M$ seem to suffer from the delusion that they are the only people in the world actually writing computer programs.
This is incredibly insightful. I'd have moderated you as such, but I want to highlight your point, as I think it is important.
I think that this is why Microsoft and more talented developers don't get on so well. Microsoft are very happy to 'allow' people to get on with application programming, but in their opinion, noone else has any business writing system software.
Sadly, they're not terribly good at system software.
And system software is interesting to geeks. Hence we feel frustrated by Microsoft, because they're doing anything possible to make it hard to develop interesting software, and easy to develop boring software.
So why is system software so important to them? Answer: Control. And that's exactly why they hate open source so much - not the competition (though they aren't thrilled about that), but because they can't control it. It doesn't give them any opportunities to create lock-in for themselves.
Even an application like a wordprocessor has been turned into a platform of a kind, with macros and so forth. So there's no reason for anyone else to create their own wp because there's a wp platform available.
Things like VB and Word are perfect for Microsoft, because they're creating the 'real' software (ok, use a limited definition of real), and there are armies of people customising the software out there, creating demand but no competition, furthering the lockin, and keeping their skillsets specific to MS.
Perhaps the fact that there are people out there who, despite the closed source, can still figure out what's going on and how to exploit the code scares them, because if they worked for Microsoft it wouldn't show people that there are holes in the infrastructure.
The infrastructure for computing. Or Microsoft, as otherwise known. Unless we can stop them.
(Sorry if this is offtopic and unstructured. The ideas were unfolding in my mind faster than I could compose English.)
Ok. I don't know if you're serious or not. I suspect not, but I can't ignore such an absurd comment.
Anti-american?! Are you sure that your name isn't McCarthy? What a load of drivel. Even if this were the case, then surely this should only be an issue when recommending systems to the US government, not privately held companies/corporations?
Arguably, the US govt has made things a little difficult for any OS (open-source or not) with the crypto regulations, and this does affect secure OSes more than others. This is why ISTR OpenBSD is based in Canada.
The reason why BSD is released under such a liberal licence is that they want high quality code. This is why some/all of the BSD network stack made its' way into the Windows NT/2k networking stack. Perhaps you advise that your clients avoid MS products, too? I know I would, but, I suspect, for different reasons. (grin)
I cannot understand why some people have such an absurd distrust of others based on their nationality and/or political views.
And if you're that concerned about conspiracies and smokescreens, either see a psychiatrist or look at the code yourself.
Re:restricting .org is great, but to corps is extr
on
VeriSign Usurps .com
·
· Score: 1
Why US corporations, specifically? The internet isn't just the United States, you know.:)
Seriously, this is an interesting point. If they are going to restrict it to Non-Profits in the legal sense, then how is this going to work on an international basis? I can't believe that I (as a UK citizen) would have to register a US Non-Profit corp in order to register a.org. Assuming it would be legal for me to do so, of course.
So how about countries which do not have a legal definition of Non-Profit corps? I'm sure that there are some about.
Actually, not all Windows code is written using Hungarian. I'm a Windows programmer by day, and refuse to use Hungarian. From what I've seen, a lot of Windows programmers simply adapt sample code taken from MSDN, and so they either get used to Hungarian or like it (!). Personally, I prefer to write code from scratch, using my own style.
As observed by J. M. Newcomer, languages that embed type information in the name (like early BASIC or FORTRAN) have either disappeared or changed. He also notes that problems occur when a variable's type is changed, since the name must be changed everywhere it is used. This is why we get the confusingly named wParam in Win32 window procedures (it's confusing because the w prefix implies it is a WORD type, whereas it is actually a LONG type).
Slashdot Mirror
M$ seem to suffer from the delusion that they are the only people in the world actually writing computer programs.
This is incredibly insightful. I'd have moderated you as such, but I want to highlight your point, as I think it is important.
I think that this is why Microsoft and more talented developers don't get on so well. Microsoft are very happy to 'allow' people to get on with application programming, but in their opinion, noone else has any business writing system software.
Sadly, they're not terribly good at system software.
And system software is interesting to geeks. Hence we feel frustrated by Microsoft, because they're doing anything possible to make it hard to develop interesting software, and easy to develop boring software.
So why is system software so important to them? Answer: Control. And that's exactly why they hate open source so much - not the competition (though they aren't thrilled about that), but because they can't control it. It doesn't give them any opportunities to create lock-in for themselves.
Even an application like a wordprocessor has been turned into a platform of a kind, with macros and so forth. So there's no reason for anyone else to create their own wp because there's a wp platform available.
Things like VB and Word are perfect for Microsoft, because they're creating the 'real' software (ok, use a limited definition of real), and there are armies of people customising the software out there, creating demand but no competition, furthering the lockin, and keeping their skillsets specific to MS.
Perhaps the fact that there are people out there who, despite the closed source, can still figure out what's going on and how to exploit the code scares them, because if they worked for Microsoft it wouldn't show people that there are holes in the infrastructure.
The infrastructure for computing. Or Microsoft, as otherwise known. Unless we can stop them.
(Sorry if this is offtopic and unstructured. The ideas were unfolding in my mind faster than I could compose English.)
EVERY DAY!
Surely even IIS can't be that bad.
I don't like to do the usual moderator criticism, but flamebait? Methinks someone has a wheel mouse and meant funny. Am I right?
Made me laugh, anyway.
Ok. I don't know if you're serious or not. I suspect not, but I can't ignore such an absurd comment.
Anti-american?! Are you sure that your name isn't McCarthy? What a load of drivel. Even if this were the case, then surely this should only be an issue when recommending systems to the US government, not privately held companies/corporations?
Arguably, the US govt has made things a little difficult for any OS (open-source or not) with the crypto regulations, and this does affect secure OSes more than others. This is why ISTR OpenBSD is based in Canada.
The reason why BSD is released under such a liberal licence is that they want high quality code. This is why some/all of the BSD network stack made its' way into the Windows NT/2k networking stack. Perhaps you advise that your clients avoid MS products, too? I know I would, but, I suspect, for different reasons. (grin)
I cannot understand why some people have such an absurd distrust of others based on their nationality and/or political views.
And if you're that concerned about conspiracies and smokescreens, either see a psychiatrist or look at the code yourself.
Why US corporations, specifically? The internet isn't just the United States, you know. :)
Seriously, this is an interesting point. If they are going to restrict it to Non-Profits in the legal sense, then how is this going to work on an international basis? I can't believe that I (as a UK citizen) would have to register a US Non-Profit corp in order to register a .org. Assuming it would be legal for me to do so, of course.
So how about countries which do not have a legal definition of Non-Profit corps? I'm sure that there are some about.
I don't know about the others, but the ARM6 and above (StrongARM included) is either big- or little- endian at the choice of the OS.
Still, you have a point.
Actually, not all Windows code is written using Hungarian. I'm a Windows programmer by day, and refuse to use Hungarian. From what I've seen, a lot of Windows programmers simply adapt sample code taken from MSDN, and so they either get used to Hungarian or like it (!). Personally, I prefer to write code from scratch, using my own style.
As observed by J. M. Newcomer, languages that embed type information in the name (like early BASIC or FORTRAN) have either disappeared or changed. He also notes that problems occur when a variable's type is changed, since the name must be changed everywhere it is used. This is why we get the confusingly named wParam in Win32 window procedures (it's confusing because the w prefix implies it is a WORD type, whereas it is actually a LONG type).
Of course tbey never explain how IE defeated Netscape in the mac market, even though Microsoft doesn't have monopoly power there
Microsoft made a deal with Apple that IE would be shipped as the default browser. That might have something to do with it.
How, exactly, are Hong Kong citizens affected by a US law?