FWIW, Opera has a special version of their browser, with the ability to render the usual webduhsigners fixed width websites on small screens. Check out Opera's Small-Screen Rendering.
Qoute from the page:
How do we do it?
Opera's Small-Screen Rendering technology enables access to all the content available on the Internet today. Even before this innovation, it was of course possible to browse the Web with Opera. The problem is that most sites are designed with fixed widths that make them hard to navigate on small handheld devices.
As an example, most news sites have a center column where the main article text is located. This column is usually 468 pixels wide (due to the standard ad-banner sizes) and the text is set to fill this width. This means that to read an article, you would have to scroll back and forth for every line of text.
With Small-Screen Rendering?, the page is reformatted to fit inside the screen width and eliminate the need for horizontal scrolling. All the content and functionality is still available, it is only the layout of the page that is changed. This innovation is the key enabler for surfing on a mobile device.
That article is written by and for Lotus Notes developers.
Allow me to quote from the article: "Does this mean I'm against anyone ever using JSPs? If you have Domino, yes. For those who don't, JSPs can (sometimes) serve a useful role in Web application development, if you're careful."
As a side note, someone who actually says that one of the advantages with not using JSP with Domino, is that you can use LotusScript can obviously not be trusted. Have you ever had the "pleasure" of programming in LotusScript, using Domino/Notes forms? I'd rather sit in a room full of droooling Dreamweaver idiots than work on one more project using LotusScript.
You won't find a good OSS timesheet system. You won't find a good OSS ERP system. OTOH, there's a whole lot of good OSS "infrastructure" out there, like JBoss, Apache, PostgreSQL etc.
The problems lie with the specialized applications. They might be built upon OSS tools (a lot of the apps I work with/on are), but the system itself is proprietary, complex (models a specific business process), has rather few users compared to other apps (like MS Word, Mozilla etc), and offer no "hobbyist value" (you won't be installing it at home, even if you had the software, since it wouldn't be useful to you at all).
Going OSS would only allow your competitors to get your work for free. Consider a system for collecting timesheets. You have to be able to integrate with the various other systems the HR dept have, maybe some card/punching terminals etc etc. The competition is FIERCE, and giving away your solution to the competition would be a commercial suicide.
Add to that, there's a whole lot of legacy systems, third party libraries, tools etc. you simply cannot give away. One application I worked on recently still use a OS/2 compatibility lib on WinNT, and the app would be useless without it. Making it OSS would make no sense
I got the SyncMaster 240T (24", 1920x1200) It was worth every dime, and the ability to run Emacs with lots of windows/buffers while browsing code etc is something I cannot live without now:) </bragging> It also got Picture-in-picture, Picture-by-picture, analog/DVI/S-VHS connectors, a pair of stylish speakers and a remote(!).
No problems gaming, either. Castle Wolfenstein is nice and smooth, with no "lagging" due to the screen refresh
The display is sharp and crisp. The only drawback is that I had to fiddle a little with XF86Config-4 to get XFree86 to use the 1920x1200 mode.
However, some of the FPS games have evolved. Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, with the introduction of the ability to gain experience points/skills, and a strong focus on different classes and teamwork/coop, is terrific fun. And it runs on Linux, too!
As a Solaris user, I can say that a lot of the internals are the same. Except, of course, that all the non-gnu versions of software suck compared to their Linux equivalents.
Tell me about it.:-) A few weeks ago I was to install my app on a Solaris box. The clueful admins obviously didn't like to waste precious disk space on utilities not really necessary, and of course Sun's tar barfed on my GNU tar archives etc. After some time, I found the magic -i switch (I think it was), and was ready to deploy my app.
When I had deployed it and started testing, the app seemed to have a problem connecting to another host on the network. So, I jumped into/bin/sh (why waste space on GNU bash?) and typed
I don't know about you. but I'd rather die or work in the advertising business than buy a book about web design by someone who uses light grey on white background on their homepage. Come on, he should know better than "It's hardly readable, but it SURE looks nice."
Hah, I got an Osborne Executive (with two 5 1/4 disk drives), Axil Sun workstation, Hyundai Sun workstation (works, complete with 21" Hyundai Monitor, tape drive, spare keyboard, mouse), c64, Dragon 32, Amiga 2000, Amiga 500, a closet full of PC-hardware, a Thinkpad 716CS (butterfly), and a Z88 (Sinclair) portable computer.
Yes, there's plenty of tutorials out there. A lot of them are also utter crap, especially regarding SQL. A newbie can't be expected to be able to judge what's sound advice or not.
A book usually goes through more QA and review before they're published.
Yes, and by the look of that page, Ballmer is completely right. There is NO FEATURE on that page that wasn't invented somewhere else. Or perhaps you could point out Firebirds unique features?
I had my first paid job doing REXX programming on the Amiga:) Brings back sweet memories (and sometimes the horrors) of using Superbase, Cygnus Ed and PPage to automate the creation of rather large catalogs and generate postscript.
And, as a bonus, the machine that controlled the RIP was a NeXT Cube:-)
I don't use inheritance that much. I use interfaces to make an object polymorphic, so it can act differently in various contexts. I seldom
write methods that expect a class, they expect an implementation of a very specific interface.
AFAIK, the answer to your question is no, but I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.
But interfaces might solve your gripe, if they are defined very specific. Let's say you define a class for handling some game logic. The game is supposed to be "playable" and "configurable".
I then make two interfaces, called Playable and Configurable. The Playable will have a method "play()" and the Configurable probably get/setConfiguration(). The configuration system will accept something that is configurable, and set the configuration. The engine will expect something that is "Playable".
Now, if I were to reuse some code between two games, I'd refactor it out into an utility class, and just forward the calls internally in the class to the util. If the code at hand is very specific, I might even make a super class, putting the common code there, implementing the interfaces, and just sublcass it to allow for the variations.
So, have you considered defining interfaces very specific to a task, or have you used them more to lump play and set/getConfiguration into a single interface?
(Anyway, this is interesting. If I misunderstood your question, please elaborate)
And, uh, SQL isn't a programming language, it's a query language. If you're using SQL as your main programming language for an application, I really hope you are building a datawarehouse or some database maintaince tool, or you're in for the Vendor Lock-in Price of the year.
(Thankfully, most RDBMS vendors do provide you with the opportunity of plugging in code written in other languages, like Java, C, or Perl, instead of those ugly stored procedures)
Hear, hear. Someone should tell the author about
the throws keyword.
And there's a few inconstincies in his argumentation (about SQL):
The approach that feels most natural is often really, really bad. I don't naturally think in terms of set operations. Well, then SQL should be good, since it isn't "natural"?
And about Java, again:
Interfaces get around part of the lack of multiple inheritance, but I'd like to be able to reuse common code in ways besides inheritance. Mixins that don't require inheritance would be a nice touch.
Well, doh. You can make a proxy/delegate. You could just instantiate a class, have it as a
private member, and, erm, just use it?
I have a hunch that the author isn't particularly experienced...
I take it you would like to read about The Mall Ninja. Read it, it is hilarious:) Preview:
BTW, I am, of course, usually carrying a pair of ceramic plates in my briefcase so that I can shield my head. My SO (we work as a team when necessary) has a similar accessory containing a breakdown NEF single-shot 300 WinMag with an 18" bbl. The plan is that I shield us with my body and "catch the rounds" while she assembles the NEF. I lay down covering fire with my 23 (Bar-Sto.357 Sig barrel) and she makes the long shots. I will then throw smoke grenades to obscure the area while continuing to lay covering fire. The problem, of course, is when I have to turn my back to run, and then the problem crops up.
So what the fuck? They're still trading illegal files on their networks. I own about ~600 CDs and a lot of LPs,7" etc. , and I couldn't care less about the pirates who've never bought CDs to support their favorite artists. Heck, throw'em in jail.
What makes you think you have some right to use or share others work at no expense?
Fine, if they give you that right, (usually some really boring trance or blues band), fine, share it. Otherwise, stick to your legally owned media.
I've transferred almost all of my CDs to mp3 (about 6300 mp3's now:) and I own all of it legally.
What bothers me is that they're trying to stop me using my legally bought music the way I want it, not that some stupid teenager thinking it is his god-given right to pirate whatever he has access to.
The case should not be about trading files, but about the legal right you as a consumer has to use the music you've bought the way you want it.
If that right excludes you from sharing it, fine. If that that right excludes you from converting to a mp3 to use it on your home network: fuck'em.
Well, VB being a "newbie language" is going to change with VB.NET. VB.NET is the worst of OO combined with the worst of VB<=6. VB is a dead end, and MS is really pushing C# as the language to use in their.NET-environment
Slashdot Mirror
FWIW, Opera has a special version of their browser, with the ability to render the usual webduhsigners fixed width websites on small screens. Check out Opera's Small-Screen Rendering.
Qoute from the page:
How do we do it?
Opera's Small-Screen Rendering technology enables access to all the content available on the Internet today. Even before this innovation, it was of course possible to browse the Web with Opera. The problem is that most sites are designed with fixed widths that make them hard to navigate on small handheld devices.
As an example, most news sites have a center column where the main article text is located. This column is usually 468 pixels wide (due to the standard ad-banner sizes) and the text is set to fill this width. This means that to read an article, you would have to scroll back and forth for every line of text.
With Small-Screen Rendering?, the page is reformatted to fit inside the screen width and eliminate the need for horizontal scrolling. All the content and functionality is still available, it is only the layout of the page that is changed. This innovation is the key enabler for surfing on a mobile device.
That article is written by and for Lotus Notes developers.
Allow me to quote from the article:
"Does this mean I'm against anyone ever using JSPs? If you have Domino, yes. For those who don't, JSPs can (sometimes) serve a useful role in Web application development, if you're careful."
As a side note, someone who actually says that one of the advantages with not using JSP with Domino, is that you can use LotusScript can obviously not be trusted. Have you ever had the "pleasure" of programming in LotusScript, using Domino/Notes forms? I'd rather sit in a room full of droooling Dreamweaver idiots than work on one more project using LotusScript.
The latest available version is 2.1 Prerelease (1999-03-23).
Oh, and the demo server is down. And the link to the install doc is a 404. Did I mention that the download link also is a 404?
In short: D E A D.
(Although it is available as a
You won't find a good OSS timesheet system. You won't find a good OSS ERP system. OTOH, there's a whole lot of good OSS "infrastructure" out there, like JBoss, Apache, PostgreSQL etc.
The problems lie with the specialized applications. They might be built upon OSS tools (a lot of the apps I work with/on are), but the system itself is proprietary, complex (models a specific business process), has rather few users compared to other apps (like MS Word, Mozilla etc), and offer no "hobbyist value" (you won't be installing it at home, even if you had the software, since it wouldn't be useful to you at all).
Going OSS would only allow your competitors to get your work for free. Consider a system for collecting timesheets. You have to be able to integrate with the various other systems the HR dept have, maybe some card/punching terminals etc etc. The competition is FIERCE, and giving away your solution to the competition would be a commercial suicide.
Add to that, there's a whole lot of legacy systems, third party libraries, tools etc. you simply cannot give away. One application I worked on recently still use a OS/2 compatibility lib on WinNT, and the app would be useless without it. Making it OSS would make no sense
He's rather discovered that Apple employs some rather lame web-duh-signers.
I got the SyncMaster 240T (24", 1920x1200) It was worth every dime, and the ability to run Emacs with lots of windows/buffers while browsing code etc is something I cannot live without now :) </bragging> It also got Picture-in-picture, Picture-by-picture, analog/DVI/S-VHS connectors, a pair of stylish speakers and a remote(!).
No problems gaming, either. Castle Wolfenstein is nice and smooth, with no "lagging" due to the screen refresh
The display is sharp and crisp. The only drawback is that I had to fiddle a little with XF86Config-4 to get XFree86 to use the 1920x1200 mode.
LabF has a NFS server and driver for $40, which isn't that expensive, IMHO.
On Debian, just do:
2 .55.x86.run.torrent
:-)
$ apt-get install bittorrent
then
$ btdownloadcurses --url http://zerowing.idsoftware.com/torrents/et-linux-
(or btdownloadheadless if you don't have curses
installed)
enjoy!
However, some of the FPS games have evolved. Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, with the introduction of the ability to gain experience points/skills, and a strong focus on different classes and teamwork/coop, is terrific fun. And it runs on Linux, too!
Download here or read more about it
Argh. I hate not being able to use the clipboard. (Did I mention NT-only vpn-client?)
s/bin/sbin/g
Tell me about it.
/bin/sh (why waste space on GNU bash?) and typed
(And no, it wasn't a problem with PATH)When I had deployed it and started testing, the app seemed to have a problem connecting to another host on the network. So, I
jumped into
I don't know about you. but I'd rather die or work in the advertising business than buy a book about web design by someone who uses light grey on white background on their homepage. Come on, he should know better than "It's hardly readable, but it SURE looks nice."
Hah, I got an Osborne Executive (with two 5 1/4 disk drives), Axil Sun workstation, Hyundai Sun workstation (works, complete with 21" Hyundai Monitor, tape drive, spare keyboard, mouse), c64, Dragon 32, Amiga 2000, Amiga 500, a closet full of PC-hardware, a Thinkpad 716CS (butterfly), and a Z88 (Sinclair) portable computer.
Of course, I'm single.
This is the release, the other were "technology previews" (ie alpha versions) and betas.
Yes, there's plenty of tutorials out there. A lot of them are also utter crap, especially regarding SQL. A newbie can't be expected to be able to judge what's sound advice or not.
A book usually goes through more QA and review before they're published.
Since when did US Air Force get involved in golf? Are you developing some secret hi-performance driver? :-)
Yes, and by the look of that page, Ballmer is completely right. There is NO FEATURE on that page that wasn't invented somewhere else. Or perhaps you could point out Firebirds unique features?
I had my first paid job doing REXX programming on the Amiga :) Brings back sweet memories (and sometimes the horrors) of using Superbase, Cygnus Ed and PPage to automate the creation of rather large catalogs and generate postscript.
:-)
And, as a bonus, the machine that controlled the RIP was a NeXT Cube
I still miss Cygnus Ed.
I don't use inheritance that much. I use interfaces to make an object polymorphic, so it can act differently in various contexts. I seldom write methods that expect a class, they expect an implementation of a very specific interface.
AFAIK, the answer to your question is no, but I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.
But interfaces might solve your gripe, if they are defined very specific. Let's say you define a class for handling some game logic. The game is supposed to be "playable" and "configurable".
I then make two interfaces, called Playable and Configurable. The Playable will have a method "play()" and the Configurable probably get/setConfiguration(). The configuration system will accept something that is configurable, and set the configuration. The engine will expect something that is "Playable".
Now, if I were to reuse some code between two games, I'd refactor it out into an utility class, and just forward the calls internally in the class to the util. If the code at hand is very specific, I might even make a super class, putting the common code there, implementing the interfaces, and just sublcass it to allow for the variations.
So, have you considered defining interfaces very specific to a task, or have you used them more to lump play and set/getConfiguration into a single interface?
(Anyway, this is interesting. If I misunderstood your question, please elaborate)
And, uh, SQL isn't a programming language, it's a query language. If you're using SQL as your main programming language for an application, I really hope you are building a datawarehouse or some database maintaince tool, or you're in for the Vendor Lock-in Price of the year.
(Thankfully, most RDBMS vendors do provide you with the opportunity of plugging in code written in other languages, like Java, C, or Perl, instead of those ugly stored procedures)
And there's a few inconstincies in his argumentation (about SQL): The approach that feels most natural is often really, really bad. I don't naturally think in terms of set operations.
Well, then SQL should be good, since it isn't "natural"?
And about Java, again:
Interfaces get around part of the lack of multiple inheritance, but I'd like to be able to reuse common code in ways besides inheritance. Mixins that don't require inheritance would be a nice touch. Well, doh. You can make a proxy/delegate. You could just instantiate a class, have it as a private member, and, erm, just use it?
I have a hunch that the author isn't particularly experienced...
Preview:
What makes you think you have some right to use or share others work at no expense?
Fine, if they give you that right, (usually some really boring trance or blues band), fine, share it. Otherwise, stick to your legally owned media.
I've transferred almost all of my CDs to mp3 (about 6300 mp3's now :) and I own all of it legally.
What bothers me is that they're trying to stop me using my legally bought music the way I want it, not that some stupid teenager thinking it is his god-given right to pirate whatever he has access to.
The case should not be about trading files, but about the legal right you as a consumer has to use the music you've bought the way you want it.
If that right excludes you from sharing it, fine. If that that right excludes you from converting to a mp3 to use it on your home network: fuck'em.
Well, VB being a "newbie language" is going to change with VB.NET. VB.NET is the worst of OO combined with the worst of VB<=6. VB is a dead end, and MS is really pushing C# as the language to use in their .NET-environment