You give Thompson a lot of credit... Ann Coulter is a very smart woman. She's made a career from shock politics - talking about her like she's insane or something only plays into the image that she's selling. It keeps her in the limelight, sells books, and gets her column space. Don't play her game by buying it.
Your post, and many others in this thread, run under the assumption that Apple explicitly designed this update to brick hacked phones.
Why is it apparently out of the realm of possiblity to believe that their update will adversely affect hacked phones despite the fact that they didn't go out of their way to do so, and it's just that simple? Lots of us are software developers that should know how easy it is to break a system with an update without good regression testing. I don't blame Apple a bit for not wanting to devote resources to doing that for a hack.
Besides, as you already stated, they've GOT their money. In fact, unlocking the phones probably only means that they will get ADDITIONAL income from those that want to run on other networks. I don't see why they'd go that far out of their way to lock you out (besides pressure from Sprint), nevermind the fact that it would be both illegal and obnoxiously stupid to do for such a high-profile company that's already under other investigation.
Come on, let's at least give them the benefit of a doubt.
The vast majority of it is transmitted over the internet. With just about everyone having broadband now, it's cheaper, easier, and more private. There's likely already hi-def stuff porn available anyhow, so these new formats aren't bringing anything new to the table.
Re:This is Slashdot, and this is the world
on
Jim Gray Is Missing
·
· Score: 1
Oh c'mon, just think about Steve biting the dust and retain a straight face when telling me you wouldn't crack jokes about it, and whether he throws his throne at God when he comes up to him, or whether he'll dance around in hell yelling devil-opers.
OK, my face is straight. Those jokes were never really that funny to begin with, and attaching them to a dude who died is just bad form.
But, and here's the catch, he's not dead. At least not officially. I'd at least wait 'til they either find the body or a week passes before claiming that he's really gone. Personally, I'd hate to read my own obituary, and I doubt that he enjoys it when people talk of him in the past, like they already consider him dead. I'd like people to wait 'til I'm really gone before they start to scold others for telling jokes about me.
So making lame jokes in bad taste about a guy who could possibly be dead is OK as long as it's not confirmed? Sure.
I'm not scolding, but Jesus - a little fucking decency.
Re:This is Slashdot, and this is the world
on
Jim Gray Is Missing
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
There's a difference between being compassionate and having the baseline level of decency to not crack jokes about what could be a man's death.
If you're desensitized to a stranger's death, fine, most of us are, but let's not pretend that you don't cross the threshold of being an asshole when you begin cracking jokes about it because of a Microsoft affiliation.
Why would they do that, so that they can be safe for another few months?
Let them all go with Blu-Ray, pray for it. The format war will be settled, all of the crackers will concentrate on it, it'll be cracked, then we'll be where we are today with DVDs and DRM will have lost yet another battle.
You're talking about a 600 dollar smartphone that's only going to be available on one network for at least two years (this coming from the "multi-year agreement" blurb).
I love Apple, but I just don't think this is the next iPod. It'll be popular, I'm sure of that, but by restricting it to one carrier they're going to be losing a huge number of potential customers (myself included).
It looks like a great platform and it's DEFINITELY a step in the right direction, but the price and the carrier are going to be pretty huge barriers to it taking off.
There's great potential here (imagine if GPS was integrated!), but I don't think this is the killer device we've all been waiting for quite yet. Great progress, though!
Sure, but the Tesla is also a real sports car that goes 0 - 60 in four seconds, and that's reflected in the tag. The vast majority of us don't need anything near that level of performance.
Not all trojans are keyloggers. All he was saying was that virtual keyboards were brought into play to defeat keyloggers specifically, not all trojans in general.
Sure, and most dads also don't wage wars that result in the deaths of thousands of American soldiers.
You're right, I wouldn't send my kid into a war. Then again, I probably wouldn't take a position that might require me to send Americans to their deaths while at the same time pulling strings (that other Americans don't have) to keep my loved ones out of it. This is a pretty disgusting trait for a leader to have, if you ask me.
Don't paint the picture of the president of the US, arguably the most powerful man in the world, as being some regular dad. He isn't.
Sorry, I meant that 70% of the population where I'm from make ten times as much as 290 bucks a month, not ten times the poverty line. I also meant that it's a stretch to imply that an investment of a few hundred dollars is as out of reach as you're making it seem to the vast majority of Americans.
I was doubting the fact it could run on a 486 (which was stated earlier, not x86) with the limited amount of RAM the 486 motherboards could support and the lack of huge amount of instructions used in MacOSX's x86 version on that specific processor.
Correct, my mistake.
Step out of the reality distortion field please. Spending a few hundred bucks is not nothing, many people are barely earning 290USD monthly where I live (having to live off that money too).
And where I live, over 70% of the population lives over the poverty line and are making more than ten times that much. So yes, spending a few hundred bucks for MANY people is nothing, unless your demographic are the very poor or those with next to no disposable income. That's a stretch.
The more interesting viruses don't seem to be in the wild as much as the badly written VB6 e-mail Trojans.
Well of course, but at no point was I ever talking about trojans, I was talking about viruses, right?
I'm guessing you didn't know that there are plenty of directions out there that tell you how to run OS X on x86 machines, then. It's already out there.
The ones that write malware and such, nope don't think they do.
What are you basing this off of?
Willing?
Yeah, willing. OS X is a great OS, and if someone is determined enough to spend a lot of time on cracking an OS, spending a few hundred bucks is nothing. Come on.
Seeing how much malware I've analyzed over the past six years tends to contain a lot of VB code... I do.
Interesting, all of the more interesting viruses I've seen are compiled at a low level language where you can actually manage memory. Lack of interest (although many do actually use web-browser exploits)?
You totally took my comment out of context here. You initially said that writing a virus for OS X would require learning a new language, to which I asked why C++ or C, very common languages, couldn't be used. Responding to that by saying "lack of interest" makes no sense in that context.
We haven't even see the lowest of low exploits (exploits on the user). I really think it's just a lack of interest in the Mac (and no, I don't think a advert that says product 'x' is better than 'y', be it or not be true will cause vandals to vandalize 'x').
You haven't been paying attention then. There was a pretty popular "virus" that depended on user stupidity to work.
But... They'd need a expensive 'entry-level' computer for the platform (trying to run MacOSX on unsupported graphic hardware is painful)
Really? So you think a CRACKER couldn't figure out how to run OS X on a 486? Do you also think there are no crackers who use OS X? Or who aren't willing to buy a used Mac Mini for a few hundred bucks? No, this is nothing even resembling a roadblock. It also presumes that the cracker would need to be running a copy of OS X himself, which is obviously a bad assumption.
and learn a new programming language, a new OS...
I have no idea what would make you think that hacking OS X would require learning a new language. What's keeping them from writing it in C, or C++, or even a webpage? Nothing. Regarding learning the new OS, if you're talking about that from a user's perspective, it's not required (again), unless they're planning on using some sort of social engineering to trick the user. That's not really a virus though, anyhow. If you're talking about learning where the vulnerability in the inner workings of the OS is, then of course they have to figure that out. That's the trick, isn't it?
I'd prefer the platform to have enough marketshare that developers can make money and Apple to make a profit, but not big enough for Virus writers and spyware authors to care (the way it is now).
I honestly have never understood this idea that Macs would suddenly get more interest from Virus writers if they had market share.
If you were a cracker and you saw these pompous Apple commercials, saw the Apple trolls that say that Apple can do no wrong, and saw all this news coverage about POTENTIAL viruses for OS X that turn out to be garbage, would this not be an obviously huge target to shoot for if you were going for notoriety?
No. I have no doubt you'd get some more interest if there were more market share, but basically Apple has been giving crackers the raspberry for years now. I highly doubt they're just idly ignoring a target that would likely get them huge press and shut Apple up about being Virus-free. That's way more interesting than an XP exploit, which we've seen hundreds of.
Why does OS X have to have an increasing marketshare to remain successful?
You just cracked the code without even knowing! Honestly, I must say that I'm a little surprised that/. in general seems to harbor so much animosity towards MySpace. If you want user content, then it should come as no surprise that lots of it is going to suck. Personally, I use it to keep in touch with friends, find old friends from school, and basically as an email system for my friends who use it (and that's just about all of them - I'm 25). For these purposes, the site just works. If you generally use it as intended (not adding friends unless they are actually your friends) and your friends do the same, it can be very useful for meeting friends of friends or continuing a conversation that you started with someone at a party or whatnot.
Are there better tools that could do all of this? Yes. Do these tools already have the vast majority of users that MySpace already has? No. Yes, the design sucks, but most of these people CSS the crap out of it until it's more theirs than MySpace's. The design and ghetto-flash isn't the point, though. The point is that it's a simple social website with all of the basic tools that everyone is using. That's why it's popular, and as long as it hangs on to its user base, that's all it will need until something much better comes along and shifts everyone over.
It's a tool that, if used correctly, is useful. It seems like/. just discovered MySpace two months ago and now looks for any excuse to post a story about it to insinuate a hate-fest.
I can't speak for Microsoft, but I would guess that they still use C++ because it doesn't need a VM and they don't want the slowdowns that can be associated with using it over fully compiled code.
I thought we turned our noses up at it because, coming from even simpler languages like Python and/or higher-level languages like Lisp, it offers nothing we didn't already have, and in many cases, less.
.NET isn't a language. Lisp and Python weren't designed to be tailored for the specific purpose of developing on Windows, which is the main (and possibly only) reason to use.NET. If you believe that Lisp or Python will be better to use as a platform to do the above over.NET, then that's your opinion.
But now I realize that on slashdot, if I don't like.NET, it must be because it's a "toy language". Gotcha! Meta: I have no idea how this made it to +5,Insightful. The post is itself a troll: suggesting that anybody who dislikes.NET is an idiot.
No, my comments were obviously only aimed at those who made such arguments. You misunderstood.
But, then, it doesn't hold your hand enough, and every text box ends up with a name like textbox1, or something like that. So, instead you have to remember each of the properties that you have to change for each control so that variables are named correctly, and all the proper default values are filled in.
Well, the "textbox1" thing is annyoing (and I believe it's fixed in 2005), that generally is the only property I have to change on a regular basis. The name of the control too, but I don't think you can really hold that against VS. If you're doing anything else (like making the font bold for the textbox), you can simply copy the control with the bold property set, paste it, then change its name. It will retain the Bold setting.
Then if all someone knows how to do is drag and drop, which is a good portion of.Net programmers...
I'm sorry, but these programmers you're talking about are either not actually programmers or you're greatly exhaggerating the ability to make useful applications using only drag and drop. I would also say that there are countless programs that do nearly the exact same thing for Java stuff, but just like.NET, the dragging and dropping is relegated to UI design.
... then they have no idea what to do when something goes wrong.
You're dealing with bad programmers then. There is nothing unique to.NET about this. If these programmers can't handle the simple code that VS generates, they should go back to school. Please don't be deluded enough to think this is is the language's fault, though.
But I think that Microsoft trying to turn programming into something that anybody can do is a big mistake. Programming robust,reliable, scalable systems requires knowledge that not everybody has. I say, leave the programming up to the people that know how, and keep everyone else far, far away.
if you only know how to drag and drop, you can put together a form, put some pretty widgets on it that do nothing when played with, and run it. That's it. The most complex thing that I can think of that VS does for you is create typed datasets. You can map some of the values in them to controls, but only if you are competent enough to populate the dataset and can either write a for-loop or understand databinding. You can not, even remotely, come close to being able to put together a semi-useful application without knowing how to code.
Then again, and as I said before, the ability to NOT have to code shouldn't be something that's snorted at. VS doesn't generate anything past mundane code that would simply eat up your time. i doubt you could even call writing what it generates as "programming."
It should also be noted that what you've brought up (and that you rightly noted) are all Visual Studio "problems." If anyone wants to argue against the merits of.NET, then do so against.NET and not its IDE.
You might want to give it another chance if you're doing Windows apps and don't need portability. I'm a Java-first kinda guy, but when I do a C# application it's a great and generally refreshing switch-up, not an excercise in pain as others on/. would have you believe.
It's not everyone on Slashdot, only the trolls who stick their noses up at tools they likely haven't ever tried before. I've seen the comments that say.NET is inferior or is a "toy language" because it's generally simple to put apps together quickly, as if that's some sort of negative thing. That sort of spin doesn't come from rational folks, so don't mind it.
Another poster did have a good point, though, and most of what you were talking about (data abstraction and advanced theory) along with the the general topics of AI are much better off in a more theoretical forum that isn't language-specific.
But yeah, the.NET trolling is little more than babyfits thrown by fools who don't understand the value in a language like.NET for most Windows development. Sort of silly to write it off like that if you ask me.
That they actually pay attention to their government and feel passionate when it screws up?
So now you have me wondering; your question made it sound as if the answer was both obvious and would reveal some nasty truth about liberals or Slashdotters... what was this answer? I'm quite curious to see how one can spin getting worked up about a corrupt government as some silly or reprehensible thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Too bad there's no hardware keyboard on this beast. I can't stand using touchscreen keyboards. Hopefully this isn't becoming the norm.
You give Thompson a lot of credit... Ann Coulter is a very smart woman. She's made a career from shock politics - talking about her like she's insane or something only plays into the image that she's selling. It keeps her in the limelight, sells books, and gets her column space. Don't play her game by buying it.
Your post, and many others in this thread, run under the assumption that Apple explicitly designed this update to brick hacked phones.
Why is it apparently out of the realm of possiblity to believe that their update will adversely affect hacked phones despite the fact that they didn't go out of their way to do so, and it's just that simple? Lots of us are software developers that should know how easy it is to break a system with an update without good regression testing. I don't blame Apple a bit for not wanting to devote resources to doing that for a hack.
Besides, as you already stated, they've GOT their money. In fact, unlocking the phones probably only means that they will get ADDITIONAL income from those that want to run on other networks. I don't see why they'd go that far out of their way to lock you out (besides pressure from Sprint), nevermind the fact that it would be both illegal and obnoxiously stupid to do for such a high-profile company that's already under other investigation.
Come on, let's at least give them the benefit of a doubt.
The vast majority of it is transmitted over the internet. With just about everyone having broadband now, it's cheaper, easier, and more private. There's likely already hi-def stuff porn available anyhow, so these new formats aren't bringing anything new to the table.
Oh c'mon, just think about Steve biting the dust and retain a straight face when telling me you wouldn't crack jokes about it, and whether he throws his throne at God when he comes up to him, or whether he'll dance around in hell yelling devil-opers.
OK, my face is straight. Those jokes were never really that funny to begin with, and attaching them to a dude who died is just bad form.
But, and here's the catch, he's not dead. At least not officially. I'd at least wait 'til they either find the body or a week passes before claiming that he's really gone. Personally, I'd hate to read my own obituary, and I doubt that he enjoys it when people talk of him in the past, like they already consider him dead. I'd like people to wait 'til I'm really gone before they start to scold others for telling jokes about me.
So making lame jokes in bad taste about a guy who could possibly be dead is OK as long as it's not confirmed? Sure.
I'm not scolding, but Jesus - a little fucking decency.
There's a difference between being compassionate and having the baseline level of decency to not crack jokes about what could be a man's death.
If you're desensitized to a stranger's death, fine, most of us are, but let's not pretend that you don't cross the threshold of being an asshole when you begin cracking jokes about it because of a Microsoft affiliation.
Why would they do that, so that they can be safe for another few months?
Let them all go with Blu-Ray, pray for it. The format war will be settled, all of the crackers will concentrate on it, it'll be cracked, then we'll be where we are today with DVDs and DRM will have lost yet another battle.
You're talking about a 600 dollar smartphone that's only going to be available on one network for at least two years (this coming from the "multi-year agreement" blurb).
I love Apple, but I just don't think this is the next iPod. It'll be popular, I'm sure of that, but by restricting it to one carrier they're going to be losing a huge number of potential customers (myself included).
It looks like a great platform and it's DEFINITELY a step in the right direction, but the price and the carrier are going to be pretty huge barriers to it taking off.
There's great potential here (imagine if GPS was integrated!), but I don't think this is the killer device we've all been waiting for quite yet. Great progress, though!
Unfortunately not, the slides specified "Including two year contract." The price for the phone is as is.
Sure, but the Tesla is also a real sports car that goes 0 - 60 in four seconds, and that's reflected in the tag. The vast majority of us don't need anything near that level of performance.
Not all trojans are keyloggers. All he was saying was that virtual keyboards were brought into play to defeat keyloggers specifically, not all trojans in general.
Sure, and most dads also don't wage wars that result in the deaths of thousands of American soldiers.
You're right, I wouldn't send my kid into a war. Then again, I probably wouldn't take a position that might require me to send Americans to their deaths while at the same time pulling strings (that other Americans don't have) to keep my loved ones out of it. This is a pretty disgusting trait for a leader to have, if you ask me.
Don't paint the picture of the president of the US, arguably the most powerful man in the world, as being some regular dad. He isn't.
Sorry, I meant that 70% of the population where I'm from make ten times as much as 290 bucks a month, not ten times the poverty line. I also meant that it's a stretch to imply that an investment of a few hundred dollars is as out of reach as you're making it seem to the vast majority of Americans.
I was doubting the fact it could run on a 486 (which was stated earlier, not x86) with the limited amount of RAM the 486 motherboards could support and the lack of huge amount of instructions used in MacOSX's x86 version on that specific processor.
Correct, my mistake.
Step out of the reality distortion field please. Spending a few hundred bucks is not nothing, many people are barely earning 290USD monthly where I live (having to live off that money too).
And where I live, over 70% of the population lives over the poverty line and are making more than ten times that much. So yes, spending a few hundred bucks for MANY people is nothing, unless your demographic are the very poor or those with next to no disposable income. That's a stretch.
The more interesting viruses don't seem to be in the wild as much as the badly written VB6 e-mail Trojans.
Well of course, but at no point was I ever talking about trojans, I was talking about viruses, right?
From a technical perspective, highly unlikely.
I'm guessing you didn't know that there are plenty of directions out there that tell you how to run OS X on x86 machines, then. It's already out there.
The ones that write malware and such, nope don't think they do.
What are you basing this off of?
Willing?
Yeah, willing. OS X is a great OS, and if someone is determined enough to spend a lot of time on cracking an OS, spending a few hundred bucks is nothing. Come on.
Seeing how much malware I've analyzed over the past six years tends to contain a lot of VB code... I do.
Interesting, all of the more interesting viruses I've seen are compiled at a low level language where you can actually manage memory.
Lack of interest (although many do actually use web-browser exploits)?
You totally took my comment out of context here. You initially said that writing a virus for OS X would require learning a new language, to which I asked why C++ or C, very common languages, couldn't be used. Responding to that by saying "lack of interest" makes no sense in that context.
We haven't even see the lowest of low exploits (exploits on the user). I really think it's just a lack of interest in the Mac (and no, I don't think a advert that says product 'x' is better than 'y', be it or not be true will cause vandals to vandalize 'x').
You haven't been paying attention then. There was a pretty popular "virus" that depended on user stupidity to work.
But... They'd need a expensive 'entry-level' computer for the platform (trying to run MacOSX on unsupported graphic hardware is painful)
Really? So you think a CRACKER couldn't figure out how to run OS X on a 486? Do you also think there are no crackers who use OS X? Or who aren't willing to buy a used Mac Mini for a few hundred bucks? No, this is nothing even resembling a roadblock. It also presumes that the cracker would need to be running a copy of OS X himself, which is obviously a bad assumption.
and learn a new programming language, a new OS...
I have no idea what would make you think that hacking OS X would require learning a new language. What's keeping them from writing it in C, or C++, or even a webpage? Nothing. Regarding learning the new OS, if you're talking about that from a user's perspective, it's not required (again), unless they're planning on using some sort of social engineering to trick the user. That's not really a virus though, anyhow. If you're talking about learning where the vulnerability in the inner workings of the OS is, then of course they have to figure that out. That's the trick, isn't it?
Disclaimer: I am a very happy owner of a Mac Pro.
I'd prefer the platform to have enough marketshare that developers can make money and Apple to make a profit, but not big enough for Virus writers and spyware authors to care (the way it is now).
I honestly have never understood this idea that Macs would suddenly get more interest from Virus writers if they had market share.
If you were a cracker and you saw these pompous Apple commercials, saw the Apple trolls that say that Apple can do no wrong, and saw all this news coverage about POTENTIAL viruses for OS X that turn out to be garbage, would this not be an obviously huge target to shoot for if you were going for notoriety?
No. I have no doubt you'd get some more interest if there were more market share, but basically Apple has been giving crackers the raspberry for years now. I highly doubt they're just idly ignoring a target that would likely get them huge press and shut Apple up about being Virus-free. That's way more interesting than an XP exploit, which we've seen hundreds of.
Why does OS X have to have an increasing marketshare to remain successful?
Because it's a publically traded company?
I don't see the attraction of myspace.
/. in general seems to harbor so much animosity towards MySpace. If you want user content, then it should come as no surprise that lots of it is going to suck. Personally, I use it to keep in touch with friends, find old friends from school, and basically as an email system for my friends who use it (and that's just about all of them - I'm 25). For these purposes, the site just works. If you generally use it as intended (not adding friends unless they are actually your friends) and your friends do the same, it can be very useful for meeting friends of friends or continuing a conversation that you started with someone at a party or whatnot.
/. just discovered MySpace two months ago and now looks for any excuse to post a story about it to insinuate a hate-fest.
It seems like everybody is using the website now.
You just cracked the code without even knowing! Honestly, I must say that I'm a little surprised that
Are there better tools that could do all of this? Yes. Do these tools already have the vast majority of users that MySpace already has? No. Yes, the design sucks, but most of these people CSS the crap out of it until it's more theirs than MySpace's. The design and ghetto-flash isn't the point, though. The point is that it's a simple social website with all of the basic tools that everyone is using. That's why it's popular, and as long as it hangs on to its user base, that's all it will need until something much better comes along and shifts everyone over.
It's a tool that, if used correctly, is useful. It seems like
Actually, I think you're thinking of the package that comes with Bitboys' Glaze 3D card. Also included is the patch that makes Daikatana not suck.
I can't speak for Microsoft, but I would guess that they still use C++ because it doesn't need a VM and they don't want the slowdowns that can be associated with using it over fully compiled code.
I thought we turned our noses up at it because, coming from even simpler languages like Python and/or higher-level languages like Lisp, it offers nothing we didn't already have, and in many cases, less.
.NET isn't a language. Lisp and Python weren't designed to be tailored for the specific purpose of developing on Windows, which is the main (and possibly only) reason to use .NET. If you believe that Lisp or Python will be better to use as a platform to do the above over .NET, then that's your opinion.
.NET, it must be because it's a "toy language". Gotcha! Meta: I have no idea how this made it to +5,Insightful. The post is itself a troll: suggesting that anybody who dislikes .NET is an idiot.
But now I realize that on slashdot, if I don't like
No, my comments were obviously only aimed at those who made such arguments. You misunderstood.
But, then, it doesn't hold your hand enough, and every text box ends up with a name like textbox1, or something like that. So, instead you have to remember each of the properties that you have to change for each control so that variables are named correctly, and all the proper default values are filled in.
.Net programmers...
.NET, the dragging and dropping is relegated to UI design.
... then they have no idea what to do when something goes wrong.
.NET about this. If these programmers can't handle the simple code that VS generates, they should go back to school. Please don't be deluded enough to think this is is the language's fault, though.
.NET, then do so against .NET and not its IDE.
/. would have you believe.
Well, the "textbox1" thing is annyoing (and I believe it's fixed in 2005), that generally is the only property I have to change on a regular basis. The name of the control too, but I don't think you can really hold that against VS. If you're doing anything else (like making the font bold for the textbox), you can simply copy the control with the bold property set, paste it, then change its name. It will retain the Bold setting.
Then if all someone knows how to do is drag and drop, which is a good portion of
I'm sorry, but these programmers you're talking about are either not actually programmers or you're greatly exhaggerating the ability to make useful applications using only drag and drop. I would also say that there are countless programs that do nearly the exact same thing for Java stuff, but just like
You're dealing with bad programmers then. There is nothing unique to
But I think that Microsoft trying to turn programming into something that anybody can do is a big mistake. Programming robust,reliable, scalable systems requires knowledge that not everybody has. I say, leave the programming up to the people that know how, and keep everyone else far, far away.
if you only know how to drag and drop, you can put together a form, put some pretty widgets on it that do nothing when played with, and run it. That's it. The most complex thing that I can think of that VS does for you is create typed datasets. You can map some of the values in them to controls, but only if you are competent enough to populate the dataset and can either write a for-loop or understand databinding. You can not, even remotely, come close to being able to put together a semi-useful application without knowing how to code.
Then again, and as I said before, the ability to NOT have to code shouldn't be something that's snorted at. VS doesn't generate anything past mundane code that would simply eat up your time. i doubt you could even call writing what it generates as "programming."
It should also be noted that what you've brought up (and that you rightly noted) are all Visual Studio "problems." If anyone wants to argue against the merits of
You might want to give it another chance if you're doing Windows apps and don't need portability. I'm a Java-first kinda guy, but when I do a C# application it's a great and generally refreshing switch-up, not an excercise in pain as others on
It's not everyone on Slashdot, only the trolls who stick their noses up at tools they likely haven't ever tried before. I've seen the comments that say .NET is inferior or is a "toy language" because it's generally simple to put apps together quickly, as if that's some sort of negative thing. That sort of spin doesn't come from rational folks, so don't mind it.
.NET trolling is little more than babyfits thrown by fools who don't understand the value in a language like .NET for most Windows development. Sort of silly to write it off like that if you ask me.
Another poster did have a good point, though, and most of what you were talking about (data abstraction and advanced theory) along with the the general topics of AI are much better off in a more theoretical forum that isn't language-specific.
But yeah, the
What's that say about liberals?
That they actually pay attention to their government and feel passionate when it screws up?
So now you have me wondering; your question made it sound as if the answer was both obvious and would reveal some nasty truth about liberals or Slashdotters... what was this answer? I'm quite curious to see how one can spin getting worked up about a corrupt government as some silly or reprehensible thing.
Someone asked if there were any differences between Dell's and Apple's panel, and someone responded. Calm down.