Sending mail through the IIS SMTP server is like 4 lines of code using CDONTS. You can access a binary stream, but it's true that you do have to either roll your own file upload code (not especially hard) or cut-n-paste some off of MSDN.
Now if you really want to know why ASP is crap here it is: They dropped Java a supported environment for building COM components, pretty much forcing you to use either VB (which I hate) or C++ (which I don't know).
Because the original ROM BASIC used the upper 208 or 224 (memory fails) for short-bytecount subroutine calls.
I'm glad that there's some way we can blame Microsoft for for the 16 IRQ problem! Damn you Bill Gates!!
On a side note, Intel's SMP chipsets have supported 255 IRQs for a number of years. For some unknown reason, they've never added this support to single CPU machines (or at least didn't with i810, the last Intel board I've used...)
Virtually every Apple II card was effectively slot dependant - disk controller in slots 6 and 5, serial in 1 and 2, 80-col in 3, etc etc. Maybe this wasn't due to physical reasons, but you'd probably find that your game copy-protection wouldn't work, you couldn't print, etc etc if you moved your cards around.
Actually, I think the only reason for the Microsoft Oracle OLEDB driver was to make Oracle's performance look crappy from ASP/VB applications and to freeze the customer base at Oracle 7.x functionality.
There's been plenty of third-party options, and most Oracle (server)/Microsoft (client) shops use them instead of the MS driver.
Right -- The web consulting business was going at a 100mph and then hit the wall and is effectively going about 10mph right now and slowly gearing up. As you mention, there's been massive layoffs, and some former big name places like MarchFirst are effectively dead.
Everyone's making this out to be a personality issue, but I wonder to what extent it's just market conditions...
The Atari 2600 was the last of the great "open" consoles. It's conventional wisdom that a tidal wave of third party crap killed both it and and the entire home console market in 1984. I have some disagreements with this theory, but it explains why 3rd party developers are not unhappy to pay licence fees.
And yes, I think the whole Freshmeat scene has hurt the development of larger project such as Mozilla.
(Of course, quality control isn't the most important thing in some random project box.)
The nice thing about that link is that it shows that 2/3s of new slashdot users are actually troll accounts. But then again, "MrBogus" used to be a troll account too...
Properly designed, the stored procedures can be considered another Tier in your n-tier appplication -- there's quite a bit of data representation that can be done that isn't "business logic" per se. Sure, that's largely platform-dependant code, but it's also at the point of the biggest bottleneck, where compiled and optimised code matters the most.
Things like EJB are just terrible for database performance if you aren't aware of what you are doing. (Ever wonder why Oracle and Sun are the biggest proponents?) Client-side joins and transactions have a huge cost in the reponsiveness of an applicaiton and the database server in general, and are done behind the sceans with tools like entitiy beans. If you aren't aware of this because you are following some middleware mantra, you aren't doing your job correctly.
Besides, you already have "business logic" in the database -- it's called a schema (unless your app has a sloow everything2-style generic node/attribute schema, in which case server-side joins are even more important.)
N4.6 also crashes (alot), but atleast it does everything, securely, and just that, no more, with me in full control
Netscape is no more secure that IE with reasonable ActiveX download prefs set. Virtually every.01 point release includes a security fix, and there's been 30 or more point releases since the product has been on the market. Major holes that have been in the 4.x codebase from the beginning are still being found.
Using Netscape 4.x probably should be considered a crime against web standards, but it's a free world. Just don't blow FUD on security issues - it's too important.
Re:Zealotry Sure Helped OS/2...
on
QT Mozilla Port
·
· Score: 1
OS/2 was actually a superior OS compared to Windows
OS/2 was a superior OS to Windows 3.1 (what wasn't?). It actually had a number of fundemental problems that made it inferior to Windows NT (which also had crappy 3rd party support until 1995-6). A lot of the percieved quality of OS/2 was that it didn't crash 3 times a day, which was real exciting for a Windows user. However, I worked with it extensively in a server environment, and wasn't very impressed for a number of reasons.
I think that's what set the Team OS/2er's off into insanity -- Microsoft effectively boxed them in from above and below and 'cut off the air supply'. IBM effectively dropped the thing in about 1994, but didn't really let this on to the customer base. Lots of adovcacy burned for nothing -- I would have prefered to see people expend their efforts on something nice like Novell UnixWare.
However you've simply replaced dealing with server based licences with complexities of client based licencing.
To be fair to both Microsoft and Novell, they have systems in place to make it eaiser for you to pay them if you are larger organization. Most MS CALs in big shops are not bought 'by the certificate', but instead in a lump yearly estimate. Novell also has similar programs so that you don't have to jump through hoops counting connections on each server.
Actually, the thing to do if you were a nerdy kid was to see Star Wars over and over and over again and then brag about it. (I think I saw it something like 5 times, older kids saw it 20 or more).
The 1979 version was a re-release, but in truth the movie had only barely left the second run theaters from the original 1977 run.
Anyway, everyone noticed that they added "Episode IV: A New Hope" to the scrolling text. I also believe that the content of the text changed (the original was more goofy scifi).
Har - The toy companies also paid Lucus a ridiclous amount of up-front money to get licence this crap. Since the movie turned out to be not as titanically popular as everyone assumed (especially among kids, who were supposedly the target audience), merchandise sales were actually pretty poor and the toy companies took a huge bath on all that crap. The only thing that really sold was the little dolls for the "adult collector" (aka stupid loser) market.
So, expect to see less Episode II junk on the shelves.
Well, if you are going to pigeonhole, let me tell you about a few of the Linux, BSD, and OS/2 users that I've met...
Every platform, including the most pathetic (Windows ME and [DR|MS]-DOS), has it's share of loser advocates. However if you get out and about, you'll find that most Mac users are just plain old ordinary lusers that bought a Mac because somebody told them they could get e-mail with less of a hassle.
The OS is just something that's necessary for you to accomplish something with a computer. Anyone who takes it more seriously than that is suspect.
One of the nice thing about getting past 1 Ghz is that CPU speeds have less marketing impact.
A 1.7 Ghz chip doesn't really sound that much faster than a 1.4 Ghz chip. Compared to the visual impact of 900Mhz versus 600Mhz. Stupid, yes, but so is Mhz-based marketing. (Now, if Intel scaled quickly up to 2.5 Ghz, then it would sound like a lot versus 1.7 Ghz...)
Although Slashdotters overstate the marketing value of Mhz, I think. Most buyers don't care that much, whether they be home users or big MIS purchacing managers. Only when you get into the game/home power user crowd do you see the dicksizing going on, and those folks are generally informed enough to understand that AMD benches faster.
According to this post, which looks informed enough, AMD has a 14% marketshare.
Simple Logic: Intel has 3x the fab capacity of AMD. As of last year, AMD was running at 100% production to get 20% of the market. In order to for AMD to raise that at all, Intel would have to be shutting down fabs.
I think that's one key point that you fanboys miss: AMD is not in the financial position to "beat" Intel in marketshare, because expanding production takes lots of ca$h, not to mention time. Instead, they are cherry-picking certain profitable segments of the market, and just staying the hell out of every other segement.
This is a winning strategy because on average they make more money per sale than Intel does (source: last AMD/. article, take it for what you will). But it has also allowed Intel to LOCK UP certain important segments of the market, including corporate desktops and tier-1 servers.
Are you sure that licencing isn't the reason for the P-133 minimum? I believe this was the first Intel chip to ship after the launch of Windows 95, which means it's probably safe (if not 100% legal without the certificate) to install Win95 without legal problems. That's the only reason I could imagine on why you would turn away a P-120 but keep the 133.
Anyway, I have a Compaq P-133 here with a manufacture date of 9/95 that had a OEM Win95 install running when I got it. Still too useful to give away, BTW.
Absolutely. When I'm at work, I have a PII-400 idleing away on the end of my DSL line. I would love to run a FTP demon to make getting files more convienent, but frankly I haven't got the gumption to set my pager to BugTraq and chase patches all day.
Give me a Java/SmallTalk/Whatever FTP server, and I'll happily run it. I don't care if it's 200 times slower than pure C - for 1 concurrant user on that box, it won't matter. Sure there might design flaws to worry about, but at least I won't have to deal with some hack's good idea of saving programmer time by exploding administrator time exponentially.
As I mentioned, I'm aware of the difference between Flash and DHTML. However, the place I see Flash used most effectively in baseline web-design is as navigation widgets (such as flyout menus, mouse-overs, etc) which really should be done in DHTML if it were practical (meaning you wouldn't have to code it 2-3 times).
Obviously, if you are using Flash as a animation or movie player, there's no current alternative. In the future, there will be W3C standards which do vector and time-based rendering. But not yet.
Actually, I believe that the "95 Plus Pack" version of IE was still 2.0. Later versions of 95 and NT4 shipped with 2.1 which at least supported tables and frames.
I only saw IE 1.0 on some random Microsoft Marketing Propaganda CD they shipped out. Some guy loaded it up so that we could all gather around and laugh at it.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, don't get me wrong, I could swear at ASP all day long. I'm just calling out misinformation.
The ASP times out when the admin tells it too. You can create a seperate process to do whatever you like (run an external mailer, for example).
Sending mail through the IIS SMTP server is like 4 lines of code using CDONTS. You can access a binary stream, but it's true that you do have to either roll your own file upload code (not especially hard) or cut-n-paste some off of MSDN.
Now if you really want to know why ASP is crap here it is: They dropped Java a supported environment for building COM components, pretty much forcing you to use either VB (which I hate) or C++ (which I don't know).
Because the original ROM BASIC used the upper 208 or 224 (memory fails) for short-bytecount subroutine calls.
I'm glad that there's some way we can blame Microsoft for for the 16 IRQ problem! Damn you Bill Gates!!
On a side note, Intel's SMP chipsets have supported 255 IRQs for a number of years. For some unknown reason, they've never added this support to single CPU machines (or at least didn't with i810, the last Intel board I've used...)
Virtually every Apple II card was effectively slot dependant - disk controller in slots 6 and 5, serial in 1 and 2, 80-col in 3, etc etc. Maybe this wasn't due to physical reasons, but you'd probably find that your game copy-protection wouldn't work, you couldn't print, etc etc if you moved your cards around.
Actually, I think the only reason for the Microsoft Oracle OLEDB driver was to make Oracle's performance look crappy from ASP/VB applications and to freeze the customer base at Oracle 7.x functionality.
There's been plenty of third-party options, and most Oracle (server)/Microsoft (client) shops use them instead of the MS driver.
Depends on your vendor, but there are many hacks available: See http://www.digital-digest.com/dvd/support/macrovis ion.html
Right -- The web consulting business was going at a 100mph and then hit the wall and is effectively going about 10mph right now and slowly gearing up. As you mention, there's been massive layoffs, and some former big name places like MarchFirst are effectively dead.
Everyone's making this out to be a personality issue, but I wonder to what extent it's just market conditions...
quality control won't come into it
The Atari 2600 was the last of the great "open" consoles. It's conventional wisdom that a tidal wave of third party crap killed both it and and the entire home console market in 1984. I have some disagreements with this theory, but it explains why 3rd party developers are not unhappy to pay licence fees.
And yes, I think the whole Freshmeat scene has hurt the development of larger project such as Mozilla.
(Of course, quality control isn't the most important thing in some random project box.)
The nice thing about that link is that it shows that 2/3s of new slashdot users are actually troll accounts. But then again, "MrBogus" used to be a troll account too...
Properly designed, the stored procedures can be considered another Tier in your n-tier appplication -- there's quite a bit of data representation that can be done that isn't "business logic" per se. Sure, that's largely platform-dependant code, but it's also at the point of the biggest bottleneck, where compiled and optimised code matters the most.
Things like EJB are just terrible for database performance if you aren't aware of what you are doing. (Ever wonder why Oracle and Sun are the biggest proponents?) Client-side joins and transactions have a huge cost in the reponsiveness of an applicaiton and the database server in general, and are done behind the sceans with tools like entitiy beans. If you aren't aware of this because you are following some middleware mantra, you aren't doing your job correctly.
Besides, you already have "business logic" in the database -- it's called a schema (unless your app has a sloow everything2-style generic node/attribute schema, in which case server-side joins are even more important.)
N4.6 also crashes (alot), but atleast it does everything, securely, and just that, no more, with me in full control
.01 point release includes a security fix, and there's been 30 or more point releases since the product has been on the market. Major holes that have been in the 4.x codebase from the beginning are still being found.
Netscape is no more secure that IE with reasonable ActiveX download prefs set. Virtually every
Using Netscape 4.x probably should be considered a crime against web standards, but it's a free world. Just don't blow FUD on security issues - it's too important.
OS/2 was actually a superior OS compared to Windows
OS/2 was a superior OS to Windows 3.1 (what wasn't?). It actually had a number of fundemental problems that made it inferior to Windows NT (which also had crappy 3rd party support until 1995-6). A lot of the percieved quality of OS/2 was that it didn't crash 3 times a day, which was real exciting for a Windows user. However, I worked with it extensively in a server environment, and wasn't very impressed for a number of reasons.
I think that's what set the Team OS/2er's off into insanity -- Microsoft effectively boxed them in from above and below and 'cut off the air supply'. IBM effectively dropped the thing in about 1994, but didn't really let this on to the customer base. Lots of adovcacy burned for nothing -- I would have prefered to see people expend their efforts on something nice like Novell UnixWare.
However you've simply replaced dealing with server based licences with complexities of client based licencing.
To be fair to both Microsoft and Novell, they have systems in place to make it eaiser for you to pay them if you are larger organization. Most MS CALs in big shops are not bought 'by the certificate', but instead in a lump yearly estimate. Novell also has similar programs so that you don't have to jump through hoops counting connections on each server.
Actually, the thing to do if you were a nerdy kid was to see Star Wars over and over and over again and then brag about it. (I think I saw it something like 5 times, older kids saw it 20 or more).
The 1979 version was a re-release, but in truth the movie had only barely left the second run theaters from the original 1977 run.
Anyway, everyone noticed that they added "Episode IV: A New Hope" to the scrolling text. I also believe that the content of the text changed (the original was more goofy scifi).
Har - The toy companies also paid Lucus a ridiclous amount of up-front money to get licence this crap. Since the movie turned out to be not as titanically popular as everyone assumed (especially among kids, who were supposedly the target audience), merchandise sales were actually pretty poor and the toy companies took a huge bath on all that crap. The only thing that really sold was the little dolls for the "adult collector" (aka stupid loser) market.
So, expect to see less Episode II junk on the shelves.
I believe 5 is the number of file-and-print connections
A file and print connection is just one thing that would require a CAL. (Essentially anything that uses Windows authentication requires a CAL.)
Who's bright idea was the CAL, anyway?
Microsoft's, although they probably noted that Novell customers were happily paying for seat licences. NT 3.1 didn't require CALs.
Microsoft created J++ in a clean room environment which was legal reverse engineering.
I don't think I've ever heard MS claim this. If so, why would they have signed a contract with Sun that allowed them to get (successfully) sued?
Well, if you are going to pigeonhole, let me tell you about a few of the Linux, BSD, and OS/2 users that I've met...
Every platform, including the most pathetic (Windows ME and [DR|MS]-DOS), has it's share of loser advocates. However if you get out and about, you'll find that most Mac users are just plain old ordinary lusers that bought a Mac because somebody told them they could get e-mail with less of a hassle.
The OS is just something that's necessary for you to accomplish something with a computer. Anyone who takes it more seriously than that is suspect.
One of the nice thing about getting past 1 Ghz is that CPU speeds have less marketing impact.
A 1.7 Ghz chip doesn't really sound that much faster than a 1.4 Ghz chip. Compared to the visual impact of 900Mhz versus 600Mhz. Stupid, yes, but so is Mhz-based marketing. (Now, if Intel scaled quickly up to 2.5 Ghz, then it would sound like a lot versus 1.7 Ghz...)
Although Slashdotters overstate the marketing value of Mhz, I think. Most buyers don't care that much, whether they be home users or big MIS purchacing managers. Only when you get into the game/home power user crowd do you see the dicksizing going on, and those folks are generally informed enough to understand that AMD benches faster.
There's no way AMD has 50% of the market.
/. article, take it for what you will). But it has also allowed Intel to LOCK UP certain important segments of the market, including corporate desktops and tier-1 servers.
According to this post, which looks informed enough, AMD has a 14% marketshare.
Simple Logic: Intel has 3x the fab capacity of AMD. As of last year, AMD was running at 100% production to get 20% of the market. In order to for AMD to raise that at all, Intel would have to be shutting down fabs.
I think that's one key point that you fanboys miss: AMD is not in the financial position to "beat" Intel in marketshare, because expanding production takes lots of ca$h, not to mention time. Instead, they are cherry-picking certain profitable segments of the market, and just staying the hell out of every other segement.
This is a winning strategy because on average they make more money per sale than Intel does (source: last AMD
Are you sure that licencing isn't the reason for the P-133 minimum? I believe this was the first Intel chip to ship after the launch of Windows 95, which means it's probably safe (if not 100% legal without the certificate) to install Win95 without legal problems. That's the only reason I could imagine on why you would turn away a P-120 but keep the 133.
Anyway, I have a Compaq P-133 here with a manufacture date of 9/95 that had a OEM Win95 install running when I got it. Still too useful to give away, BTW.
Absolutely. When I'm at work, I have a PII-400 idleing away on the end of my DSL line. I would love to run a FTP demon to make getting files more convienent, but frankly I haven't got the gumption to set my pager to BugTraq and chase patches all day.
Give me a Java/SmallTalk/Whatever FTP server, and I'll happily run it. I don't care if it's 200 times slower than pure C - for 1 concurrant user on that box, it won't matter. Sure there might design flaws to worry about, but at least I won't have to deal with some hack's good idea of saving programmer time by exploding administrator time exponentially.
As I mentioned, I'm aware of the difference between Flash and DHTML. However, the place I see Flash used most effectively in baseline web-design is as navigation widgets (such as flyout menus, mouse-overs, etc) which really should be done in DHTML if it were practical (meaning you wouldn't have to code it 2-3 times).
Obviously, if you are using Flash as a animation or movie player, there's no current alternative. In the future, there will be W3C standards which do vector and time-based rendering. But not yet.
Running "old" code is neat. But the real trick for AMD-64 will be to find some new 64-bit code to run.
Actually, I believe that the "95 Plus Pack" version of IE was still 2.0. Later versions of 95 and NT4 shipped with 2.1 which at least supported tables and frames.
I only saw IE 1.0 on some random Microsoft Marketing Propaganda CD they shipped out. Some guy loaded it up so that we could all gather around and laugh at it.