So I should pack 2 laptops around?:) If I ever do something that relies on a "UNIX only" feature (which is not that often... Perl, PHP, and other useful things run equally well on Windows) then I use two machines. Otherwise Apache running on Windows simulates the intended environment quite well. At least well enough that I don't have to lug 2 computers around to be mobile.
you get so much of a better feel on how computers actually work
I'm willing to be that 95% of people who are using computers don't care to get a better feel of how they work. I don't care how my DVD player works... it just works. If my DVD player had a command prompt rather than a remote, but the precense of a command prompt would allow me to monitor the bitrate and CPU usage on the DVD player, I would probably take return it and get one with a remote.
Actually, IIS is not that much of a player in.NET. Everything.NET is handled through an ISAPI module for IIS that could easily be run by something else. It makes very little use of existing IIS functionality at all other than the http port.
I do it because I like developing websites on Windows (Photoshop, etc.) and most of the websites I do are hosted on Apache. In the cases where I don't have direct access to the server, I simply set up my Apache system to mirror the configuration of the intended server, and then write the site and test away. This could easily be done with two computers, but it's nice to have everything all in one box.
I'm pretty sure you're right about this. I went poking around on the Microsoft website and the location where I've downloaded PWS before was gone. And I'm pretty sure I did read somewhere that MS intended to clean up the server product line and replace it with a trimmed version of IIS instead (that actually has useful functionality.)
FYI, while IIS (version 5 and version 6) may not be config file configurable, in a W2K or XP ASP.NET configuration they are nothing more than no-configuration-needed shims for the.NET framework, which is fully configurable using XML files. You can set performance, security, and your own custom properties for each individual component, group of components, or the entire ASP.NET system.
Yes, Java is composed of bytecode that runs in a sandbox... so is.NET.
But all this virus does is wrap.NET bytecode with a malicious native executable. You could just as easily write a virus that wrapped a Java.class file with malicious native executable... the only problem there is that Java.class files are not named with an.exe extension. But renaming it to an.exe would take care of that. And, it should be noted, a.dll.NET bytecode file, which is the direct equivalent of a Java.class file, cannot be infected this way since it's not directly executable.
I hate to break this to you, but you can get an old 486 or Pentium laptop for much less $ than a Linux PDA. It comes with a real keyboard, and a normal size screen. There's actually room to store a full-sized website and large amounts of code on it. You can plug it into 100bt ethernet rather than having to rely on having wireless access. The only advantage using a PDA to do the things you mention is that the box that can do those things fits in your pocket. I'll leave that space in my pocket for the money I'll save... and I'll get alot more done in the meantime.
I don't expect PDAs to be desktops. But they aren't servers or development machines either. Can you explain what you would use gcc on a handheld for? (since that one has the most exclamation points, I'm assuming that's your most-wanted app.) And IMHO, vi is really designed for a full size keyboard, not a PDA keyboard. If you can't be productive and quick on the keyboard in vi, what's the point?
What are you talking about dude. I've never heard of a Mac keyboard button called the start button, and there's definitely not one labeled as such. If you're talking about the button with a universal symbol for "power" on it, it's called a "power button." And OSX still has the Apple menu... functionality's a bit different, but no more-so than the XP start menu, which is equally changed since the 9x version.
All of the stories have the date "January 14, 2002" above them.
The stories are from the January 14th issue of Time, which will be out in a few days. That's not intended to be today's date. Stories on time.com do the same thing (although the time.com front page shows today's date, because it's not just a mirror of the most recent issue, but a daily news site.)
When you compile a C# application, you have a choice of compiling to the CLR bytecode, or to a native EXE.
No, that's not true. The MS C# compiler only compiles to bytecode. It's possible to avoid JITing that bytecode at runtime by setting an option for any particular bytecode package (this is called PreJITing, and it caches the native image), but you can do that for any application or library on your system, not just those you compile yourself.
The preJITer can take advantage of your specific hardware when generating a native image. Bytecode is actually better when you have that power... wouldn't you rather compile something for Linux directly from the source to optimize it for your machine rather then just install the 386 binary? That's what preJITing lets you do (except you notably don't get the source.:) )
Re:Ahh! Monsanto! Makers of Aspertame/Nutrisweet
on
Monsanto and PCBs
·
· Score: 1
Regardless of the truth or non-truth of the comment, it's more important to realize that this is the same company that produces NutraSweet. I don't care what it does or doesn't do to you. I'm not buying it anymore.
If only subjects could be moded up without the associated comments...
So 100GB drives are getting more and more common. So what? Are backups really any more a problem than when 200MB or less drives were common? We didn't have CD-R back then, much less DVD-R... Only smaller capacity tapes and floppies. And, people with 100GB drives... is what you have on that drive really of more substantial value than what you would have been able to store on a 200MB drive? In my opinion, I don't value what I have on my 30GB drive any more than I valued what was on my 200MB drive "way back when." I think the ratio of data I cared about to data I don't care about was about the same then as it is now. And the backup technology available today can hit that percentage (which I think is about 20%) pretty easily (CD-R) with about as much relative difficulty as floppy-swapping could have back then. Everything else can be reinstalled... no big deal.
Sure, blame the companies for setting those prices. But we don't HAVE to buy the software to play games, because we don't HAVE to play games. We don't HAVE to use a computer either. When someone starts trying to EULA air or water, then I think I will use "HAVE to" in a sentence refering to a consumer product.:)
Yeah, but they never make it if no one buys it, so they don't lose anything. If 40,000 Linux h4x0r2 buy an XBox just to install Linux and not to play games, MS loses 400,000 on the deal. But if those 40,000 people DON'T buy XBoxes, that doesn't mean MS is going to queue up 40,000 XBoxes and just let them sit on the shelves. I'm willing to bet they wouldn't even queue up 10,000.... which would be the break-even point in loss. Demand drives supply.
I'm sure most properly designed software that runs on 98 through ME will still run on 95 for years to come
No, I don't think so. For example, alot of software has at least one dependancy on IE... which alot of core windows components are tied to. If you want to use the newest components, your software has to require a newer version of IE, which also ties you to the versions of Windows that that version of IE supports. And pretty soon that will not be Windows 95 (in fact, it already isn't.) Also, any.NET app written will not run on Windows 95.... the framework is not supported on that platform. Kind of catch-22ish. But I don't think it's that bad to add XP to the mix and remove 95, personally. XP is more like 2000 in terms of what's available and works on it than 95 is like 98.
Agreed. I'm not sure how Nielsen can claim that light decoration is enough for an usable website. I personally don't think his own homepage (www.useit.com) is very usable at all. When I look at it, I have no idea what I should read first. I just stare at it blankly for a few seconds. If you don't decorate specific items to indicate the level of relative importance, a webpage may get to the browser fast, but then you lose those very seconds when the user is overwhelmed. The human brain likes to sort things out, but when there are no visual clues to help the brain do that task, you have a usability problem. Nielsen's site exemplifies that.
On his site, the useit search bar is what strikes me first. But what am I supposed to search for? It's not Amazon. I need to know more about what things are available before I search. So I look below the bar... and am blasted with two full pages of similarly )and badly) formatted text... nothing seemling any more relevant than anything else. Anyone else feel that way?
Slashdot Mirror
So I should pack 2 laptops around? :) If I ever do something that relies on a "UNIX only" feature (which is not that often... Perl, PHP, and other useful things run equally well on Windows) then I use two machines. Otherwise Apache running on Windows simulates the intended environment quite well. At least well enough that I don't have to lug 2 computers around to be mobile.
you get so much of a better feel on how computers actually work
I'm willing to be that 95% of people who are using computers don't care to get a better feel of how they work. I don't care how my DVD player works... it just works. If my DVD player had a command prompt rather than a remote, but the precense of a command prompt would allow me to monitor the bitrate and CPU usage on the DVD player, I would probably take return it and get one with a remote.
Actually, IIS is not that much of a player in .NET. Everything .NET is handled through an ISAPI module for IIS that could easily be run by something else. It makes very little use of existing IIS functionality at all other than the http port.
I do it because I like developing websites on Windows (Photoshop, etc.) and most of the websites I do are hosted on Apache. In the cases where I don't have direct access to the server, I simply set up my Apache system to mirror the configuration of the intended server, and then write the site and test away. This could easily be done with two computers, but it's nice to have everything all in one box.
I'm pretty sure you're right about this. I went poking around on the Microsoft website and the location where I've downloaded PWS before was gone. And I'm pretty sure I did read somewhere that MS intended to clean up the server product line and replace it with a trimmed version of IIS instead (that actually has useful functionality.)
For the same reason that they post duplicate stories? To revive the dead horses and the lame ducks so we can work them over again? :)
FYI, while IIS (version 5 and version 6) may not be config file configurable, in a W2K or XP ASP.NET configuration they are nothing more than no-configuration-needed shims for the .NET framework, which is fully configurable using XML files. You can set performance, security, and your own custom properties for each individual component, group of components, or the entire ASP.NET system.
Yes, Java is composed of bytecode that runs in a sandbox... so is .NET.
.NET bytecode with a malicious native executable. You could just as easily write a virus that wrapped a Java .class file with malicious native executable... the only problem there is that Java .class files are not named with an .exe extension. But renaming it to an .exe would take care of that. And, it should be noted, a .dll .NET bytecode file, which is the direct equivalent of a Java .class file, cannot be infected this way since it's not directly executable.
But all this virus does is wrap
I hate to break this to you, but you can get an old 486 or Pentium laptop for much less $ than a Linux PDA. It comes with a real keyboard, and a normal size screen. There's actually room to store a full-sized website and large amounts of code on it. You can plug it into 100bt ethernet rather than having to rely on having wireless access. The only advantage using a PDA to do the things you mention is that the box that can do those things fits in your pocket. I'll leave that space in my pocket for the money I'll save... and I'll get alot more done in the meantime.
A gcc cross compiler, like the one that is used by Palm, would work equally well. I am still not convinced of the value of this.
I don't expect PDAs to be desktops. But they aren't servers or development machines either. Can you explain what you would use gcc on a handheld for? (since that one has the most exclamation points, I'm assuming that's your most-wanted app.) And IMHO, vi is really designed for a full size keyboard, not a PDA keyboard. If you can't be productive and quick on the keyboard in vi, what's the point?
What are you talking about dude. I've never heard of a Mac keyboard button called the start button, and there's definitely not one labeled as such. If you're talking about the button with a universal symbol for "power" on it, it's called a "power button." And OSX still has the Apple menu... functionality's a bit different, but no more-so than the XP start menu, which is equally changed since the 9x version.
All of the stories have the date "January 14, 2002" above them.
The stories are from the January 14th issue of Time, which will be out in a few days. That's not intended to be today's date. Stories on time.com do the same thing (although the time.com front page shows today's date, because it's not just a mirror of the most recent issue, but a daily news site.)
Until a compiler compiles itself it is usally considered a "toy" language
Does Perl compile itself? Nice toy.
When you compile a C# application, you have a choice of compiling to the CLR bytecode, or to a native EXE.
:) )
No, that's not true. The MS C# compiler only compiles to bytecode. It's possible to avoid JITing that bytecode at runtime by setting an option for any particular bytecode package (this is called PreJITing, and it caches the native image), but you can do that for any application or library on your system, not just those you compile yourself.
The preJITer can take advantage of your specific hardware when generating a native image. Bytecode is actually better when you have that power... wouldn't you rather compile something for Linux directly from the source to optimize it for your machine rather then just install the 386 binary? That's what preJITing lets you do (except you notably don't get the source.
Regardless of the truth or non-truth of the comment, it's more important to realize that this is the same company that produces NutraSweet. I don't care what it does or doesn't do to you. I'm not buying it anymore.
If only subjects could be moded up without the associated comments...
So 100GB drives are getting more and more common. So what? Are backups really any more a problem than when 200MB or less drives were common? We didn't have CD-R back then, much less DVD-R... Only smaller capacity tapes and floppies. And, people with 100GB drives... is what you have on that drive really of more substantial value than what you would have been able to store on a 200MB drive? In my opinion, I don't value what I have on my 30GB drive any more than I valued what was on my 200MB drive "way back when." I think the ratio of data I cared about to data I don't care about was about the same then as it is now. And the backup technology available today can hit that percentage (which I think is about 20%) pretty easily (CD-R) with about as much relative difficulty as floppy-swapping could have back then. Everything else can be reinstalled... no big deal.
Sure, blame the companies for setting those prices. But we don't HAVE to buy the software to play games, because we don't HAVE to play games. We don't HAVE to use a computer either. When someone starts trying to EULA air or water, then I think I will use "HAVE to" in a sentence refering to a consumer product. :)
I don't know about you but I'm not going to put an AUTOEXEC.BAT file on my Linux box.
What's one more startup script amongst hundreds? OK, so your DOS is set to HIGH,UMB. Big deal!
New keyboard... that's my pitiful excuse. 4,000,000. Oh, and I math and I don't get along. :)
400,000
Oops, multiply that by 10 more. 400,000.
Yeah, but they never make it if no one buys it, so they don't lose anything. If 40,000 Linux h4x0r2 buy an XBox just to install Linux and not to play games, MS loses 400,000 on the deal. But if those 40,000 people DON'T buy XBoxes, that doesn't mean MS is going to queue up 40,000 XBoxes and just let them sit on the shelves. I'm willing to bet they wouldn't even queue up 10,000.... which would be the break-even point in loss. Demand drives supply.
have to dig a little bit
Ok, do some digging, and post the link here. Pre-releases and beta versions don't count.
I'm sure most properly designed software that runs on 98 through ME will still run on 95 for years to come
.NET app written will not run on Windows 95.... the framework is not supported on that platform. Kind of catch-22ish. But I don't think it's that bad to add XP to the mix and remove 95, personally. XP is more like 2000 in terms of what's available and works on it than 95 is like 98.
No, I don't think so. For example, alot of software has at least one dependancy on IE... which alot of core windows components are tied to. If you want to use the newest components, your software has to require a newer version of IE, which also ties you to the versions of Windows that that version of IE supports. And pretty soon that will not be Windows 95 (in fact, it already isn't.) Also, any
Agreed. I'm not sure how Nielsen can claim that light decoration is enough for an usable website. I personally don't think his own homepage (www.useit.com) is very usable at all. When I look at it, I have no idea what I should read first. I just stare at it blankly for a few seconds. If you don't decorate specific items to indicate the level of relative importance, a webpage may get to the browser fast, but then you lose those very seconds when the user is overwhelmed. The human brain likes to sort things out, but when there are no visual clues to help the brain do that task, you have a usability problem. Nielsen's site exemplifies that.
On his site, the useit search bar is what strikes me first. But what am I supposed to search for? It's not Amazon. I need to know more about what things are available before I search. So I look below the bar... and am blasted with two full pages of similarly )and badly) formatted text... nothing seemling any more relevant than anything else. Anyone else feel that way?