Decimals are typically only used in scientific and mathematic situations.
That's why the metric system invented many different kinds of "whole" units, which are in effect decimals, but allow people to treat them as if they aren't.
Why do you suppose that is? Most likely because the human brain, unless you've had years of training, doesn't think in decimals.
If you're a carpenter, you're not dealing with.25 of an inch, you're dealing with 1/4 inch. If you're a mechanic you don't have a.125" wrench or a.01 meter socket, you have an 1/8th inch wrench, or a 10mm socket.
C# is a *language*, not a platform.. yes, the most common platform is a windows platform, but there are projects that, for example, will compile C# to native code that runs on Linux.
Now, granted, most of those projects are experimental, but look at dotgnu (an official FSF project) or LLVM#
Oracle doesn't seem to have received that message.
Even if it turns out that Oracle's case is lost, OpenJDK isn't patent protected, it's only protected against the old Sun patents. It could still violate someone elses patent that Sun doesn't own.
Neither question have anything to do with the claim that C# is too windows centric.
Your questions also reveal a lack of undestanding of the difference betweeen a language and a framework library. C#, the language, does not rely on anything microsoft, other than the specification.
Also, since C# is an ISO standard, any lawsuit would be.. problematic to say the least.
Lol.. yeah, 10 years ago.. they backed out of the process twice. Really pissed off a lot of ISO people that had invested a lot of time and effort into it.
You're confusing two markets. The first is the application platform. If you're the one writing the low-level OS and apps, that's one thing.
If you're talking about things like iphone and android, then you're talking about an app market with 10's of thousands of applications, few of which have any idea of what the underlying hardware is... At worst, you have issues with screen layout because screen sizes change.
So, a new processor comes out, and now you want to make all 10,000 of those vendors recompile their apps? You also want to make the customer choose which version of the app to download?
Well, oracles core database products is very good, and is used in a lot of high visibility applications. So one cannot say that everything oracle does is shit.
However, you are wrong about open source people not being worried about MS and.NET. There are entire websites built up around trying to fight.NET gaining a foothold in open source software. And the majority of the argument is that they are afraid Micorosft will sue people that implement.net in open source software.
Now, it turns out that the Java camp were the first ones to sue.
There are literally hundreds of different processors out there, some are binary compatible with each other, some aren't. It would quickly devolve into an unmanageable mess trying to compile apps for each platform, then you have to confuse the user by making them choose which platform to download.
Microsoft used to do that with Windows mobile, and it was a mess.. and it put severe limitations on what platforms could be used.
This way, if a new processor comes out, someone need only write a vm for it, and all apps work developers won't need to recompile for new platforms.
What I find ironic is that everyone was worried about Microsoft suing open source implementors of.NET, and claiming that Java should be used instead.... Oops.
Because devices run on different hardware and CPU's. C requires that you (at a minimum) recompile for every platform, and ship a different binary for every platform.
C# has absolutely nothing windows oriented to it. It's a completely platform agnostic language.
Now, if you're talking about.NET, that's a slightly different story, although much of it, especially the CLI is also platform neutral. The only parts that are windows specific are things that can be replaced, such as the GUI framework.
First, how do you prove that you've never seen the patent claims. Second, how do you prove you've never used or been exposed to the claimed methods?
Kind of hard to prove a negative. Because the patent is in the public space, it's the same as.. for example publishing something in the newspaper as proof that someone has been notified of a legal action (which is commonly accepted in many kinds of legal issues).
No, the article claims that's why they're doing it, but really.. the argument makes no sense.
Even if you pay the patent fees, you're still paying less than licensing Windows mobile/phone, so the argument is that Microsoft is threatenging people that they have to pay license fees that cost less than licensing windows mobile, in order to force people to license windows mobile?
Your argument, and the articles argument makes no sense.
Ok, so if you ship android with software that requires a Microsoft patent license, you pay $x. If you ship windows mobile, you will pay $y and y is almost certainly larger than x. So why would they be "scared" into buying y when x is cheaper, even with the patent fees?
Slashdot Mirror
Decimals are typically only used in scientific and mathematic situations.
That's why the metric system invented many different kinds of "whole" units, which are in effect decimals, but allow people to treat them as if they aren't.
Why do you suppose that is? Most likely because the human brain, unless you've had years of training, doesn't think in decimals.
If you're a carpenter, you're not dealing with .25 of an inch, you're dealing with 1/4 inch. If you're a mechanic you don't have a .125" wrench or a .01 meter socket, you have an 1/8th inch wrench, or a 10mm socket.
Yes, but 16 is easier to carve up into smaller pieces using fractions.
10 is divisible by itself, 5, 2, and 1.
16 is divisible by itself, 8, 4, 2, and 1
12 is even better than 16
12 is divisble by itself, 6, 4, 3, 2, and 1
.
You will not find any Visual Studio screenshots in this book.
Nor will you find any in this book either.
C# is a *language*, not a platform.. yes, the most common platform is a windows platform, but there are projects that, for example, will compile C# to native code that runs on Linux.
Now, granted, most of those projects are experimental, but look at dotgnu (an official FSF project) or LLVM#
Oracle doesn't seem to have received that message.
Even if it turns out that Oracle's case is lost, OpenJDK isn't patent protected, it's only protected against the old Sun patents. It could still violate someone elses patent that Sun doesn't own.
Ahh.. I see.. so when people say C#, they don't mean C#... they mean whatever you think makes a good argument.
That's like saying that whenever someone says "Linux" they mean all unix-like operating systems, such as FreeBSD or Minix.
C# has no standard library functions. C# is a language, not a library.
The CLI (which C# typically uses) also doesn't have any windows specific things, and does File and threading just fine on multiple platforms.
Mono perhaps, but Microsoft already has licenses with Oracle, so Microsoft implementations are covered.
All open source software has to fear patents from anywhere, not just Microsoft or Oracle.
Neither question have anything to do with the claim that C# is too windows centric.
Your questions also reveal a lack of undestanding of the difference betweeen a language and a framework library. C#, the language, does not rely on anything microsoft, other than the specification.
Also, since C# is an ISO standard, any lawsuit would be.. problematic to say the least.
Yeah, just like copying the code for any C or C++ application will automatically work on any other platoform.
If I need to explain this to you, then you really don't have a point.
Lol.. yeah, 10 years ago.. they backed out of the process twice. Really pissed off a lot of ISO people that had invested a lot of time and effort into it.
Actually, a version of C++, which includes C, runs on the .net virtual machine, called C++/CLI
You're confusing two markets. The first is the application platform. If you're the one writing the low-level OS and apps, that's one thing.
If you're talking about things like iphone and android, then you're talking about an app market with 10's of thousands of applications, few of which have any idea of what the underlying hardware is... At worst, you have issues with screen layout because screen sizes change.
So, a new processor comes out, and now you want to make all 10,000 of those vendors recompile their apps? You also want to make the customer choose which version of the app to download?
Well, oracles core database products is very good, and is used in a lot of high visibility applications. So one cannot say that everything oracle does is shit.
However, you are wrong about open source people not being worried about MS and .NET. There are entire websites built up around trying to fight .NET gaining a foothold in open source software. And the majority of the argument is that they are afraid Micorosft will sue people that implement .net in open source software.
Now, it turns out that the Java camp were the first ones to sue.
I'm sorry, were you trying to make a point?
If so, you failed.
Java is not an ISO standard. Where did you get that idea?
We're talking about mobile devices here, in which 99% of the users are NOT on windows.
There are literally hundreds of different processors out there, some are binary compatible with each other, some aren't. It would quickly devolve into an unmanageable mess trying to compile apps for each platform, then you have to confuse the user by making them choose which platform to download.
Microsoft used to do that with Windows mobile, and it was a mess.. and it put severe limitations on what platforms could be used.
This way, if a new processor comes out, someone need only write a vm for it, and all apps work developers won't need to recompile for new platforms.
I'm not sure how your question has anything to do with whether the C# language is platform agnostic or not.
C# is an ECMA and ISO standard.
What I find ironic is that everyone was worried about Microsoft suing open source implementors of .NET, and claiming that Java should be used instead. ... Oops.
Because devices run on different hardware and CPU's. C requires that you (at a minimum) recompile for every platform, and ship a different binary for every platform.
Uh.. what?
C# has absolutely nothing windows oriented to it. It's a completely platform agnostic language.
Now, if you're talking about .NET, that's a slightly different story, although much of it, especially the CLI is also platform neutral. The only parts that are windows specific are things that can be replaced, such as the GUI framework.
First, how do you prove that you've never seen the patent claims. Second, how do you prove you've never used or been exposed to the claimed methods?
Kind of hard to prove a negative. Because the patent is in the public space, it's the same as.. for example publishing something in the newspaper as proof that someone has been notified of a legal action (which is commonly accepted in many kinds of legal issues).
No, the article claims that's why they're doing it, but really.. the argument makes no sense.
Even if you pay the patent fees, you're still paying less than licensing Windows mobile/phone, so the argument is that Microsoft is threatenging people that they have to pay license fees that cost less than licensing windows mobile, in order to force people to license windows mobile?
Your argument, and the articles argument makes no sense.
Ok, so if you ship android with software that requires a Microsoft patent license, you pay $x. If you ship windows mobile, you will pay $y and y is almost certainly larger than x. So why would they be "scared" into buying y when x is cheaper, even with the patent fees?
Microsoft can't sue apple, they already have broad patent cross licensing agreements.