Besides, can they? SourceSafe suffers random database corruption. They might not be able to move off it.
Anyway, a more advanced source control system could include RCS and SCCS. The extra features of RCS might confuse Microsoft developers at first, but they'd manage. They'd never cope with Git, totally alien to their mindset.
It'll be the license, modified so that you give permission for Microsoft to use anything you've put on GitHub in a closed source product, regardless of any license you use, and to make Microsoft co-owners.
For database, I've been using dbForge and Dezign for Databases. Vastly superior to Microsoft's offering and it's not limited to one database. True, you pay for the privilege. Also true, they are not open source. So? I'd rather have something that does the job than something that has a particular badge. I'm willing to pay for a working product.
I've not tried OmniDB yet,but it looks interesting. That is open source - BSD, which is perfectly good as a license. It looks much better than Microsoft's SQL Server editor (which I've known to randomly destroy table content on a schema edit).
Visual Studio is a pain. The tool tips make it hard to read the text. It can't handle renaming a file to change the case. Its error highlighter is defective, randomly reporting spurious errors that vanish if you reboot VS. The build can sometimes show as complete when it has failed. A RAD tool like that should never report flags are incompatible because there's no value in a RAD over text editing a compile recipe if you can set impossible combinations - those should be sanity checked at input. You know, the way we were all taught to validate inputs when first taught programming.
VS, on being presented with a wstring, shows a pointer. Getting it to show the string itself is horrible and getting it to handle such strings on re-entering the function is all but impossible as it relies on static evaluation of where things are. Sadly, DDD doesn't support Microsoft C/C++, or I'd use it exclusively.
Open source RAD? Meh. For Windows, Notepad++ with syntax highlighting is faster, easier and more robust. Eclipse is too heavy and I find its package manager gets confused easily. Otherwise, it would be a good project.
Different nations abolished slavery at different times. Britain in 1070, over 400 years before Europeans discovered America.
The question is not whether you do stupid things, it's when you grow up enough to stop. In your case, I'm not holding my breath. Most nations did grow up, with respect to slavery, America much later than Africa, who in turn were much later than northern Europeans.
(Arguably, slavery still exists as a semi-legit institution in America, they never really grew up.)
Terrorising? Sorry, no. That is not enough. This was a terrorist attack. A term he is keen on using when his supporters are at risk.
He is the President of the whole country or none of it. It is not enough until he calls it for what it is.
I don't expect him to admit to lying when he said earlier that it was a false flag, when he would have already been informed it wasn't. I don't think he has the guts. He can't do anything about that.
Letting him slide on diminishing and belittling terms. No.
And I expect any American to insist he calls it for what it is, whatever side they are on. One America, indivisible, cannot allow the belittling of an attrocity.
The same is true of all attacks on all sides. I am fully aware of the attack some time ago on a Republican and his friends. That, too, was a terrorist attack. Not terrorizing, not less than. Said so then, will repeat so now.
Those Republicans who have said it was a terrorist attack, good for you. You've courage and decency.
All I ask is for false flag theorists and "terrorizing" justifiers to do the decent thing. Call it for what it is.
That was a lone nut. We know this because he was not incited. Nobody encouraged him to be violent.
This guy was incited. Trump has specifically talked of killing people, particularly opponents. The conspiracy theories he referenced were ones promoted by Trump-backed media outlets.
You are entitled to question which incitement made the difference, who is ultimately responsible for driving him over the edge. What you aren't entitled to do is invent your own set of facts.
If you do not see any difference between the cases, I can't help you.
An alternate boot loader that loads the required system meets the specification for the bootloader you bought. Does this meet the requirements? Depends on whose specifications matter.
Likewise for a router. If you bought a router that was advertised as having a specific list of protocols, but nothing else is stated, you might contend that replacing those protocols 1:1 is to the original specification.
Specifications say the what and not the how, after all.
But this might not fly with a judge, depending on how the law says to interpret concepts.
You certainly wouldn't be able to replace IOS with Xorp, if IOS was expressly specified.
The laws that would have protected individuals were scrapped or never passed by request from users.
Companies were actively encouraged to do whatever the hell they wanted, by the users.
Facebook was rewarded for past offences by an increase in users.
Your rights exterior to yourself don't exist in the Tea Party and Libertarian world view and businesses are free to do whatever they like. World views currently elected by the users and in office.
I cannot have sympathy for self-induced injuries, at least until those users take responsibility for their acts. Most unlikely, they're having way too much fun critiquing the popularity addicts they also supply. I
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft today IS your father's Microsoft. They've changed only their slogans. They're still working to subvert and destroy open source.
Why stop using SourceSafe now?
Besides, can they? SourceSafe suffers random database corruption. They might not be able to move off it.
Anyway, a more advanced source control system could include RCS and SCCS. The extra features of RCS might confuse Microsoft developers at first, but they'd manage. They'd never cope with Git, totally alien to their mindset.
It'll be the license, modified so that you give permission for Microsoft to use anything you've put on GitHub in a closed source product, regardless of any license you use, and to make Microsoft co-owners.
For database, I've been using dbForge and Dezign for Databases. Vastly superior to Microsoft's offering and it's not limited to one database. True, you pay for the privilege. Also true, they are not open source. So? I'd rather have something that does the job than something that has a particular badge. I'm willing to pay for a working product.
I've not tried OmniDB yet,but it looks interesting. That is open source - BSD, which is perfectly good as a license. It looks much better than Microsoft's SQL Server editor (which I've known to randomly destroy table content on a schema edit).
Visual Studio is a pain. The tool tips make it hard to read the text. It can't handle renaming a file to change the case. Its error highlighter is defective, randomly reporting spurious errors that vanish if you reboot VS. The build can sometimes show as complete when it has failed. A RAD tool like that should never report flags are incompatible because there's no value in a RAD over text editing a compile recipe if you can set impossible combinations - those should be sanity checked at input. You know, the way we were all taught to validate inputs when first taught programming.
VS' debugger has nothing on DDD.
https://softwarerecs.stackexch...
VS, on being presented with a wstring, shows a pointer. Getting it to show the string itself is horrible and getting it to handle such strings on re-entering the function is all but impossible as it relies on static evaluation of where things are. Sadly, DDD doesn't support Microsoft C/C++, or I'd use it exclusively.
Open source RAD? Meh. For Windows, Notepad++ with syntax highlighting is faster, easier and more robust. Eclipse is too heavy and I find its package manager gets confused easily. Otherwise, it would be a good project.
Net neutrality existed in 1970, as data was regulated the same way as all other televoms even over X.25 and other data-only connections.
The tribe says otherwise. They deny him ever being a member, ever being affiliated, ever being hired by them.
Elizabeth Warren has at least got genetic markers proving deep ancestry. Note the word "deep". In this context, it means a long, long time ago.
I see no evidence this guy can claim even that.
Of course they have. Most chose to grow up. You, I'm not so sure. That's the difference.
There are no races.
Different nations abolished slavery at different times. Britain in 1070, over 400 years before Europeans discovered America.
The question is not whether you do stupid things, it's when you grow up enough to stop. In your case, I'm not holding my breath. Most nations did grow up, with respect to slavery, America much later than Africa, who in turn were much later than northern Europeans.
(Arguably, slavery still exists as a semi-legit institution in America, they never really grew up.)
The Greeks were a lightly burned olive colour, same as they are today.
Don't know any Democrat who has said any of that. Can you name names and offer compelling evidence?
An impartial study showing immigration by Hispanics increases under Democrat governance would suffice.
Terrorising? Sorry, no. That is not enough. This was a terrorist attack. A term he is keen on using when his supporters are at risk.
He is the President of the whole country or none of it. It is not enough until he calls it for what it is.
I don't expect him to admit to lying when he said earlier that it was a false flag, when he would have already been informed it wasn't. I don't think he has the guts. He can't do anything about that.
Letting him slide on diminishing and belittling terms. No.
And I expect any American to insist he calls it for what it is, whatever side they are on. One America, indivisible, cannot allow the belittling of an attrocity.
The same is true of all attacks on all sides. I am fully aware of the attack some time ago on a Republican and his friends. That, too, was a terrorist attack. Not terrorizing, not less than. Said so then, will repeat so now.
Those Republicans who have said it was a terrorist attack, good for you. You've courage and decency.
All I ask is for false flag theorists and "terrorizing" justifiers to do the decent thing. Call it for what it is.
That was a lone nut. We know this because he was not incited. Nobody encouraged him to be violent.
This guy was incited. Trump has specifically talked of killing people, particularly opponents. The conspiracy theories he referenced were ones promoted by Trump-backed media outlets.
You are entitled to question which incitement made the difference, who is ultimately responsible for driving him over the edge. What you aren't entitled to do is invent your own set of facts.
If you do not see any difference between the cases, I can't help you.
Can't put an AMD into an Intel-designed motherboard, and vice versa. Pins are different.
AMD also tends to want HT, as well.
Is the reverse engineering provision still in DMCA?
It's probably going to hinge on specification.
An alternate boot loader that loads the required system meets the specification for the bootloader you bought. Does this meet the requirements? Depends on whose specifications matter.
Likewise for a router. If you bought a router that was advertised as having a specific list of protocols, but nothing else is stated, you might contend that replacing those protocols 1:1 is to the original specification.
Specifications say the what and not the how, after all.
But this might not fly with a judge, depending on how the law says to interpret concepts.
You certainly wouldn't be able to replace IOS with Xorp, if IOS was expressly specified.
Sure. After it's modded, the DRM can be restored. It's now returned to original DRM spec.
Is the feature specified or undocumented?
If the latter, it's not in the specifications.
It also depends on whose specification. The specification of the product on the box probably won't include features deleted.
If you bought product X as specified on the box and literature, then hidden extras or hidden deletions aren't in the specification you were sold.
Then why are Microsoft products considered to be adding value?
The laws that would have protected individuals were scrapped or never passed by request from users.
Companies were actively encouraged to do whatever the hell they wanted, by the users.
Facebook was rewarded for past offences by an increase in users.
Your rights exterior to yourself don't exist in the Tea Party and Libertarian world view and businesses are free to do whatever they like. World views currently elected by the users and in office.
I cannot have sympathy for self-induced injuries, at least until those users take responsibility for their acts. Most unlikely, they're having way too much fun critiquing the popularity addicts they also supply.
I
USENET also had one standard for everyone. It worked just fine.
It's their service, they can store what they like. Your freedom goes no further than the end of your nose, thanks to Libertarians and Tea Partyists.
Don't like it? Then don't support those who deprive you of the right to a freedom greater than yourself.
Every successful tech goes through a phase of garage development. This hasn't happened with VR.
Gets paid something like $50-75 million a year.
Interesting perspective.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It has all sorts of jobs for people like yourself. I won't bother correcting your history essay.