I've actually been discussing this in a mozilla mailing list of embedding j2me and the startup would be included with the startup up the browser. I'm sure that sun has something similar in mind.
I tend to think of it this way...
they are getting maybe 1% of what they would receieve shoud that have actually been a Windows machine. Bt also, you are getting people used to a new system and off the crack rock that is Windows. That in the long term has an even greater loss for them.
Well for the preachers of the virtues of open source, yes. It has jumped the shark in a sense but also no it has not because every now aand then a new group of apps come along that make even us jump up and pay attention again.
And keep in mind (and I know I'm about to get flaming causes I can feel the heat), we are still a minority when it comes to people outside of IT. Those people still have never even heard of open source, have no idea what it is or what ir means and don't even know that they are already using it and what the benefits are.
However, due to the fact that even politicians in several states now are calling for open voting machines, open document formats and other open processes and formats, it seems that they are beginning to get it and for them, it hasn't even begun to jump the shark. In their world, Fonzy just got his first leather jacket.
Lets just replace javascript with bytecode once and for all and the J2ME code is only about 1.5 MB, is sandboxed and would integrate far better with server side applications than AJAX. Why isn't anyone pushing for J2ME or some other solution embedded within browsers?
Like I said in the beginning, I'm a newbie to this. I just got my Mac. This would be just as easy for you to find. You seem to keep missing this. You seem to keep missing everything I say and force me to repeat it over and over. I pity your project manager. Your development time must be doubled in.NET just from simply have to explain everything to you 5 million times until you finally understand.
why can't you just tell me give me the basic steps?
Because I don't want to transcribe the book and since I paid for it because I thought this was so cool, why should I be giving it to you for free. You're sitting there asking ME to do all this work for you and I don't even know you. I've supplied information and you don't even want to listen to that. You just keep sitting here asking for more more more and expecting me to do all this work to 'convert' you? Well guess what? I doubt you would understand as I mentioned. You obviously cannot grasp this concept, canot understand an article like 'The Blacksmith and The Bookkeeper' that every developer has read, you don't want to believe this functionality exists even though many other people have stated otherwise, you don't want to go to a barnes and noble and flip through the bok and now you are asking me to transcribe the book? This is Slashdot dude, not your mothers apron strings. If you honestly want to learn something, you still have to do the legwork yourself.
No, seriously. Can't you come up with a screenshot anywhere on the web?
Just told you... there are tons within that book. Find a reference to it or find it in your barnes and noble.
The person who wrote the book is the expert. He's the one who took the screenshots. He's the one who wrote the tutorial that I followed in the book. I suggest for the millionth time that you check it out or give up the trolling. Because if you don't understand it by now, you probably will never understand it. I doubt even the book will help you but it helped me which is why I keep mentioning it over and over and over. You seem to keep missing that fact. But I know that you are able to read these posts so assume you can also read a book. Again, suggest you follow the simple tutorial in the first 20 pages of this book... it's got loads of screenshots for you. And as many people have stated before me, will show you exactly what we have all been saying. Doubt it will do any good because I honestly think you lack the ability to comprehend at this point.
Mac Xcode2 Book - the first 20 pages. Loads of pictures, loads of explanations. Find a Barnes and Noble and just flip through. In fact, this is beginner stuff apparently as this is the first thing covered in the book so if this Mac developer doesn't know this, he has no experience with Apples own development tools whatsoever. Which is kind of sad for a Mac developer. I mean I can understand you as a.NET developer not knowing these things and being curious but your resources not knowing their own developments tools??? And this feature isn't new as this toolkit has been around for a few years with this functionality.
It's pretty sad when a newbie like me has to point out basic functionality to someone who claims to be an actual developer. Are you sure he doesn't work for Microsoft and just CLAIM to be a Apple developer?
Again, like I said, pointed this all out in previous posts. If you can't grasp the concept, it's ok. You don't have to understand everything. The book is out there and the software is out there as I and others have pointed out and you can check it out and see if you understand it then. And then if you still don't get it, it's ok. Lots of other people do and it's not your fault you don't understand. Microsoft has yet to get this concept either which is why they didn't implement it. Which is probably why you as a.NET developer can't wrap your head around it either; it's a different way of thinking about development as expressed by the article 'The Blacksmith and the Bookkeeper'. The fact that this thread is still going on and you can't seem to understand the difference between this and what.NET or what JAVA is currently doing just means you don't understand what we are talking about and that you really need to do some research on your own if you wish to understand.
I still don't think building apps by connecting icons is going to help developers in the long run, though. At some point you're going to hit the limit of what you can express that way, and then you're going to have to start over from the beginning, learning about methods and so on.
Many a developer has expressed this kind of concern including myself. But I would suggest reading a great article called 'The Blacksmith and The Bookkeeper' about the evolution of languages and what they will eventually become. Apple obviously has read this article and is preparing tools for it. Obviously it has limitations as this is first gen of this kind of thing. But it is undeniably th future and maybe in 100 years, there will be 50% fewer manual developers and most people will be doing it this way.
Apple is just acknowledging the eventual evolution of development and creating tools for it.
Oddly enough, still requires more coding and more development knowledge. You probably think I'm joking but I'm not. Really. I'm not.
The tool requires ZERO code writing. ZERO. You write ZERO lines of code for that Hello world app. It is all handled via the tool, via simple drag and dropping of icons, and the 'connecting' those icons visually.
It's all done like writing an ER Diagram. You drag a couple icons onto a pallete, you connect those icons to show the relationship and POW... you have an app. AND LITERALLY, that's how it is done... no shit! No code was written.
You already had to do alot more work and know alot more than I would have had to. I just had to look at icons and pick what I wanted. And THIS is what I was saying all along. THIS is what Visual Studio does NOT have. This is why my grandma could be writing applications on a MAC.
How do I explain the basic principl that people respond better to something when represented visually? How do I explain that a GUI is always friendlier than a command line? That a report with diagrams and pictures is easier to relate to than one without? If this concept is something you cannot grasp, the I cannot help you. It's a tenet of software development.
If.NET has something that obfuscates the code development into something driven by drag and drop icons, they have yet to announce it to the world yet. I know they TRY to make software deveopment easy but you are still touching lines of code. MAC has moved development to the next level and though it is a BABY step, it still shows that it the BEGINNINGS of the development process can be done by dragging and dropping elements onto a pallette and then hooking up those icon elements without ever touching a line of code.
Does.NET have that? Des Microsoft have that? Heck, I'm a huge Eclipse user and was thoroughly impressed that my mother, niece and I could all be doing software development using the same tool... albeit at different skill levels but still they could do some basic fundamental stuff without having to hire a software developer.
Yes but again, the point is that Mac made it easy to start developing with a simple interface so even non-developers can do development. Visual Studio and.NET have not. And beyond that, more advanced development can be done in any IDE like Eclipse or whatever you are comfortable with. So again, Visual Studio and.NET don't have anything that common IDE's already have and modern languages have.
Speaking as someone who uses Linux and Windos and just bought his first Mac last month, I use Eclipse with ease on my Mac. As far as ease of developing applications, I just found a cool set of developer tools called Xcode that LITERALLY lets you drag and drop most aspects of the GUI and then connect them up visually. And tweaking the code is a piece of cake.
Honestly, the development environment for developing applications for the Mac is far easier than anything else I have ever seen. You still have to understand MVC and OOP to be able to build a decent applicatiion but anyone can be able to throw together widgets or a simple GUI app in seconds.
I'd suggest anyone with a Mac laptop to install Xcode from their install disk and check out 'The Mac Xcode2 Boook' to get them started. Very quick, very easy and you'll be building GUI's after just a couple minutes of reading... no joke.
Agreed. Thats why the only safe places to live in the US are on the West coast or near a border. This message was safely sent from Seattle while smoking a fatty with my Canadian Ho and her pet albatross.
5-6% according to recent stats. And Linux has 4-5% depending on the stats. And these are just desktop stats. Macs laptop stats from last year were said to be 41% of all laptop sales. This isn't surprising when in the last year, I opted instead of grabbing a Dell and installing Ubuntu to instead get a Mac... as did my wife. So did half the developers are out telecom. At our LAMP meetup in Seattle, half the people their have MACS. They're the new Ipod of laptops.
So don't belikeve all stats you see. Instead, check out what you see at your local coffee shop or internet hotspot and do the percentages on that.
Polls are a sampling and a good poll can be a perfect representation within an acceptable margin of error of 1-3 percentage points. You may THINK that there is market inertia regardless of the fact that government agencies, corporations, schools and consumeres have all but boycotted the product and Microsoft has had to release inflated sales figures that include PRE-SALES number, upgrades and neglect to take into consideration return and cancellations.
Aside from that, this isn't the only report saying something similar to this. So this isn't that unlikely. The fact remains that you just would prefer to put on 'rose colored glasses' with a Microsoft logo emblem embossed on them.
The person I was replying to is extrapolating a dinky poll into "the vast majority" of the half a billion+ Windows users in the world
Yes. That dinky poll and several others taken before it in several different countries and several different industries which mirror the same sentiment. Therefore it MUST be partisan. LOL. Wow, even in the face of blinding logic some people still choose to close their eyes and walk off the cliff. Enjoy that fall.:)
If they believe you and test your theory, they will soon find out that it is not true.
And so you prove my point. Belief is not fact. However you then go to turn around your point to say that facts change and hence change your argument to say that 'the big picture has a big piture beyond even that'. For instance, Newtonian physics was correct but Quantum physics proved it wrong. Newtonian physics is still applicable so within context, it is factual. In a quantum sense, it would be less factual.
So try to stay on target with your argument. Belief is an opinion minus physical or applicable evidence such as love or god. Fact is reproducable and often observable. Regardless of your new argument (that facts change outside of context) which still holds mine true, belief still does not equal facts.
A fact is in fact just that: What the majority of people believe as truth.
Belief is not fact. I can convince everyone on this planet that they can fly and then march them off the edge of a 20 story tall cliff but the FACT is they will all plummet to their deaths... at least until the bodies pile up high enough to walk down. Regardless, still not flying.
And they don't want Vista. Correct? Can you show us some data to back this up?
Obviously your literacy skills are subpar for the article that you are submitting this comment for is the FACT you are seeking. Any other questions? Like maybe what color is a red rose? What shape is a round table? Should I provide facts for the basis of my deductions for those as well?
Do your own research. I'm not your lackey. If I say that a red rose is red and you say 'no it's not, where's your proof?', does that mean you are right merely for denying it?
As mentioned earlier, you seem to lack a basic understanding of this thing called logic. So while you are doing your research, also research logic as well so your arguments have substance as well as stupidity next time.
Windows 9x, as in Windows 95, 98, Me, was based on DOS. Windows NT, which begat 2000, XP and Vista, was developed seperately with an entirely new kernel.
And as stated earlier (BUT COMPLETELY IGNORED BY YOU), this has been refuted by Microsoft corp itself who has stated that code from 98 did make it into the NT kernel. It has said so in court documents, it has shown so in front of the European union and it has complained of the spaghetti code from 98 still being in XP and making it into Vista.
Stupid is ignoring even the people who maintain the code. If you don't believe me, do your own research. You'll find it after a couple google searches.
Are you being intentionally stupid? If Mcrosoft buys DOS and bases Windows on DOS and then bases all future versions on past versions, ipso facto NT is based on DOS for without DOS, Windows would not exist.
Are you trying to say you are not based on your grandfathers DNA? Or his grandfathers DNA? And that if you were to remove your grandfathers DNA from 3 generations ago, you would remain unaffected? Doubtful. NT is not a complete rewrite. Microsoft has stated as much and stted that it WAS in fact BASED on the 98 codebase.
The fact that you keep insisting that there is no relation shows you are ignorant of Microsoft's statements that contradict you and cannot understand the logic of inheritance.
Slashdot Mirror
I've actually been discussing this in a mozilla mailing list of embedding j2me and the startup would be included with the startup up the browser. I'm sure that sun has something similar in mind.
I tend to think of it this way... they are getting maybe 1% of what they would receieve shoud that have actually been a Windows machine. Bt also, you are getting people used to a new system and off the crack rock that is Windows. That in the long term has an even greater loss for them.
Well for the preachers of the virtues of open source, yes. It has jumped the shark in a sense but also no it has not because every now aand then a new group of apps come along that make even us jump up and pay attention again.
And keep in mind (and I know I'm about to get flaming causes I can feel the heat), we are still a minority when it comes to people outside of IT. Those people still have never even heard of open source, have no idea what it is or what ir means and don't even know that they are already using it and what the benefits are.
However, due to the fact that even politicians in several states now are calling for open voting machines, open document formats and other open processes and formats, it seems that they are beginning to get it and for them, it hasn't even begun to jump the shark. In their world, Fonzy just got his first leather jacket.
Lets just replace javascript with bytecode once and for all and the J2ME code is only about 1.5 MB, is sandboxed and would integrate far better with server side applications than AJAX. Why isn't anyone pushing for J2ME or some other solution embedded within browsers?
Like I said in the beginning, I'm a newbie to this. I just got my Mac. This would be just as easy for you to find. You seem to keep missing this. You seem to keep missing everything I say and force me to repeat it over and over. I pity your project manager. Your development time must be doubled in .NET just from simply have to explain everything to you 5 million times until you finally understand.
The person who wrote the book is the expert. He's the one who took the screenshots. He's the one who wrote the tutorial that I followed in the book. I suggest for the millionth time that you check it out or give up the trolling. Because if you don't understand it by now, you probably will never understand it. I doubt even the book will help you but it helped me which is why I keep mentioning it over and over and over. You seem to keep missing that fact. But I know that you are able to read these posts so assume you can also read a book. Again, suggest you follow the simple tutorial in the first 20 pages of this book... it's got loads of screenshots for you. And as many people have stated before me, will show you exactly what we have all been saying. Doubt it will do any good because I honestly think you lack the ability to comprehend at this point.
Exactly! Just as Vista is Microsoft's attempt to get more people to buy Linux and Mac. And then they will REALLY destroy them!
Mac Xcode2 Book - the first 20 pages. Loads of pictures, loads of explanations. Find a Barnes and Noble and just flip through. In fact, this is beginner stuff apparently as this is the first thing covered in the book so if this Mac developer doesn't know this, he has no experience with Apples own development tools whatsoever. Which is kind of sad for a Mac developer. I mean I can understand you as a .NET developer not knowing these things and being curious but your resources not knowing their own developments tools??? And this feature isn't new as this toolkit has been around for a few years with this functionality.
.NET developer can't wrap your head around it either; it's a different way of thinking about development as expressed by the article 'The Blacksmith and the Bookkeeper'. The fact that this thread is still going on and you can't seem to understand the difference between this and what .NET or what JAVA is currently doing just means you don't understand what we are talking about and that you really need to do some research on your own if you wish to understand.
It's pretty sad when a newbie like me has to point out basic functionality to someone who claims to be an actual developer. Are you sure he doesn't work for Microsoft and just CLAIM to be a Apple developer?
Again, like I said, pointed this all out in previous posts. If you can't grasp the concept, it's ok. You don't have to understand everything. The book is out there and the software is out there as I and others have pointed out and you can check it out and see if you understand it then. And then if you still don't get it, it's ok. Lots of other people do and it's not your fault you don't understand. Microsoft has yet to get this concept either which is why they didn't implement it. Which is probably why you as a
Apple is just acknowledging the eventual evolution of development and creating tools for it.
Oddly enough, still requires more coding and more development knowledge. You probably think I'm joking but I'm not. Really. I'm not.
The tool requires ZERO code writing. ZERO. You write ZERO lines of code for that Hello world app. It is all handled via the tool, via simple drag and dropping of icons, and the 'connecting' those icons visually.
It's all done like writing an ER Diagram. You drag a couple icons onto a pallete, you connect those icons to show the relationship and POW... you have an app. AND LITERALLY, that's how it is done... no shit! No code was written.
You already had to do alot more work and know alot more than I would have had to. I just had to look at icons and pick what I wanted. And THIS is what I was saying all along. THIS is what Visual Studio does NOT have. This is why my grandma could be writing applications on a MAC.
How do I explain the basic principl that people respond better to something when represented visually? How do I explain that a GUI is always friendlier than a command line? That a report with diagrams and pictures is easier to relate to than one without? If this concept is something you cannot grasp, the I cannot help you. It's a tenet of software development. If .NET has something that obfuscates the code development into something driven by drag and drop icons, they have yet to announce it to the world yet. I know they TRY to make software deveopment easy but you are still touching lines of code. MAC has moved development to the next level and though it is a BABY step, it still shows that it the BEGINNINGS of the development process can be done by dragging and dropping elements onto a pallette and then hooking up those icon elements without ever touching a line of code.
Does .NET have that? Des Microsoft have that? Heck, I'm a huge Eclipse user and was thoroughly impressed that my mother, niece and I could all be doing software development using the same tool... albeit at different skill levels but still they could do some basic fundamental stuff without having to hire a software developer.
Yes but again, the point is that Mac made it easy to start developing with a simple interface so even non-developers can do development. Visual Studio and .NET have not. And beyond that, more advanced development can be done in any IDE like Eclipse or whatever you are comfortable with. So again, Visual Studio and .NET don't have anything that common IDE's already have and modern languages have.
Speaking as someone who uses Linux and Windos and just bought his first Mac last month, I use Eclipse with ease on my Mac. As far as ease of developing applications, I just found a cool set of developer tools called Xcode that LITERALLY lets you drag and drop most aspects of the GUI and then connect them up visually. And tweaking the code is a piece of cake. Honestly, the development environment for developing applications for the Mac is far easier than anything else I have ever seen. You still have to understand MVC and OOP to be able to build a decent applicatiion but anyone can be able to throw together widgets or a simple GUI app in seconds. I'd suggest anyone with a Mac laptop to install Xcode from their install disk and check out 'The Mac Xcode2 Boook' to get them started. Very quick, very easy and you'll be building GUI's after just a couple minutes of reading... no joke.
Agreed. Thats why the only safe places to live in the US are on the West coast or near a border. This message was safely sent from Seattle while smoking a fatty with my Canadian Ho and her pet albatross.
Yeah and wasn't legalized prostitution, hashish and Monty Python also popular in Europe? Shows you that they have it al over us and US. :)
5-6% according to recent stats. And Linux has 4-5% depending on the stats. And these are just desktop stats. Macs laptop stats from last year were said to be 41% of all laptop sales. This isn't surprising when in the last year, I opted instead of grabbing a Dell and installing Ubuntu to instead get a Mac... as did my wife. So did half the developers are out telecom. At our LAMP meetup in Seattle, half the people their have MACS. They're the new Ipod of laptops.
So don't belikeve all stats you see. Instead, check out what you see at your local coffee shop or internet hotspot and do the percentages on that.
Polls are a sampling and a good poll can be a perfect representation within an acceptable margin of error of 1-3 percentage points. You may THINK that there is market inertia regardless of the fact that government agencies, corporations, schools and consumeres have all but boycotted the product and Microsoft has had to release inflated sales figures that include PRE-SALES number, upgrades and neglect to take into consideration return and cancellations.
Aside from that, this isn't the only report saying something similar to this. So this isn't that unlikely. The fact remains that you just would prefer to put on 'rose colored glasses' with a Microsoft logo emblem embossed on them.
So try to stay on target with your argument. Belief is an opinion minus physical or applicable evidence such as love or god. Fact is reproducable and often observable. Regardless of your new argument (that facts change outside of context) which still holds mine true, belief still does not equal facts.
Do your own research. I'm not your lackey. If I say that a red rose is red and you say 'no it's not, where's your proof?', does that mean you are right merely for denying it?
As mentioned earlier, you seem to lack a basic understanding of this thing called logic. So while you are doing your research, also research logic as well so your arguments have substance as well as stupidity next time.
Stupid is ignoring even the people who maintain the code. If you don't believe me, do your own research. You'll find it after a couple google searches.
Are you being intentionally stupid? If Mcrosoft buys DOS and bases Windows on DOS and then bases all future versions on past versions, ipso facto NT is based on DOS for without DOS, Windows would not exist.
Are you trying to say you are not based on your grandfathers DNA? Or his grandfathers DNA? And that if you were to remove your grandfathers DNA from 3 generations ago, you would remain unaffected? Doubtful. NT is not a complete rewrite. Microsoft has stated as much and stted that it WAS in fact BASED on the 98 codebase.
The fact that you keep insisting that there is no relation shows you are ignorant of Microsoft's statements that contradict you and cannot understand the logic of inheritance.