It wasn't until 96-97 that computers in the home were not uncommon.
Before that, very few people owned anything that could be called a computer.
Other than that I agree. I built my current computer in 2007(which was mid-high end at the time), and besides a video card dying, I have had no need to upgrade it.
Unlike Ballmer, Jobs had some technical skill and was able to tell if something sucked or not.
Ballmer is a complete retard that has no clue what he is doing and why.
Tablets are a toy, a solution in search of a problem.
Microsoft will never get more than 5% of the smartphone market. They have lost this pointless war.
MS shouldn't have even tried, but envy gets in their way.
Microsoft's bread and butter is and always will be selling to business. They have forgotten that, and are in big trouble because of it. I guess the best thing to do with a losing hand is double down because that is exactly what is happening.
MS has Apple and Google envy, but neither of those companies are competitors with Microsoft, although MS seems to not understand that. MS continually follows these companies but I don't think MS knows why.
The future of business computing are not toy tablets, but rather the so-called cloud, which is nothing more than a distributed mainframe. Yes, everything old is new again.
This is where MS should be, not in the consumer electronics toy market.
It is only a stupid business that would trust a "cloud" setup operated and controlled by a third party. There really isn't any good off the shelf solution for a company that wants to setup and manage their own distributed mainframe and MS would be in a perfect position to solidify their future by offering a solid solution.
But no, they continue to chase the consumer toy electronic market and continue to get their asses beat. Followers never succeed.
MS has a chance to go into a pretty bare, but potentially lucrative market, but they are too slow, and too stupid to grab it.
Apple could introduce the iCar and inside two year MS will enter the auto business, you could bet your house safely on it.
I can go from from nothing to a fully installed, fully functional system including every app and driver I need in under 30 minutes and no reboots.
Your average Windows user couldn't take a Windows CD and a PC with nothing installed do anything with it. Even if this average windows user got the install rolling, the system would not be fully up and running for hours, if not longer.
Bullshit.
Tablets are a toy, a solution in search of a problem.
Microsoft will never get more than 5% of the smartphone market. They have lost.
Microsoft's bread and butter is and always will be selling to business.
MS has Apple and Google envy, but neither of those companies are competitors with Microsoft, although MS seems to not understand that. MS continually follows these companies but I don't think MS knows why.
The future of business computing are not toy tablets, but rather the so-called cloud, which is nothing more than a distributed mainframe. Yes, everything old is new again.
This is where MS should be, not in the consumer toy market.
It is only a stupid business that would trust a "cloud" setup operated and controlled by a third party. There really isn't any good off the shelf solution for a company that wants to use these distributed mainframes and MS would be in a perfect position to solidify their future by offering a solid solution.
But no, they continue to chase the consumer toy electronic market and continue to get their asses beat. Followers never succeed. MS has a chance to go into a pretty bare, but potentially lucrative market, but they are too slow, and too stupid to grab it.
Apple could introduce the iCar and inside two year MS will enter the auto business, you could bet your house safely on it. Fucking retards have earned their trip into irrelevancy hell.
Your opinion falls flat in the face of facts.
C is faster than most anything most of the time, C is slower than lots of things most of the time, speed is irrelevant most of the time.
The vast majority of apps are IO bound, meaning the execution speed is meaningless, because even with a slow language implementation, it is going to be fast enough.
Web apps are a prime example. The time to render a web page dynamically will be orders of magnitude faster than it takes to get the request, send a request to the database, wait for the database to return the data, and send the page to the user.
We are talking about under 10 ms for rendering the page and several seconds for everything else.
Fortran is faster than C in mathematically intensive programs.
Java can be faster in long running programs because it can compile dynamically, with information a static compiler never will. If you can't understand this, you don't belong in this discussion.
Performance is relative. Sure Ruby is almost always a few orders of maginitude slower, but if that Ruby app is IO bound, the fact that you wrote it faster matters more. Even the much maligned ruby on rails can generate a complex page several orders of maginitudes faster than the database can retrieve it and even the time it takes to get a request in. Sure you could write that web app in C, but when it takes you 2 years to do it, and the RoR app took 2 months, what have you gained?
Neither will return the page faster than the other.
Your job prospects are severly hampered because you are a programming language end-user, not a programmer.
A programmer has the background necessary to easily move from language to language.
I know next to no Haskell(or C# or D or Erlang, etc), but if I had a chance to work for a company using it, I have the background to pick up the language because I understand its concepts.
Good programming shops hire programmers, not programming tools end-users.
It is not a fuckup on the programmers part, it is deficiencies in C++.
In the case the poster gave, there is really nothing you can do in C++ to clean up trees gracefully and without interrupting the execution.
1. Performance has nothing to do with language design and everything to do with implementation. For 99% of the use cases Ruby is fast enough.
2. Yeah, C++ is more portable. What percentage of programs run on more than one platform, 5%? 1%? Rarely an issue
3. How is the Ruby community toxic, I think you are getting Ruby and Rails confused. The rails community is where the drama is, not the ruby community. If you can find a humbler man than Matz, I would like to see it.
4. Like C++, in the hands of a crappy coder, you get an unmaintainable mess, but in skilled hands Ruby is terse, easily readable, infinitely flexible and a joy to maintain. It is obvious that you don't have the first clue about Ruby. I will take your 100,000 line C++ program and put it up a functionally equivalent 10,000 line Ruby program in a maintenance contest any day of the week. An order of magnitude less lines of code and next to no line noise in Ruby makes it way more maintainable.
5. productive> environment to> >>. If you have to rely on the compiler to do your debugging you have lost the maintainability you claim. Ruby is compiled by the way.
I think it is clear that you have zero experience and knowledge of ruby.
You shouldn't be hiring people that are not polyglots and can not seamlessly move from language to language.
Those that can't are not programmers, they are language X end-users, AKA API monkeys.
Do not hire programming language end-users, hire programmers and your little what-if vanishes.
Don't count on it.
Dennis Ritchie and John McCarthy died around the same time as Jobs, but both had a bigger impact on computing than Jobs could do in 100 lifetimes, and got next to no press.
It is about the cult of celebrity and substance goes out the window.
Personally, I have no issue with Jobs or Apple. I don't think I have bought anything from Apple in my life but I am certainly not a rabid anti-Jobs jealous freaks like the people posting here that couldn't do 1/1000 of what Jobs accomplished.
In the MS-Apple battle, Apple has clearly won, and unlike MS Apple has a bright future where MS is now IBM at best. Still huge but ultimately irrelevant.
That is funny, Linux has all the bells and whistles as 7 and yet a 1.6 mhz processor can run it fine. I can have compiz running, firefox with at least 10 tabs, amarok running, world of warcraft in wine and about 100 other processes running using under 1.2 GB ram.
7 struggles to idle with 2 GB of RAM.
Windows is a bloated pig.
Slashdot Mirror
It wasn't until 96-97 that computers in the home were not uncommon. Before that, very few people owned anything that could be called a computer. Other than that I agree. I built my current computer in 2007(which was mid-high end at the time), and besides a video card dying, I have had no need to upgrade it.
No one will ever get any real work done on a touchscreen. Ever. We are not built for that.
If you think programmers, graphics artists, editors, etc will ever be able to do their job on a handheld, you are delusional.
As for laptops, name a laptop that is equal in hardware to a high end desktop and I will show you a laptop that:
1. Overheats constantly, and thus unstable
2. Is extremely expensive
3. Doesn't really exist.
Laptops have been in a usable state for over 15 years and they have never come close to high-end desktops.
You are not only an idiot but have drunk the kool aid being passed out by clueless, trendy "technical" writers.
If losing money is your idea of "working" then Ballmer has an executive position for you!
Unlike Ballmer, Jobs had some technical skill and was able to tell if something sucked or not. Ballmer is a complete retard that has no clue what he is doing and why.
Tablets are a toy, a solution in search of a problem.
Microsoft will never get more than 5% of the smartphone market. They have lost this pointless war.
MS shouldn't have even tried, but envy gets in their way.
Microsoft's bread and butter is and always will be selling to business. They have forgotten that, and are in big trouble because of it. I guess the best thing to do with a losing hand is double down because that is exactly what is happening.
MS has Apple and Google envy, but neither of those companies are competitors with Microsoft, although MS seems to not understand that. MS continually follows these companies but I don't think MS knows why.
The future of business computing are not toy tablets, but rather the so-called cloud, which is nothing more than a distributed mainframe. Yes, everything old is new again.
This is where MS should be, not in the consumer electronics toy market.
It is only a stupid business that would trust a "cloud" setup operated and controlled by a third party. There really isn't any good off the shelf solution for a company that wants to setup and manage their own distributed mainframe and MS would be in a perfect position to solidify their future by offering a solid solution.
But no, they continue to chase the consumer toy electronic market and continue to get their asses beat. Followers never succeed.
MS has a chance to go into a pretty bare, but potentially lucrative market, but they are too slow, and too stupid to grab it.
Apple could introduce the iCar and inside two year MS will enter the auto business, you could bet your house safely on it.
Windows is much harder to install than Linux.
I can go from from nothing to a fully installed, fully functional system including every app and driver I need in under 30 minutes and no reboots.
Your average Windows user couldn't take a Windows CD and a PC with nothing installed do anything with it. Even if this average windows user got the install rolling, the system would not be fully up and running for hours, if not longer.
Bullshit. Tablets are a toy, a solution in search of a problem. Microsoft will never get more than 5% of the smartphone market. They have lost. Microsoft's bread and butter is and always will be selling to business. MS has Apple and Google envy, but neither of those companies are competitors with Microsoft, although MS seems to not understand that. MS continually follows these companies but I don't think MS knows why. The future of business computing are not toy tablets, but rather the so-called cloud, which is nothing more than a distributed mainframe. Yes, everything old is new again. This is where MS should be, not in the consumer toy market. It is only a stupid business that would trust a "cloud" setup operated and controlled by a third party. There really isn't any good off the shelf solution for a company that wants to use these distributed mainframes and MS would be in a perfect position to solidify their future by offering a solid solution. But no, they continue to chase the consumer toy electronic market and continue to get their asses beat. Followers never succeed. MS has a chance to go into a pretty bare, but potentially lucrative market, but they are too slow, and too stupid to grab it. Apple could introduce the iCar and inside two year MS will enter the auto business, you could bet your house safely on it. Fucking retards have earned their trip into irrelevancy hell.
Android does not a use a JVM
. It can NOT run anything compiled by the java compiler.
Dalvik is not a JVM.
Want proof? Take any compiled Java program, doesn't matter how simple or complex it is. Now try to get Dalvik to run it.
Dalvik is not a JVM.
With your standards, Ruby, Python, Lisp are all Java as well, since there are java bytecode compilers for them.
Your opinion falls flat in the face of facts. C is faster than most anything most of the time, C is slower than lots of things most of the time, speed is irrelevant most of the time.
The vast majority of apps are IO bound, meaning the execution speed is meaningless, because even with a slow language implementation, it is going to be fast enough.
Web apps are a prime example. The time to render a web page dynamically will be orders of magnitude faster than it takes to get the request, send a request to the database, wait for the database to return the data, and send the page to the user.
We are talking about under 10 ms for rendering the page and several seconds for everything else.
Desktop apps have similar usage patterns.
Fortran is faster than C in mathematically intensive programs. Java can be faster in long running programs because it can compile dynamically, with information a static compiler never will. If you can't understand this, you don't belong in this discussion. Performance is relative. Sure Ruby is almost always a few orders of maginitude slower, but if that Ruby app is IO bound, the fact that you wrote it faster matters more. Even the much maligned ruby on rails can generate a complex page several orders of maginitudes faster than the database can retrieve it and even the time it takes to get a request in. Sure you could write that web app in C, but when it takes you 2 years to do it, and the RoR app took 2 months, what have you gained? Neither will return the page faster than the other.
Your job prospects are severly hampered because you are a programming language end-user, not a programmer. A programmer has the background necessary to easily move from language to language. I know next to no Haskell(or C# or D or Erlang, etc), but if I had a chance to work for a company using it, I have the background to pick up the language because I understand its concepts. Good programming shops hire programmers, not programming tools end-users.
And Java now has stack allocation for short-lived objects so the last memory advantage C++ had is now gone.
Not with Java. Allocation is faster than malloc and deallocation is basically free. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp09275/index.html
It is not a fuckup on the programmers part, it is deficiencies in C++. In the case the poster gave, there is really nothing you can do in C++ to clean up trees gracefully and without interrupting the execution.
Stupid slashdot wiped my angle brackets, my point that got eaten is that C++ is lost in a sea of angle brackets, worse than lisp with parens.
1. Performance has nothing to do with language design and everything to do with implementation. For 99% of the use cases Ruby is fast enough.
2. Yeah, C++ is more portable. What percentage of programs run on more than one platform, 5%? 1%? Rarely an issue
3. How is the Ruby community toxic, I think you are getting Ruby and Rails confused. The rails community is where the drama is, not the ruby community. If you can find a humbler man than Matz, I would like to see it.
4. Like C++, in the hands of a crappy coder, you get an unmaintainable mess, but in skilled hands Ruby is terse, easily readable, infinitely flexible and a joy to maintain. It is obvious that you don't have the first clue about Ruby. I will take your 100,000 line C++ program and put it up a functionally equivalent 10,000 line Ruby program in a maintenance contest any day of the week. An order of magnitude less lines of code and next to no line noise in Ruby makes it way more maintainable.
5. productive> environment to> >>. If you have to rely on the compiler to do your debugging you have lost the maintainability you claim. Ruby is compiled by the way.
I think it is clear that you have zero experience and knowledge of ruby.
You shouldn't be hiring people that are not polyglots and can not seamlessly move from language to language. Those that can't are not programmers, they are language X end-users, AKA API monkeys. Do not hire programming language end-users, hire programmers and your little what-if vanishes.
Don't count on it. Dennis Ritchie and John McCarthy died around the same time as Jobs, but both had a bigger impact on computing than Jobs could do in 100 lifetimes, and got next to no press. It is about the cult of celebrity and substance goes out the window. Personally, I have no issue with Jobs or Apple. I don't think I have bought anything from Apple in my life but I am certainly not a rabid anti-Jobs jealous freaks like the people posting here that couldn't do 1/1000 of what Jobs accomplished. In the MS-Apple battle, Apple has clearly won, and unlike MS Apple has a bright future where MS is now IBM at best. Still huge but ultimately irrelevant.
Wine does not emulate anything. All it does is reroute function calls and puts things where the app expects them to be.
That is funny, Linux has all the bells and whistles as 7 and yet a 1.6 mhz processor can run it fine. I can have compiz running, firefox with at least 10 tabs, amarok running, world of warcraft in wine and about 100 other processes running using under 1.2 GB ram. 7 struggles to idle with 2 GB of RAM. Windows is a bloated pig.