or use (
> hint ; try QT and you will see the truth
Qt's a nice piece of work, as far as C++ APIs go. GTK's C++ binding is _decent_ -- although it's not quite as good (or at least as complete) in some areas.
From the perspective of a C++ programmer, GTK's C binding is quite evil, but the problem is precisely that it IS C. There really isn't a better way to do that kind of OO thing in C -- Qt's C binding (yes, there is one), for instance, does not take anywhere near as good an advantage of inheritance and other OO constructs.
I guess one advantage of GTK over Qt, at least in C++, is that you can program GTK in standard C++. You can't (in most cases) with Qt; some of Qt's functionality necessitates its own special C++ variant, requiring a special preprocessor. On a practical basis, that's not that big a deal, but I do prefer to stick with accepted language standards.
These issues aside, Qt is better than GTK, yes. Just be aware of the caveats.
---
DNA just wants to be free...
In reading this article it is very apparent that Microsoc is still and will always use fud to redirect issues of their parent company. They still seem to be attempting damage control from the trial.
Its not just Linux development that is draining the mind share that MS has had in the last decade. It is the internet and the huge demand for internet applications that is the largest sucking sound heard in the development community. Yes NT has ASP and COM for internet applications but, as most of us know, NT isn't stable enough to host a mission critial intra/internet application which has had the interesting effect of driving developers back to UNIX.
-==-
The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck,
is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners...
I wish I was a moderater right now. I'd +1 this just for the sig.
----------------------
There is no K5 cabal.
I am not the real rusty.
Microsoft has a real server competitor? I thought they were still stuggling to *BE* a server competitor...
0 1 - just my two bits
developers, unlike the mass media hypnotized 'clueless about computers' gullible public fascinated by shiny things, developers CAN tell crap from shinola - so it comes down to does one want to 'sell out' their profession and make some bucks creating/peddling slick, bug ridden, overhyped PC knock off's of other people's ideas
or will they hold out for an opportunity to create something really great?
Chuck
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
What employer would that be.* *
I'll develop for Linux any time.
******************************************
Superstition is a word the ignorant use to describe their ignorance. -Sifu
Look at your Windows computer (if you have the great misfortune of having one, of course).
What software is on it?
I'll tell you what software is on mine.
Microsoft FoxPro, Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Access. Do you see a pattern here?
At least with Linux or Be, third-party developers have a fighting chance. In the last couple of years, Windows has changed from an open platform to one that's proprietary in all but name. Third-party applications? Bah! Who even uses them anymore?
Microsoft is bound to lose developer mindshare in this type of situation. After all, 0% of 100,000,000 computers is still, well, zero.
D
----
Occasionally I do engage in billbashing, of course, but I'm not really much into Linux versus Windows/NT thingy. Still, I can't resist flaming here.
Fortunately, my consulting work involves mostly UNIX development. From now on, I've made a decision that I will NOT accept any more consulting assignments that involve any kind of development in Windows platform. Not Visual C++, not Visual Basic, nada. I've done both in the past, but not any more. Basically, right now there's one fewer Windows developer out there, but I bet that I'm not the only one who've made the same decision. Here's why.
Basically, I just can't tolerate it anymore, that's all. Windows-based development is so technologically crippled that I feel like I need to have my IQ artificially reduced by a few digits before I start coding.
Visual C++ is the only C++-based environment that I know of that actually *requires* a bloody WIZARD to develop. Souls who are cursed with having to use VC++ know what I'm talking about.
The damn thing is so silly, I have to laugh at it. So much absolute GLOP has to go into a VC++ program just to support the patently idiotic Windows API that even the smallest applications come out of the gate already bloated beyond all recognition.
And I won't get into the fact that even the most simple Windows-based applications have to be written using an event-driven model. That is so downright stupid that I can't even find the words to describe it.
I'VE HAD IT! Bye, Windows. I won't even miss you.
--
I agree. We are the new straw man to replace the worn-out "competitors" that OS/2 and Apple once were.
Left shift 1 for e-mail...
Instead we got Visual C++, Win32, MFC, COM, and all the rest of it.
And things have been getting worse, rather than better.
Microsoft's APIs, "drag-and-drop" approach to programming, non-round-trip wizards, lack of runtime safety, lack of API error checking, and dozens of released attempts at getting some APIs right, to name just a few, make Windows programming the most painful kind of programming I know.
But worst of all, their "designs" just lack coherence. It may take me a few hours to figure out the design and functionality of GTK or X11 or Berlin or Qt or Zope or many other libraries designed for UNIX. There are a few parts of Windows that are similarly coherent. But, for the most part, after more than five years of Win32, I still don't "get it", and I have yet to meet anybody who does. Microsoft seems to have a nack for taking basically good ideas (message passing, MVC, core-COM, etc.) and turning them into systems that make the Winchester Mystery House look tame by comparison.
BTW, I'm among the "1 million programmers" signed up for their developer program (MSDN, full subscription), as are many of my friends and colleagues. Also, a lot of "Windows programmers", in particular on the server side, are simply UNIX programmers that do the minimum amount of work necessary to make UNIX server software work on NT, without ever using a lot of Microsoft's APIs. And, as I like to quip when people marvel at the amount of software for Windows, "Windows has 50000 application programs for it, 45000 of which are there to fix bugs, provide missing OS functionality, and work around UI problems in Microsoft Windows".
Yes, I think Microsoft should be worried about this: this is a hard problem they are up against. Their usual approach of adding more code and APIs to the system won't fix it--it's at the heart of their problem.
While this response to the article wasn't off-topic or anything, I'm surprised that one wouldn't take the time to read an article on a non-/.'ed site. It's seems to be happening more as far as I can tell.
If an article or topic interests one enough to post comments to slashdot, one should read the article, look over current posts to see if there's a redundency, then post...it leads to a better, more informative site.
Again, not targeted at you BiGGo...just curious that you opened your sentence with that statement. One should know not to judge an article by the summary that Taco or Hemos might normally post ;)
AC
While this response to the article wasn't off-topic or anything, I'm surprised that one wouldn't take the time to read an article on a non-/.'ed site. It's seems to be happening more as far as I can tell.
If an article or topic interests one enough to post comments to slashdot, one should read the article, look over current posts to see if there's a redundency, then post...it leads to a better, more informative site.
Again, not targeted at you BiGGo...just curious that you opened your sentence with that statement. One should know not to judge an article by the summary that Taco or Hemos might normally post
AC
"and it's led to a big boom of GUI programs for Linux. "
... ..)
Mostly frontends to "whois" etc...
By the way, you shouldn't compare Win32 API to Xlib - those are on completely different levels. It is more like Win32 API = GTK
And I agree with previous poster - GTK is ugly and simply not pleasant to program in or use ( hint ; try QT and you will see the truth
TCl is terrible. I just finished learning StoryServer ( uses TCl as a scripting language) and how I wish they used something like Java instead. I mean what the hell is that ...
[FOREACH {j} { make sure that this is on the same line otherwise you will get criptic errors.
It is almost like fricking BASIC in 80s
PHP3 is nice but DB API they created stinks big time. "ConnectSybase","ConnectOracle" anyone ??
"That's good for Microsoft, but bad for developers. "
No , this is good for the users and bad for developers... and this is exactly why you are getting paid.
oh yeah .... I wish GTK API was at least as stable as WIN 32 ... One thing MS managed to keep is binary compability between changes. Linux is a mess compared to Win. You never know if well behaved program written on RH 5.2 will run on SUSE or even RH 6.0 ( not to mention Slackware )
This is horrible and very painfull for someone who develops for Linux...
> And it's totally alien to Win32, unlike Cygnus
> (it has pretty much equal status as far as the
> Kernel is concerned).
That's exactly why cygwin32 is so much better than products like Interix - you can mix and match your Unix code with win32 code to do GUI stuff, COM, etc.
NT actually already ships with a Posix subsystem,
though the current one sucks beyond belief.
But basically, why would you want to deploy on Windows at all if you can't do COM or GUI stuff? Those are supposed to be their two big selling points.
Here's the text of an email I just sent the author... In your C-Net article titled "Microsoft sees threats over developers" you refer to Linux as "a so-called open source platform that incorporates the work of volunteers developers worldwide". so-called \So"-called`\, a. So named; called by such a name (but perhaps called thus with doubtful propriety). so-called adj : doubtful or suspect; "these so-called experts are no help" [syn: alleged(a), supposed] Linux is truly an open source platform, so why the derogatory adjective? If that is not a quote, and it's not quoted, your "so-called" article reeks of doubtful propriety. Chris Moyer Quicksand Development www.atwatch.com moyerca@one.net
As I recall, Microsoft sees a technology, steals it, and competes against it.
exactly.
and then they wonder why no third partys wnt to develop for Windows anymore.
go figure.
-geekd
I admit, I havn't read the article, but it's name was just ludicrous.
Come on, "Competition is a concern"?
Microsoft was founded to be THE competition.
Have they innovated anything and somebody competed against it?
As I recall, Microsoft sees a technology, steals it, and competes against it.
You may say it is the same, but think of a world without competition (scary, isn't it?),
Microsoft will not exist, since every product they would make had existed already!
The one product they have invented, Bob, was such a sucess,
that all the other comapies were afraid that if they copy it, it will never be as good.
In fact, Microsoft thought that since it is so good, they should discontinue it entirely,
so not to spoil it and ruin it's reputation of a bestseller.
(the following statement makes the same sense as the above ballmer's statement)
They say Linux competes with them.
They have competed against UNIX, and the truth is that Linux bites market shares mostly from Unices.
(though it gets the mindshare of NT admins)
The last thing ever they would want is the compatition to end,
where will they steal their features from?
They wouldn't like to be an only product, since new ideas mean more to them -
Without them, people will not upgrade,
and they would have less bloat. (remember the "love bloat" article written by that Microsoft developer?)
---
The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck,
---
I'm going to live forever, or die in the attempt.
I can see that recognition of Linux by Microsoft is now solidifying into a real thing now, which is a biiiig step up from their response to the "Halloween" documents. Hopefully, the "scariness" will transform into Microsoft adding quality to their products as opposed to marketing spin. It might be too much to hope that they would want to turn to the Open side of the source, with expectations of beating Unix and Linux at their own games...Unfortunately, my Clue Stick has informed me that as long as their present system earns blind revenue as it does, it won't matter what people like Ballmer think about the competition. The machine will continue to grind.
Fighting the War on the War on Drugs.
http://smokedot.org/
I think that says it.
San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
And, when Unix crashes, you actually have to make a trip out there because there is no way you can walk some average joe through a fix on the phone.
I supported AT&T 3B computer and their networks on a support hotline for 5 years (86 - 91) and I've walked many people (including the unknowing) into restoring a Unix box to where I could access the box. Unix is just as supportable as NT. But I would add that certain equipment was required to do it right (a modem, the original disks, and a recent backup). Most Unix boxes I've worked with followed our recommendations for power (UPS) and access (a modem). I'm not that familiar with NT (my friend is) but I don't see it being any less frustrating than Linux when it bombs out.
Windows gives the average user what they want. Ease of use and out of the box functionality. When Linux matures enough for that then the world will be a better place.
I sort of agree, I find that MS just moves the frustrations from up front to else where. With *nix the tough questions tend to be up front which can scare the users.
--
Linux Home Automation - Neil Cherry - ncherry@home.net
http://members.home.net/ncherry (Text only)
http://meltingpot.fortunecity.com/lig htsey/52 (Graphics)
Neil Cherry - Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
- We all know M$ is deep in their DoJ trial. Check.
- They are in this situation because of bad (illegal?) marketing practices which prevent competition (Yes, I saw it up close and in person).
- One of their biggest "defenses" is that Linux is "competition" to them.
- We've probably noticed that M$ has let up a little on their OEM restrictions since this trial began (e.g., we're now actually seeing some OEM's selling linux boxen).
Now.. consider this article, and Ballmer's statements, and also the article earlier today on MSNBC about *BSD.- Right in the middle of the *BSD article, they placed a link to "Discuss Linux and BSD on the BBS", opening up a forum for the less tactful Linux advocates to do their less-than-tactful Linux advocacy.
- This latest article portends to cast a shadow of competition behind Linux, taking some heat off M$.
Get to the point!! Okay. Consider what's going to happen if the DoJ -does- by Microsoft's claims of competition from Linux. Consider also that having a lot of money (which Bill Gates has more of than anyone else in the world [except maybe that one sultan of somewhere.. right? ugh]) can get you a LOT of bonus points in the American "Justice" system. So, let's suppose that M$ gets out of this anti-trust suit with a "not guilty", or whatever the equivalent ruling. Or even suppose that they get off with a slap on the wrist.. then what? Then they dive head-long back into their anti-competitional business while they still have a majority of market share. OEM's and customers alike still depend heavily on M$ because they haven't had the time to switch strongly to Linux (and let's face it.. Linux isn't quite ready). Next step? M$, using their traditional brute force, retakes the market share they've lost in the past few months, summarily crushing the "Linux Movement". Wow.. don't I sound paranoid? Probably, but that's honestly how I see it. Anyone else agree? Zeitgeistperl -e 'print "zj5GuPW9b.sEiQQVgvL1Tr." ^ pack("H48","000f5c3312353e4a166e12311d363d3905172
Here in Sweden when we recruit new software engineers direct from college they show no particular interest in Win32. Instead they are fluent in the UNIX/Linux environment. I have also got the impression that this distaste for Win32 is valid in most countries.
When I was in school 4-5 years ago the draw to Linux was the ability to have a similar development environment at home that was at school (Unix). In the United States, at least in the University of California school system, I've noticed a good number of Windows machines infiltrating the CS departments. Can you believe that they'll set up a WinNT box running a Hummingbird Exceed X server as a terminal instead of a Unix box?
I wonder if they are doing this as a response to complaints from industry that new grads don't know anything about Win32.
On a side note, my new employer is having a hell of a time finding developers who want to work on Linux.
Wasn't he the one that complained to the media 12-18 months ago that "All this talk about an Evil Empire is making it hard to hire the best new developers" ?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Didn't Micorsoft buy UC with a big infrastructure donation?
You're just seeing what they got for their money.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
> 4. Microsoft constantly competes with it's own 3rd party developers and beats them senseless.
Or accidently sues them.
BTW, how do you "accidently" sue someone? Do they draw up papers for a suit just before they sign a new partnership, and keep the papers on file in case of an emergency?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
If I could moderate you up kid I would.
:)
The thought bubbles over Mr. Ballmers heads are so transparent, "if we persuade people that we have a lot of competition at the moment then maybe we will be left alone to dominate, errm compete on our totally non-level playing field, ha ha ha ha!"
A note to Microsoft, "strong competition" is when a companies like Oracle and IBM repeatedly kicks your ass in the database market.
No, you are not paranoid, they are out to get you
Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
In a perfect world, Microsoft's approach to competition should be "bring it on!", but instead they continue to think of competition as a win-lose situation; someone can only succeed at others' expense. As long they respond to competitive threats with better code, then they might not disappear off the face of the earth once thier market share slips. I guess anything less than everything can only look like a loss when you've been ahead for so long.
I personally have trouble getting behind the idea
of writing software for the Micro$oft platform,
just as I would have trouble getting behind the
idea of seeking adoption into a family which has
proven its ability to eat its young!
Exceeding the recommended torque is not recommended.
Programmers don't have a problem - there's always something new needs doing.
The thing that worries the MBAs is 'how are marketing managers going to make any money'
>The Comp Sci guys are usually the ones that sit in a closet and do bizarre stuff
We call it pro-gram-ming and it pays quite well thank-you.
Personally, I believe the original poster had a point concerning the use of Wizards. If you want to spend 3 months just writing the basic shell of a GUI win32 app, be my guest. Using the AppWizard is basically the only feasable way to start an GUI app. That's pretty lame if you ask me. Not only is this lame, but who knows how many bugs are in that AppWizard code? Knowing MS, probably tons. If I'm on a development team, the last thing I want is to track down bugs in M$ code :)
However, I do agree with your point on the event driven model. I can't possibly see any way of writing a GUI win32 WITHOUT using events, it's just inherient (sp) to the way Windows works. And, I actually like the way MFC handles the message processing, but it's a little scary if you think about it....just how much overhead is incurred by passing around hundreds of event messages for every little mouse movement?
Personally, I develop for both Windows and Linux in my spare time. I like learning the ins and outs of different platforms, and I've got to hand it to the MFC development team...they sure have an "interesting" way of doing things...
Yes, I agree with your idea (I actually use that process quite often). I didn't mean to imply that I simply hold MFC to the highest regrards, but rather look at the pros/cons of the AppWizard boilerplate shells and event driven programming. :) It is truely an horrible "language" thats not only cumbersome and slow (even 6.0), but it's damn near impossible to maintain large projects over a period of time.
Don't worry, you aren't missing much in the VB dept.
Oops, sorry, I didn't mean I like message passing, I mean't that the way MFC implements it is pretty clean. Considering the alternative of coding all those damn messages in a switch(), I think the implementation works well...
:)
BTW, thanks for the insight on the trade-off
I know there are better programming languages and libraries available, but we were talking about creating apps in VC++ using MFC, right? Personally, I'd favor using one of the above posters idea of using Tcl/Tk along with C++, but there is such a notion of using the right tool for the right job. It all depends of the situation, right?
As far as the bugs in the generated code, I was simply guessing on that one. I think most problems I've had with using MFC came from underlying bugs in the MFC classes themselves, which (honestly) is to be expected. No single piece of code is 100% bug free...
Do you think Balmer and friends is _really_ scared??? After all, they have infinite resources to do or buy anything they want to.
Clearly this is a plan to lure linux geeks into a sense of complacency, or to swell their heads to think that they are accomplishing more than they really are.
Because down deep Balmer knows that giving away free pop in Redmond is'nt enough anymore. But he knows that all he needs to do is add free candy machines with stale twinkies. He'll have more geek developers knocking on his door than he'll know what to do with.
That is why I won't program for Windows, not because I can't, not because I don't like Windows (actually it's very pretty), not because I don't like Microsoft (except for the way they treat me), not because I hate/fear/envy Bill Gates, but because it's bad for me in the long term.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
This is why Microsoft has already lost. The fact that entry-level programmers are migratating to OSS is disturbing. The fact that senior-level developers have seen the Microsoft-centric universe... and the fact that we have absolutely no role in it (other than as glorified button pushers) is fatal.
When I start my own software company, will I try to compete in the Windows environment where MS has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to obliterate any competition? Hell, no! Even if I didn't think OSS was technically superior, I would be *forced* to choose it since there's simply no viable alternative!
When I develop specifications for a new product for my employer, will I merrily tie my company's future to a company which has repeatedly shown a willingness to frivilously change APIs so ensure the market is forced to upgrade? Hell, no! Again, even if I didn't think OSS was technically superior, I would have to mark down the Microsoft solution since it would require constant maintainance due to the continually changing API.
When the software industry was a small piece of the economy a single company could effect a stranglehold on it. But now software is *everywhere*, and *no* single software company can long dominate the marketplace. I often think of this economic sector like a farm: the best way to ensure a solid harvest is to rotate your crops. Leaving a field fallow may look like a "waste," but those small plants inject valuable chemicals into the soil.
Microsoft is classic corporate farming. It keeps harvesting the same crop year after year, and it uses every bit of the plant while violently ripping out any non-crop plant. This depletes the soil, and its response is to pile on the shit. Sorry, the petrochemical fertilizers. But that will only work so long; it replaces the gross biomatter, but it still messes up the microculture.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Believe it or not, they do (sometimes). Here at school (Caltech), they gave away copies of NT Workstation 4.0 and Visual Studio 6.0 to anyone that wanted them. I wasn't about to pass up a chance to get free stuff, so I grabbed a copy of each...
-ElJefe
I guess what realy scares M$ is that most of the young guys studying computer science has no interest what so ever in Win32.
Here in Sweden when we recruit new software engineers direct from college they show no particular interest in Win32. Instead they are fluent in the UNIX/Linux environment. I have also got the impression that this distaste for Win32 is valid in most countries.
Each time a fresh guy comes on interview and passes my room, he smiles and chuckles when seeing my Linux posters. He becomes very comfortable and often admits to use Win32 sometimes for gameplay but not for any real serious things. This is a big plus and one step closer to get an offer.
Microsoft do have every reason to be scared. They will have huge difficulties to steal any new technology from small upstart companies. Their foodchain is completly broken.
//Pingo
--- Linux or FreeBSD, it's like blondes or brunettes. I like both. ---
"The PC will remain a "red-hot platform for developers," he emphasized.""
I think, he meant, the PC will remain a "red-hat platform for developers,"
I just would like to correct one point. You state that one cannot do phone support for Unix when it crashes, untrue. I have done support for Linux over the phone and the fact is that the interface is consistent and does not change from version to version, like Windows. Also, a crash in Unix/Linux/whatever almost never takes the whole system down. I can telnet in and repair it without the user having to do anything.
Other than that I agree.
---- aut viam inveniam aut faciam
"UNIX - is a great OS, how cannot it not be with so many years of growth under its belt? But Unix is so cumbersome to the average user that the apps
written for it for the average user have to be choice based, leaving out any intuition on the user . You can either hit this key or that key.
And, when Unix crashes, you actually have to make a trip out there because there is no way you can walk some average joe through a fix on the
phone. "
This is actually where it being a Unix box could come in handy. Don't want to make a visit OR talk the user through fixing it? Just telnet into the box...
Microsoft, taking the Language out of HTML and the Expert out of JPEG
Linux isn't quite ready for the average home user...yet. There's considerable work being done on the GUIs (I've seen GNOME and KDE), but as long as the work is done by programmers and not by interaction specialists, we're going to see the same Windows usability problems -- perhaps worse -- creep over to the Linux field.
"Interaction specialist" is difficult to define, as it's a position that will probably get short shrift for quite some time. AN interaction specialist is a good interface designer, preferably with some cognitive science/ergonomics background as well as a computer science background and at least some visual sense. These are people who know what Fitts' Law is and know when to favour substance over flash.
I'm watching the GUI developments in the various UNIX-based OSs (Linux) out now and coming soon (Mac OS X) tos ee what happens, and hoping that we won't end up repeating some of Microsoft's mistakes.
Is that a database app with out without a GUI?
If its without a GUI, try perl and postgreSQLl If its with a gui, I believe tcltk&postgresql is a good choice.
Wanna make it web-compatible? Sure, use PHP3&postgresql under Apache.
For Corba, you have me there, there isn't a good rapid-prototyping languge under UNIX. C/C++/Java doesn't cut it. Here is where UNIX's C heritage does stink a bit.
So, whats the problem?
Sperm competition is a discovery of biology over the recent decades, for those who have never heard the term before. The biologists have lately been using it to explain aspects of human sexual behaviour too.
However, sperm competition does not only occur inside a female's body; a dominant baboon with harem is engaging in sperm competition by keeping the females to himself.
When sperm competition does occur inside the female's body, after multiple copulations, (which may occur over days or within minutes of each other, depending on the species), it is not only volume-based. Many species have male sperm which contain sperm killer cells which cannot fertilise the egg, they can only kill off sperm cells from other males. Indeed, not only males produce killer cells, but also the female's uterus & vagina contains its own special white-blood cells, which kill off selected sperm cells.
Thus a very low volume male, with very small penis, small body, etc etc, can out-compete males of many other shapes & sizes, if his semen contains potent killer cells.
I mention all this because people often use a limited notion of "competition". The biologists are aware of a much more complicated array of factors, even in human behaviour.
For more, look up the book, "Human Sperm Competition", by Robin somebody-whose-name-I-
-forget
Well, the Win32 API is just one of the APIs that Microsoft offers on the NT kernel. There's a pretty nice Posix API made by a third party (Interix) that rumor has it may be folded into the NT system in a big way. It's fairly robust implementation of Posix (includes GCC, but it also integrates Microsoft C for building Posix binaries), and lets most Free Software packages be built and run on an NT kernel. And it's totally alien to Win32, unlike Cygnus (it has pretty much equal status as far as the Kernel is concerned).
But I know how crazy it is to talk up anything Microsoft does in this forum. Sadly there are a lot of people with an irrational hatred of Microsoft in the world. They somewhat blunt the real criticism that is due that company and their products.
They are just trying to make people think this.
"BSD or Linux" equals server.
"BSD or Linux" does not equal Desktop.
He wants most people to think that it is only for servers, and that it wouldnt do them any good at home.
You know how much M$ pays for marketing and these PR press releases? These are all planned, M$ is the masters of suggestions. You know how long they have been planning this PR press release, you know how much money, time and effort they put into tricking the public, if you only knew man.
They know what they are doing when they go to the public, if they don't want anyone to see X,Y or Z, the public ain't going to see it. If the what the public to see X, the public will see it.
For what reason?
If M$ spend the same amount of effort and time on their products as they do with Marketing, PR meetting, and the other bullshit that comes along with this business, most which they actively hype up, they could have a decent product.
If M$ would of taken the last 2+ years to fix NT 4.0 (just the bugs, not add any new F*** feartures) they would have a decent system NOW The thing is they pile useless half broken fearture upon fearture into their products. If the layer under it is broken, the higher layer is going to be seriously fucked up.
But what invester, would put his money into a product that it takes 4+ years to build and 4 years to fix, almost none. What inverster would put his money into an product that adds thousands of feartures to itself every ~2 years?
Pure and simply, M$ isn't a computer company, they know nothing about them. M$ is a marketing company, they are in it to make money and that is all, they couldn't give a shit about computers, if they could make more money pushing corn seed to farmers, do you still think they would be in this business? M$ goes where the money is, the money is in computers. If corn seed sales go up high enough, M$ wil go there.
I have nothing against M$, expect for my personal experince with their products, well oh yea, I guess I do have ALOT against M$ in that case.
Yes, I absolutely agree.
It is in Microsoft's best interest right now to see Linux succeed and gain market share. It is foolish to think that Microsoft really is running with its tail between its legs.
They could crush Linux in one open scource swipe. One thing about geeks and nerds, is that they are idealists. You want the best product to succeed. Well, it rarely works this way. We all know plenty of better products that have failed miserably.
Intel is doing the same thing with AMD!
I think what this article is really saying is that developers are being increasing drawn to new alternative APIs like GTK, QT, Gnome/Kde, Java,
etc and that the development experience as a whole is more interesting, more comfortable, and
engaging on these platforms.
There are very few Open-Source or community based windows projects on the internet for users to participate in. Even thoses that are or were Win32 specific were on top of another platform, such as all of the Doom/Quake/Unreal modifications going around.
Perhaps most developers feel that developing on Win32 with MFC is just downright irritating?
I know that the first thing I do on a Windows box is install Emacs, Cygnus/Win32, CVS, and all the standard tools I have on every other Unix machine.
Just a thought.
-Ray
Message To Spammers: Game Over! http://www.MsgTo.com
Software competition a concern is a major concern? What kinda sense does that make?
Well in my hastily written post, what I meant to say is that while you can tele-net in, that is fine, but phone support with a 50 year old secretary?
After reading all this craziness I just cannot resist putting in my 2 cents.
I work for one of the nations largest ISPS and have first hand experience of going from a strictly windows enviroment to a Unix flavor.(freeBSD).
Granted that all flavors of Unix tend to be more reliable and more scalable than Windows version out there. I use to replace Unix boxes with NT servers and learned first hand the trouble caused mainly due to reliability. I would take down an 8 year old 286 that had been totally stable and then explain that the nice shiny NT server might need some TLC every now and then. BUT this brings me to two points.
UNIX - is a great OS, how cannot it not be with so many years of growth under its belt? But Unix is so cumbersome to the average user that the apps written for it for the average user have to be choice based, leaving out any intuition on the user . You can either hit this key or that key.
And, when Unix crashes, you actually have to make a trip out there because there is no way you can walk some average joe through a fix on the phone.
Windows on the other hand is buggy but easy to use. People have it at home and tech support though often is fairly easy(hit the rest button). Windows best point is that it gets the average user pissed off enough to look under the hood, maybe install a new device, build a new pc, and decide that they like computing so much they need to find a real OS, change their outlook on life, and leave home.
The average user is where we make our money. Windows gives the average user what they want. Ease of use and out of the box functionality. When Linux matures enough for that then the world will be a better place.
AND as for the guy who turned down 120 grand and stock options? You sound like a physician just out of med school who thinks by grace a god he should be paid big bucks. Or an MCSE.
Frizz0
p.s. I run linux with apache at home, as well as 98
Its sooooo obvious that hes trying to shore up the position against DOJ.
You should all be just shakin ya heads in disgust at this ploy instead of congratulating yourselves that Linux has been named in this context.