Rewrote the removed functionality in approximately 4,000 lines of C and imbedded SQL.
The problem was that management allowed the code to reach such a state. But thats what happens when management only understands SLOCs
It's also what happens when good programmers are encouraged to only fix hot bugs and not allowed to re-factor bad but "working" code when they find it.
Now you see why MS supports IMAP: Their customers really pushed hard for it. Is it part of some big MS-conspiracy? Possibly but there's no good evidence and certianly no rationale
Is Microsoft pushing IMAP now? When did that start? There's nothing about it in the article.
I've never heard of Microsoft advocating that everyone should used IMAP.
MAPI, yes, but not IMAP.
probably even more Windows than we think
on
Netcraft Survey Updated
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Unfortunately the number of Windows boxen out there is probably higher than the survey would indicate.
Remember that Netcraft's OS detection only detects the OS of the machine that is directly connected to the Internet. See their own faq
at http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/accuracy.html
If you put your company's NT server behind a Unix-based firewall or proxy, it will be detected by Netcraft as Unix. This is probably a pretty common setup at many companies hosting their own web sites.
This is probably why usenet is still very popular around the world.
In my experience the most (perhaps only) satisfactory way to read Usenet over a modem is with a shell account. Unfortunately fewer ISPs are offering this kind of service these days. There are of course other cheap shell services available, but they are not widely known.
i'm not an MS hater. but i hate what ie has done to web development and i can't stand using it.
Compared to the hack job that is Netscape 4, Mozilla and IE are essentially indistinguishable in the way the render pages, except to somebody who knows what they are looking for to spot the differences in the finer points of CSS, etc.
MS Internet Explorer actually claims to be "Mozilla 4.0"
Remember the phrase "Netscape Enhanced" ? (Slashcode won't let me write it the way it's meant to be written, with embedded <font> tags)
Even back in 1996 or so websites already had set up CGI scripts to do things like kick out Mosaic users and only let in the Netscape users, because they wanted to use all of Netscape's non-standard HTML. I seem to recall that even the U.S. government did this!
Microsoft wanted IE users to be able to view all of these "Netscape Enhanced" websites. Their only choice was to mimic the User-Agent header of Netscape Navigator, which has always been "Mozilla X.X".
What does this guy think happens if you click on an attachment???? You get precisely this warning,
He means that the user should have fine(r) grained control over what the attachment is able to do. Even if you agree that an attachment can run, if it tries to (for example) open a socket, then the OS should prompt you again and let you OK or veto that.
This is really starting to sound more like Java, with its Security Managers and whatnot.
By default, everyone and everything runs in the superuser account in Windows XP
When installing Win2K, you have the choice of creating yourself an administrator account and having the PC automatically log login to that account when it boots. I personally have never seen an OEM installation of Win2K but I bet that it probably comes set up that way. How much more insecure than this is XP ?
I wouldn't put it past MS to phase out the machine-code components in favor of.NET components that run under the VM.
If they did it would be supremely ironic, since the runs-as-fast-native-code feature of.NET is pretty much the major argument that they use to hype it up against Java.
You're thinking of Netscape, not MS. It was Netscape who had the brilliant idea of make (and eventaully losing) a fortune by nicking freely available source code.
Didn't they have to write Navigator from scratch? NCSA still owned Mosaic, you know. Andreesen couldn't just take his code with him.
Only later was the original Mosaic commercialized by Spyglass... as competetion against Netscape. This eventually served as some kind of starting point for MSIE, but M$ have probably re-factored most of the real Mosaic code out of it by now.
So today's Mozilla is actually the second drastic re-write of the web browser, while one could claim that MSIE has simply envolved over all these years.
Because not every person searching is from the states. I know that "Loft Story" is a French reality TV show
Is it actually called "Loft Story" in France, or is that just its translation?
Doesn't make much sense that the French would give English names to their TV series, but nowhere on the Yahoo story did it ever mention a French name for the show.
Then i found out i cannot find out who registered a cx domain.
www.nic.cx does not seem to be working. Although its possible that its been slashdotted, the error message (something about Cold Fusion and IP addresses) makes me think it is just misconfigured.
Places like/. and k5 still have an echo of the old Usenet
I can't detect any such echo. Your hearing must be very good.
Agreed. Slashdot is much more like the BBSs that many people should remember from their high school days.
For us, it wasn't September that brought on the yearly flood of newbies... it was Christmas, with lots of kids getting new computers as presents from their parents, and somehow finding their way onto the BBS scene.
My first experience of USENET was that it was much more mature than the BBS culture. People on USENET did not engage in fp-like antics, like we did on the BBSs. The professional programmers and sysadmins who frequented USENET did not concern themselves about being 31337 hacker doodz like on the BBS scene. Most shocking to me at the time, people mostly posted to USENET using their real names.
Is this really a new, third way to release source?
It sounds similar to what Sun does with the source code for Java. Only Sun can distribute it. Only Sun can change and improve it. You can't fork it.
Also, Microsoft all along has done things like making the source for their C runtime library (which is just a bunch of wrappers around the Win32 API, which is in turn a wrapper around the internals of Windows' many flavors) available under various restrictions.
I don't see any inconsistency in being a pro-life libertarian
ISTR that there is in fact a pro-life faction within the Libertarian Party, but they have never been numerous enough to get a pro-life plank into the party's official platform.
Slashdot Mirror
Rewrote the removed functionality in approximately 4,000 lines of C and imbedded SQL.
The problem was that management allowed the code to reach such a state. But thats what happens when management only understands SLOCs
It's also what happens when good programmers are encouraged to only fix hot bugs and not allowed to re-factor bad but "working" code when they find it.
Now you see why MS supports IMAP: Their customers really pushed hard for it. Is it part of some big MS-conspiracy? Possibly but there's no good evidence and certianly no rationale
Is Microsoft pushing IMAP now? When did that start? There's nothing about it in the article.
I've never heard of Microsoft advocating that everyone should used IMAP.
MAPI, yes, but not IMAP.
Unfortunately the number of Windows boxen out there is probably higher than the survey would indicate.
Remember that Netcraft's OS detection only detects the OS of the machine that is directly connected to the Internet. See their own faq
at http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/accuracy.html
If you put your company's NT server behind a Unix-based firewall or proxy, it will be detected by Netcraft as Unix. This is probably a pretty common setup at many companies hosting their own web sites.
This is probably why usenet is still very popular around the world.
In my experience the most (perhaps only) satisfactory way to read Usenet over a modem is with a shell account. Unfortunately fewer ISPs are offering this kind of service these days. There are of course other cheap shell services available, but they are not widely known.
Compared to the hack job that is Netscape 4, Mozilla and IE are essentially indistinguishable in the way the render pages, except to somebody who knows what they are looking for to spot the differences in the finer points of CSS, etc.
I assumed he was talking about MSIE 6.0.
Remember the phrase "Netscape Enhanced" ? (Slashcode won't let me write it the way it's meant to be written, with embedded <font> tags)
Even back in 1996 or so websites already had set up CGI scripts to do things like kick out Mosaic users and only let in the Netscape users, because they wanted to use all of Netscape's non-standard HTML. I seem to recall that even the U.S. government did this!
Microsoft wanted IE users to be able to view all of these "Netscape Enhanced" websites. Their only choice was to mimic the User-Agent header of Netscape Navigator, which has always been "Mozilla X.X".
He means that the user should have fine(r) grained control over what the attachment is able to do. Even if you agree that an attachment can run, if it tries to (for example) open a socket, then the OS should prompt you again and let you OK or veto that.
This is really starting to sound more like Java, with its Security Managers and whatnot.
When installing Win2K, you have the choice of creating yourself an administrator account and having the PC automatically log login to that account when it boots. I personally have never seen an OEM installation of Win2K but I bet that it probably comes set up that way. How much more insecure than this is XP ?
If they did it would be supremely ironic, since the runs-as-fast-native-code feature of .NET is pretty much the major argument that they use to hype it up against Java.
Didn't they have to write Navigator from scratch? NCSA still owned Mosaic, you know. Andreesen couldn't just take his code with him.
Only later was the original Mosaic commercialized by Spyglass... as competetion against Netscape. This eventually served as some kind of starting point for MSIE, but M$ have probably re-factored most of the real Mosaic code out of it by now.
So today's Mozilla is actually the second drastic re-write of the web browser, while one could claim that MSIE has simply envolved over all these years.
Also RH6.
No, get the IBM version of the JDK. Sun's version has a tendency to segfault that the IBM version does not share, in my experience.
What do you need an image viewer for? Mozilla will display gif, jpg, png. What else do you need?
Is it actually called "Loft Story" in France, or is that just its translation?
Doesn't make much sense that the French would give English names to their TV series, but nowhere on the Yahoo story did it ever mention a French name for the show.
www.nic.cx does not seem to be working. Although its possible that its been slashdotted, the error message (something about Cold Fusion and IP addresses) makes me think it is just misconfigured.
I think various forms of listservs predated usenet.
Agreed. Slashdot is much more like the BBSs that many people should remember from their high school days.
For us, it wasn't September that brought on the yearly flood of newbies... it was Christmas, with lots of kids getting new computers as presents from their parents, and somehow finding their way onto the BBS scene.
My first experience of USENET was that it was much more mature than the BBS culture. People on USENET did not engage in fp-like antics, like we did on the BBSs. The professional programmers and sysadmins who frequented USENET did not concern themselves about being 31337 hacker doodz like on the BBS scene. Most shocking to me at the time, people mostly posted to USENET using their real names.
Hit F8 and choose "enable boot logging".
You guys invented lynx, for cryin' out loud!
"Who would have thought that they would freak out in Kansas?" -- Frank Zappa
It sounds similar to what Sun does with the source code for Java. Only Sun can distribute it. Only Sun can change and improve it. You can't fork it.
Also, Microsoft all along has done things like making the source for their C runtime library (which is just a bunch of wrappers around the Win32 API, which is in turn a wrapper around the internals of Windows' many flavors) available under various restrictions.
I dunno about that, but I always thought they were supposed to be "prequels" to the first 3.
If this is a troll, it's a damn good one.
I am sure that I only one of dozens of people to post this, but it was Ken Thompson.
http://www.acm.org/classics/sep95
ISTR that there is in fact a pro-life faction within the Libertarian Party, but they have never been numerous enough to get a pro-life plank into the party's official platform.