...DRM-fatigue, finally, sets in (it's about time!).
You know I'm glad people are finally starting to realise they're being screwed in the ass by DRM. Over the last few months I've been asked various questions by (non technical) family, friends and colleagues that all involve DRM'ed content making things awkward, and not allowing them to do what they want with their legally bought music. I'm happy to tell them why they can't play their iTunes/Napster sourced music wherever they like; hopefully they'll wake up and see where their apathy has got them.
I then mention there are plenty of places people can get all the music they like without DRM, for nothing;-) Personally I buy quite a lot of music (about 5-6 albums a week at times). Since the RIAA consider their customers, including me, to be criminals, I've decided to act like one. I burn, rip and share it, and give away copies to anyone who asks;-) Ironically, if there were no DRM, I wouldn't act this way.
If you want to add tags for other active server languages, you can probably do that just fine, then use Eclipse or Vim or your favorite other editor to write your server code (complete with syntax highlighting).
Yeah that's great! I can ditch DW and just swap back and forth between vi and Expression to do the same job!
Funny, I thought this thread would be full of MS astro-turfing, and what do you know!
Unless you have "Owned by Microsoft" stamped on your ass, I don't see why anyone would choose this garbage over Dreamweaver (disclaimer: I use DW in code view only, so can't vouch for its design abilities).
ROTFL. You're using $200 software as a simple text editor, while there are free/libre alternatives? Yeah, right. And Expression, which can also be used in code view, is garbage?
If you really think that using DW in code view is the same as using a simple text editor, you've obviously never used it. Think: site managment tools. Anyway, you're just an AC, so your opinion is pretty worthless anyway...
All developers (including PHP/JSP) can use this to build their HTML comps before making the site dynamic.
Yeah, because obviously the syntax hilighting will be fantastic with an MS app that only understands VB/C#... Makes me wonder what sort of bastardised CSS this thing generates to support MS' horrendous line of web browsers. I'm guessing it'll actually generate IE specific CSS, and render badly on anything else, as per MS standard operating practice.
Unless you have "Owned by Microsoft" stamped on your ass, I don't see why anyone would choose this garbage over Dreamweaver (disclaimer: I use DW in code view only, so can't vouch for its design abilities).
Well if a "developer" is dumb enough to lock themselves into ASP.Net, then I hope they use this. Serves them right... The problem is that there really are plenty of Microsoft trained drones out there who have absolutely no idea what exists outside of Microsoft's nice soft world for dummies, and no interest in learning anything ourside of Microsoft either. Which is the way MS likes its monkeys - dumb, and uninterested in expanding their skill set.
A useful site. Hopefully pedestrians will take heed and refrain from getting hit by cars travelling at more than 30mph, and instead wait for slower vehicles to walk in front of.
I see the most likely scenario as ajax being replaced by something designed to do the job far easier which is basically: Networkable GUI's.
It's already here, and called "Flash". Although I'm happy to write Javascript all day long, and have used it for games, windowing systems etc, I see a lot of the AJAX examples and wonder why the authors haven't just used Flash for the job. Admittedly if the app is embedding a lot of HTML content, then it makes sense to use AJAX, but for many other projects, it seems a bit of a strange choice.
I think maybe you need to do a little more research. You'll find that we've been sending data from the browser to the server - even including those pesky CRLF character codes, without needing XML, for several years now;-) Key/value pairs are much simpler and faster to decode at either end than XML; and although XML does have its place, it's certainly not the magic bullet you're making it out to be... I've also been doing "AJAX" data transfers with Javascript for several years now, both using iFrames, and piggy-backing data in cookies using image requests, before the XML HTTP Request object was available/stable. Why it's suddenly being touted as a "new" idea is beyond me...
I love the fact the pound is so strong at the moment (and the dollar so weak;-) It's far cheaper for me now to buy stuff (mostly performance car parts) from the US, pay for shipping, and even get stung for VAT than to buy it here in the UK! Hopefully the dollar will drop a bit more, then I can buy more stuff;-)
..even with the governments "neglect". As soon as the utter wankers in power start meddling with anything good they just end up screwing it all up. Politicians hold the posts they do because they're completely incapable of holding down a real job. Example #1, the most famous moron of all time, George Bush. A trail of failed companies behind him, yet he's trusted to run the biggest country on Earth (of couse, we know he doesn't get to make any real decisions as that would be madness, but he profits from his role as an asshole).
Well you certainly have proven that you know nothing about.NET,
If you look back through the thread you'll find I pretty much admit as much. Although I can't discuss the project (in fact I probably should stop now, but what the hell), I can assure you there is no back office integration, we will be maintaining the server(s) and it's a brand new, stand-alone site that the client will access using a web-based CMS.
Actually I will stop discussing it now;-)
Re:Microsoft just seems to be kind of flailing.
on
Web 2.0, Meet .Net 3.0
·
· Score: -1, Troll
You're definitely new to the.Net world and appear to have completely missed the whole existence of Mono which works with Apache on Linux. I believe other platforms are getting it soon as well but your statement is already out of date. A lot of apps will work in mono without much if any trouble. So where's the vendor lock-in exactly?
Yeah, I'm sure MS will be happy to provide the Mono developers with full documentation every time they make changes too. After all, they do help the Samba guys out all the time! Let's face it, they'll do everything they can to ensure that the only *stable* platform is.Net with IIS.
Hopefully you're correct regarding the seamless upgrades, so I'll see how it all goes. Personally I'm not enthusiastic about it at all, coming from a strong *nix, and open source background. I get the feeling that I'll end up another clock-puncher, and have no interest in my work in a few months...
Re:Microsoft just seems to be kind of flailing.
on
Web 2.0, Meet .Net 3.0
·
· Score: -1, Troll
This is pretty funny from my perspective. I'm a web developer and have recently been informed I'm going to have to start using.Net as some of our clients have decided they "must have it" (the fact they have no idea what it is, or why they need it is of course irrelevent). I'm a Java/PHP guy, so wasn't exactly over enthusiastic at this news. One of my main reasons for not wanting to get on the MS treadmill (apart from the obvious ethical reasons) was that locking yourself and your clients into one companys products WILL result in more expensive development, and less choice (which is what MS is all about).
Here's a prime example; one day code written against a framework will work. One "windows update" later, time to rewrite! Oh how I'm going to laugh!!! [breaks down into hysterical sobbing]
"Windows Server 2003 [CC] was recently compared [CC] against Linux and Unix variants in a survey by the Yankee Group...
That's the point in the article where I thought "ahh, now I see" and stopped reading. What's the point in posting garbage from these shills? Granted it promotes discussion, but I'd rather not give these "experts for hire" any more banner hits...
I used to use img src requests in the background and piggyback the data down in a cookie from the server. That way you didn't get the annoying "click"s from IE...
Pfft! Why go to all that trouble. When I bought my Rubik's cube I just took it out of the box, looked at each side and it was done! It's sat on my windowsill ever since! Far too easy...
But damn it, I want someone to prove me wrong! Write the next awesome game yourself! (I want a version of Global Thermo Nuclear Warfare please)
I wrote that a good few years ago, but some pesky kid kept hacking into my WOPR and buggering about with it, so I gave up on the game and bred Yaks instead...
You're right - I'm a programmer and I hate having to use Word for documentation. I use it so seldom that it takes me all bloody day to get a decent layout.
I've found a workaround though, I just create an HTML page with some CSS, and put my documentation in that, then save it and open it in Word to save it again (making it about 10 times the size) - works great and the docs look nice without me having to fight with 10,000 menus that seem to have different bloody options every time I open them!
Yes, but if more than a few people come to your site at once it won't look so rosy, eh;-) Damned that pesky licensing with Single Vendor, proprietary software... WAMP allows you to run a proper website - although it's obviously preferable to host on Linux...
Slashdot Mirror
...DRM-fatigue, finally, sets in (it's about time!).
;-) Personally I buy quite a lot of music (about 5-6 albums a week at times). Since the RIAA consider their customers, including me, to be criminals, I've decided to act like one. I burn, rip and share it, and give away copies to anyone who asks ;-) Ironically, if there were no DRM, I wouldn't act this way.
You know I'm glad people are finally starting to realise they're being screwed in the ass by DRM. Over the last few months I've been asked various questions by (non technical) family, friends and colleagues that all involve DRM'ed content making things awkward, and not allowing them to do what they want with their legally bought music. I'm happy to tell them why they can't play their iTunes/Napster sourced music wherever they like; hopefully they'll wake up and see where their apathy has got them.
I then mention there are plenty of places people can get all the music they like without DRM, for nothing
If you want to add tags for other active server languages, you can probably do that just fine, then use Eclipse or Vim or your favorite other editor to write your server code (complete with syntax highlighting).
Yeah that's great! I can ditch DW and just swap back and forth between vi and Expression to do the same job!
Funny, I thought this thread would be full of MS astro-turfing, and what do you know!
Unless you have "Owned by Microsoft" stamped on your ass, I don't see why anyone would choose this garbage over Dreamweaver (disclaimer: I use DW in code view only, so can't vouch for its design abilities).
ROTFL. You're using $200 software as a simple text editor, while there are free/libre alternatives? Yeah, right. And Expression, which can also be used in code view, is garbage?
If you really think that using DW in code view is the same as using a simple text editor, you've obviously never used it. Think: site managment tools. Anyway, you're just an AC, so your opinion is pretty worthless anyway...
All developers (including PHP/JSP) can use this to build their HTML comps before making the site dynamic.
Yeah, because obviously the syntax hilighting will be fantastic with an MS app that only understands VB/C#... Makes me wonder what sort of bastardised CSS this thing generates to support MS' horrendous line of web browsers. I'm guessing it'll actually generate IE specific CSS, and render badly on anything else, as per MS standard operating practice.
Unless you have "Owned by Microsoft" stamped on your ass, I don't see why anyone would choose this garbage over Dreamweaver (disclaimer: I use DW in code view only, so can't vouch for its design abilities).
Well if a "developer" is dumb enough to lock themselves into ASP.Net, then I hope they use this. Serves them right... The problem is that there really are plenty of Microsoft trained drones out there who have absolutely no idea what exists outside of Microsoft's nice soft world for dummies, and no interest in learning anything ourside of Microsoft either. Which is the way MS likes its monkeys - dumb, and uninterested in expanding their skill set.
A useful site. Hopefully pedestrians will take heed and refrain from getting hit by cars travelling at more than 30mph, and instead wait for slower vehicles to walk in front of.
I see the most likely scenario as ajax being replaced by something designed to do the job far easier which is basically: Networkable GUI's.
It's already here, and called "Flash". Although I'm happy to write Javascript all day long, and have used it for games, windowing systems etc, I see a lot of the AJAX examples and wonder why the authors haven't just used Flash for the job. Admittedly if the app is embedding a lot of HTML content, then it makes sense to use AJAX, but for many other projects, it seems a bit of a strange choice.
I think maybe you need to do a little more research. You'll find that we've been sending data from the browser to the server - even including those pesky CRLF character codes, without needing XML, for several years now ;-) Key/value pairs are much simpler and faster to decode at either end than XML; and although XML does have its place, it's certainly not the magic bullet you're making it out to be... I've also been doing "AJAX" data transfers with Javascript for several years now, both using iFrames, and piggy-backing data in cookies using image requests, before the XML HTTP Request object was available/stable. Why it's suddenly being touted as a "new" idea is beyond me...
I love the fact the pound is so strong at the moment (and the dollar so weak ;-) It's far cheaper for me now to buy stuff (mostly performance car parts) from the US, pay for shipping, and even get stung for VAT than to buy it here in the UK! Hopefully the dollar will drop a bit more, then I can buy more stuff ;-)
..even with the governments "neglect". As soon as the utter wankers in power start meddling with anything good they just end up screwing it all up. Politicians hold the posts they do because they're completely incapable of holding down a real job. Example #1, the most famous moron of all time, George Bush. A trail of failed companies behind him, yet he's trusted to run the biggest country on Earth (of couse, we know he doesn't get to make any real decisions as that would be madness, but he profits from his role as an asshole).
They're always trying to find ways of slowing the cars down more and more, so adding Windows to the ECU is probably the logical next step...
BTW, what *is* the IE alternative to CSS?
Open a web page with Explorer. There's your answer...
Well you certainly have proven that you know nothing about .NET,
;-)
If you look back through the thread you'll find I pretty much admit as much. Although I can't discuss the project (in fact I probably should stop now, but what the hell), I can assure you there is no back office integration, we will be maintaining the server(s) and it's a brand new, stand-alone site that the client will access using a web-based CMS.
Actually I will stop discussing it now
You're definitely new to the .Net world and appear to have completely missed the whole existence of Mono which works with Apache on Linux. I believe other platforms are getting it soon as well but your statement is already out of date. A lot of apps will work in mono without much if any trouble. So where's the vendor lock-in exactly?
.Net with IIS.
Yeah, I'm sure MS will be happy to provide the Mono developers with full documentation every time they make changes too. After all, they do help the Samba guys out all the time! Let's face it, they'll do everything they can to ensure that the only *stable* platform is
Hopefully you're correct regarding the seamless upgrades, so I'll see how it all goes. Personally I'm not enthusiastic about it at all, coming from a strong *nix, and open source background. I get the feeling that I'll end up another clock-puncher, and have no interest in my work in a few months...
Well, I like Java! But we'll see I guess...
This is pretty funny from my perspective. I'm a web developer and have recently been informed I'm going to have to start using .Net as some of our clients have decided they "must have it" (the fact they have no idea what it is, or why they need it is of course irrelevent). I'm a Java/PHP guy, so wasn't exactly over enthusiastic at this news. One of my main reasons for not wanting to get on the MS treadmill (apart from the obvious ethical reasons) was that locking yourself and your clients into one companys products WILL result in more expensive development, and less choice (which is what MS is all about).
Here's a prime example; one day code written against a framework will work. One "windows update" later, time to rewrite! Oh how I'm going to laugh!!! [breaks down into hysterical sobbing]
"Windows Server 2003 [CC] was recently compared [CC] against Linux and Unix variants in a survey by the Yankee Group...
That's the point in the article where I thought "ahh, now I see" and stopped reading. What's the point in posting garbage from these shills? Granted it promotes discussion, but I'd rather not give these "experts for hire" any more banner hits...
I used to use img src requests in the background and piggyback the data down in a cookie from the server. That way you didn't get the annoying "click"s from IE...
I think you'll find the J stands for JavaSCRIPT, not Java...
Pfft! Why go to all that trouble. When I bought my Rubik's cube I just took it out of the box, looked at each side and it was done! It's sat on my windowsill ever since! Far too easy...
I'd rather see a study of the effect corporate "sponsorship" has on policies.
But damn it, I want someone to prove me wrong! Write the next awesome game yourself! (I want a version of Global Thermo Nuclear Warfare please)
I wrote that a good few years ago, but some pesky kid kept hacking into my WOPR and buggering about with it, so I gave up on the game and bred Yaks instead...
If you recall, Steve Jobs offered to license Mac OS X to this project for free and they refused.
Yeah, maybe the caveat that it required the purchase of a powermac G5 with widescreen monitor to qualify wasn't popular?
You're right - I'm a programmer and I hate having to use Word for documentation. I use it so seldom that it takes me all bloody day to get a decent layout.
I've found a workaround though, I just create an HTML page with some CSS, and put my documentation in that, then save it and open it in Word to save it again (making it about 10 times the size) - works great and the docs look nice without me having to fight with 10,000 menus that seem to have different bloody options every time I open them!
Yes, but if more than a few people come to your site at once it won't look so rosy, eh ;-) Damned that pesky licensing with Single Vendor, proprietary software... WAMP allows you to run a proper website - although it's obviously preferable to host on Linux...