First off - Let's talk about the IHttpModule. Since.NET has been released - this has been available to developers to extend and do with as they would please. It's been more than sufficient for almost all of the problems a developer would face within an ASP.NET application. It's nice that MS is finally extending that kind of engineering to the ISAPI interface - as there are a select few things that you can't do with the IHttpModule and need to implement in ISAPI.
Have a look at the current model for Module development. It is with out question the most well designed OOP approach to programming modules than anything else out there (Java). The thing that really sets.NET approach is that Events and Delegates are first class citizens in the.NET world. In java, until recently, they have been relegated to the UI, which is not really a Correct way of thinking.
MS FTP is a different story - it has pretty much sucked through and through - I really wish they would fix it. Also - I do NOT want to create a forking domain, or computer user account for every FTP user.
Finally, whatever the IIS metabase is - you rarely have to edit it by hand. See there is this thing called the IIS Manager and well, it's a GUI and you use it to configure your sites. It's like really easy to use and stuff.
The got damn apache config is a pain in the ass and is far more cryptic than it needs to be. How many years has apache been available and *why* is there not a gui for creating new site?
Now my real beef is this: MS has contributed a great deal to many aspects of our desktops across all platforms. Most Linux UI's are essentially knock offs of win95 with some extra goodies that can easily be had for windows. Every time you use one though - you know it's not the real thing, there is something about the responsiveness that really tells them apart. As far as Mac OS X is concerned - There are several enhancements that are widely ignored such as Alt-Tab, something that windows has had for years but OS X just only recently incorporated with out and sort of extension. I say recently because that feature has been available since windows 3.1. There are also a number of concepts that OS X has employed that have conceptually been part of Vista for a long time but have not been delivered on as OS X has.
As an OS X owner and XP owner, and well a 2003 server owner as well - I will say this - MS knows hardware. Apple seems to have a difficult time releasing patches for software and hardware configurations that I can count on my fingers and my toes. MS has a completely different problem - how to engineer a *brand new* os that runs on ten year old hardware. Apple's OS X requires at the *very least* hardware similar to - if not exceeding Vista's projected requirements. MS has to deal with a bunch of legacy crap - Apple doesn't "do legacy", in that respect I think it's unfair to compare the two.
In closing - OS X is not perfect nor is it completely original. If we all had hardware that could support a fully abstracted 3d interface the app we create would be a *little different* now wouldn't they? Apache is good but has it's flaws (management) and lately IIS 6's security track record has been better than Apache II's, I mean we can't all be perfect all the time. Finally Vista will be Good, we will like it - but hate paying for it because there are people out there that would have us believe that it should be free. I still maintain - you get what you pay for. Have a look at the current model for Module development. It is with out question the most well designed OOP approach to programming modules than anything else out there (Java). The thing that really sets.NET approach is that Events and Delegates are first class citizens in the
With Microsoft significantly changing things, they have the risk of it being such a schism that people seriously evaluate the option of going to Open Office or other alternatives
Lol. Have you used open office? Even if they change things it will still be better than *that*.
Open office reminds me of a Liger part lion, part tiger, and just plain wierd.
Protecting Apple? No, not at all. Between the dislikes and likes I think I might come out as neutral. My question to you though is: does the ROKR Motorola phone *look* like an Apple hardware product? Does that sound like a Apple name?
From what I can tell, Apple contributed the iTunes interface and AAC decoding software to the Motorola phone. Moto provided the hardware platform. I'm sure that rewriting iTunes and the decoding libraries took some time.
Businesses do not like to disrupt their revenue streams.
They sure don't. 2/3's of apple's revenue is now from the sale of the iPod. Why on EARTH would Apple help motorola design a kick ass phone, only to have the hardware sales $$$'s go to Motorola (or share for that matter)? They wouldn't, something like that would be disruptive to their iPod revenue stream.
I'd say the ROKR is a proof of concept. I think though, that Apple has hard a very hard time selling the iPod phone concept to the providers simply becuase the providers want to control the content on the phone. Basically, they want a cut. Verizon for example, controls the content on their phones by making the wireless connection to the cell phone network the only path in or out of their phones. If you download something to your Verizon phone, Verizon collects. Apple, I suspect is not getting as much as they want out of the providers, hence the exclusive deployment with cingular (who are very open with their hardware).
My point is simply - we have yet to see the real iPod phone.
There is no money lost. The hardware is not apple's but the software is. Where is the downside on that?
The fact that it's ugly, small, and brain dead is motorola's fault. It's not an Apple product. I suspect that Apple has a much different draft of what that device is supposed to look like, and we will see it in a bit. They don't have a lot of exerience engineering mobile communications hardware. I'm pretty sure that a phone done correctly will be worth it's while. Make no mistake - the iPod phone will be a product of Apple's, which is why Motorola was left out to dry.
Recent as in last year... Yes - keep in mind that by the time firefox had been published with such functionality - the lesson had already been learned by MSFT users around the globe. Thus its incredibly easy to say "oh firefox already HAD that".
The *idea* of self installing extensions is a good one really. Its unfortunate that our trust as end users continues to be exploited.
That has no bearing on the fact that as a whole the economies in either state are not equipped to support expensive (becuase it is relatively speaking) high speed broadband. Not only that but to really take advantage you need: a computer, HD tv, and some sort of nice audio system. At 16K a year median income, I'm not sure that's really an option. Even the home prices are/were 20% less than the national average (the census data is from 2000, housing prices have more than doubled since then).
The reason that their corporate hq is there is that there is cheap labor. Have a look at the stats and you'll see that one of highest segments of employment is "Administrative".
Doesn't anyone realize that Mississippi and Louisiana are one of the two poorest states in the country? Who excactly would a next gen internet and cable be marketed to? There is also income data here and here. Let's not put our next gen tech. in an area that can't support it economically.
You just implied it. But the question at hand is about salary of "application developers". The person asking it was a web developer.
often a completely different mindset when it comes to releasing/ patching/ updating to the customer
What mindset is that exactly? Web developers have a much higher degree of flexibility when releasing products, and can in some cases push up a release so as to at least "get it out there" and make changes later. Although one of the consequences of this: the patch and update cycle is shorter and more frequent. A boxed product does not, thus takes longer to build and deploy because it requires more testing and usability analysis before shipping. Which would seem to be the environment that requires more or less discipline?
but it is so much easier to tweak a production server
No, it's simply not. Deploying, patching and debugging production N-tier architected web applications is significantly more difficult than shipping a boxed application, and trouble shooting it. There are massive version considerations in a large web application. If the application is properly built there are at least three seperate code bases that must be maintained, UI, Middle Tier, and Database. In addition the production environment usually contains subtle differences from the development environment making it difficult to tracking down bugs in the production environment. A neat boxed product does not share this level of complexity.
If you are referring to N-tier thick client applications (they usually don't come in a box) then they are generally equally complex in terms of deploy and maintain.
Rent here ranges from 1600 for a $hit hole to 2200 for a nice place down town (you can pay even more if you like). Even at 2200 that's 26K a year which is "only" 26% of 90K. There is also a state tax deduction for a portion of rent. The point is, you can live confortable in the city on 90K.
No the whole plan relys on providing a solution that is "transparent" to the end user. Coping songs from iPod to a computer that I own is not possible at the moment. In a world where DRM works, the iPod would know that the device that I'm trying to copy to is either mine, or one that I can use exclusively. Since it knows that the target is "trusted", it would allow the operation. As far as sharing music goes, DRM that worked might let me "lend" music to a friend or give them a period of time in which they could listen to the music before they had to get their own. DRM can be mostly not bad, but at the moment it is very poorly implemented. Not that I really support such ideas - but if DRM is done well, it might not be as bad as everyone thinks.
Yes but this a Hierachical menu system that is used exclusively with *MUSIC* files. So it's special, you know - and no one ever organized music files this way before... no, not at all.
It doesn't say anything about WHAT format - just that it has to be open. You don't honestly think that MSFT will just say "Word Format or the highway?" do you? They can easily have a "save as" format that complies with the standard. 2007 is a long time from now.
"I'm not saying they make efforts to to seem anything."
They do - such as google.org. Or announcing the "Google Foundation" in their SEC filing. as far as the culture goes - it matters not. The end aim of what google is doing what most of us *don't want*. The problem is primarily that captalism, specifically, maximizing shareholder wealth is very much at odds with altruism.
The people at google really, truly want to do no evil.
By participating in the furtherance of a complete network with the abilty to observe a large portion of your online activity, google employees are not "truly want[ing] to do no evil". Building better products has nothing to do with being philanthropic either. Unless you make prothetic limbs, I might cut them some slack.
I don't think I would care if there was more separation of google's end game and their image of philanthropy. I don't think the philanthropic image is entirely representative of the company's goals. It is also misleading. As google is really an advertising company (very few people look at them that way).
There really isn't anything altruistic about targeted advertising no matter how it gets delivered. Just because google seems to make efforts to "seem" not evil doesn't mean that they are.
No probably not. The difficulty of associating a particular user to ip traffic is extremely difficult and in some cases impossible.
Google can easily figure out who you are and what you are doing, what you are interested in, how you behave, and who you communicate with. Any service with google.com as the domain will allow them to cookie you - and provide visibilty of your identity across other google services, allowing them to easily aggregate your activities.
Really the reason that I bring this up is that people seem to *love* Google. I mean at $277/share i think it speaks for itself. There are a number of other companies who if they were doing such things, most people would take issue, and have in the past. Double click immediately comes to mind. Maybe people will start to figure it out when the love affair ends.
No really, doesn't ANYONE see what google is doing? They own your searchs, they own our e-mail, they are trying to own all of our connections too - either through their "accelerator" service, or by sponsoring free wifi connections across the country. Google, wants to know what we are doing - they want the data so that they can target, model and predict our behavior. I'm not sure that it's such a great thing that one company have all of this information in one place, or it might be just me...
Consider the time to open and access all of the files that needed to be closed for the reboot. Also consider the disruption in focus, it's not insignificant. Especially when done often.
Reboots don't happen unless they are a necessity. It is probably the least liked activity relating to a pc. Besides oh say, cleaning out the spam in your inbox or finding a "driver disk" for the brand new shiny piece of hardware you just brought home.
When Lee took the job he signed and agreed to a set of conditions for his employment. This contract was voluntarily entered into by Lee with Microsoft. No one forced him to take a job with a non-compete clause.
As such, it was violated, and Microsoft has every right to try and enforce a contract that Dr. Lee agreed to.
Why is this evil? It's not. It's Lee breaking "the law" and his word to Mirosoft. It could be any company or person though. Lee agreed to something and now he's not honoring it. And that....
99.4% of uptime equates to 518.4 seconds of unavailablity per day.
That's roughly 8 minutes of the day that you won't be able to use your phone. Given that unavailability is usually related to demand, you won't be able to use your phone for 8 minutes during the hours that you'd really like to.
Also, consider that for a bit more money you can get a land line with better voice quality and unlimited calling as well.
This isn't MSFT's fault. This is MSFT listening to their customers.
We as the consumers, won't use the content if we don't have the hardware. Thus we won't pay for it and those who are asking for this kind of software won't make money. In time DRM compatible may become a "selling point" for products that support this technology. We will have a choice though for what we buy and what content we view. There is always a choice.
Slashdot Mirror
First off - Let's talk about the IHttpModule. Since .NET has been released - this has been available to developers to extend and do with as they would please. It's been more than sufficient for almost all of the problems a developer would face within an ASP.NET application. It's nice that MS is finally extending that kind of engineering to the ISAPI interface - as there are a select few things that you can't do with the IHttpModule and need to implement in ISAPI.
.NET approach is that Events and Delegates are first class citizens in the .NET world. In java, until recently, they have been relegated to the UI, which is not really a Correct way of thinking.
.NET approach is that Events and Delegates are first class citizens in the
Have a look at the current model for Module development. It is with out question the most well designed OOP approach to programming modules than anything else out there (Java). The thing that really sets
MS FTP is a different story - it has pretty much sucked through and through - I really wish they would fix it. Also - I do NOT want to create a forking domain, or computer user account for every FTP user.
Finally, whatever the IIS metabase is - you rarely have to edit it by hand. See there is this thing called the IIS Manager and well, it's a GUI and you use it to configure your sites. It's like really easy to use and stuff.
The got damn apache config is a pain in the ass and is far more cryptic than it needs to be. How many years has apache been available and *why* is there not a gui for creating new site?
Now my real beef is this: MS has contributed a great deal to many aspects of our desktops across all platforms. Most Linux UI's are essentially knock offs of win95 with some extra goodies that can easily be had for windows. Every time you use one though - you know it's not the real thing, there is something about the responsiveness that really tells them apart. As far as Mac OS X is concerned - There are several enhancements that are widely ignored such as Alt-Tab, something that windows has had for years but OS X just only recently incorporated with out and sort of extension. I say recently because that feature has been available since windows 3.1. There are also a number of concepts that OS X has employed that have conceptually been part of Vista for a long time but have not been delivered on as OS X has.
As an OS X owner and XP owner, and well a 2003 server owner as well - I will say this - MS knows hardware. Apple seems to have a difficult time releasing patches for software and hardware configurations that I can count on my fingers and my toes. MS has a completely different problem - how to engineer a *brand new* os that runs on ten year old hardware. Apple's OS X requires at the *very least* hardware similar to - if not exceeding Vista's projected requirements. MS has to deal with a bunch of legacy crap - Apple doesn't "do legacy", in that respect I think it's unfair to compare the two.
In closing - OS X is not perfect nor is it completely original. If we all had hardware that could support a fully abstracted 3d interface the app we create would be a *little different* now wouldn't they? Apache is good but has it's flaws (management) and lately IIS 6's security track record has been better than Apache II's, I mean we can't all be perfect all the time. Finally Vista will be Good, we will like it - but hate paying for it because there are people out there that would have us believe that it should be free. I still maintain - you get what you pay for.
Have a look at the current model for Module development. It is with out question the most well designed OOP approach to programming modules than anything else out there (Java). The thing that really sets
Did the moderator even read the first line of the article - "Inventor denies dead cat fuel story".
The post is completely inaccurate.
With Microsoft significantly changing things, they have the risk of it being such a schism that people seriously evaluate the option of going to Open Office or other alternatives
Lol. Have you used open office? Even if they change things it will still be better than *that*.
Open office reminds me of a Liger part lion, part tiger, and just plain wierd.
It might be free, but you get what you pay for.
Protecting Apple? No, not at all. Between the dislikes and likes I think I might come out as neutral. My question to you though is: does the ROKR Motorola phone *look* like an Apple hardware product? Does that sound like a Apple name?
From what I can tell, Apple contributed the iTunes interface and AAC decoding software to the Motorola phone. Moto provided the hardware platform. I'm sure that rewriting iTunes and the decoding libraries took some time.
Businesses do not like to disrupt their revenue streams.
They sure don't. 2/3's of apple's revenue is now from the sale of the iPod. Why on EARTH would Apple help motorola design a kick ass phone, only to have the hardware sales $$$'s go to Motorola (or share for that matter)? They wouldn't, something like that would be disruptive to their iPod revenue stream.
I'd say the ROKR is a proof of concept. I think though, that Apple has hard a very hard time selling the iPod phone concept to the providers simply becuase the providers want to control the content on the phone. Basically, they want a cut. Verizon for example, controls the content on their phones by making the wireless connection to the cell phone network the only path in or out of their phones. If you download something to your Verizon phone, Verizon collects. Apple, I suspect is not getting as much as they want out of the providers, hence the exclusive deployment with cingular (who are very open with their hardware).
My point is simply - we have yet to see the real iPod phone.
No,
There is no money lost. The hardware is not apple's but the software is. Where is the downside on that?
The fact that it's ugly, small, and brain dead is motorola's fault. It's not an Apple product. I suspect that Apple has a much different draft of what that device is supposed to look like, and we will see it in a bit. They don't have a lot of exerience engineering mobile communications hardware. I'm pretty sure that a phone done correctly will be worth it's while. Make no mistake - the iPod phone will be a product of Apple's, which is why Motorola was left out to dry.
Recent as in last year... Yes - keep in mind that by the time firefox had been published with such functionality - the lesson had already been learned by MSFT users around the globe. Thus its incredibly easy to say "oh firefox already HAD that".
The *idea* of self installing extensions is a good one really. Its unfortunate that our trust as end users continues to be exploited.
That has no bearing on the fact that as a whole the economies in either state are not equipped to support expensive (becuase it is relatively speaking) high speed broadband. Not only that but to really take advantage you need: a computer, HD tv, and some sort of nice audio system. At 16K a year median income, I'm not sure that's really an option. Even the home prices are/were 20% less than the national average (the census data is from 2000, housing prices have more than doubled since then).
The reason that their corporate hq is there is that there is cheap labor. Have a look at the stats and you'll see that one of highest segments of employment is "Administrative".
lol - "are some of the poorest states"
*NOT* The place, and probably not the time.
Doesn't anyone realize that Mississippi and Louisiana are one of the two poorest states in the country? Who excactly would a next gen internet and cable be marketed to? There is also income data here and here. Let's not put our next gen tech. in an area that can't support it economically.
I'm not going to say there's a lack of discipline
You just implied it. But the question at hand is about salary of "application developers". The person asking it was a web developer.
often a completely different mindset when it comes to releasing/ patching/ updating to the customer
What mindset is that exactly? Web developers have a much higher degree of flexibility when releasing products, and can in some cases push up a release so as to at least "get it out there" and make changes later. Although one of the consequences of this: the patch and update cycle is shorter and more frequent. A boxed product does not, thus takes longer to build and deploy because it requires more testing and usability analysis before shipping. Which would seem to be the environment that requires more or less discipline?
but it is so much easier to tweak a production server
No, it's simply not. Deploying, patching and debugging production N-tier architected web applications is significantly more difficult than shipping a boxed application, and trouble shooting it. There are massive version considerations in a large web application. If the application is properly built there are at least three seperate code bases that must be maintained, UI, Middle Tier, and Database. In addition the production environment usually contains subtle differences from the development environment making it difficult to tracking down bugs in the production environment. A neat boxed product does not share this level of complexity.
If you are referring to N-tier thick client applications (they usually don't come in a box) then they are generally equally complex in terms of deploy and maintain.
Rent here ranges from 1600 for a $hit hole to 2200 for a nice place down town (you can pay even more if you like). Even at 2200 that's 26K a year which is "only" 26% of 90K. There is also a state tax deduction for a portion of rent. The point is, you can live confortable in the city on 90K.
And this is news because...?
No the whole plan relys on providing a solution that is "transparent" to the end user. Coping songs from iPod to a computer that I own is not possible at the moment. In a world where DRM works, the iPod would know that the device that I'm trying to copy to is either mine, or one that I can use exclusively. Since it knows that the target is "trusted", it would allow the operation. As far as sharing music goes, DRM that worked might let me "lend" music to a friend or give them a period of time in which they could listen to the music before they had to get their own. DRM can be mostly not bad, but at the moment it is very poorly implemented.
Not that I really support such ideas - but if DRM is done well, it might not be as bad as everyone thinks.
Yes but this a Hierachical menu system that is used exclusively with *MUSIC* files. So it's special, you know - and no one ever organized music files this way before... no, not at all.
planned obselecence reaches a new milestone. really how long is that key going to *really* last. 10 years? i don't think so...
It doesn't say anything about WHAT format - just that it has to be open. You don't honestly think that MSFT will just say "Word Format or the highway?" do you? They can easily have a "save as" format that complies with the standard. 2007 is a long time from now.
Nothing. That's the problem. There are no true drains in new orleans beacuase it's below sea level.
Break the levies and rebuild the city on the north coast of the lake.
"I'm not saying they make efforts to to seem anything."
They do - such as google.org. Or announcing the "Google Foundation" in their SEC filing. as far as the culture goes - it matters not. The end aim of what google is doing what most of us *don't want*. The problem is primarily that captalism, specifically, maximizing shareholder wealth is very much at odds with altruism.
The people at google really, truly want to do no evil.
By participating in the furtherance of a complete network with the abilty to observe a large portion of your online activity, google employees are not "truly want[ing] to do no evil". Building better products has nothing to do with being philanthropic either. Unless you make prothetic limbs, I might cut them some slack.
I don't think I would care if there was more separation of google's end game and their image of philanthropy. I don't think the philanthropic image is entirely representative of the company's goals. It is also misleading. As google is really an advertising company (very few people look at them that way).
There really isn't anything altruistic about targeted advertising no matter how it gets delivered. Just because google seems to make efforts to "seem" not evil doesn't mean that they are.
No probably not. The difficulty of associating a particular user to ip traffic is extremely difficult and in some cases impossible.
Google can easily figure out who you are and what you are doing, what you are interested in, how you behave, and who you communicate with. Any service with google.com as the domain will allow them to cookie you - and provide visibilty of your identity across other google services, allowing them to easily aggregate your activities.
Really the reason that I bring this up is that people seem to *love* Google. I mean at $277/share i think it speaks for itself. There are a number of other companies who if they were doing such things, most people would take issue, and have in the past. Double click immediately comes to mind. Maybe people will start to figure it out when the love affair ends.
I for one, welcome our new google.com overlord.
No really, doesn't ANYONE see what google is doing? They own your searchs, they own our e-mail, they are trying to own all of our connections too - either through their "accelerator" service, or by sponsoring free wifi connections across the country. Google, wants to know what we are doing - they want the data so that they can target, model and predict our behavior. I'm not sure that it's such a great thing that one company have all of this information in one place, or it might be just me...
Consider the time to open and access all of the files that needed to be closed for the reboot. Also consider the disruption in focus, it's not insignificant. Especially when done often.
Reboots don't happen unless they are a necessity. It is probably the least liked activity relating to a pc. Besides oh say, cleaning out the spam in your inbox or finding a "driver disk" for the brand new shiny piece of hardware you just brought home.
No.
When Lee took the job he signed and agreed to a set of conditions for his employment. This contract was voluntarily entered into by Lee with Microsoft. No one forced him to take a job with a non-compete clause.
As such, it was violated, and Microsoft has every right to try and enforce a contract that Dr. Lee agreed to.
Why is this evil? It's not. It's Lee breaking "the law" and his word to Mirosoft. It could be any company or person though. Lee agreed to something and now he's not honoring it. And that....
Is Wrong.
99.4% of uptime equates to 518.4 seconds of unavailablity per day.
That's roughly 8 minutes of the day that you won't be able to use your phone. Given that unavailability is usually related to demand, you won't be able to use your phone for 8 minutes during the hours that you'd really like to.
Also, consider that for a bit more money you can get a land line with better voice quality and unlimited calling as well.
This isn't MSFT's fault. This is MSFT listening to their customers.
We as the consumers, won't use the content if we don't have the hardware. Thus we won't pay for it and those who are asking for this kind of software won't make money. In time DRM compatible may become a "selling point" for products that support this technology. We will have a choice though for what we buy and what content we view. There is always a choice.