Think about it. If the court ends up buying the argument, what is the industry going to do? It's one thing to go after a mom & pop ISP in Montana (though very few of those are still left) than go head first into a fight to shut down UUnet or the Sprint backbones. This is a clever defense, I guess. It remains to be seen if the judge will agree.
Another end result could be the judge telling them to stop dicking around and go after the users, which will prove even more difficult.
Suffice to say, try printf()ing a few tabs and backslashes in quick succession under 200 or XP ad then tell me it's stable
Nope d00d, that doesn't work. Trust me. It's the same as that urban legend a few years back about something on a floppy being able to blue-screen NT 3.5. OS zealots like those funny stories but they're very rarely true.
Fuck you. Fuck you to the darkest nether regions of plague-infested Hades. Words cannot express how much I hate people like you. Curl up in a small ball and die, please.
It doesn't matter. I've made the experiment of carefully picking the settings on a new Hotmail account to explicitly avoid having it listed anywhere. Two days later the spam folder is full.
Either Hotmail is selling addresses wholesale or somebody has gotten very good at dictionary attacks.
Your post is truly beautiful. Except that your whole point is moot. When it comes to "things", you truly get what you pay for. This applies to software as well as anything else.
You can't have all that in one package. The closest you can get is managed C++ in.NET, where you can the CLR garbage collector but you do have some development constraints. I think the main sticking point is your requirement for MI... I mean, I've been writing C++ for close to six years now professionally and I can't remember more than one or two times when it was absolutely necessary (and I mean implementation MI, not just interface MI as in COM), or the problem couldn't be solved some other way.
Also, keep in mind that the language is just one part of the equation. What about the underlying technologies? Application servers? Database APIs? In my experience those things factor in as much as anything else, along with the company or client's ability to support a system long-term that was developed using a given language. Many Wintel shops will not go for VC++ simply because it's a lot harder to find a decent C++ coder than VB or Delphi or whatever developers.
However, I still can't bring myself to think that Stallman wasn't trying to start a confrontation with GNOME. Call me a cynic. I mean, even the tone of the Register's article must have picked up the confrontational "feeling" from somewhere.
Visual Basic makes use of exceptions as part of control-flow manipulations. Those are very expensive in the.net world (as they should be), so MS changed a lot in the language to allow people to write performant apps. However, old VB code is still dog-slow.
Totally incorrect. In the VB6 environment, an exception is a COM IErrorInfo object that is marshalled by value to the receiver in the stack context. This is an expensive operation. Further, the fact that many VB coders use these exceptions to control program flow makes things worse, but it's by no means the only way to do things.
In.NET, an exception is a framework "light" class, usually inherited from System.Exception. Throwing these is the preferred way to signal problems, especially now that VB.Net has class constructors (can't return a value from a constructor, remember?)
Finally, VB6 code is significantly faster than the equivalent VB.Net code, especially when doing UI stuff. WinForms are dog slow and will continue to be until Microsoft implements all those performance enhancements they talked about but didn't make it into the current release. Ditto for COM Interop, data access and most other things. The only few things I can think of right now that are faster in.NET are XML handling and remoting.
Many of the responses are about Google short-changing the person who comes up with this. I thought as much myself.
But after going outside and having a smoke, I think this is not such a bad idea. Sure, maybe I can come up with a great algorithm that does whatever, but from there to market... long road.
Better, if you're into this type of thing I'd say go at it. I mean, it's not as Google won't offer a job to the winner immediately. Heck, they'll probably employ all the runners-up as well.
Not as sexy of course, but still. Think about working for one of the few pure, stable Internet gigs out there.
10K is nice along with the recognition and all, but... I'm sure that's a lot cheaper than paying a few Google staff coders to come up with the same thing in a few months.
Last week I had an argument on the 'Linus does not scale' story with some dude whose entire contribution to suggestions on how to improve the management of the Linux kernel development process was to yell 'he can do whatever the fuck he wants, it's his kernel'.
Now that same argument, applied to de Icaza applies perfectly. Mono is not going to be "bound" in any way to GNOME, that much is fact. So the core product itself remains free. But more importantly, Miguel has to answer to a board of directors, whereas Linus can do (or not do) whatever he wants. They provide funding. They call the shots. They agreed to Ximian funding of Mono. How is anyone (especially RMS) entitled to an opinion here?
Regardless of RMS's embrace and extend FUD about everything being GNU (I bet very few people see it that way, but if it quacks like a duck...), he has absolutely no say about anything Miguel does, period. His argument of "Miguel better answer to the community" can be cleanly compiled to "explain this shit to me, boy".
Oh, and BTW, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this small detail: RMS was turned down from the GNOME board of directors in November of last year. From the precedent of previous flame wars between RMS and various other people, who can say this is not simply his way of giving GNOME a bad time?
And finally, let's face it: Anything that has a relationship (remote as it may be) with Microsoft is immediately turned into an argument about "giving into the dark side" and "fight against the evil empire". That sure gives way to very constructive discussion. Most of the posts here have either tried to denounce Miguel as a traitor or simply nit-picked his reasons for doing what he's doing. Very nice.
And to Miguel: Dile a RMS que encamine sus pasos a la progenitora de sus dias y la salude de tu parte =)
So long as big corporations with lots of money exist this will not be a viable argument. Companies choose software not on the basis of "openess" or even cost, but on whether or not the things work *and* there's a support structure behind it. Think about what support structure means - it's just not Tier I tech reps answering the phone. It's the whole culture behind a platform. Linux lacks a culture. It only has community. Most IT shops will take the culture any day and feel good about it.
The raw performance of the VM is certainly important and all, but what I'd like to see are some *application* benchmarks among the various kernel trees. Star Office, the window managers, KDE, GNOME, etc. Graphics. Storage. Networking.
Unles we're talking heavy metal servers running the usual suspect daemons the average user doesn't really give a hoot if the VM is well-designed or not - only if The Gimp runs quickly enough.
Windows 2000 is a completely secure OS. So is Linux. The problem is all the stuff that runs in them. I've never considered IIS to be a part of Windows, nor do I think Apache is a part of Linux. As long as people who are detached from the core OS security concerns (and indeed the whole QA thing that goes on at the kernel level) continue to write code that answers to marketing more than it does to basic development guidelines we'll continue to see these problems. That goes for all OS's - the problem is Windows is a lot more visible than Linux or Unix for that matter.
It's not "my OS is more secure than yours"... it's "my web server sucks less". Tacking everything on to the OS is short sighted.
Wow, did I ever say your opinion was wrong? Did I ever say I didn't understand your opinion? Reading your own issues into a comment will only leave you looking paranoid and foolish.
Your unfortunate tendency to assume who I am or what I do leaves you looking paranoid and foolish as well, wouldn't you say?
Unless you know the details of Linus' emails to Alan, unless you personally know how Linus interacts with the other developers (hint: you'd have to be a developer to know this), your opinion will always be uninformed.
Your apparent premise of a) my being uninformed and b) not being able to code my way out of main() is wrong on both accounts - strike two. Wanna go for thirds?
Slashdot Mirror
Another end result could be the judge telling them to stop dicking around and go after the users, which will prove even more difficult.
Remember, you can only say that so many times. It's like using up one of your lives. Use it wisely.
I'll see you tomorrow at the office =)
Nope d00d, that doesn't work. Trust me. It's the same as that urban legend a few years back about something on a floppy being able to blue-screen NT 3.5. OS zealots like those funny stories but they're very rarely true.
Hope this helps.
Fuck you. Fuck you to the darkest nether regions of plague-infested Hades. Words cannot express how much I hate people like you. Curl up in a small ball and die, please.
Either Hotmail is selling addresses wholesale or somebody has gotten very good at dictionary attacks.
dear juge:
M$ sux! BillG is a b0rg!!! Linux r00lz! Long Live Goatse.cx!!!!1!!!
I find it actually refreshing that they managed to pull 47 out of there, though that's not particularly redeeming.
Hope this helps.
I guess in closing we can say 'all your medium are belong to us'
Hmmmm. No, that wasn't funny.
the Web's premium socio-technical website?
ROTFLMAO!
Also, keep in mind that the language is just one part of the equation. What about the underlying technologies? Application servers? Database APIs? In my experience those things factor in as much as anything else, along with the company or client's ability to support a system long-term that was developed using a given language. Many Wintel shops will not go for VC++ simply because it's a lot harder to find a decent C++ coder than VB or Delphi or whatever developers.
Shawn should have patented the Napster model. *Grin*
... is what I call a FREKKIN' changelog. It's about time, too. Now we actually kinda sorta know what's going on.
And my 14th, and thousands of other peoples' birthdays. What better present than a new kernel :)
/. demographic group.
Kudos to you my son. You're a worthy spokesperson of the most important
*Sigh*
However, I still can't bring myself to think that Stallman wasn't trying to start a confrontation with GNOME. Call me a cynic. I mean, even the tone of the Register's article must have picked up the confrontational "feeling" from somewhere.
Visual Basic makes use of exceptions as part of control-flow manipulations. Those are very expensive in the .net world (as they should be), so MS changed a lot in the language to allow people to write performant apps. However, old VB code is still dog-slow.
.NET, an exception is a framework "light" class, usually inherited from System.Exception. Throwing these is the preferred way to signal problems, especially now that VB.Net has class constructors (can't return a value from a constructor, remember?)
.NET are XML handling and remoting.
Totally incorrect. In the VB6 environment, an exception is a COM IErrorInfo object that is marshalled by value to the receiver in the stack context. This is an expensive operation. Further, the fact that many VB coders use these exceptions to control program flow makes things worse, but it's by no means the only way to do things.
In
Finally, VB6 code is significantly faster than the equivalent VB.Net code, especially when doing UI stuff. WinForms are dog slow and will continue to be until Microsoft implements all those performance enhancements they talked about but didn't make it into the current release. Ditto for COM Interop, data access and most other things. The only few things I can think of right now that are faster in
Hope this helps.
Yeah, I just thought of that as well. Heh.
Many of the responses are about Google short-changing the person who comes up with this. I thought as much myself.
But after going outside and having a smoke, I think this is not such a bad idea. Sure, maybe I can come up with a great algorithm that does whatever, but from there to market... long road.
Better, if you're into this type of thing I'd say go at it. I mean, it's not as Google won't offer a job to the winner immediately. Heck, they'll probably employ all the runners-up as well.
Not as sexy of course, but still. Think about working for one of the few pure, stable Internet gigs out there.
And no, I don't work for them =)
10K is nice along with the recognition and all, but... I'm sure that's a lot cheaper than paying a few Google staff coders to come up with the same thing in a few months.
Jus' being paranoid.
About as often as Linux has kernel panics, yes?
That was an insightful post. Thank you.
Now that same argument, applied to de Icaza applies perfectly. Mono is not going to be "bound" in any way to GNOME, that much is fact. So the core product itself remains free. But more importantly, Miguel has to answer to a board of directors, whereas Linus can do (or not do) whatever he wants. They provide funding. They call the shots. They agreed to Ximian funding of Mono. How is anyone (especially RMS) entitled to an opinion here?
Regardless of RMS's embrace and extend FUD about everything being GNU (I bet very few people see it that way, but if it quacks like a duck...), he has absolutely no say about anything Miguel does, period. His argument of "Miguel better answer to the community" can be cleanly compiled to "explain this shit to me, boy".
Oh, and BTW, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this small detail: RMS was turned down from the GNOME board of directors in November of last year. From the precedent of previous flame wars between RMS and various other people, who can say this is not simply his way of giving GNOME a bad time?
And finally, let's face it: Anything that has a relationship (remote as it may be) with Microsoft is immediately turned into an argument about "giving into the dark side" and "fight against the evil empire". That sure gives way to very constructive discussion. Most of the posts here have either tried to denounce Miguel as a traitor or simply nit-picked his reasons for doing what he's doing. Very nice.
And to Miguel: Dile a RMS que encamine sus pasos a la progenitora de sus dias y la salude de tu parte =)
Go ahead and mod me down now.
Desktop, server - it doesn't matter.
The raw performance of the VM is certainly important and all, but what I'd like to see are some *application* benchmarks among the various kernel trees. Star Office, the window managers, KDE, GNOME, etc. Graphics. Storage. Networking. Unles we're talking heavy metal servers running the usual suspect daemons the average user doesn't really give a hoot if the VM is well-designed or not - only if The Gimp runs quickly enough.
Windows 2000 is a completely secure OS. So is Linux. The problem is all the stuff that runs in them. I've never considered IIS to be a part of Windows, nor do I think Apache is a part of Linux. As long as people who are detached from the core OS security concerns (and indeed the whole QA thing that goes on at the kernel level) continue to write code that answers to marketing more than it does to basic development guidelines we'll continue to see these problems. That goes for all OS's - the problem is Windows is a lot more visible than Linux or Unix for that matter.
It's not "my OS is more secure than yours"... it's "my web server sucks less". Tacking everything on to the OS is short sighted.
Wow, did I ever say your opinion was wrong? Did I ever say I didn't understand your opinion? Reading your own issues into a comment will only leave you looking paranoid and foolish.
Your unfortunate tendency to assume who I am or what I do leaves you looking paranoid and foolish as well, wouldn't you say?
Unless you know the details of Linus' emails to Alan, unless you personally know how Linus interacts with the other developers (hint: you'd have to be a developer to know this), your opinion will always be uninformed.
Your apparent premise of a) my being uninformed and b) not being able to code my way out of main() is wrong on both accounts - strike two. Wanna go for thirds?