Well perhaps I'm not as conspiracy-minded, but you almost make it sound like Microsoft cannot make mistakes by trying to say that they planned to have their Java support fail so that they could say "Well, we're not bad, at least we gave it a shot." As someone else with a much better memory than I pointed out in this thread, MS has had plenty of failures, and they cannot always plan for the market reaction that they're going to get. For you to say that they failed on purpose, so that they could have plausible deniability is giving them a little too much credit, methinks.
I also don't think they're immune from scrutiny as you say, the monopoly proceedings cost them quite a lot if you examine their earnings reports..NET is just ripe to open even more allegations against them. Just because it is has been released does not mean that they have a "legal monopoly to abuse."
I really like your optimism, but I think that as you point out, reality does not include Windows being killed off "in a few years." Nor do I understand why it necessarily has to die? I think most people would agree that competition is good for markets, and OS market is no different. I do not want to see one clear victor, but rather have Linux make significant inroads and have these 2 OSs and all their associated technologies push each other to become better. Even though I realize it's a different business model, I think even Linux could risk stagnation with nothing to complete with.
Let me state right off that I'm probably at least somewhat wrong, but here's how I remember the timeline.
- MS realizes that Java will be huge, makes Visual J++ tool. - Tool not too bad compared to what's out at that point, but slow adoption rate. - Many Windows developers hate performance of Java as compared to native apps. - MS tries to get some extensions to Java when apps are compiled for native Windows code. Embrace and extend, sure, but also: - Tries to get Sun to approve some functionality. Sun hates MS so drags its feet in approving anything MS does with Java. - When MS does its own thing, Sun sues. - MS loses, says Screw this, and drops JVM based on lawsuit result, and stops J++ tool development.
I think they did try to use Java, and when that didn't work,.NET became an idea. You're absolutely right that they're trying to do the same with.NET, ie get everyone to cave in. But I can also kind of see the performance arguments they had, as almost every Java app or applet I have ever used was slow or crashed.
I was a VUE testing administrator, and their whole system was in Java on Windows - oh, the humanity, the support issues, shudder. Anyway, I agree with you, I would prefer to see more Java support, but all I was saying is that their decision makes business sense. Java isn't like Linux, it was developed proprietary by their competitor, and only then became more open and popular. For them to go their own way is not completely unexpected.
Incompatible with everything? And here I was thinking Microsoft was trying really hard to make XML, SOAP, and DHTML part of their cornerstones for Web development with.NET. Let me guess, MS is trying to "taint" all of them, right? Personally, I'm all for compatibility, but to me the movement to create a compatible version on Linux is a good sign, as it means this is actually something being worth compatible with. At least we can both agree that it would benefit Linux (and all of us) greatly.
Well of course it's your opinion, but even disregarding bias, what do you think MS should have done in updating their development technology? Let's look at the options?
1) Give up completely. Not going to happen, whether you like MS or not, it's here for a while yet.
2) Adopt Java. And give in to their arch-rival Sun. No company in any market would cave in like that.
3) Keep making only minor improvements to COM and development tools. This is not going to keep market share, not with other technologies out there.
4) Make something brand new.
Option 4 is what they chose, and the only thing they could have chosen in this market. Many people like.NET, even people from the OSS side, or at least like the concepts behind it. You might not like it, but let's try to discuss merits, not bias.
You do have one valid point is that I perhaps should not have said "was" as IPv4 transition is obviously nowhere near done (if at all started on a scale that counts). The point is that there was agreement reached on gradually phasing out the old protocol and trying to implement the new, even though it's extremely hard. The same would have to be done with HTTP if and when this ever happens.
As for your ISP, well, if they're smart, they have probably already started looking at how IPv6 will affect them in the future. Thanks for cussing me out and confusing HTTP/HTML as well. Perhaps you will someday write a new browser that gets it right, and obsolete IE and Mozilla in a day. Good luck!
Giving him credit for anything takes away valuable MS bashing time, as evidenced by the posts. But good observation! Perhaps someone can tell us that he's just doing this to be subversive.
I hope the "they will remove native HTTP support" comment is trying to be funny. That would be not just shooting yourself in the foot for them, but more like in the face. And Microsoft does not go it alone when it comes to web standards - they always try to submit to a standards committee, as they know that will greatly improve their chances of getting it to be adopted.
I love your proof of this though, the fact that old Netscape does not work for MSN.com. Yes, I think every media company should make sure that their site works on every possible version of every browser, even if it's hopelessly outdated. For more evidence of Microsoft Evil, try loading their homepage with Mosaic 1.0 - Oh, no, widely adopted web standards like DHTML/CSS have changed since then and it doesn't look right! Evil!
Re:What about things that P2P doesn't make sense f
on
HTTP's Days Numbered
·
· Score: 1
He is not advocating using P2P for everything, merely that a more full-featured protocol would have P2P functionality in it, along with some other features that he mentioned. HTTP will certainly stay here for browsing, I don't see it going away anytime soon, but HTTP2 or whatever you choose to call it will be a lot more suited for today's uses.
How can you argue that? Although the server application was indeed an intermediary for clients, the actual direct transfer of files and chat happened directly from one peer to another. Hence, peer to peer. If it was truly client-server, the server would play a role in the whole transaction, which it does not after making the initial "match" for users seeking files.
Why post comments when you have absolutely no idea about the topic matter? Let's see,.NET is not built on SOAP, you're not even comparing anything that can be compared..NET is a framework and a set of tools, whereas SOAP is a standard for XML data interchange..NET applications can utilize SOAP, but saying that it's built on it is completely upside down.
Next, let's discuss Microsoft realizing that.NET is a "stupid idea." Microsoft doesn't care about setting up a scapegoat because they're 100% sure it will work, and they're probably right. The whole company has been restructured to work with.NET and it is not going away. Latest copy of Windows in development is Windows.NET, latest set of development tools is Visual Studio.NET, latest certification is MCSD.NET. Getting a trend here yet?
HTTP is old and needs to be replaced, as soon as we can figure out what the best replacement is. It will be extremely hard, just like IPv4 was, but very similarly, we had no idea the protocol would be used as it is being used today when it was developed. Microsoft is expressing something many other people know in this case, and the fact that a.NET architect said this does not really have anything to do with.NET, as this HTTP replacement would not happen for a long long time from now.
I hope that addresses all your points, and educates you more about the subject at hand.
I'm not sure what you mean - obviously the eventual target was hardware, but you still had to load sound drivers in your config.sys that were appropriate for your sound card. Making an interface on a bootable cd that loads the appropriate driver based on auto-detection or user selection is quite doable, and would emulate the hardware most older games would expect. SB16 or AWE compatibility modes would work for most cards.
And if you are referring to games that would access hardware directly somehow, using their own logic, they still do it through interrupts, which are quite possible to capture and create virtual hardware devices that would fool these older programs. Hardware emulation on this basic level is not out of reach today.
You would really pay $50 for something the company already made plenty of money on potentially? I enjoyed Wolfenstein and Doom a long time ago, but I would not pay full price for them again now, not when there are other new games to spend money on. And even if you love these games so much, everything depreciates in value, and games should be no exception. Just like a brand new car from 4 years ago is worth less now, there should be no reason to pay full price for outdated or abandoned software.
I don't know, you could fit a whole lot of drivers on a cd, and allow the user to select. I clearly remember the issues we all had as well with getting sound working, but perhaps trying several compatibility modes first and then allowing the user to select would work around this problem.
I'm sorry I didn't realize you were trying to be funny. You have to admit, there are plenty of serious posts that seem to come up similar to that one, so it was pretty hard to distinguish:)
To answer your 2nd point, it's even possible for those of us in US who are not worried about DMCA, but the point is that cracking the Xbox doesn't seem possible so far due to all the encryption on it. Porting efforts to it certainly don't seem to be going as fast as originally predicted, at least. Finally, my guess was just based on an assumption - I'm pretty sure the government would make sure that a revenue-affecting device turned over to consumers was relatively safe from tampering and would be examined as part of other normal car inspections. I don't think that's a very unreasonable assumption.
Hmm, it seems more logical for fuel taxes to support roads than social programs, what is the public opinion in UK regarding restructuring of those taxes? It just seems like it would be cheaper to tax citizens as we do, rather than retrofit all old cars to keep track of their usage data with all the equipment like satellites, computers, and transmitters. One may argue it's more fair to tax those actually using the roads at those peak times, but it seems a great deal more difficult.
Thanks for turning every story into something relevant to Linux, it's truly inspirational. I hear scientists captured some anti-matter particles last week, I wonder how this will affect the latest kernel. Or that cloned cat, how will it get along with Tux?
Ok, with that aside, there's no way you could port Linux to some government sealed black box in your car. We can't even port it to the big black box in a living room called Xbox, why could we do it with a tamperproof, yearly-inspected one?
You can't seriously believe military spending will decrease under Bush, can you? It will only go up, and debating that missile defense would not have helped us against terrorist attacks will not get us anywhere. The current climate is that questioning the government, and especially defense initiatives, is unpatriotic. Also, we have no right to know what's going on as citizens, since that information may get into the wrong hands. Like say we elect a VP (which the majority of people didn't, but stick with me) and he is gone for weeks in some undisclosed location doing God knows what - that's not lack of accountability, that's national security.
Thanks for the off-topic moderation. The death of an animation great certainly has nothing to do with a discussion about US and Japanese animation. I'll try to stay more on topic next time.
I don't know about the whole subtitles vs dub argument - sometimes the English dubbing is really not that bad. And subtitles frequently block a great deal of the thing we're supposedly really trying to appreciate - the art, not to mention the fact that you miss a great deal of what's onscreen trying to read them. If it's something I really like, like Mononoke Hime, it's best seen on DVD, where you can watch it both ways and pick a preferred way for each case.
MTV also used to show Aeon Flux, which was as close to anime as American tv has come, and Liquid Animation, which was a showcase of great shorts. And Beavis and Butthead for that matter. But I guess people just can't get enough of Real World / Road Rules / Another Group of Perfect Looking People and a Token Minority Drinking and Screwing. God bless the mainstream...
Most of the time when they announce some old actor or director passing on, I may feel some tinge of sadness, but generally it is as if hearing about a stranger. Hearing about Chuck Jones made me incredibly sad, much more than I ever would expect. But I guess it makes sense, this man has defined so much of what we know about animation. He created idols that are essentially timeless. I'm very glad his work will live on, but I think this is one person we can all agree we shall miss.
Comparing all of anime to children's programming, as was done a few posts up, shows pretty much a lack of familiarity with the genre. As for animation festivals mentioned above, there may be some great stuff there, but how many of us have a chance to go to one? I certainly would have had I heard of one coming to my city, but this has never happened afaik.
Therefore, anime is popular to a large extent, at least from my point of view, because it frequently combines outstanding animation with challenging topics or great futuristic plotlines. Now before you start mentioning Pokemon or DZ, yes, obviously there are inferior shows/features, but that is true of any genre.
To ask "why does anyone like this stuff" pretty much means that either you don't like it, or never had interest in it, and probably never will. Which is fine, of course. But I think if you have any interest, a much better question would have been, "I know a lot of people like this, what do you recommend I check out?"
Slashdot Mirror
Well perhaps I'm not as conspiracy-minded, but you almost make it sound like Microsoft cannot make mistakes by trying to say that they planned to have their Java support fail so that they could say "Well, we're not bad, at least we gave it a shot." As someone else with a much better memory than I pointed out in this thread, MS has had plenty of failures, and they cannot always plan for the market reaction that they're going to get. For you to say that they failed on purpose, so that they could have plausible deniability is giving them a little too much credit, methinks.
.NET is just ripe to open even more allegations against them. Just because it is has been released does not mean that they have a "legal monopoly to abuse."
I also don't think they're immune from scrutiny as you say, the monopoly proceedings cost them quite a lot if you examine their earnings reports.
I really like your optimism, but I think that as you point out, reality does not include Windows being killed off "in a few years." Nor do I understand why it necessarily has to die? I think most people would agree that competition is good for markets, and OS market is no different. I do not want to see one clear victor, but rather have Linux make significant inroads and have these 2 OSs and all their associated technologies push each other to become better. Even though I realize it's a different business model, I think even Linux could risk stagnation with nothing to complete with.
Once again, let's settle our issues in the courtroom and not in the marketplace. Perhaps this issue will finally come to some closure soon.
Let me state right off that I'm probably at least somewhat wrong, but here's how I remember the timeline.
.NET became an idea. You're absolutely right that they're trying to do the same with .NET, ie get everyone to cave in. But I can also kind of see the performance arguments they had, as almost every Java app or applet I have ever used was slow or crashed.
- MS realizes that Java will be huge, makes Visual J++ tool.
- Tool not too bad compared to what's out at that point, but slow adoption rate.
- Many Windows developers hate performance of Java as compared to native apps.
- MS tries to get some extensions to Java when apps are compiled for native Windows code. Embrace and extend, sure, but also:
- Tries to get Sun to approve some functionality. Sun hates MS so drags its feet in approving anything MS does with Java.
- When MS does its own thing, Sun sues.
- MS loses, says Screw this, and drops JVM based on lawsuit result, and stops J++ tool development.
I think they did try to use Java, and when that didn't work,
I was a VUE testing administrator, and their whole system was in Java on Windows - oh, the humanity, the support issues, shudder. Anyway, I agree with you, I would prefer to see more Java support, but all I was saying is that their decision makes business sense. Java isn't like Linux, it was developed proprietary by their competitor, and only then became more open and popular. For them to go their own way is not completely unexpected.
Incompatible with everything? And here I was thinking Microsoft was trying really hard to make XML, SOAP, and DHTML part of their cornerstones for Web development with .NET. Let me guess, MS is trying to "taint" all of them, right? Personally, I'm all for compatibility, but to me the movement to create a compatible version on Linux is a good sign, as it means this is actually something being worth compatible with. At least we can both agree that it would benefit Linux (and all of us) greatly.
Well of course it's your opinion, but even disregarding bias, what do you think MS should have done in updating their development technology? Let's look at the options?
.NET, even people from the OSS side, or at least like the concepts behind it. You might not like it, but let's try to discuss merits, not bias.
1) Give up completely. Not going to happen, whether you like MS or not, it's here for a while yet.
2) Adopt Java. And give in to their arch-rival Sun. No company in any market would cave in like that.
3) Keep making only minor improvements to COM and development tools. This is not going to keep market share, not with other technologies out there.
4) Make something brand new.
Option 4 is what they chose, and the only thing they could have chosen in this market. Many people like
You do have one valid point is that I perhaps should not have said "was" as IPv4 transition is obviously nowhere near done (if at all started on a scale that counts). The point is that there was agreement reached on gradually phasing out the old protocol and trying to implement the new, even though it's extremely hard. The same would have to be done with HTTP if and when this ever happens.
As for your ISP, well, if they're smart, they have probably already started looking at how IPv6 will affect them in the future. Thanks for cussing me out and confusing HTTP/HTML as well. Perhaps you will someday write a new browser that gets it right, and obsolete IE and Mozilla in a day. Good luck!
Giving him credit for anything takes away valuable MS bashing time, as evidenced by the posts. But good observation! Perhaps someone can tell us that he's just doing this to be subversive.
Never mind the fact that he does not actually say this ever, but this is rather the Slashdot take on it.
I hope the "they will remove native HTTP support" comment is trying to be funny. That would be not just shooting yourself in the foot for them, but more like in the face. And Microsoft does not go it alone when it comes to web standards - they always try to submit to a standards committee, as they know that will greatly improve their chances of getting it to be adopted.
I love your proof of this though, the fact that old Netscape does not work for MSN.com. Yes, I think every media company should make sure that their site works on every possible version of every browser, even if it's hopelessly outdated. For more evidence of Microsoft Evil, try loading their homepage with Mosaic 1.0 - Oh, no, widely adopted web standards like DHTML/CSS have changed since then and it doesn't look right! Evil!
He is not advocating using P2P for everything, merely that a more full-featured protocol would have P2P functionality in it, along with some other features that he mentioned. HTTP will certainly stay here for browsing, I don't see it going away anytime soon, but HTTP2 or whatever you choose to call it will be a lot more suited for today's uses.
How can you argue that? Although the server application was indeed an intermediary for clients, the actual direct transfer of files and chat happened directly from one peer to another. Hence, peer to peer. If it was truly client-server, the server would play a role in the whole transaction, which it does not after making the initial "match" for users seeking files.
Why post comments when you have absolutely no idea about the topic matter? Let's see, .NET is not built on SOAP, you're not even comparing anything that can be compared. .NET is a framework and a set of tools, whereas SOAP is a standard for XML data interchange. .NET applications can utilize SOAP, but saying that it's built on it is completely upside down.
.NET is a "stupid idea." Microsoft doesn't care about setting up a scapegoat because they're 100% sure it will work, and they're probably right. The whole company has been restructured to work with .NET and it is not going away. Latest copy of Windows in development is Windows.NET, latest set of development tools is Visual Studio.NET, latest certification is MCSD.NET. Getting a trend here yet?
.NET architect said this does not really have anything to do with .NET, as this HTTP replacement would not happen for a long long time from now.
Next, let's discuss Microsoft realizing that
HTTP is old and needs to be replaced, as soon as we can figure out what the best replacement is. It will be extremely hard, just like IPv4 was, but very similarly, we had no idea the protocol would be used as it is being used today when it was developed. Microsoft is expressing something many other people know in this case, and the fact that a
I hope that addresses all your points, and educates you more about the subject at hand.
I'm not sure what you mean - obviously the eventual target was hardware, but you still had to load sound drivers in your config.sys that were appropriate for your sound card. Making an interface on a bootable cd that loads the appropriate driver based on auto-detection or user selection is quite doable, and would emulate the hardware most older games would expect. SB16 or AWE compatibility modes would work for most cards.
And if you are referring to games that would access hardware directly somehow, using their own logic, they still do it through interrupts, which are quite possible to capture and create virtual hardware devices that would fool these older programs. Hardware emulation on this basic level is not out of reach today.
You would really pay $50 for something the company already made plenty of money on potentially? I enjoyed Wolfenstein and Doom a long time ago, but I would not pay full price for them again now, not when there are other new games to spend money on. And even if you love these games so much, everything depreciates in value, and games should be no exception. Just like a brand new car from 4 years ago is worth less now, there should be no reason to pay full price for outdated or abandoned software.
I don't know, you could fit a whole lot of drivers on a cd, and allow the user to select. I clearly remember the issues we all had as well with getting sound working, but perhaps trying several compatibility modes first and then allowing the user to select would work around this problem.
I'm sorry I didn't realize you were trying to be funny. You have to admit, there are plenty of serious posts that seem to come up similar to that one, so it was pretty hard to distinguish :)
To answer your 2nd point, it's even possible for those of us in US who are not worried about DMCA, but the point is that cracking the Xbox doesn't seem possible so far due to all the encryption on it. Porting efforts to it certainly don't seem to be going as fast as originally predicted, at least. Finally, my guess was just based on an assumption - I'm pretty sure the government would make sure that a revenue-affecting device turned over to consumers was relatively safe from tampering and would be examined as part of other normal car inspections. I don't think that's a very unreasonable assumption.
Hmm, it seems more logical for fuel taxes to support roads than social programs, what is the public opinion in UK regarding restructuring of those taxes? It just seems like it would be cheaper to tax citizens as we do, rather than retrofit all old cars to keep track of their usage data with all the equipment like satellites, computers, and transmitters. One may argue it's more fair to tax those actually using the roads at those peak times, but it seems a great deal more difficult.
Thanks for turning every story into something relevant to Linux, it's truly inspirational. I hear scientists captured some anti-matter particles last week, I wonder how this will affect the latest kernel. Or that cloned cat, how will it get along with Tux?
Ok, with that aside, there's no way you could port Linux to some government sealed black box in your car. We can't even port it to the big black box in a living room called Xbox, why could we do it with a tamperproof, yearly-inspected one?
You can't seriously believe military spending will decrease under Bush, can you? It will only go up, and debating that missile defense would not have helped us against terrorist attacks will not get us anywhere. The current climate is that questioning the government, and especially defense initiatives, is unpatriotic. Also, we have no right to know what's going on as citizens, since that information may get into the wrong hands. Like say we elect a VP (which the majority of people didn't, but stick with me) and he is gone for weeks in some undisclosed location doing God knows what - that's not lack of accountability, that's national security.
Anyway, this idea will not fly, but good try.
Thanks for the off-topic moderation. The death of an animation great certainly has nothing to do with a discussion about US and Japanese animation. I'll try to stay more on topic next time.
I don't know about the whole subtitles vs dub argument - sometimes the English dubbing is really not that bad. And subtitles frequently block a great deal of the thing we're supposedly really trying to appreciate - the art, not to mention the fact that you miss a great deal of what's onscreen trying to read them. If it's something I really like, like Mononoke Hime, it's best seen on DVD, where you can watch it both ways and pick a preferred way for each case.
MTV also used to show Aeon Flux, which was as close to anime as American tv has come, and Liquid Animation, which was a showcase of great shorts. And Beavis and Butthead for that matter. But I guess people just can't get enough of Real World / Road Rules / Another Group of Perfect Looking People and a Token Minority Drinking and Screwing. God bless the mainstream...
Most of the time when they announce some old actor or director passing on, I may feel some tinge of sadness, but generally it is as if hearing about a stranger. Hearing about Chuck Jones made me incredibly sad, much more than I ever would expect. But I guess it makes sense, this man has defined so much of what we know about animation. He created idols that are essentially timeless. I'm very glad his work will live on, but I think this is one person we can all agree we shall miss.
Comparing all of anime to children's programming, as was done a few posts up, shows pretty much a lack of familiarity with the genre. As for animation festivals mentioned above, there may be some great stuff there, but how many of us have a chance to go to one? I certainly would have had I heard of one coming to my city, but this has never happened afaik.
Therefore, anime is popular to a large extent, at least from my point of view, because it frequently combines outstanding animation with challenging topics or great futuristic plotlines. Now before you start mentioning Pokemon or DZ, yes, obviously there are inferior shows/features, but that is true of any genre.
To ask "why does anyone like this stuff" pretty much means that either you don't like it, or never had interest in it, and probably never will. Which is fine, of course. But I think if you have any interest, a much better question would have been, "I know a lot of people like this, what do you recommend I check out?"