Uh oh. Judging by the inaccessability of the servers mentioned, I sure hope their site isn't running of a uClinux simm!
"Oops, I forgot to turn off httpd logging. The memory filled up in 1.8 seconds!"
Then again, a rack enclosure with 50 of these guys and a load balancer could be an interesting prospect. Forget tracking session variables by cookie. Each user could be diverted to their very own simm 'associate' for their custom eCommerce transaction!
remember, no matter what the medium, you can't keep doubling the performance indefinitely.
Just to play devil's advocate: Why can't you?
What's the actual physical laws that dictate that you can't? As far as I know, there's no equivilant to the laws of thermodynamics pertaining to information theory.
It's interesting to think that if people weren't always thinking that Moore's law can't stand up to more than another 10 years, we'd need a new law.
What I mean is that since it takes about 10 years for an emerging technology to go from theory to mass implementation, if there were theories that showed the promise of Moore's Law living on for more than ten years into the future, products based on those theories would emerge faster than Moore's Law predicts.
Fox's Law: The estimated time that Moore's Law will hold true will always be close to the time it takes to turn the latest theory into a commercial product.
The worst offender is USA Networks. They have 10-second long fully animated mini-ads for upcoming shows in the corner when you come back from a commercial.
This is almost as irritating as the first week UPN was on the air, and their logo was literally 1/4 the width of the screen and 1/4 the height. It took them a week to realize things on a TV screen look bigger than on a computer screen mockup.
(caveat: This is something I remember reading, but I'd love more info either way)
I recall an article talking about Apple product placements in movies and TV, and an interesting tidbit was that sponsors will pay a lot for placement in movies, but that this isn't done in TV. Sure, product placement happens, but it's usually because the company in question donates product (a powerbook here, a truckload of Krispy Kreme doughnuts there), but that there isn't placement for pay on TV.
I wasn't clear whether this is a generally accepted practice, or if it's law. Does anyonehave more info on this?
In any case, the article states that on a Tivo unit 88% of the commercials go unwatched.
Don't believe everything you read, sparky.
I can't speak for Replay, but TiVo doesn't have a 30 second skip for exactly the reasons you describe. They have a 6-second back, and three fastforward speeds (the fastest is virtually unusable to skip through commercials because you spend more time cuing up to the end of the commercials than if you just used FFW2). The two reasonable fastforward speeds still allow for the impact of the commercial to get through. In fact, as a usability researcher, I can tell you that the average ad has more impact on FFW2 than it does on 'normal' TV because the viewer is intently watching to determine when the show comes back on so they don't overshoot.
I use my TiVo almost exclusively and I can still tell you who all the advertisers are for all my shows, and for 90% of the ads, the brand recognition is more important to the advertiser than the actual patter contained in the commercial.
you're right on one point, though. Widespread TiVo and replayTV use will change the industry, but it's not a disaster. 15 years ago people thought the VCR would mean the end of premium channels like HBO and Showtime. Now everyone has a VCR and yet premium channels still flourish.
The biggest change the VCR had on the industry is the incessant inclusion of tiny station-identification logos in the corner of the screen.
It's not really the end of the world, but with all the press the DeCSS and Napster cases are getting, it's no wonder people are in a hype-happy mood for any sort of digital copying.
The RIAA doesn't like Napster because it interferes with the revenue stream. Music studios get money when people buy new CDs and don't when they're distributed via Napster.
TV, on the other hand, gets revenue through advertising. Neither ReplayTV nor TiVo chops out commercials, so digitally distributed recordings have the commercials in place. every time it's passed around and watched, the commercials are watched too.
So, all that the TV industry needs to do is find a way to get reasonable metrics on which shows are recorded, and which are being passed around, so they can adjust their estimate of the number of impressions a given show, and consequently the commercials, will be viewed, and incorporate that into the price of advertising for a particular show. In fact, both TiVo and ReplayTV already supply 'number of recordings' metrics to the networks. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that the networks are using these figures to adjust the viewership estimates for many shows like X-Files and South Park.
In Canada, for example, the courts have decided that it's okay to redistribute broadcast TV as long as the commercials remain intact. It's not taking money out of anyone's pocket as long as 'recording viewings' are factored into the original advertising and residuals charges.
This is hardly the same thing as copying and distributing purchased CDs.
(I know I'll get thrashed for this, but my karma can take it)
It seems to me that creating a new 'standard' language, which neverltheless relies heavily on COM and.NET ties which only exist on Windows, is in part a tactical method to inhibit migration of Windows products to other platforms.
Let's say that C# is simply a better language to program for Windows than C++ is. Let's also suppose the hypothetical case where new Windows functionality comes along in future Win versions, and that this functionality is more easily taken advantage of using this new C# language. This gives developers the incentive to code new Windows products in C#. Note that C# has substantially different enough structures that porting from C# to C++ would not be trivial.
Now suppose that Linux (or another OS) starts gaining prominence in the next 2-8 years. As with any new OS, its main barrier to entry is lack of software. (The only reason Linux is viable is because of all the UNIX software it inherits.) In this time, Microsoft's pushing of C# has created a new software base for Windows that is relatively locked into place, unable to be ported to other platforms without significant effort.
Now I'm not saying this is evil. I'm not saying it's a conspiracy. Often languages built for specific environments are superior tools in those environments specifically because they're specialized.
On the other hand, I took the pictures off of AppleInsider and posted them on my own site. Thereafter I was sent a notice of infringement letter by Apple.
Listen: Apple did *not* sue the rumor sites. They sent them cease-and-desist letters, then started going after the employees and/or contractors who leaked the information.
I didn't say they sued the rumor sites. I said they threatened to sue the rumor sites. I should know. I got one of the letters.
-----
And how, exactly, is this "the heart of F.U.D.?" The 'fear', I can understand, but it doesn't seem to me that Apple left much room for 'uncertainty' or 'distrust' -- by ordering the sites to pull the pictures, they basically certified them as the real deal, and no one has been brazen enough to claim that the information wasn't leaked illegally from Apple.
First off, it's "Fear, uncertainty and doubt." Second, the F.U.D. I'm refering to is the fear of prosecution from Apple, the uncertainty of the legality of their actions, let alone yours, and the doubt as to who the bad guy is, you or them.
-----
Your second-to-last paragraph makes no sense. The aggrieved parties would win, because the courts would back Apple?
Which part of "More to the point, such a class-action suit probably wouldn't win" didn't you understand?
-----
Finally, the last thing you recommend *is* an example of FUD -- by manipulating the evidence as you suggest, Apple would have been, in my mind, guilty of far worse an offense than asking some stolen pictures to get yanked from the Web.
Uncertainty and doubt? Sure, but that's what rumor sites are all about. Fear? I don't know about you, but I'm not afraid of looking at photoshop mockups of products that may or may not exist.
Basically trade secrecy laws can be enforced on the person who stole the secret, via espionage, violation of NDA, employee agreement, or whatever.
A trade secret is still a trade secret as long as it has not been 'widely disseminated' to the public. As long as it was just in the hands of a few rumors sites, it was not widely disseminated, but if it was on the sites and was read by a few thousand people, it starts crossing that line.
The most interesting bit to me is that every NDA I've ever read (except for ones written on napkins during business lunches) states that the relevant party only has to keep the information learned a secret until he or she hears the information from a third party to which he or she has not signed an NDA.
Basically this means that even if Joe Apple Contractor leaked the info to AppleInsider, Apple would have to prove that he didn't get it from another rumor board first.
As for the cease and desist letters sent out to everyone who posted the pictures (including me), that's simple strongarming. As long as Apple doesn't know for certain that the publisher doesn't have an NDA or other confidentiality agreement with Apple, Apple can tell them to take it down and threaten legal action. Anyone can threaten legal action against anyone else. whether they'd win is another matter entirely, but in many cases (including AppleInsider, MacInTouch, and MacOSRumors) the expense any legal action would entail, valid or not, represents a threat large enough to warrant taking down the info to appease Apple.
This, my friends, is the heart of F.U.D., and unless someone were to organize, fight, and win a class-action harassment suit against Apple, don't expect anything to change. More to the point, such a class-action suit probably wouldn't win, because while the Cube was still conceivably a trade secret, most courts would probably agree to Apple's rights to attempt to protect it in the manner they did.
Of course the punchline is that if they hadn't fought, or better yet, if they send out a barrage of badly photoshopped mock-ups of the Cube along with the real ones, nobody would have believed it anyhow.
According to Palm's site, the dimensions (wlh and weight) of the m100 are exactly the same as the Palm V and Vx. That in and of itself makes it attractive.
If I didn't already have a V, I'd love to be able to get such a small Palm for $150. the Visor's.7" while this is just.4", just over half as thick.
That and at $150 I'd be comfortable taking it places I wouldn't risk my Palm V.
This'll definitely be the must-give present for the spouses, SOs and kids of devout Palm V/Vx owners.
We're supposedly moving ever closer to convergence and internet appliances, but when oh when will these devices come with ethernet adapters? I only have one phone line, but with a 10.net subnet and DSL connection in my house, I feel it's a waste every time I attach a cable box, Tivo, or game system up to my analog line.
Can't these companies start at least coding their boxes with this kind of expandability in mind? Why should we have group playability on these machines running at transfer and latency speeds we stopped accepting 5 years ago?
What?? Header files and interface files are just a side-effect of the C++ language. Eliminating them is closer to a compiler issue, not a language issue. I would hardly say that putting your code in fewer files brings it much closer to Java.
Being a highly component-ized language has nothing to do with how your source code is organized in files. It's all about the re-usable components that you are writing with the language. I wouldn't mind putting all the code for my component in a single file.
Then you should recheck the quote from the interview. To reiterate, Hejlsberg said:
When you write code in C#, you write everything in one place. There is no need for header files, IDL files (Interface Definition Language), GUIDs and complicated interfaces
So then what you (BitchMonkey) are saying is that the advances C# makes over C++ are just compiler issues? This is my point. I don't know what languages you program in (I confess that I stay away from C and C++) but in my experience the twin goals of having code-parts that can be shared by several components and that of having all my code for a component in a single file are mutually exclusive.
Reusability is more than copy and pasting your code from one 'single file' to another.
On the other hand, I could be missing your point entirely, in which case I apologize.
Microsoft doesn't support the CSS standard correctly, just like they didn't support Java correctly.
While more 'complete' than Netscape's CSS implementation, it's inconsistant, not only internally, but also across Mac and Windows platforms running the same version of IE. Regardless of other browsers, standards don't do the developer any good unless they are actually standard.
I meant no disrepsect. I literally meant I'd rather use Dylan (even though it's noi longer supported).
Actually, the best language I've ever programmed in is NewtonScript created by Walter Smith who, ironically, later left Apple to work on Windows CE (now he works on Windows Update).
It's worth checking out (NewtonScript, that is. Not Windows Update).
We picked the best parts out of several languages, but mostly C++
We're incorporating new concepts to make a better language
That's great, but his examples are stupid. Cases in point:
"one of our key design goals was to make the C# language component-oriented, to add to the language itself all of the concepts that you need when you write components. Concepts such as properties, methods, events, attributes, and documentation are all first-class language constructs."
Sure. That's new.
"And C# is the first language to incorporate XML comment tags that can be used by the compiler to generate readable documentation directly from source code."
So what? Ever heard of JavaDoc? POD? Having to code your comments in XML isn't a revolutionary leap (forward, anyhow).
"One of the key differences between C# and these other languages, particularly Java, is that we tried to stay much closer to C++ in our design." -snip-
"Another important concept is what I call "one-stop-shopping software." When you write code in C#, you write everything in one place. There is no need for header files, IDL files (Interface Definition Language), GUIDs and complicated interfaces."
What?? First, C++ is the master of header files and interfaces. To write a language eliminating these is a good thing, but it's moving away from C++ and towards more modern languages like Java, not vice-versa. And even so, how can you say you're creating a highly component-ized language and then write everything in one place? OO-Pascal?
The most annoying thing about this interview is Hejlsberg's stance that people should choose C# because "We're starting with a clean sheet of paper" building a language from scratch. This has been done several times, but too often the first thing that happens to that clean sheet of paper is that it gets marked up with the motives of the creating body, in this case, anti-Java, anti-interoperability Microsoft.
Don't forget this is the same company that spearheaded the standardization of CSS, yet still fails to support the standard correctly in their browsers.
Apple and Microsoft aren't the only ones. Logitech is shipping their padless optical mouse. It looks to be a nice mix of design: Two buttons and a scroll wheel, but not as bulky as the IntelliMouse.
Thanks for the reply. I'm mostly dealing with my own experiences, both with routers and with ISPs, but I'll freely aceed to your expertise. A little of this, a little of that, basically yes, I do dick about routing.
Damn snuclear weapons though, you can never trust them.
Slashdot Mirror
New from Maxis: SimmBeowulf!
Kevin Fox
Uh oh. Judging by the inaccessability of the servers mentioned, I sure hope their site isn't running of a uClinux simm!
"Oops, I forgot to turn off httpd logging. The memory filled up in 1.8 seconds!"
Then again, a rack enclosure with 50 of these guys and a load balancer could be an interesting prospect. Forget tracking session variables by cookie. Each user could be diverted to their very own simm 'associate' for their custom eCommerce transaction!
Kevin Fox
remember, no matter what the medium, you can't keep doubling the performance indefinitely.
Just to play devil's advocate: Why can't you?
What's the actual physical laws that dictate that you can't? As far as I know, there's no equivilant to the laws of thermodynamics pertaining to information theory.
Kevin Fox
It's interesting to think that if people weren't always thinking that Moore's law can't stand up to more than another 10 years, we'd need a new law.
What I mean is that since it takes about 10 years for an emerging technology to go from theory to mass implementation, if there were theories that showed the promise of Moore's Law living on for more than ten years into the future, products based on those theories would emerge faster than Moore's Law predicts.
Fox's Law: The estimated time that Moore's Law will hold true will always be close to the time it takes to turn the latest theory into a commercial product.
Kevin Fox
The worst offender is USA Networks. They have 10-second long fully animated mini-ads for upcoming shows in the corner when you come back from a commercial.
This is almost as irritating as the first week UPN was on the air, and their logo was literally 1/4 the width of the screen and 1/4 the height. It took them a week to realize things on a TV screen look bigger than on a computer screen mockup.
Kevin Fox
(caveat: This is something I remember reading, but I'd love more info either way)
I recall an article talking about Apple product placements in movies and TV, and an interesting tidbit was that sponsors will pay a lot for placement in movies, but that this isn't done in TV. Sure, product placement happens, but it's usually because the company in question donates product (a powerbook here, a truckload of Krispy Kreme doughnuts there), but that there isn't placement for pay on TV.
I wasn't clear whether this is a generally accepted practice, or if it's law. Does anyonehave more info on this?
Kevin Fox
In any case, the article states that on a Tivo unit 88% of the commercials go unwatched.
Don't believe everything you read, sparky.
I can't speak for Replay, but TiVo doesn't have a 30 second skip for exactly the reasons you describe. They have a 6-second back, and three fastforward speeds (the fastest is virtually unusable to skip through commercials because you spend more time cuing up to the end of the commercials than if you just used FFW2). The two reasonable fastforward speeds still allow for the impact of the commercial to get through. In fact, as a usability researcher, I can tell you that the average ad has more impact on FFW2 than it does on 'normal' TV because the viewer is intently watching to determine when the show comes back on so they don't overshoot.
I use my TiVo almost exclusively and I can still tell you who all the advertisers are for all my shows, and for 90% of the ads, the brand recognition is more important to the advertiser than the actual patter contained in the commercial.
you're right on one point, though. Widespread TiVo and replayTV use will change the industry, but it's not a disaster. 15 years ago people thought the VCR would mean the end of premium channels like HBO and Showtime. Now everyone has a VCR and yet premium channels still flourish.
The biggest change the VCR had on the industry is the incessant inclusion of tiny station-identification logos in the corner of the screen.
It's not really the end of the world, but with all the press the DeCSS and Napster cases are getting, it's no wonder people are in a hype-happy mood for any sort of digital copying.
Kevin Fox
The RIAA doesn't like Napster because it interferes with the revenue stream. Music studios get money when people buy new CDs and don't when they're distributed via Napster.
TV, on the other hand, gets revenue through advertising. Neither ReplayTV nor TiVo chops out commercials, so digitally distributed recordings have the commercials in place. every time it's passed around and watched, the commercials are watched too.
So, all that the TV industry needs to do is find a way to get reasonable metrics on which shows are recorded, and which are being passed around, so they can adjust their estimate of the number of impressions a given show, and consequently the commercials, will be viewed, and incorporate that into the price of advertising for a particular show. In fact, both TiVo and ReplayTV already supply 'number of recordings' metrics to the networks. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that the networks are using these figures to adjust the viewership estimates for many shows like X-Files and South Park.
In Canada, for example, the courts have decided that it's okay to redistribute broadcast TV as long as the commercials remain intact. It's not taking money out of anyone's pocket as long as 'recording viewings' are factored into the original advertising and residuals charges.
This is hardly the same thing as copying and distributing purchased CDs.
Kevin Fox
s/easily/more easily than C# be/
Kevin Fox
(I know I'll get thrashed for this, but my karma can take it)
.NET ties which only exist on Windows, is in part a tactical method to inhibit migration of Windows products to other platforms.
It seems to me that creating a new 'standard' language, which neverltheless relies heavily on COM and
Let's say that C# is simply a better language to program for Windows than C++ is. Let's also suppose the hypothetical case where new Windows functionality comes along in future Win versions, and that this functionality is more easily taken advantage of using this new C# language. This gives developers the incentive to code new Windows products in C#. Note that C# has substantially different enough structures that porting from C# to C++ would not be trivial.
Now suppose that Linux (or another OS) starts gaining prominence in the next 2-8 years. As with any new OS, its main barrier to entry is lack of software. (The only reason Linux is viable is because of all the UNIX software it inherits.) In this time, Microsoft's pushing of C# has created a new software base for Windows that is relatively locked into place, unable to be ported to other platforms without significant effort.
Now I'm not saying this is evil. I'm not saying it's a conspiracy. Often languages built for specific environments are superior tools in those environments specifically because they're specialized.
It's just something to be aware of.
Kevin Fox
On the other hand, I took the pictures off of AppleInsider and posted them on my own site. Thereafter I was sent a notice of infringement letter by Apple.
So did I obtain the images through illegal means?
Kevin Fox
Listen: Apple did *not* sue the rumor sites. They sent them cease-and-desist letters, then started going after the employees and/or contractors who leaked the information.
I didn't say they sued the rumor sites. I said they threatened to sue the rumor sites. I should know. I got one of the letters.
-----
And how, exactly, is this "the heart of F.U.D.?" The 'fear', I can understand, but it doesn't seem to me that Apple left much room for 'uncertainty' or 'distrust' -- by ordering the sites to pull the pictures, they basically certified them as the real deal, and no one has been brazen enough to claim that the information wasn't leaked illegally from Apple.
First off, it's "Fear, uncertainty and doubt." Second, the F.U.D. I'm refering to is the fear of prosecution from Apple, the uncertainty of the legality of their actions, let alone yours, and the doubt as to who the bad guy is, you or them.
-----
Your second-to-last paragraph makes no sense. The aggrieved parties would win, because the courts would back Apple?
Which part of " More to the point, such a class-action suit probably wouldn't win " didn't you understand?
-----
Finally, the last thing you recommend *is* an example of FUD -- by manipulating the evidence as you suggest, Apple would have been, in my mind, guilty of far worse an offense than asking some stolen pictures to get yanked from the Web.
Uncertainty and doubt? Sure, but that's what rumor sites are all about. Fear? I don't know about you, but I'm not afraid of looking at photoshop mockups of products that may or may not exist.
But thanks for playing.
Kevin Fox
Basically trade secrecy laws can be enforced on the person who stole the secret, via espionage, violation of NDA, employee agreement, or whatever.
A trade secret is still a trade secret as long as it has not been 'widely disseminated' to the public. As long as it was just in the hands of a few rumors sites, it was not widely disseminated, but if it was on the sites and was read by a few thousand people, it starts crossing that line.
The most interesting bit to me is that every NDA I've ever read (except for ones written on napkins during business lunches) states that the relevant party only has to keep the information learned a secret until he or she hears the information from a third party to which he or she has not signed an NDA.
Basically this means that even if Joe Apple Contractor leaked the info to AppleInsider, Apple would have to prove that he didn't get it from another rumor board first.
As for the cease and desist letters sent out to everyone who posted the pictures (including me), that's simple strongarming. As long as Apple doesn't know for certain that the publisher doesn't have an NDA or other confidentiality agreement with Apple, Apple can tell them to take it down and threaten legal action. Anyone can threaten legal action against anyone else. whether they'd win is another matter entirely, but in many cases (including AppleInsider, MacInTouch, and MacOSRumors) the expense any legal action would entail, valid or not, represents a threat large enough to warrant taking down the info to appease Apple.
This, my friends, is the heart of F.U.D., and unless someone were to organize, fight, and win a class-action harassment suit against Apple, don't expect anything to change. More to the point, such a class-action suit probably wouldn't win, because while the Cube was still conceivably a trade secret, most courts would probably agree to Apple's rights to attempt to protect it in the manner they did.
Of course the punchline is that if they hadn't fought, or better yet, if they send out a barrage of badly photoshopped mock-ups of the Cube along with the real ones, nobody would have believed it anyhow.
Kevin Fox
According to Palm's site, the dimensions (wlh and weight) of the m100 are exactly the same as the Palm V and Vx. That in and of itself makes it attractive.
.7" while this is just .4", just over half as thick.
If I didn't already have a V, I'd love to be able to get such a small Palm for $150. the Visor's
That and at $150 I'd be comfortable taking it places I wouldn't risk my Palm V.
This'll definitely be the must-give present for the spouses, SOs and kids of devout Palm V/Vx owners.
Kevin Fox
Oops, I missed the bit about ethernet. Okay Mods, go easy, but the post still applies to all the *other* machines out there.
Go go xbox.
Kevin Fox
We're supposedly moving ever closer to convergence and internet appliances, but when oh when will these devices come with ethernet adapters? I only have one phone line, but with a 10.net subnet and DSL connection in my house, I feel it's a waste every time I attach a cable box, Tivo, or game system up to my analog line.
Can't these companies start at least coding their boxes with this kind of expandability in mind? Why should we have group playability on these machines running at transfer and latency speeds we stopped accepting 5 years ago?
Kevin Fox
What?? Header files and interface files are just a side-effect of the C++ language. Eliminating them is closer to a compiler issue, not a language issue. I would hardly say that putting your code in fewer files brings it much closer to Java.
Being a highly component-ized language has nothing to do with how your source code is organized in files. It's all about the re-usable components that you are writing with the language. I wouldn't mind putting all the code for my component in a single file.
Then you should recheck the quote from the interview. To reiterate, Hejlsberg said:
When you write code in C#, you write everything in one place. There is no need for header files, IDL files (Interface Definition Language), GUIDs and complicated interfaces
So then what you ( BitchMonkey ) are saying is that the advances C# makes over C++ are just compiler issues? This is my point. I don't know what languages you program in (I confess that I stay away from C and C++) but in my experience the twin goals of having code-parts that can be shared by several components and that of having all my code for a component in a single file are mutually exclusive.
Reusability is more than copy and pasting your code from one 'single file' to another.
On the other hand, I could be missing your point entirely, in which case I apologize.
Kevin Fox
Microsoft doesn't support the CSS standard correctly, just like they didn't support Java correctly.
While more 'complete' than Netscape's CSS implementation, it's inconsistant, not only internally, but also across Mac and Windows platforms running the same version of IE. Regardless of other browsers, standards don't do the developer any good unless they are actually standard.
Supporting evidence can be found here and here.
Kevin Fox
I meant no disrepsect. I literally meant I'd rather use Dylan (even though it's noi longer supported).
Actually, the best language I've ever programmed in is NewtonScript created by Walter Smith who, ironically, later left Apple to work on Windows CE (now he works on Windows Update).
It's worth checking out (NewtonScript, that is. Not Windows Update).
Kevin Fox
That's great, but his examples are stupid. Cases in point:
"one of our key design goals was to make the C# language component-oriented, to add to the language itself all of the concepts that you need when you write components. Concepts such as properties, methods, events, attributes, and documentation are all first-class language constructs."
Sure. That's new.
"And C# is the first language to incorporate XML comment tags that can be used by the compiler to generate readable documentation directly from source code."
So what? Ever heard of JavaDoc? POD? Having to code your comments in XML isn't a revolutionary leap (forward, anyhow).
"One of the key differences between C# and these other languages, particularly Java, is that we tried to stay much closer to C++ in our design."
-snip-
"Another important concept is what I call "one-stop-shopping software." When you write code in C#, you write everything in one place. There is no need for header files, IDL files (Interface Definition Language), GUIDs and complicated interfaces."
What?? First, C++ is the master of header files and interfaces. To write a language eliminating these is a good thing, but it's moving away from C++ and towards more modern languages like Java, not vice-versa. And even so, how can you say you're creating a highly component-ized language and then write everything in one place? OO-Pascal?
The most annoying thing about this interview is Hejlsberg's stance that people should choose C# because "We're starting with a clean sheet of paper" building a language from scratch. This has been done several times, but too often the first thing that happens to that clean sheet of paper is that it gets marked up with the motives of the creating body, in this case, anti-Java, anti-interoperability Microsoft.
Don't forget this is the same company that spearheaded the standardization of CSS, yet still fails to support the standard correctly in their browsers.
I'd just as soon start using Dylan exclusively.
Kevin Fox
There's an absolutely fabulous and revealing interview with Richard Stallman from a couple weeks ago up on Pigdog.
Kevin Fox
Isn't this just the set for Big Brother 2001?
Kevin Fox
Am I the only one who gets the wrong idea when people talk about a PS/2?
I can't wait until the release of the new Dungeons and Dragons logic peripheral, the TSR-80!
Kevin Fox
Apple and Microsoft aren't the only ones. Logitech is shipping their padless optical mouse. It looks to be a nice mix of design: Two buttons and a scroll wheel, but not as bulky as the IntelliMouse.
Kevin Fox
Thanks for the reply. I'm mostly dealing with my own experiences, both with routers and with ISPs, but I'll freely aceed to your expertise. A little of this, a little of that, basically yes, I do dick about routing.
Damn snuclear weapons though, you can never trust them.
Kevin Fox