They stop developing "conventional" email client because they don't need it.
OE is simple and standards-based (pop, imap) client, works like a charm with Unix mailservers.
Why MS would need it?
Instead, they do their standard embrace-and-extend trick -
customer is fed up with insecurity of traditional email and spam?
Fine, we are going to have new mail client built right-into the OS, working some proprietary protocol against Exchange backend (for corp users) or against monstrous SQL Server /.net/passport clusters for consumers.
No need to download another client just like with the browser. And guess what - in a little while SMTP/POP3/IMAP will become a niche, because everyone will have MS supermail on their desktops.
They are trying to do to email what IIS was going to do to the web - quetly and gradually replace open protocols. Apache stopped IIS from monopolizing the web.
What is going to stop this one?
"unthinking hero-worshipping idiot"
thank you. It is because of hidden perls like that I keep coming back to./
Well put and right on the subject.
People from the thoughtful crowd need to post more often.
Right, no argument there.
But dont' you think sometimes that the programmic language constructs are "mark-up" for your ideas?
And there is native similarity between how we structure code ("begin block; do something; exception handler; end block;") and structure of an XML doc?
Besides, ideally such language will almost never be manipulated by hand.
I keep thinking about a language where definitions (objects, classes) and procedural logic (functions/method calls) would be expressed in XML.
XML schema might come in handy.
Such language will be exclusively machine readable and WRITABLE. Imagine the possibilities.
If someone wants to run with this idea, I want 10%.
No you don't get it - GUI is simple and intuitive:
you just go to Start -> All Programs -> Accessories -> Elevator Control, select elevator from the list and click on the floor, it that easy!
Java/JSP _does_ have all these libraries and HTML/session integration.
With JSPs you have the same:
access to rich Java libraries for text processing, XML, LDAP, images, zip, etc
plus easy way out to the enterprise world with J2EE.
So what is the point?
.. blowing up poles, wires, POPs and everything in between!
Liberation, nation-building and infrastructure upgrade in one convinient package.
Re:Nice to see the sideswipe at .NET (not)
on
Nat Demos Dashboard
·
· Score: 1
I have been involved in several massive Java project recently and had a chance to see it in action.
Unfortunately Java is not free and not a standard. Everyone is free to implement.NET, at least C# and CLR. If Sun folds tomorrow and cannot be keeper of Java anymore, I do not know how long it lasts.
C# on Mono will bring nice env for desktop applications to Linux. Having powerful OOP language (and horde of developers on the Windows side as well) will bring Linux closer to mainstream.
Jump to Linux will be easier for many organizations.
Re:Nice to see the sideswipe at .NET (not)
on
Nat Demos Dashboard
·
· Score: 1
More like Troll than Interesting but I guess we need to be grateful it is not Insightful...
Since you are piling together crap about both.NET and Java in the same sentence, I take it you have never been part of real enterprise software development project. Things like proper OOP languages (without C++ rectal bleeding), native separation of presentation (HTML) and logic (classes), easy deployment (assemblies in.NET, jars, wars and ears in Java) do not mean anything to you.
But they do to others. Mono is the best thing happening to Open Source since Linux. It will ensure that free software will continue no matter what and will prevail over Evil in Evil's own domain.
What about coding the thing to the Interface?
So the OSS framework remains OSS and has well defined interfaces that proprietary plug-ins can implement.
Language specific features would help too. For example in Java jar files (code archives) can clearly separate "my code" from "your code" and the Factory classes can instantiate plugins dynamically without being aware of their proprietary nature.
Yes there will be more and more self-order-and-pay kiosks.
I imagine kitchen automation at the restaurant is possible (steak cooking robot).
But general-purpose robots? I don't think so. Roomba the vacuum cleaner is out already. Robotic lawn movers will be next. Robotic gas-pumps, construction site robots, etc are definetely to come.
But a general purpose walking and talking robot will never be justifyable to build and market.
I think we will end up with millions and millions of highly specialized robots networked together and dynamically provisioned and allocated by AI control systems.
Yes, lots of people will have to retrain. No, it will not result in 50% unemployment. And someone has to program all those things so/. crowd will be all right;-)
A bit offtopic - need help promoting OSS in federal government environment, preferrably inside Department of Treasury (that is US).
Anyone had experience justifying Apache Tomcat installation for projects like that?
Look at some of the X prize projects, like Canadian Arrow.
The thing is souped-up German V2. If it can lift 3 people 100km up, it would be able to deliver 300-500 lb warhead 100-200 miles easily. AND it will be technology developed easily by a bunch of people in the garage at a cost of 3-5 mln dollars.
OF COURSE, government will do anything possible to prevent this technology from becoming easy.
If it is ".. FOR Consultants", we should expect either discussion on how to create the hostile enviroment for your consultants or discussion of book or article (.. in three easy lessons!")
That process is only secure if the different consumer-oriented distros make out-of-the-box security priority number one. Exactly. And now we are praying that ONE "distro" (Microsoft that is) is secure enough. Prolifiration of Linux will result in possibly hundreds od small specialized distros(media, document management,etc) and they _will_ have security as prority because if they don't and the exploit becomes the news, that is it - they are history and replaced by the other one.
Slashdot Mirror
I must be in the wrong universe again...
Most of the projects I have seen since 2000 use Ant ( server-side Java ).
They stop developing "conventional" email client because they don't need it. .net/passport clusters for consumers.
OE is simple and standards-based (pop, imap) client, works like a charm with Unix mailservers. Why MS would need it?
Instead, they do their standard embrace-and-extend trick -
customer is fed up with insecurity of traditional email and spam?
Fine, we are going to have new mail client built right-into the OS, working some proprietary protocol against Exchange backend (for corp users) or against monstrous SQL Server /
No need to download another client just like with the browser. And guess what - in a little while SMTP/POP3/IMAP will become a niche, because everyone will have MS supermail on their desktops.
They are trying to do to email what IIS was going to do to the web - quetly and gradually replace open protocols.
Apache stopped IIS from monopolizing the web. What is going to stop this one?
"unthinking hero-worshipping idiot" ./
thank you. It is because of hidden perls like that I keep coming back to
Well put and right on the subject.
People from the thoughtful crowd need to post more often.
The day Wired hits the mailbox - Slashdot starts posting their stories.
I wonder if this is some kind of cross-marketing or just pathetic journalism.
... we did master-master replication with Open LDAP (with simple patch) back in 00.
Right, no argument there.
But dont' you think sometimes that the programmic language constructs are "mark-up" for your ideas?
And there is native similarity between how we structure code ("begin block; do something; exception handler; end block;") and structure of an XML doc?
Besides, ideally such language will almost never be manipulated by hand.
I keep thinking about a language where definitions (objects, classes) and procedural logic (functions/method calls) would be expressed in XML.
XML schema might come in handy.
Such language will be exclusively machine readable and WRITABLE. Imagine the possibilities.
If someone wants to run with this idea, I want 10%.
No you don't get it - GUI is simple and intuitive:
you just go to Start -> All Programs -> Accessories -> Elevator Control, select elevator from the list and click on the floor, it that easy!
Now, the guy:
obviously knows what he is talking about (even if he (horror!) pasted from his own posting from other website).
has something to say
Why don't you people listen and learn even if you do not agree with the poster?
Java/JSP _does_ have all these libraries and HTML/session integration. With JSPs you have the same:
access to rich Java libraries for text processing, XML, LDAP, images, zip, etc
plus easy way out to the enterprise world with J2EE.
So what is the point?
.. blowing up poles, wires, POPs and everything in between!
Liberation, nation-building and infrastructure upgrade in one convinient package.
I have been involved in several massive Java project recently and had a chance to see it in action. .NET, at least C# and CLR. If Sun folds tomorrow and cannot be keeper of Java anymore, I do not know how long it lasts.
Unfortunately Java is not free and not a standard. Everyone is free to implement
C# on Mono will bring nice env for desktop applications to Linux. Having powerful OOP language (and horde of developers on the Windows side as well) will bring Linux closer to mainstream.
Jump to Linux will be easier for many organizations.
More like Troll than Interesting but I guess we need to be grateful it is not Insightful... .NET and Java in the same sentence, I take it you have never been part of real enterprise software development project. Things like proper OOP languages (without C++ rectal bleeding), native separation of presentation (HTML) and logic (classes), easy deployment (assemblies in .NET, jars, wars and ears in Java) do not mean anything to you.
Since you are piling together crap about both
But they do to others. Mono is the best thing happening to Open Source since Linux. It will ensure that free software will continue no matter what and will prevail over Evil in Evil's own domain.
NTFS appears to be remarkably stable. ;-)
Of course, Msoft had long time of real-user experience to perfect crash-resistant file system
What about coding the thing to the Interface?
So the OSS framework remains OSS and has well defined interfaces that proprietary plug-ins can implement.
Language specific features would help too. For example in Java jar files (code archives) can clearly separate "my code" from "your code" and the Factory classes can instantiate plugins dynamically without being aware of their proprietary nature.
That exactly what pilgrims said!
Yes there will be more and more self-order-and-pay kiosks. /. crowd will be all right ;-)
I imagine kitchen automation at the restaurant is possible (steak cooking robot).
But general-purpose robots? I don't think so.
Roomba the vacuum cleaner is out already. Robotic lawn movers will be next. Robotic gas-pumps, construction site robots, etc are definetely to come.
But a general purpose walking and talking robot will never be justifyable to build and market.
I think we will end up with millions and millions of highly specialized robots networked together and dynamically provisioned and allocated by AI control systems.
Yes, lots of people will have to retrain. No, it will not result in 50% unemployment. And someone has to program all those things so
How do they detect that - do network cards start blowing up with beeping,sparks and stuff?
A bit offtopic - need help promoting OSS in federal government environment, preferrably inside Department of Treasury (that is US).
Anyone had experience justifying Apache Tomcat installation for projects like that?
Open source airline -
GNU-is-Not-AA?
Look at some of the X prize projects, like Canadian Arrow.
The thing is souped-up German V2. If it can lift 3 people 100km up, it would be able to deliver 300-500 lb warhead 100-200 miles easily. AND it will be technology developed easily by a bunch of people in the garage at a cost of 3-5 mln dollars.
OF COURSE, government will do anything possible to prevent this technology from becoming easy.
Based on personal experience -
Places with emphasis on CMM _always_ had lousy software (kinda of sad, like a curse).
If it is ".. FOR Consultants", we should expect either discussion on how to create the hostile enviroment for your consultants or discussion of book or article (.. in three easy lessons!")
.. for a while now!
Rinse and spit.
That process is only secure if the different consumer-oriented distros make out-of-the-box security priority number one.
Exactly. And now we are praying that ONE "distro" (Microsoft that is) is secure enough. Prolifiration of Linux will result in possibly hundreds od small specialized distros(media, document management,etc) and they _will_ have security as prority because if they don't and the exploit becomes the news, that is it - they are history and replaced by the other one.