IBM was evil back in the day but they were cool evil dammit. They made great techonological breakthroughs, won some Nobel prizes and helped bring a lot of cool things into existance (like hard drives).
Microsoft's idea of innovation is a talking paper clip. Sheesh.
I would very much like to see the Objective C bindings for Gnome updated, for it's a very interesting language to develop in. It is simple, elegent, and does not suffer from the featuritis of C++.
Well, initially 32-bit Intel chips could only address 4GB's, but recently we have crazy shit like PAE that allows up to 16GB RAM to be installed and addressed by the OS that supports it, but applications can still only use 4GB at a time.
Have you ever actually been to a classroom of the "newer generation" you like to make sweeping generalizations about
I've taught quite a few classes, thank you. And I've even done surveys on the matter. The conclusion is always overwhelmingly "students like pointy-clicky, consoles suck".
That's what serial consoles are for. No need for a pen and paper, just dump the output of the terminal to a serial terminal (this requires another computer) and save the log there. This is very handy, unless of course, it's the serial code that futzes up, then you're screwed (however this is highly improbable).
Windows 95 did not demonize the command line, it demonized DOS. Microsoft desperatly wanted everyone to ditch the mess that is DOS and develop Windows GUI programs.
Whatever their intent, they seem to have indoctrinated the "commands are hard" philosophy into every computer user. They also like to point out that Linux relies on command lines, therefore it is "hard" in their FUD-fests.
That said, Windows 2k and XP have very powerful command lines. Almost every aspect of windows can be manipulated and scripted through the command line. Microsoft's Active Directory relies heavily on these capabilities. If Microsoft wanted it to die, why would the keep improving it in every version of Windows?
Sure, it gets better, but they don't really seem to be trying. Unix command shells are far more flexible, and some are older than NT, and with all the kajillions in the bank you'd think they'd have one that rivals *nix by now.
Why teach people to use it as part of their MSCE training?
They teach many things during MSCE training, but that's irrelevant. They target their marketing to the majority of computer users who aren't MCSE trainees, and they push the pointy-clicky paradigm onto them.
This has one unfortunate effect : newer generation of kids who enrol in computer science courses know only GUI's and get shit scared of consoles. They freak out, irrationally, at the mere sight of a command prompt. You can teach them C++ and Java and whatnot, and they actually remember the syntax, and yet command prompts are still described at "arcane".
I find the comment "before MicroSoft" amusing. Apple had the first commercially successful GUI in 1984- nine years before MicroSofts wirst usable version of windows. The UNIX world was using XWindows six years earlier too. Everyone was making fun of MicroSoft's lowly MS-DOS interface.
No, no, Microsoft brought about the "dark times" by forcing its braindead "CLI sucks" philosophy on ever single damn computer user.
Can't blame this one on Gatesy. Three guys are at fault here; two named Steve, the other named Xerox.
They invented the GUI but they didn't demonize the CLI the same way Gatesy did. And Apple now has a Unix shell in OS X, so they have redeemed themselves.
I wonder why my post was modded down though. Must be a lot of humorless Microsoft apologists in the audience today.
...as part of its Win95 hype machine. Microsoft likes to point out that pointy-clicky is sooo much easier than the "arcane" and "cryptic" command prompt, and tried as hard as possible to hide it. Microsoft certainly didn't try to improve its command prompt much, and even in modern version of Windows it still retains a lot of its retardedness inherited from the early days of DOS.
The question is, why? Sure, newbies hate it, but it's really useful to have a powerful command prompt, so it wouldn't hurt to include it. Even Macs have them now. Windows would be much more tolerable if it had a Unix-style command shell out of the box. Yet Microsoft feels the command prompt should die and it seems (at least from my point of view) that it's included only grudgingly in the OS.
Master: "It's a command line. The instrument of a Unix Programmer. Not as random or clumsy as a GUI. An elegant interface for a more civilized age. Before the dark times. Before...Microsoft!"
Wow, shouldn't schools concentrate on teaching real languages, that could be useful in life?
Who says Sindarin isn't useful? It's great to be able to communicate in a language few people understand. Write down confidential information in Elvish, and then minimize the damage caused if it's accidently discovered by someone else (what are the chances that someone speaks Sindarin?)
Or if you're a programmer, write down all your comments in Sindarin. That way if they fire you they'll have a headache trying to hire a replacement that also knows the language:)
Every major new Microsoft product or technology takes the better part of a decade to take over the desktop. By about 2007-2008 or so, once there starts to be a large installed base of Longhorn machines (which will have.NET preinstalled),.NET will really start to take off for shrinkwrap applications. Five years down the line from there, it will be just about ubiquitous.
Of course, the reason that MS junk becomes so ubiquitous is that they have the luxury of being a monopoly, so like it or not they can shove practically *anything* down your throat, good or bad.
I know hordes of Microsoft fans who think anything out of Redmond is awesome, no matter how crappy it is. It reminds me of "Animal Farm", where some of the animals claim that the water tastes sooo much sweeter ever since Napoleon took over the farm.
Wouldn't a cheaper solution than buying the licenses have been so switch from linux to freebsd?
And what makes you certain that SCO won't come after *BSD too? Don't say "because they have no case" because they have no case with Linux users either, but that hasn't stopped them. Must everyone have to switch OS's (On production systems? That would be expensive) everytime some lawsuit-happy moron starts making idiotic claim? It's more prudent to ignore them till they go away.
Microsoft wants Windows to ship with Media Player for basically the same reason that almost every version of unix ships with a vi work-alike; it is a convenient utility that adds value to the product.
There's a very big difference between the two. I can choose *not* to install vi, even if it's included with the *nix install CD. In Microsoft's case, you can't choose to remove what you don't want, *and* the bundled junk behaves obnoxiously on your system (messenger that always bugs you to register, IE that always wants to be the default browser, etc. etc.).
Bill said it's *impossible* to do that, since extra crap like web browsers are an *integral* part of the operating system (I wonder how they made operating systems before web browsers were invented). If they do this, does it mean it suddenly and miraculously became possible?
Will they sell it in other countries, or to customers who want it? Back during the Netscape/IE fiasco, I read one of Microsoft's supporters say "customers must buy what is sold to them, not what they want". Uh huh. Right now Linux has exactly what I want, and I don't even have to pay for it. Beat that, MS!
Slashdot Mirror
IBM was evil back in the day but they were cool evil dammit. They made great techonological breakthroughs, won some Nobel prizes and helped bring a lot of cool things into existance (like hard drives).
Microsoft's idea of innovation is a talking paper clip. Sheesh.
I would very much like to see the Objective C bindings for Gnome updated, for it's a very interesting language to develop in. It is simple, elegent, and does not suffer from the featuritis of C++.
Well, initially 32-bit Intel chips could only address 4GB's, but recently we have crazy shit like PAE that allows up to 16GB RAM to be installed and addressed by the OS that supports it, but applications can still only use 4GB at a time.
Probably not, but you can always do a free FTP install.
Have you ever actually been to a classroom of the "newer generation" you like to make sweeping generalizations about
I've taught quite a few classes, thank you. And I've even done surveys on the matter. The conclusion is always overwhelmingly "students like pointy-clicky, consoles suck".
That's what serial consoles are for. No need for a pen and paper, just dump the output of the terminal to a serial terminal (this requires another computer) and save the log there. This is very handy, unless of course, it's the serial code that futzes up, then you're screwed (however this is highly improbable).
The penguin and the....uh.... abstract looking stylized flying window?
The mascot coolness factor alone makes Linux a superior competitor!
Windows 95 did not demonize the command line, it demonized DOS. Microsoft desperatly wanted everyone to ditch the mess that is DOS and develop Windows GUI programs.
Whatever their intent, they seem to have indoctrinated the "commands are hard" philosophy into every computer user. They also like to point out that Linux relies on command lines, therefore it is "hard" in their FUD-fests.
That said, Windows 2k and XP have very powerful command lines. Almost every aspect of windows can be manipulated and scripted through the command line. Microsoft's Active Directory relies heavily on these capabilities. If Microsoft wanted it to die, why would the keep improving it in every version of Windows?
Sure, it gets better, but they don't really seem to be trying. Unix command shells are far more flexible, and some are older than NT, and with all the kajillions in the bank you'd think they'd have one that rivals *nix by now. Why teach people to use it as part of their MSCE training? They teach many things during MSCE training, but that's irrelevant. They target their marketing to the majority of computer users who aren't MCSE trainees, and they push the pointy-clicky paradigm onto them.
This has one unfortunate effect : newer generation of kids who enrol in computer science courses know only GUI's and get shit scared of consoles. They freak out, irrationally, at the mere sight of a command prompt. You can teach them C++ and Java and whatnot, and they actually remember the syntax, and yet command prompts are still described at "arcane".
I find the comment "before MicroSoft" amusing. Apple had the first commercially successful GUI in 1984- nine years before MicroSofts wirst usable version of windows. The UNIX world was using XWindows six years earlier too. Everyone was making fun of MicroSoft's lowly MS-DOS interface.
No, no, Microsoft brought about the "dark times" by forcing its braindead "CLI sucks" philosophy on ever single damn computer user.
Can't blame this one on Gatesy. Three guys are at fault here; two named Steve, the other named Xerox.
They invented the GUI but they didn't demonize the CLI the same way Gatesy did. And Apple now has a Unix shell in OS X, so they have redeemed themselves.
I wonder why my post was modded down though. Must be a lot of humorless Microsoft apologists in the audience today.
...as part of its Win95 hype machine. Microsoft likes to point out that pointy-clicky is sooo much easier than the "arcane" and "cryptic" command prompt, and tried as hard as possible to hide it. Microsoft certainly didn't try to improve its command prompt much, and even in modern version of Windows it still retains a lot of its retardedness inherited from the early days of DOS.
The question is, why? Sure, newbies hate it, but it's really useful to have a powerful command prompt, so it wouldn't hurt to include it. Even Macs have them now. Windows would be much more tolerable if it had a Unix-style command shell out of the box. Yet Microsoft feels the command prompt should die and it seems (at least from my point of view) that it's included only grudgingly in the OS.
Apprentice: "What is that, Master?"
Master: "It's a command line. The instrument of a Unix Programmer. Not as random or clumsy as a GUI. An elegant interface for a more civilized age. Before the dark times. Before...Microsoft!"
I guess I'll never be a Gnome user. What is the fascination with muddy colours?
GNOME is quite themable; if you don't like the muddy colours, use another theme.
Wow, shouldn't schools concentrate on teaching real languages, that could be useful in life?
:)
Who says Sindarin isn't useful? It's great to be able to communicate in a language few people understand. Write down confidential information in Elvish, and then minimize the damage caused if it's accidently discovered by someone else (what are the chances that someone speaks Sindarin?)
Or if you're a programmer, write down all your comments in Sindarin. That way if they fire you they'll have a headache trying to hire a replacement that also knows the language
Every major new Microsoft product or technology takes the better part of a decade to take over the desktop. By about 2007-2008 or so, once there starts to be a large installed base of Longhorn machines (which will have .NET preinstalled), .NET will really start to take off for shrinkwrap applications. Five years down the line from there, it will be just about ubiquitous.
Of course, the reason that MS junk becomes so ubiquitous is that they have the luxury of being a monopoly, so like it or not they can shove practically *anything* down your throat, good or bad.
I know hordes of Microsoft fans who think anything out of Redmond is awesome, no matter how crappy it is. It reminds me of "Animal Farm", where some of the animals claim that the water tastes sooo much sweeter ever since Napoleon took over the farm.
Lemme guess, a Mr. Furious impersonation? :)
Great, now I got that Ray Parker song stuck in my head, no thanks to your post.
Anyone care to fansub this article?
Nice picture though.
Wouldn't a cheaper solution than buying the licenses have been so switch from linux to freebsd?
And what makes you certain that SCO won't come after *BSD too? Don't say "because they have no case" because they have no case with Linux users either, but that hasn't stopped them. Must everyone have to switch OS's (On production systems? That would be expensive) everytime some lawsuit-happy moron starts making idiotic claim? It's more prudent to ignore them till they go away.
Unlike Americans who are born with the lawyer gene, Germans are born with the engineer gene. So this decision is not so surprising ;)
My friends, you bow to no one!
If Linux 2.2.XX had security holes they would say upgrade.
:p
Bzzzt! Wrong answer. Linux 2.2.xx and even 2.0.xx is still being actively maintained for bugfixes
Microsoft Island. A small island, in international waters, where Microsoft can conspir... err, schem... err, work... without fear of government raids.
New reality TV show?
Microsoft wants Windows to ship with Media Player for basically the same reason that almost every version of unix ships with a vi work-alike; it is a convenient utility that adds value to the product.
There's a very big difference between the two. I can choose *not* to install vi, even if it's included with the *nix install CD. In Microsoft's case, you can't choose to remove what you don't want, *and* the bundled junk behaves obnoxiously on your system (messenger that always bugs you to register, IE that always wants to be the default browser, etc. etc.).
Bill said it's *impossible* to do that, since extra crap like web browsers are an *integral* part of the operating system (I wonder how they made operating systems before web browsers were invented). If they do this, does it mean it suddenly and miraculously became possible?
Will they sell it in other countries, or to customers who want it? Back during the Netscape/IE fiasco, I read one of Microsoft's supporters say "customers must buy what is sold to them, not what they want". Uh huh. Right now Linux has exactly what I want, and I don't even have to pay for it. Beat that, MS!