My experience with Eclipse is that it's an OK IDE for Java, but it handles C++ as if it were designed in 1995. Well, the other 1995 products were actually easier to configure.
"Apple thinks it's better not to include features that aren't yet ready for prime time..."
As Dr. Phil would say "that dog won't hunt". Apple has been doing copy/paste and multitasking for years, they could do it with their eyes closed.
No, the real reason is the Steve thinks he knows best so the first version is a full reflection of his "vision". Later, if customers demand features that aren't part of his vision, he'll have the opportunity to present them with great fanfare as if that was the plan all along.
Perhaps you were speaking metaphorically, but most people would consider that getting it "in front of customers" would require that the device was actually physically available.
Or perhaps the fact that you didn't know the iPad wasn't going to be introduced first has you backtracking your argument.
Strawmanning and changing the subject are we? I never said the iPad was "horrible" and even if Apple sold a billion units in the 1st day, it wouldn't negate my argument.
"Have you considered that perhaps the reason they didn't listen to you is because they are not and never will target people like you (a tiny minority of geeks) with a product like the iPad?"
What "tiny minority of geeks" do you think I'm part of? Go back and read my comment in context and you'll see that your comment really doesn't address mine.
Having never worked at MS, I have no inside information about why they waited 8 years (under "an entire fucking decade" as a matter of fact) to release Windows NT.
I suspect having to maintain compatibility with the thousands of existing applications probably had something to do with it.
Let me put it another way. Any code running on an 8088 can execute any instruction or can access any memory location without limitation. So any application can barf on the OS and cause it to crash.
"With other languages, it is not so clear cut. The Java crowd, for example, has some good programmers, but a lot of terrible ones. The reason is that you can get an app with terrible structure and design working in Java, while it almost impossible in C/C++/ObjC."
My experience with Java suggests that you have to do things the "proper" way even if you don't want to. I think it's easier to create a poorly structured program in C/C++ (I haven't used ObjC).
Slashdot Mirror
That's a lot of menu navigation. Why don't they just have a top-level checkbox with the label "Make Performance Suck"?
My observation is that people claim that Java has improved and and is finally competitive with the speed of C or C++ applications.
The only problem is they've been making the same claim every 2 years since Java was introduced.
"It's always been very snappy on Windows"
Hmm. And I always thought that "snappy" implied fast and responsive. I guess not.
My experience with Eclipse is that it's an OK IDE for Java, but it handles C++ as if it were designed in 1995. Well, the other 1995 products were actually easier to configure.
If you keep eliminating parts of your original point, I'm sure that you'll eventually come up with an argument that nobody disagrees with.
"Apple thinks it's better not to include features that aren't yet ready for prime time..."
As Dr. Phil would say "that dog won't hunt". Apple has been doing copy/paste and multitasking for years, they could do it with their eyes closed.
No, the real reason is the Steve thinks he knows best so the first version is a full reflection of his "vision". Later, if customers demand features that aren't part of his vision, he'll have the opportunity to present them with great fanfare as if that was the plan all along.
Perhaps you were speaking metaphorically, but most people would consider that getting it "in front of customers" would require that the device was actually physically available.
Or perhaps the fact that you didn't know the iPad wasn't going to be introduced first has you backtracking your argument.
Strawmanning and changing the subject are we? I never said the iPad was "horrible" and even if Apple sold a billion units in the 1st day, it wouldn't negate my argument.
"Have you considered that perhaps the reason they didn't listen to you is because they are not and never will target people like you (a tiny minority of geeks) with a product like the iPad?"
What "tiny minority of geeks" do you think I'm part of? Go back and read my comment in context and you'll see that your comment really doesn't address mine.
Yes, because all potential customers speak English and prefer English-sounding names.
What I've read is that the WePad will roll-out in Germany before the iPad does. If your theory is true, I guess the iPad is doomed in Germany.
So Apple gets creative credit for the ideas of speculators? Too bad Apple wasn't listening more carefully - they'd have a better product.
Having never worked at MS, I have no inside information about why they waited 8 years (under "an entire fucking decade" as a matter of fact) to release Windows NT.
I suspect having to maintain compatibility with the thousands of existing applications probably had something to do with it.
While researching Xenix I discovered some surprising history. MS initially sugested to IBM that they us Xenix as their OS, but IBM refused.
Then MS they suggested they get DRI to make their OS.
Finally, after that failed, MS bought the "shitty" OS and IBM apparently liked it.
Just like real-time co-driving - see, there are two steering wheels...
Besides Geeks, who knows that the letter 'A' is encoded as 1000001? Oh, you mean the text editor readable document format that is the web.
They're the ones who want to keep JavaScript and HTML for everything. Don't let them screw the pooch again.
like just another M$ shill. No, I guess I'll stay with the Stones' lyrics.
Nice guess, but wrong. The 80188 was essentially an 8088 with integrated peripherals and a few enhanced instructions.
Let me put it another way. Any code running on an 8088 can execute any instruction or can access any memory location without limitation. So any application can barf on the OS and cause it to crash.
Nobody has forgotten Xenix and its DOS-like stability on a 8088 PC. That's what I meant by saying "it wouldn't have been UNIX as you know it"
"An x86 that can handle Unix dates back to 1985."
Yes, but that was 4 years after the PC was introduced so IBM couldn't have used it.
it wouldn't have been UNIX as you know it. The 8088 didn't have privilege levels, so essentially everything would run as root.
http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/04/12/the-wepad-gets-a-price-and-launch-date/
"With other languages, it is not so clear cut. The Java crowd, for example, has some good programmers, but a lot of terrible ones. The reason is that you can get an app with terrible structure and design working in Java, while it almost impossible in C/C++/ObjC."
My experience with Java suggests that you have to do things the "proper" way even if you don't want to. I think it's easier to create a poorly structured program in C/C++ (I haven't used ObjC).