Did anyone stop to think that the BCF perhaps is a better standard than ebXML? Oh, that's right, since Microsoft is behind it - and we all know how much you like them - it must be proprietary. I suppose you all missed that IBM is pushing this, too? And from what I've read some time back, others are too. So far as I can tell, OASIS is only backing ebXML.
Do you people even know what these two standards are for? I doubt it. You just see the word "Microsoft" and start raving like uninformed idiots.
So what it Microsoft paid the salaries and a few meal tickets to sway opinion. If you quit working on open-source free-ware and joined the real working world, you'd see this is a common practice. I work for a small start-up and even we do that. Get a clue.
This guy is so ill-informed. Yes,.NET is a JIT'd language like Java, but this isn't the reason for so many MS holes recently - those are good ol' buffer overflows, something the Common Language Runtime (CLR) protects against.
Even disgregarding the last statement, Microsoft has currently not shown any massive holes in.NET-based software. The holes have been in native applications like Winodws itself (currently uses no.NET - or managed - code in the core libraries), IIS (again, no managed code), etc.
Yes, this does provide a way for people to view the Intermediate Language (IL, or MSIL with MS extensions) embedded in modules within assemblies, but isn't this what the OSS community basically wanted anyway? It's not open source, but it does provide insight into how Microsoft is doing things. I commonly find myself using ildasm.exe (the IL disassemblier that ships with the.NET Framework SDK) to get insight into how they achieve this or that. Microsoft even condones such a practice in many of their MSDN articles (sometimes even disassembling, changing, and reassembling the IL in order to derive from a class at compile-time).
Leave it to a Democrat for a quick-fix "solution". Something like this won't last long. Think about the dangers of these running breath tests. It's bad enough with people talking on their mobiles or even doing work on their laptops on the freeway. And imagine the disruptance to other drivers when someone's car goes crazy. Anybody that's already a little unnerved by driving on the freeway is going to freak and probably cause an accident (and at those speeds, they're often fatal).
Quick - and stupid - fix indeed. Long-term solutions may take a while, but they tend to stick. They've pretty much been all laid out on the table, but this friggin' liberal congress / nation doesn't want to take time.
It's funny and sad, really, when the hardest rock known in existence is to symbolize the fleeting concept of marriage. With a divorce rate over 50% (at least here in the US), a rock is hardly a symbol.
Actually, the sad thing is that most people seem to already know this but no one does / can do (?) anything to stop them. DeBeers, after all, pretty much controls the majority of diamonds on this planet.
To give DeBeers the slap in the face they need, maybe we should harvest this white dwarf. Heck, just tell Liz Taylor about this and she'll get that "sparkly" diamond almost half as big as she is in no time!
Yes, but if you actually read the patent and know anything about "your enemy" Microsoft, the patent describes WSH, or the Windows Scripting Host. Someone even posted an example toward the top of the page.
Microsoft isn't patenting XML itself, just one more grammar of like everyone else is doing these days.
I saw it coming when Microsoft announced that they're changing their APIs for 64-bit platform many years ago! Get off the bandwagon and actually try researching what you hate/fear.
I agree, but I think the real problem here is that patent officers are paid commission (or so I've heard many times on/. from those who say they know). If that can't change, at least hold the officers accountable for this misgivings, such as docking them pay or giving them the boot after a couple of patents are proven obvious and / or pre-existing, as many of the computer technology patents have been lately.
The point that so many people miss is that Internet Explorer (iexplore.exe) is merely a container application for the WebBrowser control, which is actually Internet Explorer. This WebBrowser control is used by MANY applications, even many non-Microsoft applications. It's a great way to embed an HTML viewer and designer (you can easily turn it into a designer). The WebBrowser control, in turn, hosts the MSHTML component which must of the Windows Shell uses for rendering. If you remove it, you break the shell. This doesn't, however, constitute that Internet Explorer is always running - only some components of it are (just like all the monikers that service MSHTML and the WebBrowser control). To start the container application (commonly referred to as Internet Explorer) doesn't take much because most of the components are already loaded.
In the case of Mozilla, it's a completely stand-alone application so it takes a while to initialize (and the largest part of that is all the XBL and XUL required to display the application - parsing that much XML and creating a UI can be pretty expensive).
But you don't have to pay for Media Player or IE (even though Microsoft recently announced IE upgrades will only be available with OS upgrades, although I'm sure they'll change their minds after industry backlash).
Besides, WMP is actually a separate program - it is no more integrated than RealOne is. MS has published the ways to have the AutoPlay features (including the enchancements to AutoPlay in XP and newer) and the file type associations are definitely nothing new. Most modern media players even have settings to ensure that selected file types remain associated with the player by checking them when the application starts. Everything developers need to know is in the Platform SDK which is available to download for free or to browse on MSDN Online.
IE is integrated in the fact that the shell uses the WebBrowser control (shdocvw.dll) to enhance it and make developing shell extensions easier. You can still have a default browser, except for the side-links which up until recently were tied to IE (MS announced - as was posted on/. not too long ago - that these will now use the default browser as well).
Most users - as someone earlier said - are afraid to do much with their OSes because os sheer stupidity. I think Microsoft is correct in installing several applications to improve the users' experience (being able to play media out of the box is important). Nothing's preventing them from installing something else.
Hell, even the linux distros I've used come bundled with media players and web browsers and the like. In RedHat if you choose a typical workstation setup, you got them installed. Sure there was alternatives, but most people stick with one anyway.
For those that know they exist, I know plenty of people that use Winamp and Mozilla (or Firebird) on their Windows system. If people don't know they exist, it's their own fault for not educating themselves.
Is it just me, or does every time you see "Spirit Rolls" on/. make your heart skip a beat. I keep thinking that it rolled - such as flipped. Perhaps "moves" might be a better choice of words, especially after the catastrophe with Beagle 2!
I blame the over-use of specialized pieces. Heck, when I was constantly building LEGO assemblies the most specialized piece was the human figures. Now many LEGO packages are made up of human figures, a contoured bottom, and two or three pieces to complete the set. I realize creativety is lacking these days, but who wants to buy LEGOs to assemble a whole 3 or 4 pieces?
I agree and realize this fact, but I still don't trust the massive difference in the IO test results. So long as they used the BCL (namely the System.IO classes), the results should've been close since, like I said before, the majority of the work is performed by the mscorlib.dll which won't run any differently from one language to the next (it's already compiled and the IL will be JIT'd and executed the same way).
Right, but the benchmarks were only using the base class library (BCL) which should give little to no differences in the benchmark results. The compiler optimizations in this case are all that would matter, but from my own experience in using many of the different languages shows negligable differences.
It all still comes down to the fact - barring unsafe code blocks (not unmanged, which MC++ can do, though) and P/Invoked functions with most (if not all, but I don't know ALL the languages targeting the CLR and if their compilers support everytihng) - each language is still bound to what the CTS provides.
Yes, I know that well, but the benchmarks seemed to be using only the base class library (BCL) which should have little to know effect on the benchmark results.
Why benchmark the various ".NET languages" (those languages whose compilers target the CLR)? Every compiler targeting the CLR produces Intermediate Languages, or more specifically MSIL. The only differences you'd find is in optimizations performed for each compiler, which usually aren't too much (like VB.NET allocates a local variable for the old "Function = ReturnValue" syntax whether you use it or not).
Look at the results for C# and J#. They are almost exactly the same, except for the IO which I highly doubt. Compiler optimizations could squeeze a few more ns or ms out of each procedure, but nothing like that. After all, it's the IL from the mscorlib.dll assembly that's doing most the work for both languages in exactly the same way (it's already compiled and won't differ in execution).
When are people going to get this? I know a lot of people that claim to be ".NET developers" but only know C# and don't realize that the clas libraries can be used by any languages targeting the CLR (and each has their shortcuts).
What a poor design! They have to update the software in order to get new images? That's got to be the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. Did they forget that the Internet exists where you can update images and indexes automatically? Sheesh.
I have used it, but like you said - the mental addiction is hardest. Everytime my boss speaks and crap comes out his mouth (impossible deadlines, etc. - you know the drill) I "need" a smoke or I'm going to snap. I guess to quit smoking, I'll just have to quit my job! Now if only there was some gum or a patch to help find a new one...
Technology advances, and things that depend on that technology either need to advance or will be lost.
Having just completed the Christmas season (or "holidays"), I'm sure a lot of people (at least Americans) are used to seeing the Salvation Army people ringing for change and small bills. With society moving more and more to a cashless society, they can expect to see falling donations from this practice.
There's no reasons pollsters shouldn't expect the same since they can't call cell phones.
If this happened in practically any other state, you wouldn't hear anything about it! Here in the midwest, there's a higher ratio than.175 birds/turbine/year (as someone else calculated above) of birds kill by man per year (granted, not endangered birds).
I looked to see if anyone asked this, but didn't notice...
What's that other famous scream that's heard in Star Wars and many others, typically when someone falls a very long way? It almost sounds like someone's about ready to scream their guts out...really!
Surely that one has a name, too. I hear that almost as much as the Wilhelm Scream.
AS E-Rock was hinting at, some people like HTML mail. Sure it's often abused and sometimes so damn annoying (like blue text on a pink background with kitties and teddy-bears all over), but is serves some purpose. Heck, it's a lot less bloated than RTF emails.
An email's intention was to communicate back and forth. There was never a requirement for text-only messages.
Slashdot Mirror
Did anyone stop to think that the BCF perhaps is a better standard than ebXML? Oh, that's right, since Microsoft is behind it - and we all know how much you like them - it must be proprietary. I suppose you all missed that IBM is pushing this, too? And from what I've read some time back, others are too. So far as I can tell, OASIS is only backing ebXML.
Do you people even know what these two standards are for? I doubt it. You just see the word "Microsoft" and start raving like uninformed idiots.
So what it Microsoft paid the salaries and a few meal tickets to sway opinion. If you quit working on open-source free-ware and joined the real working world, you'd see this is a common practice. I work for a small start-up and even we do that. Get a clue.
This guy is so ill-informed. Yes, .NET is a JIT'd language like Java, but this isn't the reason for so many MS holes recently - those are good ol' buffer overflows, something the Common Language Runtime (CLR) protects against.
Even disgregarding the last statement, Microsoft has currently not shown any massive holes in .NET-based software. The holes have been in native applications like Winodws itself (currently uses no .NET - or managed - code in the core libraries), IIS (again, no managed code), etc.
Yes, this does provide a way for people to view the Intermediate Language (IL, or MSIL with MS extensions) embedded in modules within assemblies, but isn't this what the OSS community basically wanted anyway? It's not open source, but it does provide insight into how Microsoft is doing things. I commonly find myself using ildasm.exe (the IL disassemblier that ships with the .NET Framework SDK) to get insight into how they achieve this or that. Microsoft even condones such a practice in many of their MSDN articles (sometimes even disassembling, changing, and reassembling the IL in order to derive from a class at compile-time).
Leave it to a Democrat for a quick-fix "solution". Something like this won't last long. Think about the dangers of these running breath tests. It's bad enough with people talking on their mobiles or even doing work on their laptops on the freeway. And imagine the disruptance to other drivers when someone's car goes crazy. Anybody that's already a little unnerved by driving on the freeway is going to freak and probably cause an accident (and at those speeds, they're often fatal).
Quick - and stupid - fix indeed. Long-term solutions may take a while, but they tend to stick. They've pretty much been all laid out on the table, but this friggin' liberal congress / nation doesn't want to take time.
It's funny and sad, really, when the hardest rock known in existence is to symbolize the fleeting concept of marriage. With a divorce rate over 50% (at least here in the US), a rock is hardly a symbol.
Actually, the sad thing is that most people seem to already know this but no one does / can do (?) anything to stop them. DeBeers, after all, pretty much controls the majority of diamonds on this planet.
To give DeBeers the slap in the face they need, maybe we should harvest this white dwarf. Heck, just tell Liz Taylor about this and she'll get that "sparkly" diamond almost half as big as she is in no time!
Yes, but if you actually read the patent and know anything about "your enemy" Microsoft, the patent describes WSH, or the Windows Scripting Host. Someone even posted an example toward the top of the page.
Microsoft isn't patenting XML itself, just one more grammar of like everyone else is doing these days.
I saw it coming when Microsoft announced that they're changing their APIs for 64-bit platform many years ago! Get off the bandwagon and actually try researching what you hate/fear.
I agree, but I think the real problem here is that patent officers are paid commission (or so I've heard many times on /. from those who say they know). If that can't change, at least hold the officers accountable for this misgivings, such as docking them pay or giving them the boot after a couple of patents are proven obvious and / or pre-existing, as many of the computer technology patents have been lately.
The point that so many people miss is that Internet Explorer (iexplore.exe) is merely a container application for the WebBrowser control, which is actually Internet Explorer. This WebBrowser control is used by MANY applications, even many non-Microsoft applications. It's a great way to embed an HTML viewer and designer (you can easily turn it into a designer). The WebBrowser control, in turn, hosts the MSHTML component which must of the Windows Shell uses for rendering. If you remove it, you break the shell. This doesn't, however, constitute that Internet Explorer is always running - only some components of it are (just like all the monikers that service MSHTML and the WebBrowser control). To start the container application (commonly referred to as Internet Explorer) doesn't take much because most of the components are already loaded.
In the case of Mozilla, it's a completely stand-alone application so it takes a while to initialize (and the largest part of that is all the XBL and XUL required to display the application - parsing that much XML and creating a UI can be pretty expensive).
But you don't have to pay for Media Player or IE (even though Microsoft recently announced IE upgrades will only be available with OS upgrades, although I'm sure they'll change their minds after industry backlash).
Besides, WMP is actually a separate program - it is no more integrated than RealOne is. MS has published the ways to have the AutoPlay features (including the enchancements to AutoPlay in XP and newer) and the file type associations are definitely nothing new. Most modern media players even have settings to ensure that selected file types remain associated with the player by checking them when the application starts. Everything developers need to know is in the Platform SDK which is available to download for free or to browse on MSDN Online.
IE is integrated in the fact that the shell uses the WebBrowser control (shdocvw.dll) to enhance it and make developing shell extensions easier. You can still have a default browser, except for the side-links which up until recently were tied to IE (MS announced - as was posted on /. not too long ago - that these will now use the default browser as well).
Most users - as someone earlier said - are afraid to do much with their OSes because os sheer stupidity. I think Microsoft is correct in installing several applications to improve the users' experience (being able to play media out of the box is important). Nothing's preventing them from installing something else.
Hell, even the linux distros I've used come bundled with media players and web browsers and the like. In RedHat if you choose a typical workstation setup, you got them installed. Sure there was alternatives, but most people stick with one anyway.
For those that know they exist, I know plenty of people that use Winamp and Mozilla (or Firebird) on their Windows system. If people don't know they exist, it's their own fault for not educating themselves.
Amen! Send them my way when you get out up there!
Is it just me, or does every time you see "Spirit Rolls" on /. make your heart skip a beat. I keep thinking that it rolled - such as flipped. Perhaps "moves" might be a better choice of words, especially after the catastrophe with Beagle 2!
I blame the over-use of specialized pieces. Heck, when I was constantly building LEGO assemblies the most specialized piece was the human figures. Now many LEGO packages are made up of human figures, a contoured bottom, and two or three pieces to complete the set. I realize creativety is lacking these days, but who wants to buy LEGOs to assemble a whole 3 or 4 pieces?
I agree and realize this fact, but I still don't trust the massive difference in the IO test results. So long as they used the BCL (namely the System.IO classes), the results should've been close since, like I said before, the majority of the work is performed by the mscorlib.dll which won't run any differently from one language to the next (it's already compiled and the IL will be JIT'd and executed the same way).
Right, but the benchmarks were only using the base class library (BCL) which should give little to no differences in the benchmark results. The compiler optimizations in this case are all that would matter, but from my own experience in using many of the different languages shows negligable differences.
It all still comes down to the fact - barring unsafe code blocks (not unmanged, which MC++ can do, though) and P/Invoked functions with most (if not all, but I don't know ALL the languages targeting the CLR and if their compilers support everytihng) - each language is still bound to what the CTS provides.
Yes, I know that well, but the benchmarks seemed to be using only the base class library (BCL) which should have little to know effect on the benchmark results.
Why benchmark the various ".NET languages" (those languages whose compilers target the CLR)? Every compiler targeting the CLR produces Intermediate Languages, or more specifically MSIL. The only differences you'd find is in optimizations performed for each compiler, which usually aren't too much (like VB.NET allocates a local variable for the old "Function = ReturnValue" syntax whether you use it or not).
Look at the results for C# and J#. They are almost exactly the same, except for the IO which I highly doubt. Compiler optimizations could squeeze a few more ns or ms out of each procedure, but nothing like that. After all, it's the IL from the mscorlib.dll assembly that's doing most the work for both languages in exactly the same way (it's already compiled and won't differ in execution).
When are people going to get this? I know a lot of people that claim to be ".NET developers" but only know C# and don't realize that the clas libraries can be used by any languages targeting the CLR (and each has their shortcuts).
Hey, check your dictionary. Both are allowed. And quit using LOL unnecessarily - didn't you read that article posted on /. a couple days ago?!
What a poor design! They have to update the software in order to get new images? That's got to be the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. Did they forget that the Internet exists where you can update images and indexes automatically? Sheesh.
I have used it, but like you said - the mental addiction is hardest. Everytime my boss speaks and crap comes out his mouth (impossible deadlines, etc. - you know the drill) I "need" a smoke or I'm going to snap. I guess to quit smoking, I'll just have to quit my job! Now if only there was some gum or a patch to help find a new one...
Technology advances, and things that depend on that technology either need to advance or will be lost.
Having just completed the Christmas season (or "holidays"), I'm sure a lot of people (at least Americans) are used to seeing the Salvation Army people ringing for change and small bills. With society moving more and more to a cashless society, they can expect to see falling donations from this practice.
There's no reasons pollsters shouldn't expect the same since they can't call cell phones.
If this happened in practically any other state, you wouldn't hear anything about it! Here in the midwest, there's a higher ratio than .175 birds/turbine/year (as someone else calculated above) of birds kill by man per year (granted, not endangered birds).
I looked to see if anyone asked this, but didn't notice...
What's that other famous scream that's heard in Star Wars and many others, typically when someone falls a very long way? It almost sounds like someone's about ready to scream their guts out...really!
Surely that one has a name, too. I hear that almost as much as the Wilhelm Scream.
AS E-Rock was hinting at, some people like HTML mail. Sure it's often abused and sometimes so damn annoying (like blue text on a pink background with kitties and teddy-bears all over), but is serves some purpose. Heck, it's a lot less bloated than RTF emails.
An email's intention was to communicate back and forth. There was never a requirement for text-only messages.