If I think in technical/geeky terms I lean towards mono because it's an "evolution" of the technology (it is also shiny and newer than Java!) also the.net compact framework is on my PDA.
When I think of the Linux "world" and freedom of software then Java is the *overwhelming* choice, Java is also installed in most mobile phones, not to mention the development tools are far maturer than something like monodevelop and fully functional (unlike Visual Studio Express).
As much as I like mono based on your comments Java is the way forward!
As a Programmer I am really torn between Java and Mono!
Both platforms solve the same problem but which one shall I commit to?
Do I install and run both platforms on my PC? Surely running both platforms at the same time *must* be detrimental to my PC's performance (e.g. memory usage and cpu time executing both VMs)!
I also cannot afford the time to learn both platforms properly!
It is unfortunately a question of politics. Java is now open-sourced and offically sanctioned. Mono is the "unauthorised"(by Microsoft) port of.net technology and patents are a concern.
Both platforms have great software written for them (e.g. banshee, jedit, monodevelop, eclipse and netbeans) and patents are not really a concern to me because I live in the UK (software patents do not apply...YET!).
It is unfortunate that the mono is so closely associated with Windows, if the mono team had created/implemented a completely new set of cross-platform libraries (that bore no relation to Microsoft's framework) it would be more accepted.
I really like mono - the work that has been done is nothing short of amazing but the constant catch-up with Microsoft is a concern.
Java is widespread in mobile phones and most modern desktops unfortunatly for me it is not available on my PDA (ipaq 2210).
What about something like jedit (I know it's a java app!) or kdevelop?
I use jedit at work and it extremely configurable, you can add add the mono compiler as a menu item. (e.g. write your source code in the ide and easily compile it by selecting your custom menu item).
Kdevelop is built upon the QT and KDE libraries, I've used it before and is just as "customisable" as jedit.
However, if you don't have the gnome libraries (do you also mean gtk too?) then developing mono desktop apps may be problematic for you (the "gui" libraries in mono depend on gtk being installed)
On the other hand, if your developing console-type applications then the desktop aspect of mono is irrelevant and using any ide would be o.k.
Sure, this seems like a 'rip-off' of Nintendo's controllers but it may have practical uses with a PC.
Would this be ideal for 3D modelling?
Imagine using this with something like Blender - instead of using the mouse and countless keystrokes you can intuitively use the Asus controller to work with the models.
It could also be used in presentations - architectural models can be easily navigated by the presenter to an audience.
I think this is a good idea and surprised how long it took someone to develop this for the PC.
I currently own a Palm Tungsten T3(my previous PDA was a Palm m550) and until a year 1/2 ago was genuinely useful. It did everything I wanted; play music, read pdfs, various programming options and browse the Internet with my mobile phone. There are/were many useful applications for it, Office software, font anti-aliasing software(way before Pocket PCs could do it) and even a Java VM (no longer downloadable because Palm discontinued it - this could have made it much more useful - mind you the implementation is extremely dated).
These days it's just a pain in the backside. I had to buy a new mobile phone and I cannot get my Palm T3 linked to my mobile - considering they both support Bluetooth my T3 just generates an Exception and crashes (I've looked for ways round it and none of them work).
My problem is that the OS is severely limited now. The memory structure is segmented (limited to 64k blocks?), you can't even task switch applications let alone multi-task - when you start an application the previous has to exit first.
The most *important* limitation my T3 has is that it is limited to 1GB sd cards!
On the other hand it fully backward compatible with old Palm-based software via it's emulator.
If Palm continued to update the OS (even for the TX) I would still use it but unfortunately this is yet another bad management decision by Palm.
Most Palm systems are based round an ARM processor and more than capable CPU, for just look at the Nokia n800 series or the Zaurus line of PDAs.
As far as I am concerned Palm just don't exist as a credible PDA company their management seem to lack any common-sense , business acumen or any experience.
There is still hope via the linux4palm project - but support is still immature, if they can complete support for the T3 then I will switch, beyond that my T3 days are coming to an end.
It's sad - Palm had a golden opportunity to really lead the PDA industry and in the early years were innovators but unfortunately the company will disappear.
My next PDA is going to be an open-source one. Whether it's Symbian or a Linux derivative that way I can stay in control of the technology.
I have to admit if the allegations are true then Google probably has one of the best Marketing/PR departments in the world.
I've been in the IT industry for a long time and I can still remember Microsoft's public image was similar many, many years ago! (anyone remember a small company called 'Stac'?) and it's now happening again, same 'strategy' - different company!
Initially I was skeptical when I started reading the article (I know, I know I have just broken a Slashdot cardinal rule) when I read this:
"..the potential for 50 million users - was "just too big to come from someone else" and that "this is how Google operates.."
quoted from Scott McMullan, a senior executive in the Google Apps partner program
Moral of the story?
It's ok to be a 'partner' to a large company as long as your product is not *too* popular or successful.
Anyone partnering with a large company should learn lessons from this - remember a large companie's main responsibility is to it's shareholders - they are the people who want a return on thier investment and usually at any cost!
I currently maintain some software here at work and you've guessed it - most of it is implemented in vb, vb.net, vbscript and asp.
I have also used c, c++ and c# in other projects in my working career.
Almost all computer languages have common underpinnings and principles (e.g. conditional statement, local/global scoped variables & loop constructs) when you know the basic (no pun intended) elements of a language - this rest will follow.
Personally I always get to grips with the core elements of a language and ensure I have a good foundation to build on before I start on the libraries. For me, the libraries are the most 'challenging' aspect of learning a new language. Once you've got your head round the libraries you will find it much easier to solve problems.
I've recently started Java programming again and feel almost overwhelmed at the sheer size of just the core libraries in Java. It's a worthwhile investment in time and energy because Java is pretty much implemented everywhere and of course now open-sourced.
I Have enjoyed writing software in Mono for the past year or so and developing.Net applications at work a little longer.
But one thing bothers me - you know what I going to say next......Patents! or MS derived technology.
Now, to be fair it seems pretty much most software is 'perceived' to violate a patent of some description today.
As I understand it the mono vm apparently is o.k. but some of the libraries(e.g. ADO, Windows.Forms, ASP and even c#) are suppossed to violate patents and this is unfortunate.
Some of the software I have written will have commercial applications and the *uncertainty* of the status of mono in general is in question. Even the MS 'agreements' signed by Novell purposely *exclude* mono in any protection.
Personally I prefer Mono(and some great apps are available-e.g. Banshee, MonoDevelop) compared to Java but because of the huge amount of work by Sun and the community to fully open-source Java I will switch to it immediately.
My reasons to switch are: 1) Java is open-sourced and the actual company(Sun) that created it are fully involved and are a positive influence in the community. 2) Java is present in almost all modern mobile phones. There is great potential to leverage this and I'm sure there are many ways this can be used with the Desktop. 3) The development tools are free, full versions and are very powerful. Visual Studio Express is free but it has reduced functionality compared to the full version. 4) 'Peace of Mind'. I can develop my software without looking over my shoulder wondering 'will I get sued'! 5).Net's direction from v2.00 to v3.5 is becoming more tied in to Windows. From v3.0(or v3.5?) Microsoft included Vista libraries are part of the default installation. It's the old MS Treadmill(tm) all over again.
As far as I know both Java and Mono are very capable technologies. It is difficult to choose one on technical merit alone, it comes down to the licensing - Sun has fully committed to the community and Microsoft has been fairly under-handed.
If Mono is to survive and be taken seriously within the community it must take a completely different direction. Start developing open-source equivalents of the libraries (e.g. gtk# for gui controls).
Like I said before I prefer Mono to Java (concerning the gui Mono just 'feels' more responsive than Java).
What we should do as a community is to fully get behind Java and push its development and start using it on the desktop. We can create some great applications for it and keep open-source software 'untainted'.
Sun have made a great long-term decision by opening-up Java - it will be seen as a safe option and is available for many platforms..Net's long-term future is in doubt because Microsoft will not open-source or allow competing versions to exist. Many forms of computers now exist today in mobile phones, pdas, laptops and many different types of CPUs. Java(in various forms) runs everywhere. By using Java as a common standard all these devices can communicate together and develop interesting uses.
Just the insane ramblings of a elderly programmer (I'm 38 you know!).
Judging by the review they seem to have discovered the 'Zen of GUI' - keep the interface as simple as you can - only include what is necessary to use the device.
Apple seem to understand this as well.
I think that software developers and GUI designers can learn some lessons here (me included).
Is there room in the market for MS? Or will they squeeze VMWare out? We'll soon find out...
HaHaHa!
This is Microsoft we're talking about here - there is no room in the marketplace!
On a serious note - virtualisation plays a major part in computing today, if Microsoft's os is going to be virtualised it will be done on thier terms and of course deeply integrated.
If they want to do this that's fine...
.
.
However, typically Microsoft's business practise is to try and 'remove' any competitive products from the marketplace - vmware had better be sharp because thier life is about to get more difficult.
When an emerging market is noticed by Microsoft they seem to wait and see how it develops. If it appears to be profitable they wade in with thier own version and take it all even if thier own product is inferior - they can use thier OS as leverage (which has happend time and time again).
Again, it's Microsoft's monopoly status that allows them to do this and I have a problem with that.
If vmware are forced out the market at least there are open-source alternatives available which fortunately cannot be forced out the market (unless patent issues are raised?).
As open source code in the *true sense* of the word that's fine; you can write/edit the source code , write a patch and then you can either create a version specifically for your piece of software or better still send the patch to the developer responsible for the library. The change is integrated into the original source and the rest of the community gets the benefit. With the addition of a non-restricting license, the code can be redistributed or new works can be derived from it or even forked if the need arises - usually there is no legal pitfalls.
With Microsoft it is very different. It's not as if you can say 'I have an idea to improve a particular routine' modify the source and try an idea or experiment with it to see if it works and thus improve the library.
It is not possible under a restrictive license as governed by Microsoft.
The legal implications *do* have an impact on *some* developers particularly with the mono project (if you view the.net source code you cannot contribute to the mono project). What happens at some point in the future you end-up moving to Linux(or any other os) and start developing mono applications(legally fine) but you want to contribute to mono itself - you will not be allowed to. The potential to sue is a real possibility and will restrict your rights as an individual.
Releasing the source code by Microsoft is a big deal for the *company* not particularly for the community.
As regards to the code; you can see it, smell it but you cannot touch it! The source is *read only*. As a result it is of limited use.
My primary development environment at work is Microsoft.net. I use the Express editions of Visual Studio for our development and at the moment is perfectly suited to the job at-hand and I can use Visual Studio at home for my own projects(I can also use mono on my Linux partition). The barrier to entry is low and more people can participate.
A few years ago this simply was not possible - you had to pay for a full version of Visual Studio. The barrier to entry was high. As a result many alternatives are now available because of additional pressures of competition.
I am grateful for Microsoft for releasing the Express editions of their software but before-hand you to pay *a lot* of money before you got decent support (even then it usually turned into a sales pitch to buy more product).
It's a shame Microsoft have chosen this path, if they *had used* an open-source license then their platform would be widely adopted and everyone would benefit from the developments it could entail.
It just seems to be that Microsoft's narrow focus on the Windows monopoly is hampering the company in the long run and every decision they make is centered around Windows.
Mind you what if you *do* discover a bug in Microsoft's code, what can you do?
You can't modify the source code - 'it's read only', even if you were allowed to to modify it you'll 'break' standards.
You can tell Microsoft - we all know how well they listen to 'customers/developers' and how long will it take them to fix it.
If you also use mono you will not be able to contribute to the project because you have seen 'the code'.
I've been using.net in a major project at work and as yet not needed to see the source code of the libraries (I probably never will) and I know there are bugs/'features' in the libraries but there are workarounds - it's not stopped us so far.
I really don't think it's in mono's interest to try and keep compatibility with Microsoft's libraries (it's that old Microsoft Treadmill routine again). I imagine at some point Microsoft will release a future library that will make the current version obsolete - they are already doing this with the.forms library - just you watch!
Mono and it's developers have put in too much hard work for this to happen - mono should follow it's own path and develop libraries from the 'ground-up'(e.g. gtk#) rather than attempt to keep up.
We should have more faith in the mono project rather than constantly 'slam-it' for 'patent issues' or because Micorsoft 'invented' it.
You can only *look* at the code and you cannot re-distribute the libraries not to mention the legal aspects (specifically mono).
This is probably only useful from an *educational* point-of-view and when you think about it, there is so much publically available code out there already how much more will you learn from the.net sources anyway (I'm sure someone here will prove me wrong).
I thought one of the major benefits of OOP was code abstraction - in theory there should not be a need to see the implementation.
In fact too much knowledge could be a 'bad thing'(tm) you may start relying on *how* something is implemented - if the implementation changes your code *may* break.
As for the mono project I believe only the implementation of libraries is the issue. The vm and c# are a public standard and 'patent free?'- maybe mono should diverse in a seperate direction rather trying to catchup with Microsoft (considering how.net 3.5 has bloated because of the vista specific libraries have been added, and yet another series of APIs being included - typical Microsoft).
The major benefit of mono for me is that I can use Microsoft's.net at work, at home I can use mono on Linux and my.net coding experience is relevant to both platforms.
After reading the article and viewing the graphs(just look how many web servers are out there) it really 'hit home' how bad it would be if Microsoft dominated the 'server space'.
At present there are many different web servers in use today and it was something I took for granted. I am a heavy Internet user and when I am visiting web sites I never give a second thought about what server it is running on - everything *usually* works within my browser.
Do you know why?
These web servers follow *open standards* using standard protocols and published specifications.
Now imagine if Microsoft dominated the web server market. They will have a commanding share of the OS, web browser and server market. Once this is in place then you just know these 'standards' will drift away and eventually rely on *Microsoft* standards.
The seamless nature of browsing the internet will eventually disappear.
Eventually Microsoft's servers would be modified to serve content to 'Explorer' only - if you use a different browser you would get a 'blank' screen or message stating 'this site is best viewed in Internet Explorer'.
Internet Explorer would exhibit the same behavior, if it detected a non-Microsoft server again a message would appear instead of the web-site informing the user that the site is unavailable or incompatible.
If you're not running Microsoft Explorer your pages won't render properly - users complain & companies get nervous. If you're not running a Microsoft server stack your pages won't be served properly - users complain & companies get nervous.
Microsoft become the de-facto standard because it will be *perceived* as the most conservative and least risky option.
If you run your own business you can look forward to ever-increasing overheads.
The barrier to entry will again be high, Microsoft and their many partners are set to earn *huge* revenues and of course any competition will be extinguished.
Microsoft has an abundance of patience and it will probably take years for this to happen.
The Internet as you know it will become bland, colourless, safe, corporation and media friendly.
Embrace, Extend & Extinguish.
It's a sad way of doing business, if they were actually respectful and *co-operate* with IT industry they can still be a successful company without having to destroy everthing.
I visited the link and there is no mention of the site shutting down! (is kdawson again posting misleading headlines?)
O.k., the production team have been pulled of the site - not a good sign!
There seems to be alot of advertising on the site - *if* the site is shut down - that would be nuts (assuming it is generating a profit)! There is also a new Star Trek film in the pipeline why would they shut the site down.
Unless they will use the domain to promote the new film - hopefully the content will still be available if people are interested in the film it makes sense to allow the 'old' content to be available.
The files are in a folder shared with Kazaa. The files are PUBLICLY available to other downloaders.
The fact that the music is in another format IS NOT THE ISSUE it is because the files are PUBLICLY available that IS THE ISSUE!
If the copyrighted files are on a PUBLICLY shared folder - that's distribution - you are NOT ALLOWED to do this unless you HAVE PERMISSION from the COPYRIGHT HOLDER.
For example, you have a sharable folder on your home computer(say in your living room) via a network and you use your laptop upstairs to access the files and listen to them that's o.k.
If you then make that folder sharable under a publicly accessible FILE SHARING network then you are in danger of being taken to court for breach of copyright.
BTW I mainly use Linux not XP (as you assumed) on my computer and XP does NOT share all folders & drives by default. I should know, the family computer(running XP Home) has 4 accounts on it and nobody can see each other's personal files.
Fair enough, I suppose 'pretty stupid' is a bit harsh, but if you use a 'file sharing' service I would have thought it was obvious that it worked the 'other way' - maybe this should be made clearer in the software or website - at least some sort of message informing/warning the user that thier files will be available to other people.
With the scenario you mentioned about streaming your mp3s - as long as these files were available to yourself I'd imagine that is fair use. There are legitimate uses for this e.g. streaming the files around your house via a network.
The problem in this case is the files in the defendant's shared folder were effectively made *public* via KaZaa's network.
(Assuming that is actually what happened)
It's just a shame with RIAA's heavy-handed attitude the defendant will suffer severe consequences.
Now I hate the RIAA as much as the next guy but the following quote:
"...Exhibit B to Plaintiffs' Complaint is a series of screen shots showing the sound recording and other files found in the KaZaA shared folder..."
and
"...Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs' recording into the compressed.mp3 format and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiffs..."
I don't think personal use is the issue - it is the fact he made the recordings potentially public is the problem. I imagine the RIAA will get him on 'unauthorized distribution'.
The guy who did this is pretty stupid - what kind of reaction from the RIAA does he expect?
Pretty much all my music is in some kind of digital form, when I rip cds I certainly don't store them in a sharable folder - it's for my private use.
Then again this is the RIAA this person will probably suffer a ridiculous fine (or jail term?) that can potentially ruin his life (it's only music for christ's sake).
If I knock over someone with my car and kill them I would probably be fined £1000 and incur points on my driving license (or a ban for 12 months).
(Hey it's the old if "it was a car" analogy).
With all the fighting and bickering with the OOXML and document standards the market may eventually decide this anyway.
At some point people will grow tired of the politics of this so-called debate and the issue will become completely irrelevant.
In this instance I'm not sure if letting market forces decide which format it will use because Microsoft Office is the market anyway.
Actually maybe this is Microsoft's plan all along:
If their document spec (in it's original form) had made it through the standards process - win for Microsoft
If there were objections to it, obscure and delay the whole standards process and implement the spec through Microsoft Office anyway - win for Microsoft
Win-Win for Microsoft!
Of course this would mean a Lose-Lose situation to everybody else - Microsoft maintain their lock on the market and an obscure standard becomes a nightmare to implement for everyone else.
It's a pity a company has to act this way - If they actually cooperated with everyone Microsoft could influence the I.T. industry in a positive way.(If they weren't so blinkered by Windows - I'm 'looking' at you Mr Ballmer!)
I never did go for this 'new-fangled htmlised' comment posting!
My ancient weathered fingers can't take the extra typing of the tags on the keyboard!
(ironically I am wearing a 'splint' on my left hand due to a RSI! a sure sign of old age - maybe I should stop typing from the bedroom window!)
Ahhh there's my sense of humour I wondered where it went to!
Joking aside...
This is the only forum I feel I truly belong - I very seldom post comments anywhere else. There are people from many different backgrounds here which makes slashdot so interesting to read and sometimes even educational.
I thought the whole point of "Social Networking" was to be socialiable??!!
One of the great aspects of the Internet was anyone could take part, no matter your race, religion, colour or *age* everyone is equal behind the keyboard.
After reading some of the negative comments on this thread it saddens me there are people who obviously find people of "a certain age" offensive.
Me? I am 37 years old and have no hang-ups or insecurites about my age at all (I never did)!
As this thread continues I am hoping many more positive posts will outweigh the negative comments I have seen so far otherwise I will have to re-consdider participating in Slashdot.
The funny thing it is *inevitable* *you* will reach this age one day...HaHaHa
Allowing businesses to legitimise thier Microsoft software is fair enough and a good idea...
but...then allowing them to 'audit' your software collection? I sincerley hope Microsoft have strict policies on what they are *allowed* to audit and limit it to Microsoft software only.
Can you imagine if you were using a competitive product and after the 'audit' receiving sales calls(bullied?) on why you should be using *thier* products instead? (believe me when thay start they don't when to shutup)
I find the idea of an audit pretty extreme.
From personal experience no other software company stipulates this 'requirement'.
Does anybody have more details on what an audit from Microsoft entails?
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Troll,
I may only *speak* one language (english) but at least I can spell!
"...starting to programm." :P
P.S. Your post makes NO sense!
You make an excellent point!
If I think in technical/geeky terms I lean towards mono because it's an "evolution" of the technology (it is also shiny and newer than Java!) also the .net compact framework is on my PDA.
When I think of the Linux "world" and freedom of software then Java is the *overwhelming* choice, Java is also installed in most mobile phones, not to mention the development tools are far maturer than something like monodevelop and fully functional (unlike Visual Studio Express).
As much as I like mono based on your comments Java is the way forward!
As a Programmer I am really torn between Java and Mono!
Both platforms solve the same problem but which one shall I commit to?
Do I install and run both platforms on my PC?
Surely running both platforms at the same time *must* be detrimental to my PC's performance (e.g. memory usage and cpu time executing both VMs)!
I also cannot afford the time to learn both platforms properly!
It is unfortunately a question of politics. .net technology and patents are a concern.
Java is now open-sourced and offically sanctioned.
Mono is the "unauthorised"(by Microsoft) port of
Both platforms have great software written for them (e.g. banshee, jedit, monodevelop, eclipse and netbeans) and patents are not really a concern to me because I live in the UK (software patents do not apply...YET!).
It is unfortunate that the mono is so closely associated with Windows, if the mono team had created/implemented a completely new set of cross-platform libraries (that bore no relation to Microsoft's framework) it would be more accepted.
I really like mono - the work that has been done is nothing short of amazing but the constant catch-up with Microsoft is a concern.
Java is widespread in mobile phones and most modern desktops unfortunatly for me it is not available on my PDA (ipaq 2210).
I am really stuck with this! :(
What about something like jedit (I know it's a java app!) or kdevelop?
I use jedit at work and it extremely configurable, you can add add the mono compiler as a menu item. (e.g. write your source code in the ide and easily compile it by selecting your custom menu item).
Kdevelop is built upon the QT and KDE libraries, I've used it before and is just as "customisable" as jedit.
However, if you don't have the gnome libraries (do you also mean gtk too?) then developing mono desktop apps may be problematic for you (the "gui" libraries in mono depend on gtk being installed)
On the other hand, if your developing console-type applications then the desktop aspect of mono is irrelevant and using any ide would be o.k.
Sure, this seems like a 'rip-off' of Nintendo's controllers but it may have practical uses with a PC.
Would this be ideal for 3D modelling?
Imagine using this with something like Blender - instead of using the mouse and countless keystrokes you can intuitively use the Asus controller to work with the models.
It could also be used in presentations - architectural models can be easily navigated by the presenter to an audience.
I think this is a good idea and surprised how long it took someone to develop this for the PC.
This can actually be useful.
I currently own a Palm Tungsten T3(my previous PDA was a Palm m550) and until a year 1/2 ago was genuinely useful.
It did everything I wanted; play music, read pdfs, various programming options and browse the Internet with my mobile phone. There are/were many useful applications for it, Office software, font anti-aliasing software(way before Pocket PCs could do it) and even a Java VM (no longer downloadable because Palm discontinued it - this could have made it much more useful - mind you the implementation is extremely dated).
These days it's just a pain in the backside. I had to buy a new mobile phone and I cannot get my Palm T3 linked to my mobile - considering they both support Bluetooth my T3 just generates an Exception and crashes (I've looked for ways round it and none of them work).
My problem is that the OS is severely limited now. The memory structure is segmented (limited to 64k blocks?), you can't even task switch applications let alone multi-task - when you start an application the previous has to exit first.
The most *important* limitation my T3 has is that it is limited to 1GB sd cards!
On the other hand it fully backward compatible with old Palm-based software via it's emulator.
If Palm continued to update the OS (even for the TX) I would still use it but unfortunately this is yet another bad management decision by Palm.
Most Palm systems are based round an ARM processor and more than capable CPU, for just look at the Nokia n800 series or the Zaurus line of PDAs.
As far as I am concerned Palm just don't exist as a credible PDA company their management seem to lack any common-sense , business acumen or any experience.
There is still hope via the linux4palm project - but support is still immature, if they can complete support for the T3 then I will switch, beyond that my T3 days are coming to an end.
It's sad - Palm had a golden opportunity to really lead the PDA industry and in the early years were innovators but unfortunately the company will disappear.
My next PDA is going to be an open-source one. Whether it's Symbian or a Linux derivative that way I can stay in control of the technology.
I have to admit if the allegations are true then Google probably has one of the best Marketing/PR departments in the world.
I've been in the IT industry for a long time and I can still remember Microsoft's public image was similar many, many years ago! (anyone remember a small company called 'Stac'?) and it's now happening again, same 'strategy' - different company!
Initially I was skeptical when I started reading the article (I know, I know I have just broken a Slashdot cardinal rule) when I read this:
"..the potential for 50 million users - was "just too big to come from someone else" and that "this is how Google operates.."
quoted from Scott McMullan, a senior executive in the Google Apps partner program
Moral of the story?
It's ok to be a 'partner' to a large company as long as your product is not *too* popular or successful.
Anyone partnering with a large company should learn lessons from this - remember a large companie's main responsibility is to it's shareholders - they are the people who want a return on thier investment and usually at any cost!
I currently maintain some software here at work and you've guessed it - most of it is implemented in vb, vb.net, vbscript and asp.
I have also used c, c++ and c# in other projects in my working career.
Almost all computer languages have common underpinnings and principles (e.g. conditional statement, local/global scoped variables & loop constructs) when you know the basic (no pun intended) elements of a language - this rest will follow.
Personally I always get to grips with the core elements of a language and ensure I have a good foundation to build on before I start on the libraries.
For me, the libraries are the most 'challenging' aspect of learning a new language.
Once you've got your head round the libraries you will find it much easier to solve problems.
I've recently started Java programming again and feel almost overwhelmed at the sheer size of just the core libraries in Java.
It's a worthwhile investment in time and energy because Java is pretty much implemented everywhere and of course now open-sourced.
Stay at it and good luck!
Thanks for the info.
Correct me if I am wrong but Java 6 SE now uses the native drawing routines of the underlying widget library (e.g. gtk)?
Is gui performance - particularly 'Swing' less of an issue now?
I Have enjoyed writing software in Mono for the past year or so and developing .Net applications at work a little longer.
But one thing bothers me - you know what I going to say next.... ..Patents! or MS derived technology.
Now, to be fair it seems pretty much most software is 'perceived' to violate a patent of some description today.
As I understand it the mono vm apparently is o.k. but some of the libraries(e.g. ADO, Windows.Forms, ASP and even c#) are suppossed to violate patents and this is unfortunate.
Some of the software I have written will have commercial applications and the *uncertainty* of the status of mono in general is in question. Even the MS 'agreements' signed by Novell purposely *exclude* mono in any protection.
Personally I prefer Mono(and some great apps are available-e.g. Banshee, MonoDevelop) compared to Java but because of the huge amount of work by Sun and the community to fully open-source Java I will switch to it immediately.
My reasons to switch are: .Net's direction from v2.00 to v3.5 is becoming more tied in to Windows. From v3.0(or v3.5?) Microsoft included Vista libraries are part of the default installation. It's the old MS Treadmill(tm) all over again.
1) Java is open-sourced and the actual company(Sun) that created it are fully involved and are a positive influence in the community.
2) Java is present in almost all modern mobile phones. There is great potential to leverage this and I'm sure there are many ways this can be used with the Desktop.
3) The development tools are free, full versions and are very powerful. Visual Studio Express is free but it has reduced functionality compared to the full version.
4) 'Peace of Mind'. I can develop my software without looking over my shoulder wondering 'will I get sued'!
5)
As far as I know both Java and Mono are very capable technologies. It is difficult to choose one on technical merit alone, it comes down to the licensing - Sun has fully committed to the community and Microsoft has been fairly under-handed.
If Mono is to survive and be taken seriously within the community it must take a completely different direction. Start developing open-source equivalents of the libraries (e.g. gtk# for gui controls).
Like I said before I prefer Mono to Java (concerning the gui Mono just 'feels' more responsive than Java).
What we should do as a community is to fully get behind Java and push its development and start using it on the desktop. We can create some great applications for it and keep open-source software 'untainted'.
Sun have made a great long-term decision by opening-up Java - it will be seen as a safe option and is available for many platforms. .Net's long-term future is in doubt because Microsoft will not open-source or allow competing versions to exist. Many forms of computers now exist today in mobile phones, pdas, laptops and many different types of CPUs. Java(in various forms) runs everywhere. By using Java as a common standard all these devices can communicate together and develop interesting uses.
Just the insane ramblings of a elderly programmer (I'm 38 you know!).
P.S. 'Get off my lawn!'
Judging by the review they seem to have discovered the 'Zen of GUI' - keep the interface as simple as you can - only include what is necessary to use the device.
Apple seem to understand this as well.
I think that software developers and GUI designers can learn some lessons here (me included).
HaHaHa!
This is Microsoft we're talking about here - there is no room in the marketplace!
On a serious note - virtualisation plays a major part in computing today, if Microsoft's os is going to be virtualised it will be done on thier terms and of course deeply integrated.
If they want to do this that's fine... . . However, typically Microsoft's business practise is to try and 'remove' any competitive products from the marketplace - vmware had better be sharp because thier life is about to get more difficult.
When an emerging market is noticed by Microsoft they seem to wait and see how it develops. If it appears to be profitable they wade in with thier own version and take it all even if thier own product is inferior - they can use thier OS as leverage (which has happend time and time again).
Again, it's Microsoft's monopoly status that allows them to do this and I have a problem with that.
If vmware are forced out the market at least there are open-source alternatives available which fortunately cannot be forced out the market (unless patent issues are raised?).
As open source code in the *true sense* of the word that's fine; you can write/edit the source code , write a patch and then you can either create a version specifically for your piece of software or better still send the patch to the developer responsible for the library. The change is integrated into the original source and the rest of the community gets the benefit. With the addition of a non-restricting license, the code can be redistributed or new works can be derived from it or even forked if the need arises - usually there is no legal pitfalls.
.net source code you cannot contribute to the mono project).
With Microsoft it is very different.
It's not as if you can say 'I have an idea to improve a particular routine' modify the source and try an idea or experiment with it to see if it works and thus improve the library.
It is not possible under a restrictive license as governed by Microsoft.
The legal implications *do* have an impact on *some* developers particularly with the mono project (if you view the
What happens at some point in the future you end-up moving to Linux(or any other os) and start developing mono applications(legally fine) but you want to contribute to mono itself - you will not be allowed to. The potential to sue is a real possibility and will restrict your rights as an individual.
Releasing the source code by Microsoft is a big deal for the *company* not particularly for the community.
As regards to the code; you can see it, smell it but you cannot touch it! The source is *read only*.
As a result it is of limited use.
My primary development environment at work is Microsoft.net. I use the Express editions of Visual Studio for our development and at the moment is perfectly suited to the job at-hand and I can use Visual Studio at home for my own projects(I can also use mono on my Linux partition). The barrier to entry is low and more people can participate.
A few years ago this simply was not possible - you had to pay for a full version of Visual Studio. The barrier to entry was high. As a result many alternatives are now available because of additional pressures of competition.
I am grateful for Microsoft for releasing the Express editions of their software but before-hand you to pay *a lot* of money before you got decent support (even then it usually turned into a sales pitch to buy more product).
It's a shame Microsoft have chosen this path, if they *had used* an open-source license then their platform would be widely adopted and everyone would benefit from the developments it could entail.
It just seems to be that Microsoft's narrow focus on the Windows monopoly is hampering the company in the long run and every decision they make is centered around Windows.
Absolutely agree!
.net in a major project at work and as yet not needed to see the source code of the libraries (I probably never will) and I know there are bugs/'features' in the libraries but there are workarounds - it's not stopped us so far.
.forms library - just you watch!
You have to be *careful* how you use this.
Mind you what if you *do* discover a bug in Microsoft's code, what can you do?
You can't modify the source code - 'it's read only', even if you were allowed to to modify it you'll 'break' standards.
You can tell Microsoft - we all know how well they listen to 'customers/developers' and how long will it take them to fix it.
If you also use mono you will not be able to contribute to the project because you have seen 'the code'.
I've been using
I really don't think it's in mono's interest to try and keep compatibility with Microsoft's libraries (it's that old Microsoft Treadmill routine again).
I imagine at some point Microsoft will release a future library that will make the current version obsolete - they are already doing this with the
Mono and it's developers have put in too much hard work for this to happen - mono should follow it's own path and develop libraries from the 'ground-up'(e.g. gtk#) rather than attempt to keep up.
We should have more faith in the mono project rather than constantly 'slam-it' for 'patent issues' or because Micorsoft 'invented' it.
You can only *look* at the code and you cannot re-distribute the libraries not to mention the legal aspects (specifically mono).
.net sources anyway (I'm sure someone here will prove me wrong).
.net 3.5 has bloated because of the vista specific libraries have been added, and yet another series of APIs being included - typical Microsoft).
.net at work, at home I can use mono on Linux and my .net coding experience is relevant to both platforms.
This is probably only useful from an *educational* point-of-view and when you think about it, there is so much publically available code out there already how much more will you learn from the
I thought one of the major benefits of OOP was code abstraction - in theory there should not be a need to see the implementation.
In fact too much knowledge could be a 'bad thing'(tm) you may start relying on *how* something is implemented - if the implementation changes your code *may* break.
As for the mono project I believe only the implementation of libraries is the issue. The vm and c# are a public standard and 'patent free?'- maybe mono should diverse in a seperate direction rather trying to catchup with Microsoft (considering how
The major benefit of mono for me is that I can use Microsoft's
After reading the article and viewing the graphs(just look how many web servers are out there) it really 'hit home' how bad it would be if Microsoft dominated the 'server space'.
At present there are many different web servers in use today and it was something I took for granted. I am a heavy Internet user and when I am visiting web sites I never give a second thought about what server it is running on - everything *usually* works within my browser.
Do you know why?
These web servers follow *open standards* using standard protocols and published specifications.
Now imagine if Microsoft dominated the web server market. They will have a commanding share of the OS, web browser and server market. Once this is in place then you just know these 'standards' will drift away and eventually rely on *Microsoft* standards.
The seamless nature of browsing the internet will eventually disappear.
Eventually Microsoft's servers would be modified to serve content to 'Explorer' only - if you use a different browser you would get a 'blank' screen or message stating 'this site is best viewed in Internet Explorer'.
Internet Explorer would exhibit the same behavior, if it detected a non-Microsoft server again a message would appear instead of the web-site informing the user that the site is unavailable or incompatible.
If you're not running Microsoft Explorer your pages won't render properly - users complain & companies get nervous.
If you're not running a Microsoft server stack your pages won't be served properly - users complain & companies get nervous.
Microsoft become the de-facto standard because it will be *perceived* as the most conservative and least risky option.
If you run your own business you can look forward to ever-increasing overheads.
The barrier to entry will again be high, Microsoft and their many partners are set to earn *huge* revenues and of course any competition will be extinguished.
Microsoft has an abundance of patience and it will probably take years for this to happen.
The Internet as you know it will become bland, colourless, safe, corporation and media friendly.
Embrace, Extend & Extinguish.
It's a sad way of doing business, if they were actually respectful and *co-operate* with IT industry they can still be a successful company without having to destroy everthing.
For a brief moment I thought it said "World's Smallest Penis" !
I thought "that's funny I didn't see a webcam in my bathroom this morning" !
I visited the link and there is no mention of the site shutting down! (is kdawson again posting misleading headlines?)
O.k., the production team have been pulled of the site - not a good sign!
There seems to be alot of advertising on the site - *if* the site is shut down - that would be nuts (assuming it is generating a profit)! There is also a new Star Trek film in the pipeline why would they shut the site down.
Unless they will use the domain to promote the new film - hopefully the content will still be available if people are interested in the film it makes sense to allow the 'old' content to be available.
"Live long and prosper?"
The files are in a folder shared with Kazaa. The files are PUBLICLY available to other downloaders.
The fact that the music is in another format IS NOT THE ISSUE it is because the files are PUBLICLY available that IS THE ISSUE!
If the copyrighted files are on a PUBLICLY shared folder - that's distribution - you are NOT ALLOWED to do this unless you HAVE PERMISSION from the COPYRIGHT HOLDER.
For example, you have a sharable folder on your home computer(say in your living room) via a network and you use your laptop upstairs to access the files and listen to them that's o.k.
If you then make that folder sharable under a publicly accessible FILE SHARING network then you are in danger of being taken to court for breach of copyright.
BTW I mainly use Linux not XP (as you assumed) on my computer and XP does NOT share all folders & drives by default. I should know, the family computer(running XP Home) has 4 accounts on it and nobody can see each other's personal files.
You sir are a TTTTTTRRRRRRRROOOOOOOLLLLLLLL!
Fair enough, I suppose 'pretty stupid' is a bit harsh, but if you use a 'file sharing' service I would have thought it was obvious that it worked the 'other way' - maybe this should be made clearer in the software or website - at least some sort of message informing/warning the user that thier files will be available to other people.
With the scenario you mentioned about streaming your mp3s - as long as these files were available to yourself I'd imagine that is fair use. There are legitimate uses for this e.g. streaming the files around your house via a network.
The problem in this case is the files in the defendant's shared folder were effectively made *public* via KaZaa's network.
(Assuming that is actually what happened)
It's just a shame with RIAA's heavy-handed attitude the defendant will suffer severe consequences.
Now I hate the RIAA as much as the next guy but the following quote:
.mp3 format and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiffs..."
"...Exhibit B to Plaintiffs' Complaint is a series of screen shots showing the sound recording and other files found in the KaZaA shared folder..."
and
"...Once Defendant converted Plaintiffs' recording into the compressed
I don't think personal use is the issue - it is the fact he made the recordings potentially public is the problem. I imagine the RIAA will get him on 'unauthorized distribution'.
The guy who did this is pretty stupid - what kind of reaction from the RIAA does he expect?
Pretty much all my music is in some kind of digital form, when I rip cds I certainly don't store them in a sharable folder - it's for my private use.
Then again this is the RIAA this person will probably suffer a ridiculous fine (or jail term?) that can potentially ruin his life (it's only music for christ's sake).
If I knock over someone with my car and kill them I would probably be fined £1000 and incur points on my driving license (or a ban for 12 months).
(Hey it's the old if "it was a car" analogy).
With all the fighting and bickering with the OOXML and document standards the market may eventually decide this anyway.
At some point people will grow tired of the politics of this so-called debate and the issue will become completely irrelevant.
In this instance I'm not sure if letting market forces decide which format it will use because Microsoft Office is the market anyway.
Actually maybe this is Microsoft's plan all along:
If their document spec (in it's original form) had made it through the standards process - win for Microsoft
If there were objections to it, obscure and delay the whole standards process and implement the spec through Microsoft Office anyway - win for Microsoft
Win-Win for Microsoft!
Of course this would mean a Lose-Lose situation to everybody else - Microsoft maintain their lock on the market and an obscure standard becomes a nightmare to implement for everyone else.
It's a pity a company has to act this way - If they actually cooperated with everyone Microsoft could influence the I.T. industry in a positive way.(If they weren't so blinkered by Windows - I'm 'looking' at you Mr Ballmer!)
I never did go for this 'new-fangled htmlised' comment posting!
My ancient weathered fingers can't take the extra typing of the tags on the keyboard!
(ironically I am wearing a 'splint' on my left hand due to a RSI! a sure sign of old age - maybe I should stop typing from the bedroom window!)
Ahhh there's my sense of humour I wondered where it went to!
Joking aside...
This is the only forum I feel I truly belong - I very seldom post comments anywhere else.
There are people from many different backgrounds here which makes slashdot so interesting to read and sometimes even educational.
I am going for my afternoon nap now...
Oh great!
I thought the whole point of "Social Networking" was to be socialiable??!!
One of the great aspects of the Internet was anyone could take part, no matter your race, religion, colour or *age* everyone is equal behind the keyboard.
After reading some of the negative comments on this thread it saddens me there are people who obviously find people of "a certain age" offensive.
Me? I am 37 years old and have no hang-ups or insecurites about my age at all (I never did)!
As this thread continues I am hoping many more positive posts will outweigh the negative comments I have seen so far otherwise I will have to re-consdider participating in Slashdot.
The funny thing it is *inevitable* *you* will reach this age one day...HaHaHa
Allowing businesses to legitimise thier Microsoft software is fair enough and a good idea...
but...then allowing them to 'audit' your software collection?
I sincerley hope Microsoft have strict policies on what they are *allowed* to audit and limit it to Microsoft software only.
Can you imagine if you were using a competitive product and after the 'audit' receiving sales calls(bullied?) on why you should be using *thier* products instead?
(believe me when thay start they don't when to shutup)
I find the idea of an audit pretty extreme.
From personal experience no other software company stipulates this 'requirement'.
Does anybody have more details on what an audit from Microsoft entails?