QUOTE: The real question is this: would you rather program against the pitiful number API's that come with C#, or the huge Free Software diversity that you get with C? The death of C has been greatly exaggerated.
Now what a spin. The.NET API's are by no means 'pitiful in number', and they can be embraced, extended, and overridden as desired. C *can* adapt, but the point of a C# based desktop system or development platform is not solely to exclude C, but to bring the benefits of managed code to other system consumers. C could adapt, but not without a lot of overhead and fundamental changes that really is the point behind C#. I'm sure we'll be in a backwards-compatible, C-friendly world for a long time to come, but there's no reason to bash something new and different because it is new a different. That's just FUD.
True, I don't think it's worth it's retail costs... but how did this situation get this way? Because OEM's refuse to offer all their configurations with options for alternatives. By doing this consistently, they ensure generations of users are familiar with only one desktop solution, and then only that one is in demand.
Now I know some do or have, but you can't tell me there's a true choice -- I can't go to Dell.com and get what I want with Linux... heck, I can't get hardly anything with Linux.
Windows isn't overpriced just because MS is greedy. It's also overpriced because the OEM's have painted themselves in a corner.
Well if China can get away with this under the WTO's side, I hope some non pro-BigBusiness types can bring similar legislation up in the US. I for one, an unemployed IT worker at the moment, would welcome some kinds of protections on jobs for citizens who are highly motivated and skilled, but shut out of a labor force that has been moved overseas who don't have to pay for the cost of living I do.
I wonder if this will integrate into their sponsorship with Orkut? Maybe it's lending them some ideas about how people interact that will let them introduce some new features into webmail to make it more appealing...
Of course he's going to embrace.NET technologies, even if they allow rivals to compete against other Microsoft products. MS has done a fantastic job of promoting the.NET framework, getting free tools out to people to learn their systems, and now they're locking in various businesses into expensive VS.NET installations. Not to mention MS Press books and other training that my workplace purchases.... they're quite smart. Evil, but smart.
Unfortunately, if you have an older 2G phone on the Sprint PCS network, you don't pay to receive SMS messages themselves, but it costs you 39 cents/minute (or about $10-15/month if you want a package) to "get on the web" to view the message. Otherwise, your voicemail indicator stays on until you download it.
That's why I ask people *not* to text message me. It really sucks.
I'm also a senior at the University of Oklahoma preparing to graduating with a degree in MIS. While the situation is very bleak here too (bad economy, plus, few high-tech jobs exist in Oklahoma), I think it would be a misnomer to declare the software industry dead. The driving force behind new application development, growth, will return someday. In the meantime, there is still a market for software engineers to maintain and incrementally upgrade existing applications.
It really sucks to graduate into this kind of market. However, you may look around at government jobs. At least here, this state can't keep technology workers here, so state IT jobs command some of the highest merit system pay grades for entry-level jobs. Also, a number of military installations (AFB's in Texas and Oklahoma I'm aware of at least) have their Vietname-era programmers reaching retirement age and leaving in droves. Maybe a government job isn't very stylish, but it's something in an economy that won't throw me a friggin' bone here.;P
I really wish something would be done to this effect. As a senior graduating in May with my undergrad in MIS, many of us are looking at a Catch-22 job market where entry level programming positions are being moved off-shore, and other available corporate positions require that work experience as a prerequisite.
It's definitely not fair IMNSHO that minimum wage laws that aim to maintain a quality of living in this country make beggers out of degreed job-seekers and shift lost wages to other countries.
Honestly, even if they had, what could good could the advanced notification have done? Surely in a few hours not even 5% of all vulnerable systems would be patched, so the point is fairly moot, I believe.
I think the problem increases as programmers are less and less a part of the complete systems development life cycle and are contracted to work on individual components of an overall system. Especially during the maintenance phases of a system's life, the inexperience of new programmers on a project is probably more to blame than 'training' per say to think in a black-box mentality.
It's a good point that perhaps we are focusing perhaps too intently on the life lost in the Columbia accident compared to other deathes around the world, but I disagree in part to the idea our expenditures in space are ill-placed.
If we want to develop tomorrow's cures for AIDS or other diseases that grab our attention in horrific ways or otherwise improve our quality of life, we have to expand our knowledge -- in some ways only experimentation in space can. Granted, it's not a panacea for every social ill, but Tower of Babel I think is going too far. The rewards we reap in applications for healthcare, engineering, and otherwise could be used for the greater good or to become a nationalistic bully. However, that's a rather short-term effect.
Instead, if we invest everything now in our close-to-home problems, we might solve those problems. What about the future? We won't be prepared if we don't look ahead.
The payoff for continuing involvement in the expensive field of space exploration lie not in the development of a commercially viable model from the exploration itself. Rather, our incentive is a contribution to the great body of knowledge known as basic research.
While I won't deny that it's great to gain knowledge for its own sake, that's really not the point. Governments for years has understood the value in making significant contributions to basic research so that private firms can capitalize on those findings and bolster the economy of the nation making the investment. Whether or not that model is viable in today's global, instantaneous information-sharing age is debatable, but to continue in that mentality, we must look beyond such tragic, yet short-term disasters such as Columbia and understand where we would and would not be without our ventures into space experimentation if we were to cease. Leadership demands sacrifice.
Now what I'm wondering is if this will be a self-selecting method for fuzzy-logic programs the federal government keeps hyping to identify people who oppose certain vaguely-terrorist-related legislation and policies.
Makes you wonder - if it's out there and on a public government site, sure seems open to that level of scrutiny.
That's an interesting point. If their DRM system can prevent the ripping of MP3's and ISO's, imagine the PR line MS would have. I'm sure they would push the idea that Linux and other non-Microsoft operating systems' purposes are to perpetrate illegal activities, casting anything non-MS in a highly questional light.
I'm a MIS senior now, and while pure academics may not accept.NET in the classroom, it all depends on what the industry adopts. When talking with fellow classmates about programming courses, they want to take whatever is widest-deployed so they can use the degree-required class as a resume bullet point. If.NET becomes a hot new standard and competitive edge, it will be adopted by the student body much faster than you might imagine.
Slashdot Mirror
QUOTE: The real question is this: would you rather program against the pitiful number API's that come with C#, or the huge Free Software diversity that you get with C? The death of C has been greatly exaggerated.
.NET API's are by no means 'pitiful in number', and they can be embraced, extended, and overridden as desired. C *can* adapt, but the point of a C# based desktop system or development platform is not solely to exclude C, but to bring the benefits of managed code to other system consumers. C could adapt, but not without a lot of overhead and fundamental changes that really is the point behind C#. I'm sure we'll be in a backwards-compatible, C-friendly world for a long time to come, but there's no reason to bash something new and different because it is new a different. That's just FUD.
Now what a spin. The
True, I don't think it's worth it's retail costs... but how did this situation get this way? Because OEM's refuse to offer all their configurations with options for alternatives. By doing this consistently, they ensure generations of users are familiar with only one desktop solution, and then only that one is in demand.
Now I know some do or have, but you can't tell me there's a true choice -- I can't go to Dell.com and get what I want with Linux... heck, I can't get hardly anything with Linux.
Windows isn't overpriced just because MS is greedy. It's also overpriced because the OEM's have painted themselves in a corner.
Well if China can get away with this under the WTO's side, I hope some non pro-BigBusiness types can bring similar legislation up in the US. I for one, an unemployed IT worker at the moment, would welcome some kinds of protections on jobs for citizens who are highly motivated and skilled, but shut out of a labor force that has been moved overseas who don't have to pay for the cost of living I do.
I wonder if this will integrate into their sponsorship with Orkut? Maybe it's lending them some ideas about how people interact that will let them introduce some new features into webmail to make it more appealing...
Of course he's going to embrace .NET technologies, even if they allow rivals to compete against other Microsoft products. MS has done a fantastic job of promoting the .NET framework, getting free tools out to people to learn their systems, and now they're locking in various businesses into expensive VS.NET installations. Not to mention MS Press books and other training that my workplace purchases.... they're quite smart. Evil, but smart.
Unfortunately, if you have an older 2G phone on the Sprint PCS network, you don't pay to receive SMS messages themselves, but it costs you 39 cents/minute (or about $10-15/month if you want a package) to "get on the web" to view the message. Otherwise, your voicemail indicator stays on until you download it.
That's why I ask people *not* to text message me. It really sucks.
I'm also a senior at the University of Oklahoma preparing to graduating with a degree in MIS. While the situation is very bleak here too (bad economy, plus, few high-tech jobs exist in Oklahoma), I think it would be a misnomer to declare the software industry dead. The driving force behind new application development, growth, will return someday. In the meantime, there is still a market for software engineers to maintain and incrementally upgrade existing applications.
;P
It really sucks to graduate into this kind of market. However, you may look around at government jobs. At least here, this state can't keep technology workers here, so state IT jobs command some of the highest merit system pay grades for entry-level jobs. Also, a number of military installations (AFB's in Texas and Oklahoma I'm aware of at least) have their Vietname-era programmers reaching retirement age and leaving in droves. Maybe a government job isn't very stylish, but it's something in an economy that won't throw me a friggin' bone here.
I really wish something would be done to this effect. As a senior graduating in May with my undergrad in MIS, many of us are looking at a Catch-22 job market where entry level programming positions are being moved off-shore, and other available corporate positions require that work experience as a prerequisite.
It's definitely not fair IMNSHO that minimum wage laws that aim to maintain a quality of living in this country make beggers out of degreed job-seekers and shift lost wages to other countries.
I'd say "Don't go into IT! Be an engineer like Mom and Dad want!!" ;)
Honestly, even if they had, what could good could the advanced notification have done? Surely in a few hours not even 5% of all vulnerable systems would be patched, so the point is fairly moot, I believe.
I think the problem increases as programmers are less and less a part of the complete systems development life cycle and are contracted to work on individual components of an overall system. Especially during the maintenance phases of a system's life, the inexperience of new programmers on a project is probably more to blame than 'training' per say to think in a black-box mentality.
Wouldn't the Mono project constitute as prior art? Can patents prevent derivatives after they've already been in existance?
It's a good point that perhaps we are focusing perhaps too intently on the life lost in the Columbia accident compared to other deathes around the world, but I disagree in part to the idea our expenditures in space are ill-placed.
If we want to develop tomorrow's cures for AIDS or other diseases that grab our attention in horrific ways or otherwise improve our quality of life, we have to expand our knowledge -- in some ways only experimentation in space can. Granted, it's not a panacea for every social ill, but Tower of Babel I think is going too far. The rewards we reap in applications for healthcare, engineering, and otherwise could be used for the greater good or to become a nationalistic bully. However, that's a rather short-term effect.
Instead, if we invest everything now in our close-to-home problems, we might solve those problems. What about the future? We won't be prepared if we don't look ahead.
The payoff for continuing involvement in the expensive field of space exploration lie not in the development of a commercially viable model from the exploration itself. Rather, our incentive is a contribution to the great body of knowledge known as basic research.
While I won't deny that it's great to gain knowledge for its own sake, that's really not the point. Governments for years has understood the value in making significant contributions to basic research so that private firms can capitalize on those findings and bolster the economy of the nation making the investment. Whether or not that model is viable in today's global, instantaneous information-sharing age is debatable, but to continue in that mentality, we must look beyond such tragic, yet short-term disasters such as Columbia and understand where we would and would not be without our ventures into space experimentation if we were to cease. Leadership demands sacrifice.
Now what I'm wondering is if this will be a self-selecting method for fuzzy-logic programs the federal government keeps hyping to identify people who oppose certain vaguely-terrorist-related legislation and policies.
Makes you wonder - if it's out there and on a public government site, sure seems open to that level of scrutiny.
"Stopping windows isos being traded on P2P?"
That's an interesting point. If their DRM system can prevent the ripping of MP3's and ISO's, imagine the PR line MS would have. I'm sure they would push the idea that Linux and other non-Microsoft operating systems' purposes are to perpetrate illegal activities, casting anything non-MS in a highly questional light.
I'm a MIS senior now, and while pure academics may not accept .NET in the classroom, it all depends on what the industry adopts. When talking with fellow classmates about programming courses, they want to take whatever is widest-deployed so they can use the degree-required class as a resume bullet point. If .NET becomes a hot new standard and competitive edge, it will be adopted by the student body much faster than you might imagine.