What scares me is not so much HOW they are going to get the payment, but what they are going to charge!! I'm guessing at least $1/minute like many rippoffish cell-phone companies did when they first released...
I mean, what's to stop them? They don't exactly have a lot of competition, especially in an airport. So if you're going to browse slashdot and check your email, you best write a fast script to hop on, download, and get off ASAP! (that alone might cost you a good $5 depending on how much email you have)
Re-read parent.. I said linux compatible.. meaning, just like Linus did- making a kernel that works with most of the GNU stuff out there but isn't quite Linux... (just "linux compatible" and everything magically runs linux stuff)
What's to stop MS from creating a free linux compatible distribution ("Bill Hat"), but not open source and then competing with the likes of Redhat? That would seem to me the only way they would do Linux software.
The mono project is very exciting. I'm looking forward to installing ASP.NET on Slackware and see how well my existing apps port over. My.NET user group will certainly do some open source projects on the platform and demonstrate how well (or not) it works.
One thing that really excites me is that Mono could be sort of a "bridge" of technology. It can bring Windows developers to linux, and linux developers to windows. And no worry about the platform. Of course, Java attempted to do this, but lawsuits prevented it from really going forward on the Windows platform (couple that with the marketing machine). Now we have the "reverse" situation that we had 5 years ago. Mono is attempting to produce a.NET "clone" if you will, for the Linux platform. It's doubtful that lawsuits / litigation will arise because C#/CLI is an open standard (ECMA). However, after recently speaking at a Linux user group on.NET many were very frightened that MS might have something up their sleeves. I guess only time will tell.
There are definitely some interesting new places out there to explore.. but at what risk? Perhaps there are people who don't want to go outside of the safety of the corporate sponsored channels. That doesn't mean people shouldn't be allowed though. It could be an option- similar to the little key that shows up when you're on a secure site. However, that could introduce some unfairness (who maintains the "safe" sites, how do you get added to it, etc.). Honestly I really don't like the idea, but it would probably cut down on a lot of the security / annoyance issues. AOL and MSN could come with it selected by default.
Yea! Just stick to MSN and all is ok then? Get real, why should the user be concerned with where he surf? To stop surfing at "suspicious sites" should probably cut off most user made sites in existance. You sound like some big corporation that wants all internet users to stick to the shopping sites and subscription sites.
That's like asking "why should I have to be concerned where I drive? I just don't know why I keep getting flat tires when I drive over these pot hole streets!" Sure, the govt should fix these potholes, but does that mean you should go ahead and drive on them and blame them for not being fixed? Why should Microsoft be blamed for other peoples actions (willingly installing something that they don't know what it is)? Why do people think there such a difference for doing things online than doing things in real life? That's the type of thinking that takes away our rights and clogs up our courts.
Bad people will always find ways to take an advantage of stuff, especially software. Microsoft built ActiveX and scripting into the browser so that it could be USEFUL. Despite what many think, there are tons of *good* things you can do with those tools that others have decided to use for bad things. Sure, they could have put a little more thought into it. But honestly, I would prefer having to use a little common sense and not visit potentially harmful sites than lose the functionality that is in IE that can be used to build nice web applications (in a trusted zone).
The easiest way to avoid parasite programs, he says, is to stop using Internet Explorer because it is targeted by many of the adware and spyware companies.
I've never ran accross a site that "forced" its software on me. I've ran accross "gator" a few times which tries to install without my permission, but I still have to hit OK. This article has a hint of FUD.
As with anything, if people used common sense probably 95% of problems could be avoided. By common sense I mean NOT going to suspicious sites (you can usually tell by the URL.. something that has "geocities" or ends with ".cz" is probably going to be more dangerous than amazon.com for instance). Let's face it, there is always going to be some security holes in the most popular and widely used browser. Even if that browser ever becomes Mozilla (which I doubt will happen any time soon- I run Mozilla but speed wise it just doesn't compare with IE).
Unfortunately, we can't rely on common sense because it really isn't all that common. It would be nice to have a "sandbox browser setting" for people who don't trust themselves to practice safe browsing. Here's an idea- they could click on a little icon of ralph wiggam playing in his sandbox (remember, he doesn't go into the deep end). This automatically forces the most stringent security settings (disabling activeX, scripting, etc.) and double prompts each time you go to download something "Are you sure? Are you really sure?". This probably wouldn't be too hard to add to IE.
The week I am in Tokyo I have 3 months of catching up on playing with my kids and I don't want to review contracts or mod messages i just want to play with my kids (not answer 30 emails a day from [AspElite] who think all tools have to be bug free and I have to fix some urgent missing list description or mispelled footer) and when I bring them home I want to play with them both for many weeks I miss them so much and have evening classes on ASP.net to teach too. This ASPFRIENDS stuff is huge task and aint getting smaller.
It sounds like you are in definite need of a break, and I commend you on having the guts to take it. When it all comes down to it, the things that we will look back on are not our accomplishments in technology/work but where it matters.. family, friends, etc. I'll be praying for you and your family! I hope things go well from here on, and of course, thanks much for hosting the lists as long as you did. I'm definitely bummed to see them go but I'm sure there will be other ways for us ASPr's to connect in the community.
I use these lists regularly. On more than one occasion, they have saved me countless hours (and days even) when I have had some sort of unusual technical question. In fact, these lists are somewhat of a "security blanket". The news groups are a lot slower, more impersonal. Back in the beta days, many of the MS project team would answer questions on the lists. I've personally corresponded with authors of books, presenters, and other experts. I'm going to be really bummed if and when they go down. I also find these lists very useful as a.NET User Group leader where I can announce my meetings in the community list.
Anyway, I've kind of been taking a back seat and watching the responses. It seems like its basically a battle between MS and Charles Carrol, the list owner. Actually, Charles hasn't really said anything as of yet since he has been in Florida, but according to Scott Guthrie (the MS founder/expert on ASP among other.NET topics, and a great guy in general), Charles didn't want to accept the terms of the MS agreement (he went to MS in the first place because he could no longer fund the list- costs about $3K per month).
A lot of people are guessing he didn't want to accept because of one of the clauses-- saying how MS gets the list if it closes. A quote from Scott's email:
Over the course of the last few days, Charles has refused to reply to our emails, and has immediately hung up on us the two times we've been able to get through to him on the phone.
We've had a long association with Charles and respect the work he's done with the community, so it's distressing to the team and to me personally that Charles has chosen this path.
What is suprising to me is that a bunch of people on the list (over 70K people total on the list) are offering to pony up $20. Kloberg Mac, apparently a close friend of Charles, has said the following: The reason Charles hasn't responded yet is because he's currently in Florida, teaching a class.
He wanted me to let you know, that although your willingness to save AspFriends is appreciated,
*** PLEASE DO NOT SEND ANY DONATIONS AT THIS TIME ***
I'm sure he will comment in more detail later...
Regardless of what happens, this is a MAJOR PR issue for MS. I think it needs to be resolved as QUICKLY as possible. A lot of people are starting to get really peaved at MS. I question why they got involved in the first place. Even though the group is obviously benefitting MS, I really don't think Charles should have went to MS. Getting money from MS (or any company for that matter) is going to have some strings attached!
Unfortunately I cannot think of a great solution to this. I suppose paypal donations are one way, but even that means there is no guarantee that the 3K bill would be paid each month. Requiring donations or a subscription means that you lose out on a lot of the experienced techies who are contributing as well as the newbies who are looking to learn. Losing either means a critical hit (techies in terms of answering questions, newbies in terms of growing the list).
On the other hand, if MS starts a mailing list, it will be percieved as totally biased and probably have stringent rules. Example: no bashing MS products or MS people. People want "freedom of speech" and an independent list means that.
Meanwhile, I'll be watching the activity and will try to post updates to this thread as it unfolds.
I use Windows. I have used Linux. Here is my story..
Back in my college days (94-98) I was big into Linux. After the prompting of a friend, I decided to see what this "Linux" was all about. I was always into computers and started programming in Turbo Pascal as a hobby back when that was considered geeky (heck, it still probably would be).
Anyway, I first installed Slackware back in 1994 and ran a server out of my dorm room once we got 10BT connections. As a student in Computer Science and Engineering, Linux was a good choice because many of my programming projects were to be written in C. I still recall compiling my first c program with gcc for a class. I was mesmerized by the power that Linux offered me with simple command line constructs. Granted, it took me a while to learn many of these commands, but there was always a sense of gratification that came along with it. Not only that, but figuring out how to master the files in rc.d. Messing with fstab and mounting a cdrom for the first time. Recompiling the kernal so my soundcard, ethernet card, and zip drive could work. These were all fun things for me, and I enjoyed helping others "buy into" Linux and the sheer power that it offered minus the bloat.
Anyway, several years passed by and I soon graduated. I had an internship at a company where I had to program "ASP" web pages. At the time, connecting a database to a web page was something new and exciting to me. Prior to my new development duties, I was happily using Emacs. However, with ASP I had to use Visual Interdev. This was my first experience with "Intellisense" and I really liked it.
I was still gung-ho Linux at this point (in 1998). However, my boss, a former unix guru (spent 15 years at BGSU setting up their Internet) was trying to tell me how Unix is far behind in terms of the real business world. He had met and fellowshipped in the "long hair" Unix conventions with the likes of RMS, Eric Allman, and other well knowns. His biggest argument was that it is just easier to get things done with Microsoft (at least from a development perspective).
Over the next 2 years I began developing database applications for company I worked for. I was truly excited by the ease of use in the development tools. Unfortunately, I had also seen many a web server crash due to memory leaks and other issues with MS. I still wasn't completely sold on MS but I knew I could deal with it.
Enter.NET . Somewhere in 2000, I began hearing about the new.NET initiative. At that time it was called something like "Next Generation". Not too much longer, the preview edition of.NET was released. I immediately downloaded it and I was quite excited. I must admit this new technology has sold me on Microsoft. I now use the.NET technology to develop applications, and although not perfect, it is a very productive framework for solving business problems.
I guess when I think about the Linux vs. Microsoft battle, I believe that it really does boil down to a few crucial points.
1. What are the best tools for the job? Depends on what job you are doing. For me it is developing software applications. Most computers out in the real world run Microsoft OS's and have IE browseres. Hence, it only makes SENSE to develop for that. In addition, the tools that developers have are really second to none. There may be some technically superior languages that only run on Linux, more powerful things you can do, more security, etc. But honestly, those things aren't as important as building applications for the majority of people, which are on MS platforms.
That leads me to my next point: 2. The MS platform is what is out there. Linux is difficult to set up for the average joe blow user on the desk top. There is no authority on what windowing system / manager to use. In a sense, Linux's strong point is also a weakness- free/open source means everyone is equal. Anyone can develop something for it. Not everyone wants to develop the same thing, so Linux has factions. Will Linux ever be able to unite and compete? I think Redhat has a good shot at it, but honestly the concept of free and open is inheritenly never going to make Redhat the beast that MS is. Which again brings me to the next point:
3. We live in a capitalist society. Business are largely the entities who drive the marketplace. Linux doesn't stand for capitalism (going back to the previous point) because it wants to be "free". Microsoft is just the opposite- it wants to charge as much as possible for it's OS as the market will accept. But Microsoft is also very unified and looking out to continually make money which means, at least to some degree, giving the customer what it wants. If Windows ever got "that bad", people really would switch to something else. But why would Bill Gates, probably the wisest business man EVER, let windows get "that bad"? Of course that is possible, that is how America works. But I don't see that happening for a long time. Microsoft must change with technology, the economy and the times in general lest it fall to the same fate of IBM back in the 80's.
On slashdot there are many zealots for the Linux cause. Part of me is still one of those zealots at heart, because I do fancy breaking away from the "borg". I enjoy being part of a subculture that can poke fun at corporate America. I still have a longing to be a "geek" that goes against the grain and hence I will always have Linux installed SOMEWHERE on one of my pc's. I think Linux certainly has proven itself as decent server software but I honestly don't think it will grow too much beyond that unless there is a major change, or even a revolution. The.COM era was a catalyst to this sort of change, but unfortunately that didn't go very far. Even if it did, my guess is that there would be a new Linux for the geeks inside us that want to go against the grain. Even with the advent of Redhat we've seen a lot of flames because of the business actions and dealings the company has made.
I guess to sum up all this stuff- I would put it like this. There is a reality and an ideal. Microsoft is the reality. Linux is the ideal. We strive to meet the ideal utopia of free software, open source, and everyone happy. Linux is technically superior and more appealing in many ways. But in reality, we live in corporate America where everyone needs to make money and stay competitive. Microsoft has ushered in the information economy we now live in and will be here to stay for some time. I look forward to the upcoming years to see how this will pan out and continue.
May the Penguin live in all of us while the Borg is all around us.
ATI All-in-Wonder video cards can output NTSC television signals. It should also be pretty easy to connect a VGA signal to an HDTV set.
It's not difficult to connect a VGA signal using those output jobbies on the back of the card, I agree. However, the quality leaves much to be desired in my opinion. I haven't used the ATI card, but my AGP Diamond card had a video out and it doesn't come close to the quality that my DVD player gives me. Not only that, but you also have to get that connection TO the TV. A lot of people don't have the tv right next to the PC, so that means that they have to either buy a long cable and run it or use one of the wireless transmitter/reciever devices. Again, crappy quality and a lot more work than just sticking a DVD in the player.
However, your other point (video availability) is a pretty good one. It really gets me ticked when I go to the video and the 99 copies of the new release are gone. However, after reading the article it kind of sounds like the new releas selection will be AFTER the videos have been released at the video store.
1. You can download certain videos that are probably like the "new release" section at the video store, but also some classics (examples- A beautiful mind, harry potter,..)
2. You can view it within 30 days of the download, but once "play is hit" you can only watch it within a 24 hr period (but as many times as you want).
3. Cost will be between 2.99 and 4.99
My question is- Why not save yourself 1 1/2 hrs and possibly a buck and drive to the video store? The only thing I can think of is no late fees. A little more convenient in that sense. But what about video quality? Who wants to watch a video on their pc as opposed to the big screen tv upstairs?
Thanks for taking the time to respond! That really helps. I suppose if I were to get a Mac, it wouldn't be for gaming. It seems like there are far more better things to do on a Mac based on your post anyway:)
It seems like most people that I know who have used Mac's really enjoy them. Unfortunately most of those people have been non-techies and usually graphics designers. It's interesting to see that Macs as you say, are friendly to "average Joes and hardcore geeks alike".
As far as software goes, since it is a Unix OS, can you run just about anything GNU on it? For example- will I be able to run everything I can run from my linux box on there (such as GIMP in X, or emacs and gcc in console).
Thanks for the info-- appreciate your intelligent and friendly response, definitely a breath of fresh air! I may have to make a trip to COMPUSA and play around with one the next time I'm there. A Mac would probably never be my primary system (I'm a developer and use Visual Studio.NET) but it would be nice for some of the other things I dolike pictures, videos, non-ms development, etc.
The virus issue on the MS platform is definitely something that gets me. I just had to reinstall Win2K pro because of a couple IIS let in. Granted, part of that was my fault (left the DMZ open and forgot to shutdown IIS). However, I can't help but wonder once OSX gets more popular that virii will target it.
Well, meaning to or not, you were trolling. I could tell you were trolling as soon as I saw this:
Not only that, but you get some really great tech support.
I was referring to their on-line tech support, not calling in. You can download the manual, any driver you need, etc. for whatever system you purchase. I find that very useful and great, no matter what some magazine tells me. Dell may not be what they used to be, but they are still a good company to buy from.
If you have something constructive to say, please say it.. How about "Apples support is better than dells because..." not "Dell's support sucks because I found this cool link on an article to back my view up". I think you're the one trolling!
What would you say is better about MacOS X vs. RedHat Linux? I'm guessing the window environment.. (does it use X Windows?). I really don't know much about OSX. Anything else?
I just can't help but wonder why everyone seems to be so excited about Macs. If you ever want to run the latest game on that "other" OS, you can't really do it on Mac without paying a premium and/or having to wait forever for it to come out. And not just games, but other software too.
Dell has a comparable deal that is $999 for an Inspiron 2650, comes with a free hard drive upgrade and a CD-burner (or DVD) upgrade. Not only that, but you get some really great tech support. And no, I don't work for dell. I just can't understand what all this jazz about getting an Apple is.
Sure the Mac has cool looking hardware, but beyond that is there really a compelling reason for techies/nerds to switch from Intel/AMD based machines?? I can't think of any real good reasons.
This is really not a troll, I'm just trying to understand what the hoopla is. Please enlighten me!!
Isn't it sad how he who has the most money wins the lawsuits? So much for a fair judicial system. The "youmaybenext.com" web site realizes this, and thats why they are gathering people together- get the combined pockets deep enough and they will win.
Money talks!! It is high time for some patent reform laws...
I don't know, but based on the marketing speech, there is not much "intelligence" in this software. The reason why it sounds easy, safe and secure for the Joe Average, is probably the fact that it is marketed as a software created just for this "single task" and it is therefore much more easy to buy and understand it.
Yes, the software is definitely for Joe Average. However, that is what sells. Things that are simple and easy and don't require any intelligence on the part of the user. That is why Linux has such a hard time being adopted by the AOL population-- they're not L33T or anywhere close to it.
For instance, I had to explain to my mother-in-law the other day what a web browser was as opposed to "AOL". She just couldn't understand the concept that AOL provides the internet connection and that she could use any "browser" that she wanted (something wasn't showing up right on a site she was using so I told her to try it with IE). The thing was, she didn't WANT to know anything outside her AOL sandbox. All she wanted was for her "pictures to work". On that same note, I think this mac switch software is ingenius! If it weren't for the high price of Mac's, it may be the "silver bullet".
I'd like to look into it a little more, but that's cool he got it down to a decent LOC. I wonder what he did to reduce the LOC from the TMC version?
In addition, here is the "criteria" that TMC had to follow according to their report. I wonder if some of the criteria forced certain design decisions that caused more code.
1. The J2EE and.NET implementations had to be 100% functionally equivalent with no behavioral differences. 2. Both applications had to be created according to best-practice coding standards such that each serves as a valid design pattern that real customers can follow when building their own applications. 3. Each application had to be a logical three-tier implementation, with the use of well-partitioned components to encapsulate middle-tier business and data access logic. 4. The applications had to be designed such that they can each be easily clustered across multiple middle tier application servers for scale-out. 5. The benchmarks had to be run with realistic application server and database deployment settings that reflect a real-world production deployment. 6. All source code, data load and test scripts for the benchmark applications (both.NET and J2EE) have been published on the Serverside.com so that customers can replicate and verify the results. The source code, database schemas, and test scripts used in the benchmark, can be downloaded from: http://www.middlewarecompany. com/j2eedotnetbench /.
There will probably be another J2EE implementation that can "beat" the.NET benchmark. However, I think there is some degree of truth to this particular one. At our.NET User Group Meeting last night, we had someone from Microsoft actually talking about this benchmark. He didn't go into much detail on the J2EE side, but said that the MiddleWare company spent 10 weeks trying to get the J2EE implementation tweaked. So either these consultants are really incompetent on the Java platform, or there really is a significant performance difference.
It's even more convincing in reading the article posted in the link (the "review" that is). Basically it was bringing up how the lines of code count was not correct because J2EE could have done a better job. Bah, that's a silly argument. LOC can't just be brushed off because it really does have something to do with the cost. More lines of code isn't just for "lazy programmers", it's also a factor when you have to think about MAINTAINING that code.
However, I do buy the argument about not using the "latest and greatest" J2EE. So, I get back to my original point.. I'm just waiting for the next benchmark.
So since the author complains about the PetStore app as being such a bad design, how about coming up with a new one and then comparing those? It seems to me like, no matter what, the author of the article doesn't believe.NET could *ever* be faster/better/etc. than J2EE. So really, it's a religious thing and I don't think any amount of proof will convince him. And I'm sure there are certainly others out there thinking that way. Of course the other camp also believes.NET is "all that".
I think the public has a right to know about this sort of activity and I am glad slashdot posted it. Granted, it generates a certain amount of FUD but that is to be expected (it is slashdot).
Why should the cable companies need to start doing this sort of thing in order to make money? I'm sure there are better ways. How about offering decent service and some other products (such as spam filters) that we can pay additional for? Why do they have to be so sneaky? I feel sorry for the poor AOL converts that have no clue about what is being installed on their system- they are just innocent victims. They may not even know how to uninstall something- so they have no choice.
This kind of behavior is unethical, especially if the customer doesn't know what is going on. If privacy or high speed connection were mutually exclusive, I would choose privacy and I think a good percentage of others would also. It's bad enough with all the other crap that seems to fill up your hard drive when you're on the internet, we don't need the ISP doing it as well.
Slashdot Mirror
What scares me is not so much HOW they are going to get the payment, but what they are going to charge!! I'm guessing at least $1/minute like many rippoffish cell-phone companies did when they first released...
I mean, what's to stop them? They don't exactly have a lot of competition, especially in an airport. So if you're going to browse slashdot and check your email, you best write a fast script to hop on, download, and get off ASAP! (that alone might cost you a good $5 depending on how much email you have)
Re-read parent.. I said linux compatible .. meaning, just like Linus did- making a kernel that works with most of the GNU stuff out there but isn't quite Linux... (just "linux compatible" and everything magically runs linux stuff)
What's to stop MS from creating a free linux compatible distribution ("Bill Hat"), but not open source and then competing with the likes of Redhat? That would seem to me the only way they would do Linux software.
The mono project is very exciting. I'm looking forward to installing ASP.NET on Slackware and see how well my existing apps port over. My .NET user group will certainly do some open source projects on the platform and demonstrate how well (or not) it works.
.NET "clone" if you will, for the Linux platform. It's doubtful that lawsuits / litigation will arise because C#/CLI is an open standard (ECMA). However, after recently speaking at a Linux user group on .NET many were very frightened that MS might have something up their sleeves. I guess only time will tell.
One thing that really excites me is that Mono could be sort of a "bridge" of technology. It can bring Windows developers to linux, and linux developers to windows. And no worry about the platform. Of course, Java attempted to do this, but lawsuits prevented it from really going forward on the Windows platform (couple that with the marketing machine). Now we have the "reverse" situation that we had 5 years ago. Mono is attempting to produce a
There are definitely some interesting new places out there to explore.. but at what risk? Perhaps there are people who don't want to go outside of the safety of the corporate sponsored channels. That doesn't mean people shouldn't be allowed though. It could be an option- similar to the little key that shows up when you're on a secure site. However, that could introduce some unfairness (who maintains the "safe" sites, how do you get added to it, etc.). Honestly I really don't like the idea, but it would probably cut down on a lot of the security / annoyance issues. AOL and MSN could come with it selected by default.
Yea! Just stick to MSN and all is ok then? Get real, why should the user be concerned with where he surf? To stop surfing at "suspicious sites" should probably cut off most user made sites in existance. You sound like some big corporation that wants all internet users to stick to the shopping sites and subscription sites.
That's like asking "why should I have to be concerned where I drive? I just don't know why I keep getting flat tires when I drive over these pot hole streets!" Sure, the govt should fix these potholes, but does that mean you should go ahead and drive on them and blame them for not being fixed? Why should Microsoft be blamed for other peoples actions (willingly installing something that they don't know what it is)? Why do people think there such a difference for doing things online than doing things in real life? That's the type of thinking that takes away our rights and clogs up our courts.
Bad people will always find ways to take an advantage of stuff, especially software. Microsoft built ActiveX and scripting into the browser so that it could be USEFUL. Despite what many think, there are tons of *good* things you can do with those tools that others have decided to use for bad things. Sure, they could have put a little more thought into it. But honestly, I would prefer having to use a little common sense and not visit potentially harmful sites than lose the functionality that is in IE that can be used to build nice web applications (in a trusted zone).
The easiest way to avoid parasite programs, he says, is to stop using Internet Explorer because it is targeted by many of the adware and spyware companies.
I've never ran accross a site that "forced" its software on me. I've ran accross "gator" a few times which tries to install without my permission, but I still have to hit OK. This article has a hint of FUD.
As with anything, if people used common sense probably 95% of problems could be avoided. By common sense I mean NOT going to suspicious sites (you can usually tell by the URL.. something that has "geocities" or ends with ".cz" is probably going to be more dangerous than amazon.com for instance). Let's face it, there is always going to be some security holes in the most popular and widely used browser. Even if that browser ever becomes Mozilla (which I doubt will happen any time soon- I run Mozilla but speed wise it just doesn't compare with IE).
Unfortunately, we can't rely on common sense because it really isn't all that common. It would be nice to have a "sandbox browser setting" for people who don't trust themselves to practice safe browsing. Here's an idea- they could click on a little icon of ralph wiggam playing in his sandbox (remember, he doesn't go into the deep end). This automatically forces the most stringent security settings (disabling activeX, scripting, etc.) and double prompts each time you go to download something "Are you sure? Are you really sure?". This probably wouldn't be too hard to add to IE.
The week I am in Tokyo I have 3 months of catching up on playing with my
kids and I don't want to review contracts or mod messages i just want to
play with my kids (not answer 30 emails a day from [AspElite] who think all
tools have to be bug free and I have to fix some urgent missing list
description or mispelled footer) and when I bring them home I want to play
with them both for many weeks I miss them so much and have evening classes
on ASP.net to teach too. This ASPFRIENDS stuff is huge task and aint
getting smaller.
It sounds like you are in definite need of a break, and I commend you on having the guts to take it. When it all comes down to it, the things that we will look back on are not our accomplishments in technology/work but where it matters.. family, friends, etc. I'll be praying for you and your family! I hope things go well from here on, and of course, thanks much for hosting the lists as long as you did. I'm definitely bummed to see them go but I'm sure there will be other ways for us ASPr's to connect in the community.
What happens when the founder of Xircom and his brother bolt a DV Camcorder to the side of a 200 lb. model rocket and press the red button
:)
503 Service Unavailable
The requested URL Bandwidth is temporarily unavailable.
That's what happens!
I use these lists regularly. On more than one occasion, they have saved me countless hours (and days even) when I have had some sort of unusual technical question. In fact, these lists are somewhat of a "security blanket". The news groups are a lot slower, more impersonal. Back in the beta days, many of the MS project team would answer questions on the lists. I've personally corresponded with authors of books, presenters, and other experts. I'm going to be really bummed if and when they go down. I also find these lists very useful as a .NET User Group leader where I can announce my meetings in the community list.
.NET topics, and a great guy in general), Charles didn't want to accept the terms of the MS agreement (he went to MS in the first place because he could no longer fund the list- costs about $3K per month).
Anyway, I've kind of been taking a back seat and watching the responses. It seems like its basically a battle between MS and Charles Carrol, the list owner. Actually, Charles hasn't really said anything as of yet since he has been in Florida, but according to Scott Guthrie (the MS founder/expert on ASP among other
A lot of people are guessing he didn't want to accept because of one of the clauses-- saying how MS gets the list if it closes. A quote from Scott's email:
Over the course of the last few days, Charles has refused to reply to
our emails, and has immediately hung up on us the two times we've been
able to get through to him on the phone.
We've had a long association with Charles and respect the work he's done
with the community, so it's distressing to the team and to me personally
that Charles has chosen this path.
What is suprising to me is that a bunch of people on the list (over 70K people total on the list) are offering to pony up $20. Kloberg Mac, apparently a close friend of Charles, has said the following:
The reason Charles hasn't responded yet is because he's currently in Florida, teaching a class.
He wanted me to let you know, that although your willingness to save AspFriends is appreciated,
*** PLEASE DO NOT SEND ANY DONATIONS AT THIS TIME ***
I'm sure he will comment in more detail later...
Regardless of what happens, this is a MAJOR PR issue for MS. I think it needs to be resolved as QUICKLY as possible. A lot of people are starting to get really peaved at MS. I question why they got involved in the first place. Even though the group is obviously benefitting MS, I really don't think Charles should have went to MS. Getting money from MS (or any company for that matter) is going to have some strings attached!
Unfortunately I cannot think of a great solution to this. I suppose paypal donations are one way, but even that means there is no guarantee that the 3K bill would be paid each month. Requiring donations or a subscription means that you lose out on a lot of the experienced techies who are contributing as well as the newbies who are looking to learn. Losing either means a critical hit (techies in terms of answering questions, newbies in terms of growing the list).
On the other hand, if MS starts a mailing list, it will be percieved as totally biased and probably have stringent rules. Example: no bashing MS products or MS people. People want "freedom of speech" and an independent list means that.
Meanwhile, I'll be watching the activity and will try to post updates to this thread as it unfolds.
I use Windows. I have used Linux. Here is my story..
.NET . Somewhere in 2000, I began hearing about the new .NET initiative. At that time it was called something like "Next Generation". Not too much longer, the preview edition of .NET was released. I immediately downloaded it and I was quite excited. I must admit this new technology has sold me on Microsoft. I now use the .NET technology to develop applications, and although not perfect, it is a very productive framework for solving business problems.
.COM era was a catalyst to this sort of change, but unfortunately that didn't go very far. Even if it did, my guess is that there would be a new Linux for the geeks inside us that want to go against the grain. Even with the advent of Redhat we've seen a lot of flames because of the business actions and dealings the company has made.
Back in my college days (94-98) I was big into Linux. After the prompting of a friend, I decided to see what this "Linux" was all about. I was always into computers and started programming in Turbo Pascal as a hobby back when that was considered geeky (heck, it still probably would be).
Anyway, I first installed Slackware back in 1994 and ran a server out of my dorm room once we got 10BT connections. As a student in Computer Science and Engineering, Linux was a good choice because many of my programming projects were to be written in C. I still recall compiling my first c program with gcc for a class. I was mesmerized by the power that Linux offered me with simple command line constructs. Granted, it took me a while to learn many of these commands, but there was always a sense of gratification that came along with it. Not only that, but figuring out how to master the files in rc.d. Messing with fstab and mounting a cdrom for the first time. Recompiling the kernal so my soundcard, ethernet card, and zip drive could work. These were all fun things for me, and I enjoyed helping others "buy into" Linux and the sheer power that it offered minus the bloat.
Anyway, several years passed by and I soon graduated. I had an internship at a company where I had to program "ASP" web pages. At the time, connecting a database to a web page was something new and exciting to me. Prior to my new development duties, I was happily using Emacs. However, with ASP I had to use Visual Interdev. This was my first experience with "Intellisense" and I really liked it.
I was still gung-ho Linux at this point (in 1998). However, my boss, a former unix guru (spent 15 years at BGSU setting up their Internet) was trying to tell me how Unix is far behind in terms of the real business world. He had met and fellowshipped in the "long hair" Unix conventions with the likes of RMS, Eric Allman, and other well knowns. His biggest argument was that it is just easier to get things done with Microsoft (at least from a development perspective).
Over the next 2 years I began developing database applications for company I worked for. I was truly excited by the ease of use in the development tools. Unfortunately, I had also seen many a web server crash due to memory leaks and other issues with MS. I still wasn't completely sold on MS but I knew I could deal with it.
Enter
I guess when I think about the Linux vs. Microsoft battle, I believe that it really does boil down to a few crucial points.
1. What are the best tools for the job? Depends on what job you are doing. For me it is developing software applications. Most computers out in the real world run Microsoft OS's and have IE browseres. Hence, it only makes SENSE to develop for that. In addition, the tools that developers have are really second to none. There may be some technically superior languages that only run on Linux, more powerful things you can do, more security, etc. But honestly, those things aren't as important as building applications for the majority of people, which are on MS platforms.
That leads me to my next point:
2. The MS platform is what is out there. Linux is difficult to set up for the average joe blow user on the desk top. There is no authority on what windowing system / manager to use. In a sense, Linux's strong point is also a weakness- free/open source means everyone is equal. Anyone can develop something for it. Not everyone wants to develop the same thing, so Linux has factions. Will Linux ever be able to unite and compete? I think Redhat has a good shot at it, but honestly the concept of free and open is inheritenly never going to make Redhat the beast that MS is. Which again brings me to the next point:
3. We live in a capitalist society. Business are largely the entities who drive the marketplace. Linux doesn't stand for capitalism (going back to the previous point) because it wants to be "free". Microsoft is just the opposite- it wants to charge as much as possible for it's OS as the market will accept. But Microsoft is also very unified and looking out to continually make money which means, at least to some degree, giving the customer what it wants. If Windows ever got "that bad", people really would switch to something else. But why would Bill Gates, probably the wisest business man EVER, let windows get "that bad"? Of course that is possible, that is how America works. But I don't see that happening for a long time. Microsoft must change with technology, the economy and the times in general lest it fall to the same fate of IBM back in the 80's.
On slashdot there are many zealots for the Linux cause. Part of me is still one of those zealots at heart, because I do fancy breaking away from the "borg". I enjoy being part of a subculture that can poke fun at corporate America. I still have a longing to be a "geek" that goes against the grain and hence I will always have Linux installed SOMEWHERE on one of my pc's. I think Linux certainly has proven itself as decent server software but I honestly don't think it will grow too much beyond that unless there is a major change, or even a revolution. The
I guess to sum up all this stuff- I would put it like this. There is a reality and an ideal. Microsoft is the reality. Linux is the ideal. We strive to meet the ideal utopia of free software, open source, and everyone happy. Linux is technically superior and more appealing in many ways. But in reality, we live in corporate America where everyone needs to make money and stay competitive. Microsoft has ushered in the information economy we now live in and will be here to stay for some time. I look forward to the upcoming years to see how this will pan out and continue.
May the Penguin live in all of us while the Borg is all around us.
ATI All-in-Wonder video cards can output NTSC television signals. It should also be pretty easy to connect a VGA signal to an HDTV set.
It's not difficult to connect a VGA signal using those output jobbies on the back of the card, I agree. However, the quality leaves much to be desired in my opinion. I haven't used the ATI card, but my AGP Diamond card had a video out and it doesn't come close to the quality that my DVD player gives me. Not only that, but you also have to get that connection TO the TV. A lot of people don't have the tv right next to the PC, so that means that they have to either buy a long cable and run it or use one of the wireless transmitter/reciever devices. Again, crappy quality and a lot more work than just sticking a DVD in the player.
However, your other point (video availability) is a pretty good one. It really gets me ticked when I go to the video and the 99 copies of the new release are gone. However, after reading the article it kind of sounds like the new releas selection will be AFTER the videos have been released at the video store.
Here is the jist according to me:
..)
1. You can download certain videos that are probably like the "new release" section at the video store, but also some classics (examples- A beautiful mind, harry potter,
2. You can view it within 30 days of the download, but once "play is hit" you can only watch it within a 24 hr period (but as many times as you want).
3. Cost will be between 2.99 and 4.99
My question is- Why not save yourself 1 1/2 hrs and possibly a buck and drive to the video store? The only thing I can think of is no late fees. A little more convenient in that sense. But what about video quality? Who wants to watch a video on their pc as opposed to the big screen tv upstairs?
Thanks for taking the time to respond! That really helps. I suppose if I were to get a Mac, it wouldn't be for gaming. It seems like there are far more better things to do on a Mac based on your post anyway :)
It seems like most people that I know who have used Mac's really enjoy them. Unfortunately most of those people have been non-techies and usually graphics designers. It's interesting to see that Macs as you say, are friendly to "average Joes and hardcore geeks alike".
As far as software goes, since it is a Unix OS, can you run just about anything GNU on it? For example- will I be able to run everything I can run from my linux box on there (such as GIMP in X, or emacs and gcc in console).
Thanks for the info-- appreciate your intelligent and friendly response, definitely a breath of fresh air! I may have to make a trip to COMPUSA and play around with one the next time I'm there. A Mac would probably never be my primary system (I'm a developer and use Visual Studio .NET) but it would be nice for some of the other things I dolike pictures, videos, non-ms development, etc.
The virus issue on the MS platform is definitely something that gets me. I just had to reinstall Win2K pro because of a couple IIS let in. Granted, part of that was my fault (left the DMZ open and forgot to shutdown IIS). However, I can't help but wonder once OSX gets more popular that virii will target it.
Well, meaning to or not, you were trolling. I could tell you were trolling as soon as I saw this:
Not only that, but you get some really great tech support.
I was referring to their on-line tech support, not calling in. You can download the manual, any driver you need, etc. for whatever system you purchase. I find that very useful and great, no matter what some magazine tells me. Dell may not be what they used to be, but they are still a good company to buy from.
If you have something constructive to say, please say it.. How about "Apples support is better than dells because..." not "Dell's support sucks because I found this cool link on an article to back my view up". I think you're the one trolling!
No, I read slashdot every day. I've just ignored most of the mac articles until now.. care to provide any direct links?
What would you say is better about MacOS X vs. RedHat Linux? I'm guessing the window environment.. (does it use X Windows?). I really don't know much about OSX. Anything else?
I just can't help but wonder why everyone seems to be so excited about Macs. If you ever want to run the latest game on that "other" OS, you can't really do it on Mac without paying a premium and/or having to wait forever for it to come out. And not just games, but other software too.
Dell has a comparable deal that is $999 for an Inspiron 2650, comes with a free hard drive upgrade and a CD-burner (or DVD) upgrade. Not only that, but you get some really great tech support. And no, I don't work for dell. I just can't understand what all this jazz about getting an Apple is.
Sure the Mac has cool looking hardware, but beyond that is there really a compelling reason for techies/nerds to switch from Intel/AMD based machines?? I can't think of any real good reasons.
This is really not a troll, I'm just trying to understand what the hoopla is. Please enlighten me!!
Good idea.. that probably would work!!
Isn't it sad how he who has the most money wins the lawsuits? So much for a fair judicial system. The "youmaybenext.com" web site realizes this, and thats why they are gathering people together- get the combined pockets deep enough and they will win.
Money talks!! It is high time for some patent reform laws...
I don't know, but based on the marketing speech, there is not much "intelligence" in this software. The reason why it sounds easy, safe and secure for the Joe Average, is probably the fact that it is marketed as a software created just for this "single task" and it is therefore much more easy to buy and understand it.
Yes, the software is definitely for Joe Average. However, that is what sells. Things that are simple and easy and don't require any intelligence on the part of the user. That is why Linux has such a hard time being adopted by the AOL population-- they're not L33T or anywhere close to it.
For instance, I had to explain to my mother-in-law the other day what a web browser was as opposed to "AOL". She just couldn't understand the concept that AOL provides the internet connection and that she could use any "browser" that she wanted (something wasn't showing up right on a site she was using so I told her to try it with IE). The thing was, she didn't WANT to know anything outside her AOL sandbox. All she wanted was for her "pictures to work". On that same note, I think this mac switch software is ingenius! If it weren't for the high price of Mac's, it may be the "silver bullet".
I'd like to look into it a little more, but that's cool he got it down to a decent LOC. I wonder what he did to reduce the LOC from the TMC version?
.NET implementations had to be 100% functionally equivalent with .NET and J2EE) have been published on the Serverside.com so that customers canh /.
In addition, here is the "criteria" that TMC had to follow according to their report. I wonder if some of the criteria forced certain design decisions that caused more code.
1. The J2EE and
no behavioral differences.
2. Both applications had to be created according to best-practice coding standards
such that each serves as a valid design pattern that real customers can follow
when building their own applications.
3. Each application had to be a logical three-tier implementation, with the use of
well-partitioned components to encapsulate middle-tier business and data access
logic.
4. The applications had to be designed such that they can each be easily clustered
across multiple middle tier application servers for scale-out.
5. The benchmarks had to be run with realistic application server and database
deployment settings that reflect a real-world production deployment.
6. All source code, data load and test scripts for the benchmark applications (both
replicate and verify the results. The source code, database schemas, and test
scripts used in the benchmark, can be downloaded from: http://www.middlewarecompany.
com/j2eedotnetbenc
There will probably be another J2EE implementation that can "beat" the .NET benchmark. However, I think there is some degree of truth to this particular one. At our .NET User Group Meeting last night, we had someone from Microsoft actually talking about this benchmark. He didn't go into much detail on the J2EE side, but said that the MiddleWare company spent 10 weeks trying to get the J2EE implementation tweaked. So either these consultants are really incompetent on the Java platform, or there really is a significant performance difference.
.NET could *ever* be faster/better/etc. than J2EE. So really, it's a religious thing and I don't think any amount of proof will convince him. And I'm sure there are certainly others out there thinking that way. Of course the other camp also believes .NET is "all that".
It's even more convincing in reading the article posted in the link (the "review" that is). Basically it was bringing up how the lines of code count was not correct because J2EE could have done a better job. Bah, that's a silly argument. LOC can't just be brushed off because it really does have something to do with the cost. More lines of code isn't just for "lazy programmers", it's also a factor when you have to think about MAINTAINING that code.
However, I do buy the argument about not using the "latest and greatest" J2EE. So, I get back to my original point.. I'm just waiting for the next benchmark.
So since the author complains about the PetStore app as being such a bad design, how about coming up with a new one and then comparing those? It seems to me like, no matter what, the author of the article doesn't believe
I think the public has a right to know about this sort of activity and I am glad slashdot posted it. Granted, it generates a certain amount of FUD but that is to be expected (it is slashdot).
Why should the cable companies need to start doing this sort of thing in order to make money? I'm sure there are better ways. How about offering decent service and some other products (such as spam filters) that we can pay additional for? Why do they have to be so sneaky? I feel sorry for the poor AOL converts that have no clue about what is being installed on their system- they are just innocent victims. They may not even know how to uninstall something- so they have no choice.
This kind of behavior is unethical, especially if the customer doesn't know what is going on. If privacy or high speed connection were mutually exclusive, I would choose privacy and I think a good percentage of others would also. It's bad enough with all the other crap that seems to fill up your hard drive when you're on the internet, we don't need the ISP doing it as well.
What about OS/2 zealots? I remember they were quite fanatical. Remember those "Team OS/2" t-shirts?
:)
I haven't seen any of them lately, maybe they joined the Mac camp.