C# being better designed than Java is no big surprise. Why? Because Sun has done very little to further the actual language itself.
Java really hasn't changed much since its inception. All we have are a few more libraries, a GUI framework that blows ass, and a server-side framework that we didn't really need to begin with. But we have no real additional language FEATURES.
Like a lot of people, I've been using Java since the beginning. I look at the C# language and I see everything I want in Java. The great majority of differences between C# and Java are purely syntactical sugar -- compiler candy. AND THAT IS WHAT WE WANT.
We've been asking for support for generics and parametric types since JDK1.1. And they still aren't in (they were removed from 1.4 at the last minute). We've been asking for A REAL CONST. We've been asking for assertions -- and finally got them.
But all in all... most SEASONED Java developers aren't happy with the progress. Java has been plainly behind the curve when it comes to evolving new and different features. Instead, Sun poured all of their effort into their bullshit J2EE framework which is a complete shambles, IMHO.
Its obvious. Microsoft simply went to Usenet... read a bunch of Java posts... and saw that Java was stagnant. They took advantage of it. They created a new language... based upon Java... adding everything that Java developers were complaining about. Voila! C#!
I wonder if this would have happened if Java were open source. Probably not.
But one thing for sure... Microsoft is an EXPERT at catching a company while it is asleep at the wheel... ripping of its product... making it better... and seizing an entire market.
Gee... how about giving China most favored trade status? How about giving China the Olympics? Real nice. How about in this time of war, Bush going over to China to hobnob with those communist bastards? As if we need his support? How about letting China back into world trade? Very nice, indeed. And that was all Bush.
I'm not condoning the way the Clinton/Gore handled China, but Bush hasn't done any better. Last I checked, the United States will still be participating in the Olympics. In a country that probably has more human rights violations than anyone else combined.
Bush is equally guilty, if not more so. He claims to be on a higher-plane... morally speaking. But then never stops kissing the ass of the biggest communist nation on earth.
Very nice, indeed.
Re:It still doesn't pass the 'wife' test...
on
Five Years of KDE
·
· Score: 1
The issue was the she (unknowingly) was trying to download StarOffice into a place she didn't have permissions to. The browser didn't give any kind of an error. It just closed the 'download file' dialog without a message. She was using Konqueror. But she also tried Mozilla.
She thought, "Wow... that downloaded awfully fast...", and then went to look for it and didn't find it.
Once I told her to download it into her home directory, she was able to do it. But then, she had to make the file executable. She didn't understand that, either.
Ultimately, she was able to install it. But she didn't understand the whole permissions thing. Nor did she understand having to 'chmod' the downloaded file to make it executable. Like I said, she isn't a geek. She is used to just double-clicking it, and it installs.
It still doesn't pass the 'wife' test...
on
Five Years of KDE
·
· Score: 1
This weekend, I tried Mandrake 8.1 (with KDE 2.2.x) on the wife. And then I ended up re-installing Windows 98 about three hours later.
For the past three years, client-side Linux hasn't passed the 'wife' test. My wife is just a regular schmoe who doesn't know a Linux kernal from a corn kernal.
I know that the predominant thought is that KDE/Gnome isn't out to compete with Windows. But SOMEBODY has to if we want to introduce competition into the market in order to have a viable Microsoft alternative.
And right now, KDE (or Gnome) just isn't there. Frequent crashes. The stock browsers are lame. Hardware support is limited. Voice conferencing is next to none. Webcam support is limited -- my Logitech WebCam is the most popular in history -- yet isn't supported without a kernel recompile and makefile hacking. Browser plugins are very tedious to install and get going -- causing crashes and other niceties.
Forget trying to install new software easily. Gnome does this 'vanilla' sometimes, but KDE is horrid. Both environments need their desktop environments to be more in touch with the layout of the OS. Right now, the end-user really has to be a developer in order to make installed software integrate properly with the desktop. Boo. Hiss.
Needless to say, my wife tried it. She tried to install two popular new pieces of software on it (StarOffice and Opera) and failed. Whereas, in Windows, she is pleased that she can install most software without any headache. For a non-computer person to accomplish things on a computer makes them feel good. In this case, it made her feel dumb.
When we were all done, she said the same thing that she has said for the last three years.
"Linux makes me feel stupid. I don't know how to make it work. Put Windows back."
That isn't to say that I didn't see improvements in KDE. I saw some. I just didn't see anything monumental enough where the end-user/easy-to-use experience is concerned.
I guess KDE and Gnome will crawl before they walk. I just hope they don't crawl for much longer. Nevertheless, I will try it again next year on the wife... and see how it works out.
Konqueror absolutely sucks. A lot of websites won't even render. Getting plugins to work is difficult to impossible for the regular user. Rendering speed is horrible.
The only thing worse is Mozilla. Two horrid browsers.
I'd love to see Internet Explorer on Linux. It might be an oxymoron to the purists, but it still is the best browser out there.
Re:Competition never hurts. I welcome J# completel
on
J#
·
· Score: 1
Most (clueful) Windows users already tweak their desktop as far as posssible to get away from the 'boring grey rectangle' school of design that MS have favoured in the past (pre-XP) so I wouldn't underestimate the user base's willingness to embrace new types and styles of controls.
We are talking about the look and feel of the operating system and the applications that run on it. There is a definitely for look and feel to be consistent. You can't have a bunch of different applications with a bunch of different look and feel. It doesn't make sense. The learning curve is high.
The native Windows look-and-feel is actually very well designed, easy to use, and easy on the eyes. It has been through years of evolution to come to its current state. And it is very slick.
Desktop 'tweaks' do nothing but alter colors and font-sizes. But these have nothing to do with the Windows 'look and feel'. The native L&F is actually a very strict guideline by which the placement of controls relative to eachother happens.
We're talking pixels here. That a menu item must be so many pixels inset from its container border... blah blah blah. Stuff like that. Swing is so far off the mark that it is ridiculous.
I find the Java L&F to be very bland. No anti-aliasing of fonts. No smoothing. Limited font selection.
You aren't going to see Swing have better widgets the Microsoft anytime soon. Microsoft got a several year head start on them. I'd be willing to settle for Java widgets that behave like Windows widgets in the WindowsL&F. Right now... they really don't. They look 'similar', and behave 'similar'. But that doesn't cut it.
Java is NOT open-source. Don't even begin to think that it is. Sun has been trying to pass their SCSL off as a GPL... but it is FAR from it. Truly open-source application are those which satisfy by the definition of open-source by either the FSF or OSI.
I point you to these limitations within Sun's Community Source License (SCSL) which you are purporting to be open-source:
1) Modified source code cannot be distributed without the express written permission of Sun.
2) Binary programs built using modified Java 2 SDK source code may not be distributed, internally or externally, without meeting the compatibility and other requirements described in the License Agreement
There is NOTHING open about these two line items. They give you the source, but open-source is more than just looking at it.
I encourage you to investigate what open-source really means by visiting the two sites I mention above.
You might get away with this for CLI compliant code.
But it can't be done if you are using Windows-specific libraries or system calls. Which is the entire point that someone would want to use C#/J# anyways. We want the front-end controls.
So cross-compiling isn't going to be a reality.
Competition never hurts. I welcome J# completely.
on
J#
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
First, a disclaimer, I am not a Microsoft advocate. Those guys can stick it up their ass. That being said, I will do what it takes to do my job and get paid.
The issue here is that *many* Java developers have been trying to code quality front-end applications on Windows using Java -- and have failed (or fallen very short). *I* am one of those people who have done so. I know many other Java developers who have failed to meet their expectations reasonably when coding on Windows.
If I know that my target platform is only going to be Windows, but I can't use any of the Windows libraries... what good is Java? Its not. So I have to go back to C++. But C++ is a horror in its own ways.
Too many in the Java community are zealots about what Java should and shouldn't be used for. The idea that if it isn't WORA (Write Once Run Anywhere) then it shouldn't be written in Java is completely ludicrous, IMHO.
Some Java developers want the elegance of Java with an easy way to utlitize Windows native libraries without having to write convoluted JNI interfaces all over the place.
The answer is J#. However, I was perfectly happy with the idea of C#. C# has some compilation advantages and syntax advantages over Java that I really love.
I have extensive experience with Swing (Java GUI libraries), and they just simply don't cut it for serious front-end application development. The more complex controls such as JTable and JTree are full of bugs, they are difficult to use, and complicated. If you want less complicated controls, you have to buy a proprietary vendor's API and use those, instead. The Windows 'look and feel' does NOT look and feel like Windows. Because of the MVC design, you have to import practically every single class in Swing into your programs.
AWT was much more compact and easy to use. It also was pretty snappy; however, it suffered from lack of GUI controls.
I don't see anything wrong with J#. If it works for you and serves your purpose, use it. If it doesn't, then don't.
But a little competition in the Java marketplace (or any marketplace) never hurts. Maybe it will light a fire under Sun's ass and get them to contribute more to the front-end side of Java -- which has been ignored for far too long.
Better yet, maybe they will open-source Java, instead. Even better.
No. Actually, speed (which is what I assume you mean by performance) is the last thing a database engineer is worried about; otherwise, you're just increasing the speed at which you fuck your dataset.
No. ACIDity means nothing if your SQL takes ten years to come back. As far as fucking your dataset because of high performance... I'm afraid I haven't seen that.
Now, agreed, lots of DBAs don't care about performance. Apparently, you are one of those. But from a usability perspective, you have to have good performance.
Enhanced MySQL (especially with Gemini tables) has excellent ACIDity. Automatic crash recoverty, ACID transactions. Row-level locks. SQL-standard statement atomicity. Replication. Index based queries. Table cardinality and referential integrity. Blocked I/O for good performance. Optimization statistics.
What I am saying is that MySQL is a fantastic database which not only has good features as far as ACIDity goes, but is also faster than everyone in the bunch -- although I'm not sure about fucking of datasets -- I've never had MySQL fuck up my datasets.
I'm not ragging on PostgreSQL. PostgreSQL is the most feature-rich, open-source implementation of a SQL92 database out there.
But the fact is, MySQL simply kills it in performance. Which is usually the number one issue with any kind of database. That isn't to say that PostgreSQL is bad. It just isn't as fast. That's all. Here's a benchmark of MySQL versus other databases... including PostgreSQL.
All of this being said... if MySQL gets the following features, I think PostgreSQL will lose ground on MySQL again:
1) Nested sub-queries/sub-selects *coming in 4.x*
2) Update a table with joins to other tables. *coming in 4.x*
3) Delete from a table with joins to other tables. *coming in 4.x*
4) Stored procedures *coming in 4.x*
5) Triggers *who knows*
With 4.1, they will be most of the way there. With triggers, they will be pretty much feature complete.
Personally, I'd like to see materialized views implemented once all of this is done. I think that having materialized views will position MySQL as a serious consideration in the IT industry an an 'Oracle killer'. Lots of companies have already trashed Oracle in favor of MySQL. Those that have not... usually haven't done it because of lack of features in MySQL.
It is readily apparent that there is a faction within the W3C that is trying to cash in on corporate patents. I see no other motivation for the W3C to even consider adopting such a policy. I'm sure they've had much pressure for years to make this kind of move. From companies such as Microsoft, Sun, and others. These corporate sloths have been trying for years to get the W3C to adopt their patented products under these kinds of guidelines. It looks like now that this could become a reality.
I wouldn't be surprised if the folks over at the FSF have something to do with this as well. This is the kind of thing that the FSF always harps on. Staunch FSF supporters have always felt that the FSF software model should extend to standardization. Which I think is bunk.
If this policy is adopted, we will definitely see a competing standards body to take its place.
We'll end up with the FSF version of the W3C, and the OSS version of the W3C.
IMHO, this is a really bad thing. This move by the W3C would cause an even greater fragment in the open source community.
That's not something we need in the open-source community. We've got enough challenges as it is.
FastTrack invented this protocol to make it easier for people to share (mostly) copyrighted material.
Really? Wow. I didn't know that. Can you point me to where it says that in their mission statement or on their website? This statement is pure conjecture.
I think firearm manufacturers probably should pay society to cover for the lost lives.
I see. Should knife manufacturers pay society for the cost of lives lost due to stabbings? Perhaps manufacturers of alcohol should pay for drunk driving casualties? C'mon. You are reaching a little bit.
When I say, "wrapped up Gnutella" clients, I meant it figuratively... not explicitly. Fasttrack is very much based upon Gnutella, although it is not actually Gnutella. More like Gnutella on steroids. But the concept and idea are the same... with more bells and whistles.
My point is this. This is a direct attack on peer-to-peer protocols.
Peer-to-peer protocols run the entire internet. Illegal mp3 files can be transported on any number of protocols. They aren't going to ban them all. To do that would literally bring the entire net to a screeching halt.
Proprietary or not. They aren't going to win a lawsuit against a company that creates a decentralized, peer-to-peer protocol used for file exchange.
That's like filing a lawsuit against firearm manufacturers for all of the gun-related deaths. Or Phil Zimmerman for terrorists using PGP. Or Wilbur & Orville Wright for inventing airplanes that terrorists use to kill people.
This strikes me very funny. All of these programs are nothing but wrapped up Gnutella clients. What are they going to do? Start filing lawsuits against the companes who create FTP servers/clients? Newsgroup decoders? Puhleeze.
There is no way that the RIAA will be successful here. I don't know why people think that they actually will be able to go after MusicCity and WIN.
If they succeed in getting rid of Morpheus/Kazaa, then they should go after other famous transport mechanisms for files:
1) wu-ftpd
2) wsftp
3) cuteftp
4) any alt.binaries newsgroups
5) any newsgroup decoders
6) all major web browser
7) inventors of the FTP protocol.
8) inventors of the telnet protocol
9) inventors of SSL
10) inventors of HTTP
... basically they should try to eliminate all forms of data transport.
1) I hate groups.
2) I knew I was the strongest coder too.
3) I wrote all of the code one morning before ever having the first group meeting.
4) I didn't want to deal with having them argue about how to do it and having it take several days.
5) Then I told them to do the testing without me.
Where do I start?
First, you hate groups. So you are basically a non-gregarious person when it comes to the workplace. Big minus.
Second, you have a tall self image. You think you are the best coder, but coding is really only half of the battle when developing software. Big ego.
Third, you went and did all the work by yourself without consulting your team. Self indulgent.
Fourth, you didn't want the team to participate in any discussions about your project. Basically, you wanted all the glory for yourself, and didn't want to be bothered with their input. Selfish and uncaring what others think.
Fifth, after you single-handedly went out on your little coding expedition, you then play dictator and tell them all to do the testing. Seeya later.
No offense, guy, but you are my worst nightmare. I have fired probably five or six guys just like you over the last few years. You need to get lessons on how to really develop software. Why people skills are important. Why complete team input is important. Why you don't know half of what you think you do.
Like the title says, be humble. You have a lot to learn. Even though you may not think so.
Looks like I reverse my position. It sounds pretty safe.
I guess my initial reaction is that this appears to be a process that is very difficult to control and stablize. Producing heat in the millions of degrees Fahrenheit.
Like a fission reaction, I guess I expected that the fusion reaction could have worse consequences.
This post is obviously discussing an issue that is based in the USA and affects the USA directly.
Nobody is forgetting that the internet is not just based in the US. You are an idiot for saying so.
Shit, just because someone posts something that is specific to the USA doesn't mean that everyone in the USA is 'missing the point' and thinks that 'the internet is only based in the USA'.
By all means, if you would like something posted that is relevant to you, then suggest it for an article. Otherwise, quit bitching.
Agreed... there is no 'rational' argument against it. But then again, there really is no 'rational' argument against any crimes. Because 'rationality' is in the eye of the beholder.
I don't see the harm in a man or a woman masturbating to computer generated images of children, cats, or giant saguaros.
First off, I find it highly irregular that you would feel compelled to group together child pornography with cats or animals. I guess we know where you rate humanity when it comes to these kinds of things.
Let me ask you, do you think that it is rational for someone to masturbate to photos of young children?
Let me ask you... is murder rational to the murderer? I'd say that they (the murderer) thinks it is rational. But that doesn't mean that it is lawful.
Ah, but you'll say : "That's different. There is a victim of that crime."
And I say... who says its wrong to murder? You? Me? Religion? Perhaps murder is always justified. Perhaps we in society are all complete fanatics for suggesting that murder is a crime. Does a crime always have to have a direct victim?
So are crimes with indirect consequences really not crimes? I wonder.
Laws themselves, friend, are based upon completely contrived ideas of morality. There is no universal morality. No universal laws that say, "This is wrong" or "That is wrong". People make laws based upon what they 'feel' is lawful or unlawful. Morality itself is completely based upon opinion. Nothing more.
And along those lines, I'm saying that I feel that the viewing of child pornography is unjust. I feel that it compels one to commit further atrocities towards children. I do not rate it equivalent to someone viewing photos of zoophilia. If a man is willing to view naked pictures of little kids performing lewd acts, then I say that he should be taken away. Period.
Am I a fanatic? No more than anyone else who says that any other act is unjust.
If a man is looking at any kind of child pornography, I want him behind bars. Guys who look at young children naked or doing lewd acts should be put behind bars.
I don't care how sexually liberal anyone is. This has nothing to do with sexual liberation or freedom. I place my limit on sexual freedom (fetishes) when someone gets sexual entertainment from looking at naked kids. That's not a "fetish". That is absolute perversion.
I don't care if the images are computer generated or not.
This is the question posed by some:
"What is the harm or crime in a man jacking off to computer generated photos of six year olds?"
And to that, I say this : If you actually need an answer to that question, you are yourself in dire need of help.
You misinterpreted. I don't think that taxes work at all.
There are two ways to ensure a fair market place. Laws, and enforcement of those laws. You can't have a marketplace without laws. Such is a brute force, anarchist atmosphere that would certainly lead to a monopoly almost always.
To think that a completely free market would function with no regulation is ludicrous. That never has worked, and it never will work. One company will rise above ther rest and crush the others.
The government regulates and oversees the free market to ensure fairness and competition in the marketplace. This is why we have anti-trust laws on the books. These are the regulations which ensure fairness in the marketplace.
My greatest concern, as is evident by this DOJ trial is that Microsoft is not only capable of single-handedly usurping the entire free market, but also capable of overpowering government regulators by applying corporate pressure, paying off lawmakers, or undermining consumer confidence.
Microsoft has a control that I feel is unparalled on any scale to anything since Standard Oil.
Slashdot Mirror
C# being better designed than Java is no big surprise. Why? Because Sun has done very little to further the actual language itself.
Java really hasn't changed much since its inception. All we have are a few more libraries, a GUI framework that blows ass, and a server-side framework that we didn't really need to begin with. But we have no real additional language FEATURES.
Like a lot of people, I've been using Java since the beginning. I look at the C# language and I see everything I want in Java. The great majority of differences between C# and Java are purely syntactical sugar -- compiler candy. AND THAT IS WHAT WE WANT.
We've been asking for support for generics and parametric types since JDK1.1. And they still aren't in (they were removed from 1.4 at the last minute). We've been asking for A REAL CONST. We've been asking for assertions -- and finally got them.
But all in all... most SEASONED Java developers aren't happy with the progress. Java has been plainly behind the curve when it comes to evolving new and different features. Instead, Sun poured all of their effort into their bullshit J2EE framework which is a complete shambles, IMHO.
Its obvious. Microsoft simply went to Usenet... read a bunch of Java posts... and saw that Java was stagnant. They took advantage of it. They created a new language... based upon Java... adding everything that Java developers were complaining about. Voila! C#!
I wonder if this would have happened if Java were open source. Probably not.
But one thing for sure... Microsoft is an EXPERT at catching a company while it is asleep at the wheel... ripping of its product... making it better... and seizing an entire market.
They just might be doing it again...
Gee... how about giving China most favored trade status? How about giving China the Olympics? Real nice. How about in this time of war, Bush going over to China to hobnob with those communist bastards? As if we need his support? How about letting China back into world trade? Very nice, indeed. And that was all Bush.
I'm not condoning the way the Clinton/Gore handled China, but Bush hasn't done any better. Last I checked, the United States will still be participating in the Olympics. In a country that probably has more human rights violations than anyone else combined.
Bush is equally guilty, if not more so. He claims to be on a higher-plane... morally speaking. But then never stops kissing the ass of the biggest communist nation on earth.
Very nice, indeed.
The issue was the she (unknowingly) was trying to download StarOffice into a place she didn't have permissions to. The browser didn't give any kind of an error. It just closed the 'download file' dialog without a message. She was using Konqueror. But she also tried Mozilla.
She thought, "Wow... that downloaded awfully fast...", and then went to look for it and didn't find it.
Once I told her to download it into her home directory, she was able to do it. But then, she had to make the file executable. She didn't understand that, either.
Ultimately, she was able to install it. But she didn't understand the whole permissions thing. Nor did she understand having to 'chmod' the downloaded file to make it executable. Like I said, she isn't a geek. She is used to just double-clicking it, and it installs.
This weekend, I tried Mandrake 8.1 (with KDE 2.2.x) on the wife. And then I ended up re-installing Windows 98 about three hours later.
For the past three years, client-side Linux hasn't passed the 'wife' test. My wife is just a regular schmoe who doesn't know a Linux kernal from a corn kernal.
I know that the predominant thought is that KDE/Gnome isn't out to compete with Windows. But SOMEBODY has to if we want to introduce competition into the market in order to have a viable Microsoft alternative.
And right now, KDE (or Gnome) just isn't there. Frequent crashes. The stock browsers are lame. Hardware support is limited. Voice conferencing is next to none. Webcam support is limited -- my Logitech WebCam is the most popular in history -- yet isn't supported without a kernel recompile and makefile hacking. Browser plugins are very tedious to install and get going -- causing crashes and other niceties.
Forget trying to install new software easily. Gnome does this 'vanilla' sometimes, but KDE is horrid. Both environments need their desktop environments to be more in touch with the layout of the OS. Right now, the end-user really has to be a developer in order to make installed software integrate properly with the desktop. Boo. Hiss.
Needless to say, my wife tried it. She tried to install two popular new pieces of software on it (StarOffice and Opera) and failed. Whereas, in Windows, she is pleased that she can install most software without any headache. For a non-computer person to accomplish things on a computer makes them feel good. In this case, it made her feel dumb.
When we were all done, she said the same thing that she has said for the last three years.
"Linux makes me feel stupid. I don't know how to make it work. Put Windows back."
That isn't to say that I didn't see improvements in KDE. I saw some. I just didn't see anything monumental enough where the end-user/easy-to-use experience is concerned.
I guess KDE and Gnome will crawl before they walk. I just hope they don't crawl for much longer. Nevertheless, I will try it again next year on the wife... and see how it works out.
Konqueror absolutely sucks. A lot of websites won't even render. Getting plugins to work is difficult to impossible for the regular user. Rendering speed is horrible.
The only thing worse is Mozilla. Two horrid browsers.
I'd love to see Internet Explorer on Linux. It might be an oxymoron to the purists, but it still is the best browser out there.
Most (clueful) Windows users already tweak their desktop as far as posssible to get away from the 'boring grey rectangle' school of design that MS have favoured in the past (pre-XP) so I wouldn't underestimate the user base's willingness to embrace new types and styles of controls.
We are talking about the look and feel of the operating system and the applications that run on it. There is a definitely for look and feel to be consistent. You can't have a bunch of different applications with a bunch of different look and feel. It doesn't make sense. The learning curve is high.
The native Windows look-and-feel is actually very well designed, easy to use, and easy on the eyes. It has been through years of evolution to come to its current state. And it is very slick.
Desktop 'tweaks' do nothing but alter colors and font-sizes. But these have nothing to do with the Windows 'look and feel'. The native L&F is actually a very strict guideline by which the placement of controls relative to eachother happens.
We're talking pixels here. That a menu item must be so many pixels inset from its container border... blah blah blah. Stuff like that. Swing is so far off the mark that it is ridiculous.
I find the Java L&F to be very bland. No anti-aliasing of fonts. No smoothing. Limited font selection.
You aren't going to see Swing have better widgets the Microsoft anytime soon. Microsoft got a several year head start on them. I'd be willing to settle for Java widgets that behave like Windows widgets in the WindowsL&F. Right now... they really don't. They look 'similar', and behave 'similar'. But that doesn't cut it.
Java is NOT open-source. Don't even begin to think that it is. Sun has been trying to pass their SCSL off as a GPL... but it is FAR from it. Truly open-source application are those which satisfy by the definition of open-source by either the FSF or OSI.
I point you to these limitations within Sun's Community Source License (SCSL) which you are purporting to be open-source:
1) Modified source code cannot be distributed without the express written permission of Sun.
2) Binary programs built using modified Java 2 SDK source code may not be distributed, internally or externally, without meeting the compatibility and other requirements described in the License Agreement
There is NOTHING open about these two line items. They give you the source, but open-source is more than just looking at it.
I encourage you to investigate what open-source really means by visiting the two sites I mention above.
Best regards.
You might get away with this for CLI compliant code.
But it can't be done if you are using Windows-specific libraries or system calls. Which is the entire point that someone would want to use C#/J# anyways. We want the front-end controls.
So cross-compiling isn't going to be a reality.
First, a disclaimer, I am not a Microsoft advocate. Those guys can stick it up their ass. That being said, I will do what it takes to do my job and get paid.
The issue here is that *many* Java developers have been trying to code quality front-end applications on Windows using Java -- and have failed (or fallen very short). *I* am one of those people who have done so. I know many other Java developers who have failed to meet their expectations reasonably when coding on Windows.
If I know that my target platform is only going to be Windows, but I can't use any of the Windows libraries... what good is Java? Its not. So I have to go back to C++. But C++ is a horror in its own ways.
Too many in the Java community are zealots about what Java should and shouldn't be used for. The idea that if it isn't WORA (Write Once Run Anywhere) then it shouldn't be written in Java is completely ludicrous, IMHO.
Some Java developers want the elegance of Java with an easy way to utlitize Windows native libraries without having to write convoluted JNI interfaces all over the place.
The answer is J#. However, I was perfectly happy with the idea of C#. C# has some compilation advantages and syntax advantages over Java that I really love.
I have extensive experience with Swing (Java GUI libraries), and they just simply don't cut it for serious front-end application development. The more complex controls such as JTable and JTree are full of bugs, they are difficult to use, and complicated. If you want less complicated controls, you have to buy a proprietary vendor's API and use those, instead. The Windows 'look and feel' does NOT look and feel like Windows. Because of the MVC design, you have to import practically every single class in Swing into your programs.
AWT was much more compact and easy to use. It also was pretty snappy; however, it suffered from lack of GUI controls.
I don't see anything wrong with J#. If it works for you and serves your purpose, use it. If it doesn't, then don't.
But a little competition in the Java marketplace (or any marketplace) never hurts. Maybe it will light a fire under Sun's ass and get them to contribute more to the front-end side of Java -- which has been ignored for far too long.
Better yet, maybe they will open-source Java, instead. Even better.
No. Actually, speed (which is what I assume you mean by performance) is the last thing a database engineer is worried about; otherwise, you're just increasing the speed at which you fuck your dataset.
No. ACIDity means nothing if your SQL takes ten years to come back. As far as fucking your dataset because of high performance... I'm afraid I haven't seen that.
Now, agreed, lots of DBAs don't care about performance. Apparently, you are one of those. But from a usability perspective, you have to have good performance.
Enhanced MySQL (especially with Gemini tables) has excellent ACIDity. Automatic crash recoverty, ACID transactions. Row-level locks. SQL-standard statement atomicity. Replication. Index based queries. Table cardinality and referential integrity. Blocked I/O for good performance. Optimization statistics.
What I am saying is that MySQL is a fantastic database which not only has good features as far as ACIDity goes, but is also faster than everyone in the bunch -- although I'm not sure about fucking of datasets -- I've never had MySQL fuck up my datasets.
That was all I was saying.
I'm not ragging on PostgreSQL. PostgreSQL is the most feature-rich, open-source implementation of a SQL92 database out there.
But the fact is, MySQL simply kills it in performance. Which is usually the number one issue with any kind of database. That isn't to say that PostgreSQL is bad. It just isn't as fast. That's all. Here's a benchmark of MySQL versus other databases... including PostgreSQL.
All of this being said... if MySQL gets the following features, I think PostgreSQL will lose ground on MySQL again:
1) Nested sub-queries/sub-selects *coming in 4.x*
2) Update a table with joins to other tables. *coming in 4.x*
3) Delete from a table with joins to other tables. *coming in 4.x*
4) Stored procedures *coming in 4.x*
5) Triggers *who knows*
With 4.1, they will be most of the way there. With triggers, they will be pretty much feature complete.
Personally, I'd like to see materialized views implemented once all of this is done. I think that having materialized views will position MySQL as a serious consideration in the IT industry an an 'Oracle killer'. Lots of companies have already trashed Oracle in favor of MySQL. Those that have not... usually haven't done it because of lack of features in MySQL.
Hopefully that changes.
It is readily apparent that there is a faction within the W3C that is trying to cash in on corporate patents. I see no other motivation for the W3C to even consider adopting such a policy. I'm sure they've had much pressure for years to make this kind of move. From companies such as Microsoft, Sun, and others. These corporate sloths have been trying for years to get the W3C to adopt their patented products under these kinds of guidelines. It looks like now that this could become a reality.
I wouldn't be surprised if the folks over at the FSF have something to do with this as well. This is the kind of thing that the FSF always harps on. Staunch FSF supporters have always felt that the FSF software model should extend to standardization. Which I think is bunk.
If this policy is adopted, we will definitely see a competing standards body to take its place.
We'll end up with the FSF version of the W3C, and the OSS version of the W3C.
IMHO, this is a really bad thing. This move by the W3C would cause an even greater fragment in the open source community.
That's not something we need in the open-source community. We've got enough challenges as it is.
FastTrack invented this protocol to make it easier for people to share (mostly) copyrighted material.
Really? Wow. I didn't know that. Can you point me to where it says that in their mission statement or on their website? This statement is pure conjecture.
I think firearm manufacturers probably should pay society to cover for the lost lives.
I see. Should knife manufacturers pay society for the cost of lives lost due to stabbings? Perhaps manufacturers of alcohol should pay for drunk driving casualties? C'mon. You are reaching a little bit.
When I say, "wrapped up Gnutella" clients, I meant it figuratively... not explicitly. Fasttrack is very much based upon Gnutella, although it is not actually Gnutella. More like Gnutella on steroids. But the concept and idea are the same... with more bells and whistles.
My point is this. This is a direct attack on peer-to-peer protocols.
Peer-to-peer protocols run the entire internet. Illegal mp3 files can be transported on any number of protocols. They aren't going to ban them all. To do that would literally bring the entire net to a screeching halt.
Proprietary or not. They aren't going to win a lawsuit against a company that creates a decentralized, peer-to-peer protocol used for file exchange.
That's like filing a lawsuit against firearm manufacturers for all of the gun-related deaths. Or Phil Zimmerman for terrorists using PGP. Or Wilbur & Orville Wright for inventing airplanes that terrorists use to kill people.
This strikes me very funny. All of these programs are nothing but wrapped up Gnutella clients. What are they going to do? Start filing lawsuits against the companes who create FTP servers/clients? Newsgroup decoders? Puhleeze.
There is no way that the RIAA will be successful here. I don't know why people think that they actually will be able to go after MusicCity and WIN.
If they succeed in getting rid of Morpheus/Kazaa, then they should go after other famous transport mechanisms for files:
1) wu-ftpd
2) wsftp
3) cuteftp
4) any alt.binaries newsgroups
5) any newsgroup decoders
6) all major web browser
7) inventors of the FTP protocol.
8) inventors of the telnet protocol
9) inventors of SSL
10) inventors of HTTP
... basically they should try to eliminate all forms of data transport.
Not gonna happen.
Well guys, you might want to mod the right post next time. The next post about the 'recruiter' was the 'funny' one.
I'm with another poster. KOffice is far preferred right now.
Wow, there are some real telling sentences here:
1) I hate groups.
2) I knew I was the strongest coder too.
3) I wrote all of the code one morning before ever having the first group meeting.
4) I didn't want to deal with having them argue about how to do it and having it take several days.
5) Then I told them to do the testing without me.
Where do I start?
First, you hate groups. So you are basically a non-gregarious person when it comes to the workplace. Big minus.
Second, you have a tall self image. You think you are the best coder, but coding is really only half of the battle when developing software. Big ego.
Third, you went and did all the work by yourself without consulting your team. Self indulgent.
Fourth, you didn't want the team to participate in any discussions about your project. Basically, you wanted all the glory for yourself, and didn't want to be bothered with their input. Selfish and uncaring what others think.
Fifth, after you single-handedly went out on your little coding expedition, you then play dictator and tell them all to do the testing. Seeya later.
No offense, guy, but you are my worst nightmare. I have fired probably five or six guys just like you over the last few years. You need to get lessons on how to really develop software. Why people skills are important. Why complete team input is important. Why you don't know half of what you think you do.
Like the title says, be humble. You have a lot to learn. Even though you may not think so.
Looks like I reverse my position. It sounds pretty safe.
I guess my initial reaction is that this appears to be a process that is very difficult to control and stablize. Producing heat in the millions of degrees Fahrenheit.
Like a fission reaction, I guess I expected that the fusion reaction could have worse consequences.
Thanks for the clarifications.
I'm all for alternative methods of power, but not fusion.
I think the risk is just too great of something going wrong. Something which is probably on the level of mass cataclysm.
I have a question, which all of these articles ignore.
What happens if something goes wrong in a fusion reactor? Literally, speaking. What could the consequences be?
Before I made any kind of decision like this, I'd like to know what could happen in the case of a foulup.
This post is obviously discussing an issue that is based in the USA and affects the USA directly.
Nobody is forgetting that the internet is not just based in the US. You are an idiot for saying so.
Shit, just because someone posts something that is specific to the USA doesn't mean that everyone in the USA is 'missing the point' and thinks that 'the internet is only based in the USA'.
By all means, if you would like something posted that is relevant to you, then suggest it for an article. Otherwise, quit bitching.
I could not have said it better myself.
Agreed... there is no 'rational' argument against it. But then again, there really is no 'rational' argument against any crimes. Because 'rationality' is in the eye of the beholder.
Great post.
I don't see the harm in a man or a woman masturbating to computer generated images of children, cats, or giant saguaros.
First off, I find it highly irregular that you would feel compelled to group together child pornography with cats or animals. I guess we know where you rate humanity when it comes to these kinds of things.
Let me ask you, do you think that it is rational for someone to masturbate to photos of young children?
Let me ask you... is murder rational to the murderer? I'd say that they (the murderer) thinks it is rational. But that doesn't mean that it is lawful.
Ah, but you'll say : "That's different. There is a victim of that crime."
And I say... who says its wrong to murder? You? Me? Religion? Perhaps murder is always justified. Perhaps we in society are all complete fanatics for suggesting that murder is a crime. Does a crime always have to have a direct victim?
So are crimes with indirect consequences really not crimes? I wonder.
Laws themselves, friend, are based upon completely contrived ideas of morality. There is no universal morality. No universal laws that say, "This is wrong" or "That is wrong". People make laws based upon what they 'feel' is lawful or unlawful. Morality itself is completely based upon opinion. Nothing more.
And along those lines, I'm saying that I feel that the viewing of child pornography is unjust. I feel that it compels one to commit further atrocities towards children. I do not rate it equivalent to someone viewing photos of zoophilia. If a man is willing to view naked pictures of little kids performing lewd acts, then I say that he should be taken away. Period.
Am I a fanatic? No more than anyone else who says that any other act is unjust.
If a man is looking at any kind of child pornography, I want him behind bars. Guys who look at young children naked or doing lewd acts should be put behind bars.
I don't care how sexually liberal anyone is. This has nothing to do with sexual liberation or freedom. I place my limit on sexual freedom (fetishes) when someone gets sexual entertainment from looking at naked kids. That's not a "fetish". That is absolute perversion.
I don't care if the images are computer generated or not.
This is the question posed by some:
"What is the harm or crime in a man jacking off to computer generated photos of six year olds?"
And to that, I say this : If you actually need an answer to that question, you are yourself in dire need of help.
You misinterpreted. I don't think that taxes work at all.
There are two ways to ensure a fair market place. Laws, and enforcement of those laws. You can't have a marketplace without laws. Such is a brute force, anarchist atmosphere that would certainly lead to a monopoly almost always.
To think that a completely free market would function with no regulation is ludicrous. That never has worked, and it never will work. One company will rise above ther rest and crush the others.
The government regulates and oversees the free market to ensure fairness and competition in the marketplace. This is why we have anti-trust laws on the books. These are the regulations which ensure fairness in the marketplace.
My greatest concern, as is evident by this DOJ trial is that Microsoft is not only capable of single-handedly usurping the entire free market, but also capable of overpowering government regulators by applying corporate pressure, paying off lawmakers, or undermining consumer confidence.
Microsoft has a control that I feel is unparalled on any scale to anything since Standard Oil.
It really is truly scaring the hell out of me.