What has .NET brought to the programmer?
on
Was .NET All a Mistake?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
What.NET has brought to the Microsoft programmer is a decade of lucrative employment. That's not a bad thing. The trick now is to convert back to C++ and... I'm tempted to say "go out and get real jobs" but that would be unfair.
Oh c'mon, I think we are imaginative enough to be able to hypothesize another vehicle without actually seeing it. Must we be held by the hand all the way through the story?
http://www.microsoft.com/download is probably fairly safe. And the opportunity exists to download it from a different machine if you forgot and started the install before downloading.
And in case readers don't understand, what we're talking about is keeping the PC physically disconnected from the Internet until the service packs are installed.
That's why you download the admin version of the service packs *first* and burn them onto CD. Although admittedly most people wouldn't think to do that.
Shrug. I don't happen to have a spare $139 and Windows XP runs my applications just fine. It's important to remember, the OS isn't the application. The OS runs applications.
> Or if you look at electrolysis, there's the basic second-law issue: you'd be better off just using the electricity directly than splitting water to H2 & O2 then reacting them to get back to H2O.
Years and years ago, one way in which this was envisioned is if you had a huge, cheap, centralized source of electricity, and you needed a practical (as in, works with technology of the time) way to store and transport that energy.
The idea was, hydrogen will burn in existing internal combustion engines without too much modification, and could be transported and parceled out similar to how LP is now. It was therefore considered easier and cheaper to convert to hydrogen than to electricity at the automobile level.
But the great big hairy source of nearly free electricity and very inexpensive hydrogen was supposed to be nuclear fusion plants distilling and splitting ocean water, and I don't have to tell you how that worked out.
> I might point out that the same auto industry that ran attack ads about how 56.2 would destroy their businesses and force everyone to drive electric cars has embraced 54.5 as an achievable target
That might be a bit disingenuous. How much time has lapsed between the first and second parts of that statement? And what technologies have been developed in the intervening gap?
Yes, on the right hand side because I dial with my left hand. In the Cretaceous period I wore my slide rule on my left side so I could cross-draw. In the Pleistocene era my Palm Pilot was always in its holster on my right side. Fortunately horizontal holsters are available now, which have a lower profile and are less likely to get hung up on chair arms and door levers.
If you're carrying your phone in your hand or shirt pocket, you deserve to lose it. If you can't bring yourself to practice secure behavior with your phone, then carry a dumb phone. It's smaller, cheaper, has longer battery life, and you won't lose your credit card numbers when you leave it in a bar.
I keep my phone with me. I never get drunk enough that I'm likely to leave my phone in a bar. I do a belt check whenever I leave a hotel room. My phone charger is on my desk in full view so I'm not likely to forget it in the charger.
Keeping your phone near you is at least 80% of security. No tool will absolutely guarantee you won't lose your data if you lose your phone. So first and foremost, don't lose your phone.
> "What happens after The Avengers, or Christopher Nolan's third and final Batman movie — after we've seen all there is to see of the best comic-book blockbusters ever made?""
Must superhero films be "blockbusters"? Must they all be multi-hundred million dollar tentpoles? Will every writing team from now on be so micro-managed by a terrified studio that we never get anything anymore except multimillion dollar tepid crapfests like Green Lantern and the last Superman abortion?
Because that's the real issue. "The time of superhero movies is over" is an argument by studio apologists to excuse the box office failure of ultra-expensive, timidly made films. There are plenty of other properties, perhaps not as well known, over the complete gambit from children's stories (shazam, metal men) to R-rated adult (sandman, miracleman) and everything in between. The studios have planted only the half acre closest to the farmhouse (and in some cases forgot to water it) when there are huge fields still lying fallow. The issue is not that there are no more easily recognizable properties. The issue is a reluctance to take chances and maybe give us something we haven't seen before. It seems like the more a property is recognized as a "blockbuster" (coughsupermancough) the more likely it is that the only film anyone will have the guts to make will be a rehash of an earlier film.
There is room in the genre for innovation. "The Dark Knight" was, in many ways, a huge departure from the usual superhero film, and last I heard it did pretty good at the box office.
I mean, it's like saying "Science fiction... ok, there's Star Wars and Star Trek... what else?" Well, like, I dunno, EVERYTHING???
> Not sure if this is an issue in other countries, but here (NZ) we have nasty-looking, tattooed individuals who squirt your screen with guff and then wipe it off as soon as you get to the lights.
We have them in various parts of the US as well. And then they demand payment for smearing the bugs around on your window. Some can get really hostile if you don't give them something. Parenthetically, I've always wondered -- if they're homeless bums, how can they afford all the tattoos?
Oops, I'm pretty sure that as an American I'm not allowed to call effortly-challenged people either "Bums" or "Homeless".
But to your question, I'd expect the technology to be embedded on the inside surface of the window, so unless they scratch the hell out of it to the point where it's impractical for its primary purpose (as a window) you'd be ok.
Slashdot Mirror
Because he's not white.
What .NET has brought to the Microsoft programmer is a decade of lucrative employment. That's not a bad thing. The trick now is to convert back to C++ and ... I'm tempted to say "go out and get real jobs" but that would be unfair.
Ah. Thanks, that makes perfect sense.
You're telling geeks to stop breeding? Isn't that redundant?
Even. More. Expensive.
48.5 percent.
> like how did the girl even get there?
Oh c'mon, I think we are imaginative enough to be able to hypothesize another vehicle without actually seeing it. Must we be held by the hand all the way through the story?
http://www.microsoft.com/download is probably fairly safe. And the opportunity exists to download it from a different machine if you forgot and started the install before downloading.
And in case readers don't understand, what we're talking about is keeping the PC physically disconnected from the Internet until the service packs are installed.
I happen to have a wholesaler within three miles from my house, but for most people that would be true. Or pay the $19 to have it shipped from Amazon.
I predict you will be a proponent of the "greater good" right up to the moment it unjustly affects you.
Not only is it not free, it's ridiculously priced for just something I use to load Adobe Photoshop.
That's why you download the admin version of the service packs *first* and burn them onto CD. Although admittedly most people wouldn't think to do that.
Shrug. I don't happen to have a spare $139 and Windows XP runs my applications just fine. It's important to remember, the OS isn't the application. The OS runs applications.
So everyone go out right now and pay the $139 for Windows Home Premium. I'll wait...
(This should cause a measurable bump in the economy. Any moment now...)
"I treat my phone like my wallet or my kidney". That's my new favorite phrase.
> The Economist writes a thoughtful article about the next generation of HDTVs and how they will provide resolutions beyond 1080p.
But... but... why?
> The drive for higher resolution is driven in part by the demands of 3D content.
But... but... but... WHY??
> Or if you look at electrolysis, there's the basic second-law issue: you'd be better off just using the electricity directly than splitting water to H2 & O2 then reacting them to get back to H2O.
Years and years ago, one way in which this was envisioned is if you had a huge, cheap, centralized source of electricity, and you needed a practical (as in, works with technology of the time) way to store and transport that energy.
The idea was, hydrogen will burn in existing internal combustion engines without too much modification, and could be transported and parceled out similar to how LP is now. It was therefore considered easier and cheaper to convert to hydrogen than to electricity at the automobile level.
But the great big hairy source of nearly free electricity and very inexpensive hydrogen was supposed to be nuclear fusion plants distilling and splitting ocean water, and I don't have to tell you how that worked out.
> This bug affects several Apache projects directly — Apache Lucene Core
So... from Oracle's standpoint, it's a feature?
> I might point out that the same auto industry that ran attack ads about how 56.2 would destroy their businesses and force everyone to drive electric cars has embraced 54.5 as an achievable target
That might be a bit disingenuous. How much time has lapsed between the first and second parts of that statement? And what technologies have been developed in the intervening gap?
Yes, on the right hand side because I dial with my left hand. In the Cretaceous period I wore my slide rule on my left side so I could cross-draw. In the Pleistocene era my Palm Pilot was always in its holster on my right side. Fortunately horizontal holsters are available now, which have a lower profile and are less likely to get hung up on chair arms and door levers.
If you're carrying your phone in your hand or shirt pocket, you deserve to lose it. If you can't bring yourself to practice secure behavior with your phone, then carry a dumb phone. It's smaller, cheaper, has longer battery life, and you won't lose your credit card numbers when you leave it in a bar.
I keep my phone with me. I never get drunk enough that I'm likely to leave my phone in a bar. I do a belt check whenever I leave a hotel room. My phone charger is on my desk in full view so I'm not likely to forget it in the charger.
Keeping your phone near you is at least 80% of security. No tool will absolutely guarantee you won't lose your data if you lose your phone. So first and foremost, don't lose your phone.
> "What happens after The Avengers, or Christopher Nolan's third and final Batman movie — after we've seen all there is to see of the best comic-book blockbusters ever made?""
Must superhero films be "blockbusters"? Must they all be multi-hundred million dollar tentpoles? Will every writing team from now on be so micro-managed by a terrified studio that we never get anything anymore except multimillion dollar tepid crapfests like Green Lantern and the last Superman abortion?
Because that's the real issue. "The time of superhero movies is over" is an argument by studio apologists to excuse the box office failure of ultra-expensive, timidly made films. There are plenty of other properties, perhaps not as well known, over the complete gambit from children's stories (shazam, metal men) to R-rated adult (sandman, miracleman) and everything in between. The studios have planted only the half acre closest to the farmhouse (and in some cases forgot to water it) when there are huge fields still lying fallow. The issue is not that there are no more easily recognizable properties. The issue is a reluctance to take chances and maybe give us something we haven't seen before. It seems like the more a property is recognized as a "blockbuster" (coughsupermancough) the more likely it is that the only film anyone will have the guts to make will be a rehash of an earlier film.
There is room in the genre for innovation. "The Dark Knight" was, in many ways, a huge departure from the usual superhero film, and last I heard it did pretty good at the box office.
I mean, it's like saying "Science fiction... ok, there's Star Wars and Star Trek... what else?" Well, like, I dunno, EVERYTHING???
> Not sure if this is an issue in other countries, but here (NZ) we have nasty-looking, tattooed individuals who squirt your screen with guff and then wipe it off as soon as you get to the lights.
We have them in various parts of the US as well. And then they demand payment for smearing the bugs around on your window. Some can get really hostile if you don't give them something. Parenthetically, I've always wondered -- if they're homeless bums, how can they afford all the tattoos?
Oops, I'm pretty sure that as an American I'm not allowed to call effortly-challenged people either "Bums" or "Homeless".
But to your question, I'd expect the technology to be embedded on the inside surface of the window, so unless they scratch the hell out of it to the point where it's impractical for its primary purpose (as a window) you'd be ok.
It's been awhile, but in either the movie or TOS, didn't a terrorist kill people by blanking out their super high tech windows in high speed traffic?
Even if it didn't happen that way, can you imagine a BSOD at speed?