Re:I fix PC's by day... and use Macs at home.
on
Mac v. Microsoft TCO
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I second the motion.
At work, I develop for Microsoft's.Net platform, so I'm pretty much stuck with Windows all day long. Our machines are always acting up, and it's kind of a pain in the ass. I mean, it seems like there's something wrong every five minutes.
At home, I have two machines I work with regularly: an Apple iBook running OS/X, and a Sony Vaio Picturebook running Slackware.
The iBook is a champ. I mean, it never gives me any trouble at all. The only thing I had trouble with recently was figuring out the CD-burning software (use Finder? Or Disk Copy? Create new blank disk image? Or create image from folder? Or drag, drop and burn? Yeesh. Nothing like CD burning under Linux...). Even that wasn't that hard to straighten out, and once I had it straight, it turned out to be a pretty cool setup.
My little Slackware box is running really well. It's cool, not much bigger than a paperback. It doesn't give me any problems, either. Hardening it was easy, setting up the firewall was no big deal... Slackware rocks. Everything is done via/etc/. Easy.
I mean, I don't have NUMBERS, per se, but in my experience, if operating systems were girls,
Macintosh = Kylie Minogue, really fast/high class,
and frisky; Linux = Sandra Bullock, total "girl next door",
friendly and good sense of humor; Windows = Roseanne Barr with a hangover and an axe
to grind.
Who would YOU like to hang out with?
Re:But I have many brands of tools...
on
Mac v. Microsoft TCO
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Another thing is, a lot of the newer Windows games that are coming out crash a LOT. And, I mean, it isn't just the game crashing, it's the whole BOX. I recently bought rEvolution, which really looked amazing. You get to be this techie/maintenance guy, working for a Big Evil Corporation, and after getting screwed by them (and morphed into a non-human super-soldier), you start fighting for a resistance movement, and trying for revenge because the corporation put you in the position of killing this chick you kinda dug.
Sounds great, right?
Well, it would only run on my machine for a few hours, and then, usually right in the middle of a serious battle, wham! Blue screen of death. It was really annoying, because I'd have to cycle the power to get the computer working again.
It was a shame, because it really was kind of a cool game. It was like being given a Ferrari GT40, driving it for a little while, having it stall, and looking under the hood -- to see a beat up, oil-leaking Yugo engine rattling around in there.
Sigh...
I never had that happen on a Mac. The worst thing that's happened on my iBook was, Alien Vs. Predator crashed once or twice. But the O/S was unaffected, only the game quit. And, mostly the game ran fine.
Re:But I have many brands of tools...
on
Mac v. Microsoft TCO
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Tools only available under Windows?
Hmm...
Sobig; Slammer; Blaster; ILoveYou; Kournikova (remember her?); Um... This is a long list, how much time do you have?;)
1. XFree86 4.3 works just fine, so most people will continue to use that for as long as it takes to come up with a suitable alternative.
2. Many people are working on suitable alternatives; this annoyance might inspire them, invigorate them, or, more likely, piss them off. Any of the three would speed their efforts. This is a Good Thing.
3. Having something new, something cleaner, something fresh and interesting would be really cool, anyway. So it's not like discarding XFree86 is going to hurt us.
4. If the X guys wanna shoot themselves in the head, shouldn't we support them in that? You don't want to crush their dreams, do you? Perhaps they want to be revered like Kurt Cobain, and have a candlelight vigil in their name or something. C'mon, let 'em be happy! Everyone go back to X 4.3 and light a candle in memory of the Geeks That Time Forgot.
Well, aren't YOU just an immature, unprofessional little shit? But of course you don't have the sense to be embarassed by your violent reaction to my friendly advice.
No, you can't, actually. Because what you're doing is different from what you would be doing if you were working with Windows.
Being able to code C# syntax is one thing.
Being able to work with all the libraries, and knowing the best practices for enterprise development, and being comfortable with all the tools... Well, that's another thing entirely. Just as an example, do you have the Oracle 9i providers for.Net working with your Mono instance? Can you do, say, an anonymous stored procedure and store a BLOB? How about working with web services? Do you have any equivalent for Visual Studio and IIS? No? Then you're not doing pure ASP.Net.
No disrespect to the mono team is meant; what they're doing is very interesting. But saying you can code in ASP.Net on Linux is misleading. Even if you get a project to work, your whole working process is going to be radically different (and much, much slower in terms of productivity) than what you would have using a "Pure".Net environment.
I know, I know... Someone is going to yell "Damnit, Visual Studio is an abomination! Code in VI the way God meant you to program!" All I've got for these people is a Bronx Cheer. Visual studio rocks, not least for its debugger, its integration with IIS and web services, and intellisense.
Until you've worked with it for a while, man, you just have NO IDEA.
Don't let it wreck your faith in human nature. I think most people are basically good, but they make stupid choices on a regular basis. Sometimes they manage to immolate themselves during one of their stupider choices, you know? It's like another great quote I've heard a lot: "Never attribute to evil that which can be attributed to stupidity".
Anyway, that aside, it sounds like your wife was just being a creep. I mean, if you basically told her you wouldn't mind as long as she talked about it with you, her sneaking around seems like a deliberate effort to hurt you. Then her letting you know after the fact, well, it just sounds like a deliberate attack -- not a mistake. That's just awful.
Only FOUR??? That can't be correct. Maybe for a college kid, I dunno... Actually, to be fair, I think New York is a mixed bag sexually. Some people (catholics, for example, but not all!) tend to try to get involved with longer-term relationships, so their numbers would be lower (but that's by choice). And, there ARE people in New York who marry their first, but that's rare in my experience, it was more something the older set did, before the 1970's, you know? Old school.
Younger people (in my experience anyway) tend to be a lot more active around here. Check out craigslist and you'll see people looking for casual sex all the time (www.craigslist.com, it's very interesting!). Go to bars and you see all kinds of picking up going on. One nighters, etc...
It's not just New York, though, it's any of several major cities in culturally fast-moving areas of the country. I think the big ones are New York City, San Francisco (well, anywhere in California really), Miami Florida (more New Yorkers than Floridans in some places down there, it's a major migration target of the "I hate the winter" set), and places like those. Mostly, they're places where the local culture is mostly secular and religion has a very weak grip. The coasts, primarily.
Anyway, people pick people up in bars and have sex with them, and then may or may not continue to see them. It happens all the time. And, to get the kinds of numbers I mentioned, all you have to do is stay single and get lucky three times a year over the course of your twenties. Not too hard, you know? I mean, lots of people go way over that. Others, tend to tone it down. Most New Yorkers don't really marry and settle down until they're in their thirties because they're minding their careers, so the "three times a year" number would be more common than you'd think.
Then there are the guys who go to brothels and massage parlors, and the guys who are into strippers, and so on. These things are widely available in New York, and they're not reviled like they are in more religious places. It's just another thing, you know? Not that big a deal.
I moved upstate three years ago, and because I don't know anyone up here, I've been laying low and not hitting the bars all that much. So actually I haven't had sex in the past three years; all my experience was from before I turned thirty. But I've been thinking about getting back in the game, you know? I was in a bar a couple of weeks ago and this chick was TOTALLY checking me and my friend out. I could have gotten together with her; I let it go, though. I'm not sure why; but the next time I get a chance like that, I'm going for it. I've been getting kinda bored lately with the celibacy thing.
By the way: Your wife didn't use protection in two of her affairs??? That's just awful. See, now, THAT would piss me off to no end. Around here, you use it no matter what. To not use it (or to try and get away without using it) is a major faux pas, unless you're practically married to someone and she's on the pill. I think if MY wife cheated on me and didn't protect herself, and was crazy enough to TELL me about it, I'd go ballistic.
Anyway, yeah, New York's a pretty rocking place. The only thing is, people are into looks. You've got to go out with some nice threads and be kinda buff to get lucky on any sort of regular basis. But if you've got that hooked up, getting lucky isn't as hard as you'd imagine.
1. No just and loving God would force you to face "serious consequences" after your death for merely having sex with a willing partner. The Jesus portrayed in the bible would never DREAM of doing something like that to people. His whole belief system was about forgiveness. He saved an adulteress from getting stoned to death, saying "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Do you really think someone would would stand in the way of an angry mob to save, basically, a cheating wife, would then be willing to cast you into hell over a little nooky? I don't think so...
2. IF God is the way you religious guys think he is (again, clearly I don't buy into all that stuff), and he really IS putting all the slutty girls and guys in Hell, then you want to be in Hell, where all the FUN people are. So why not get laid and secure your reservation?
localman said: "Like it or not, infidelity is "the norm". And I'm thinking the less special sex is (i.e. the more partners you've had) the less that hurts. But that's really just a guess."
That's true... My numbers are up there, although they're really low for a New Yorker (I've only had sex with about 35-40 different women in my entire life). And, at some point, you realize sex is just an activity, like shooting pool or playing a videogame. It's fun, and as long as you don't take it too seriously, it's fine. It really IS just sex, after all. And, infidelity has ALWAYS been the norm. Consider Chaucer's The Miller's Tale (written between 1387 and 1400 AD):
"...It's he who has no wife who is no cuckold....We mustn't be inquisitive About God's secret doings, or our wives'. So long as you can find God's plenty there, About the rest, you've no call to inquire."
I tend to agree with Chaucer on this; as long as my girlfriend still wanted to get naked with me, I would probably get over it if she told me she'd cheated. I'd nag her about it for a while, get on her nerves, etc. But eventually I'd get over it I think. It really depends on how fond of her I would be, you know?
Really, the only thing I'd be upset about would be the potential for disease. That's just plain dangerous these days.
Yeah, no kidding... Recently I read an article in some science-news site, I don't remember where... The gist of it was that the scientists did a study in which one group of women screwed their boyfriends with condoms, and one group used other methods of birth control, like the pill, or the sponge, or whatever. Then they tested the mood and general happiness of the groups over time.
They found that the group that was in actual contact with sperm tended to be much more upbeat, with an elevated mood, regardless of which end the sperm found itself in. This was true across the board, and they said the only possible explanation for it is that the women were somehow absorbing hormones from the sperm that were affecting their systems. So it's like, we evolved in such a way that when we have lots of sex with a woman, the woman is happier! Not just "I got laid" happy, but actually, altered-consciousness happy. If that's not an endorsement of sex, I don't know what is.
It's not shallow at all to dump someone who doesn't want to have sex with you. If you really love sex, and you want it, and she doesn't, and she's not about to change her mind on that, it's time to move on. You're just not sexually compatible.
It may be "only one part of a multifaceted interaction", but it's a pretty CENTRAL part, and I can have "multi-faceted interactions" with anyone I want. Remember, there are plenty of fish in the sea, and most of them like to get naked.
That's all us guys EVER want. Playing with naked women beats just about all other activities hands down. Playing with them while you're both drunk as lords is even MORE fun. I know no one likes to admit this, everyone's always talking about the "hearts and flowers" thing (No, baby, I love you because of your principles -- yeah, right!), but as a guy who's more honest than most, let me tell it like it is: we guys, especially when we're in love with someone, think about screwing them whenever our minds aren't busy doing something else. Waiting for a meeting to start? Thinking about the girlfriend, naked, in bed. Waiting for the subway? Thinking about the girlfriend's new bikini wax (Oh, yeah! Baby!). Buying a bagel? Thinking about the girlfriends breasts -- they're pretty cute, aren't they? They WANT to be held...
You're just puffing up your ego by arguing about something completely pointless and trivial. Since both uses are roughly equivalent, your anal-retentive insistence on your approved usage makes you look like a putz. Really; everyone knew what he was talking about. Who cares about a two or three letter difference? Who, indeed, except some long-headed type who gets his rocks off by correcting other people's grammar, like some idiot 4th grade schoolteacher who can't leave her work at work and ends up a divorced cat lady?
Chill out. It really truly doesn't matter whether he says "deprecated" or "depreciated". Not even remotely.
Well, ok, I see why you might find this annoying, but look at it from another perspective:
First of all, because you're compiling to CLI and using a runtime, you don't have to recompile your code every time a vulnerability comes out and you decide your users should patch. They patch the runtime and the app keeps working (knock on wood). A related benefit is that as the runtime improves, your users get a performance boost without you having to lift a finger, if, that is, they're keeping up with their patches (I know, I KNOW).
Look at a related technology to see this in action: Between Java's JRE 1.3 and JRE 1.4, Sun added a feature that compiles classes to native code and caches them. This is basically an improvement to a runtime that ends up benefitting all code that uses the runtime, without recompiles or rollouts. Users just upgrade their JRE, and poof. Performance boost.
Ok, another benefit of a runtime is, you don't have to worry about installed libraries, DLL Hell, or any other similar thing. You just make sure your users have the most recent copy of the runtime, and you're set. No more having to figure out dependencies and make sure they get into your MSI. No more having to run RegCrawler on user machines to strip out a dozen instances of the same DLL because some brainiac sysadmin kept re-registering the same dll over and over again (YES, I've had to clean up this kind of thing before, when updating legacy code that hadn't been installed with an MSI -- Ugh). Everything is clean and easy, and everything is where you would expect it to be. Nice for a change, after years of VB6 and dll hell.
Finally, since the runtime is really only a 25MB download or so, as pointed out by another poster, you can put the install on a mini-cd along with your code MSI and write a script that installs one, then the other -- can't you? It seems to me that that would be relatively trivial. And, everyone who makes a runtime grants developers some form of redistribution rights, don't they? It seems to come with the SDK most of the time.
I think you're underestimating the value of this approach. Plus, you're overestimating the difficulty of working with it.
Ah, my pointy-headed friend! Do not let your fish-belly-white complexion turn red with anger, for you are getting all excited about nothing and need to relax, get laid, have a beer, or all three!
The meaning of these two words is so similar that either can be used in common usage, and both have been used in one volume or another. A reasonable man would argue that it hardly matters at all WHICH word you use, because you can consider a language feature to be "deprecated" in that you desire its removal, or "depreciated" in that you feel its value is diminished compared with newer features.
Lighten up. I know it's a geek tradition to show off your vast vocabulary while insulting others (comparing the parent post's thinking to that of "a rather stupid translator AI program"), but at some point you cease to impress and begin to look like that kid whose shorts were always run up the flagpole after gym.
I stand corrected. I'll have to write up the depreciation of my geek cred on my next income taxes, if that is, they haven't deprecated the tax forms in lieu of a new interface, like those fancy little postcards they waved around in the last election...
Eclipse (with exaggerated innocence): Moi? Whatever do you mean?
Sun: You know.
Eclipse: Actually, no, I don't.
Sun: Don't be coy!
Eclipse: YAWN. Do you have something to say or what?
Sun: You know damn well we're working on Swing, and Netbeans, and all that, and here you come out with SWT and start going off on weird tangents, I mean, hell, who's in charge here? I thought you were going to be cool about this.
Eclipse: I am. People really dig java, and they're having a blast using Eclipse to work on it.
Sun: Yeah, thanks a lot, poor Forte...
Eclipse: I didn't tell you to charge so much for it.
Sun: I didn't tell you to be free!
Eclipse: No, that was my idea. But it's cool anyway. Anyway, you've got problems of your own. It's like, make up your mind already.
Sun: What the hell are you talking about???
Eclipse: Java 1.1.8, then Java 1.2, then Java 1.3, then 1.4, and every five minutes you "depreciate" something, driving your developers nuts...
Sun: You... How can you... You...
Eclipse: And then there's AWT, no, it's Swing, no, it's going to be some kind of weird beany scheme...
Sun: You... OOOOH you make me SO MAD! Swing was a good idea! So were the beans!
Eclipse: Well, so's SWT. Deal.
Sun: It's not the same thing!
Eclipse: Sure it is.
Sun: Is not!
Eclipse: Is too!
Sun: Is not!
Eclipse: Is too! Anyway, what's the difference? SWT is based on AWT, so it works everywhere, doesn't it? You should really dig it.
Sun: (Sulks)
Eclipse: Aw, come on, join the board of directors. You know you want to. You can even keep your Netbeans. I promise.
I stand corrected; but in my own defense, I never knew about MPW so it's not entirely my fault. Of course, since I didn't know about it, it's possible the author didn't, so he would have thought there wasn't one. Hence the pascal-like feelings of not being worthy, etc -- so the thesis is still good.;)
Out of curiosity, how did MPW work? Did it pop up a shell or something? I remember the old MrJ was more dialog based than anything else; you'd drag java files onto an icon, which kinda turned me off a little.
I just got something that made it even better. Up until now, I've only had the software development tools I got from Apple Developer Connection. They're great, and they would produce great code for a mac, but I also wanted an IDE that would let me do plain-vanilla java, that would run anywhere. I got a copy of Eclipse (it's free, www.eclipse.org) and added that to my system.
I really think this is the best setup for java development I've ever had. I've got a little bit of everything now. I can write Carbon or Cocoa apps, or plain-jane Java, or applets, or whatever. Cool. And all the tools were free. You just HAVE to love an environment that takes care of developers like that. It's just plain friendly.
P.S. I know someone is going to yell at us and say "Hey! Linux tools are free!" This is true, but the Mac OS/X tools are SO comfortable. I think the difference is like this:
Linux tools: a souped up '69 Mustang Mach 1 with a hearst shifter that's a lot of work to drive and maintain but powerful. The mufflers are "cherry-bomb" brand, the car is loud as hell. The faster you go, the louder the roar.
Mac OS/X tools: a gorgeous and powerful 2004 Jaguar, maxed out with all the options, automatic transmission, A/C, creamy tan leather seats and a walnut dash. No work to drive and maintain at all! In fact, it just purrs along no matter how fast you go.
Both cars are about equally fast and powerful. Which one you drive depends on what kind of thing you're into.;)
P.S. I almost forgot Windows: a '2000 Ford Crown Victoria. Looks ok, plain vinyl seats and dash, tape player, the engine and transmission are from a Pinto and the locks are all broken. Heh heh heh...:)
Slashdot Mirror
I second the motion.
.Net platform, so I'm pretty much stuck with Windows all day long. Our machines are always acting up, and it's kind of a pain in the ass. I mean, it seems like there's something wrong every five minutes.
/etc/. Easy.
At work, I develop for Microsoft's
At home, I have two machines I work with regularly: an Apple iBook running OS/X, and a Sony Vaio Picturebook running Slackware.
The iBook is a champ. I mean, it never gives me any trouble at all. The only thing I had trouble with recently was figuring out the CD-burning software (use Finder? Or Disk Copy? Create new blank disk image? Or create image from folder? Or drag, drop and burn? Yeesh. Nothing like CD burning under Linux...). Even that wasn't that hard to straighten out, and once I had it straight, it turned out to be a pretty cool setup.
My little Slackware box is running really well. It's cool, not much bigger than a paperback. It doesn't give me any problems, either. Hardening it was easy, setting up the firewall was no big deal... Slackware rocks. Everything is done via
I mean, I don't have NUMBERS, per se, but in my experience, if operating systems were girls,
Macintosh = Kylie Minogue, really fast/high class,
and frisky;
Linux = Sandra Bullock, total "girl next door",
friendly and good sense of humor;
Windows = Roseanne Barr with a hangover and an axe
to grind.
Who would YOU like to hang out with?
Another thing is, a lot of the newer Windows games that are coming out crash a LOT. And, I mean, it isn't just the game crashing, it's the whole BOX. I recently bought rEvolution, which really looked amazing. You get to be this techie/maintenance guy, working for a Big Evil Corporation, and after getting screwed by them (and morphed into a non-human super-soldier), you start fighting for a resistance movement, and trying for revenge because the corporation put you in the position of killing this chick you kinda dug.
Sounds great, right?
Well, it would only run on my machine for a few hours, and then, usually right in the middle of a serious battle, wham! Blue screen of death. It was really annoying, because I'd have to cycle the power to get the computer working again.
It was a shame, because it really was kind of a cool game. It was like being given a Ferrari GT40, driving it for a little while, having it stall, and looking under the hood -- to see a beat up, oil-leaking Yugo engine rattling around in there.
Sigh...
I never had that happen on a Mac. The worst thing that's happened on my iBook was, Alien Vs. Predator crashed once or twice. But the O/S was unaffected, only the game quit. And, mostly the game ran fine.
Tools only available under Windows?
;)
Hmm...
Sobig; Slammer; Blaster; ILoveYou; Kournikova (remember her?); Um... This is a long list, how much time do you have?
I thought they were trying to say they'd patented Cascading Style Sheets! Phew, that was close...
1. XFree86 4.3 works just fine, so most people will continue to use that for as long as it takes to come up with a suitable alternative.
2. Many people are working on suitable alternatives; this annoyance might inspire them, invigorate them, or, more likely, piss them off. Any of the three would speed their efforts. This is a Good Thing.
3. Having something new, something cleaner, something fresh and interesting would be really cool, anyway. So it's not like discarding XFree86 is going to hurt us.
4. If the X guys wanna shoot themselves in the head, shouldn't we support them in that? You don't want to crush their dreams, do you? Perhaps they want to be revered like Kurt Cobain, and have a candlelight vigil in their name or something. C'mon, let 'em be happy! Everyone go back to X 4.3 and light a candle in memory of the Geeks That Time Forgot.
Well, aren't YOU just an immature, unprofessional little shit? But of course you don't have the sense to be embarassed by your violent reaction to my friendly advice.
You're an idiot, and not worth helping.
Grow the fuck up.
No, you can't, actually. Because what you're doing is different from what you would be doing if you were working with Windows.
.Net working with your Mono instance? Can you do, say, an anonymous stored procedure and store a BLOB? How about working with web services? Do you have any equivalent for Visual Studio and IIS? No? Then you're not doing pure ASP.Net.
.Net environment.
Being able to code C# syntax is one thing.
Being able to work with all the libraries, and knowing the best practices for enterprise development, and being comfortable with all the tools... Well, that's another thing entirely. Just as an example, do you have the Oracle 9i providers for
No disrespect to the mono team is meant; what they're doing is very interesting. But saying you can code in ASP.Net on Linux is misleading. Even if you get a project to work, your whole working process is going to be radically different (and much, much slower in terms of productivity) than what you would have using a "Pure"
I know, I know... Someone is going to yell "Damnit, Visual Studio is an abomination! Code in VI the way God meant you to program!" All I've got for these people is a Bronx Cheer. Visual studio rocks, not least for its debugger, its integration with IIS and web services, and intellisense.
Until you've worked with it for a while, man, you just have NO IDEA.
Don't let it wreck your faith in human nature. I think most people are basically good, but they make stupid choices on a regular basis. Sometimes they manage to immolate themselves during one of their stupider choices, you know? It's like another great quote I've heard a lot: "Never attribute to evil that which can be attributed to stupidity".
Anyway, that aside, it sounds like your wife was just being a creep. I mean, if you basically told her you wouldn't mind as long as she talked about it with you, her sneaking around seems like a deliberate effort to hurt you. Then her letting you know after the fact, well, it just sounds like a deliberate attack -- not a mistake. That's just awful.
You deserve better than THAT, I mean really!
Only FOUR??? That can't be correct. Maybe for a college kid, I dunno... Actually, to be fair, I think New York is a mixed bag sexually. Some people (catholics, for example, but not all!) tend to try to get involved with longer-term relationships, so their numbers would be lower (but that's by choice). And, there ARE people in New York who marry their first, but that's rare in my experience, it was more something the older set did, before the 1970's, you know? Old school.
Younger people (in my experience anyway) tend to be a lot more active around here. Check out craigslist and you'll see people looking for casual sex all the time (www.craigslist.com, it's very interesting!). Go to bars and you see all kinds of picking up going on. One nighters, etc...
It's not just New York, though, it's any of several major cities in culturally fast-moving areas of the country. I think the big ones are New York City, San Francisco (well, anywhere in California really), Miami Florida (more New Yorkers than Floridans in some places down there, it's a major migration target of the "I hate the winter" set), and places like those. Mostly, they're places where the local culture is mostly secular and religion has a very weak grip. The coasts, primarily.
Anyway, people pick people up in bars and have sex with them, and then may or may not continue to see them. It happens all the time. And, to get the kinds of numbers I mentioned, all you have to do is stay single and get lucky three times a year over the course of your twenties. Not too hard, you know? I mean, lots of people go way over that. Others, tend to tone it down. Most New Yorkers don't really marry and settle down until they're in their thirties because they're minding their careers, so the "three times a year" number would be more common than you'd think.
Then there are the guys who go to brothels and massage parlors, and the guys who are into strippers, and so on. These things are widely available in New York, and they're not reviled like they are in more religious places. It's just another thing, you know? Not that big a deal.
I moved upstate three years ago, and because I don't know anyone up here, I've been laying low and not hitting the bars all that much. So actually I haven't had sex in the past three years; all my experience was from before I turned thirty. But I've been thinking about getting back in the game, you know? I was in a bar a couple of weeks ago and this chick was TOTALLY checking me and my friend out. I could have gotten together with her; I let it go, though. I'm not sure why; but the next time I get a chance like that, I'm going for it. I've been getting kinda bored lately with the celibacy thing.
By the way: Your wife didn't use protection in two of her affairs??? That's just awful. See, now, THAT would piss me off to no end. Around here, you use it no matter what. To not use it (or to try and get away without using it) is a major faux pas, unless you're practically married to someone and she's on the pill. I think if MY wife cheated on me and didn't protect herself, and was crazy enough to TELL me about it, I'd go ballistic.
Anyway, yeah, New York's a pretty rocking place. The only thing is, people are into looks. You've got to go out with some nice threads and be kinda buff to get lucky on any sort of regular basis. But if you've got that hooked up, getting lucky isn't as hard as you'd imagine.
Two things:
1. No just and loving God would force you to face "serious consequences" after your death for merely having sex with a willing partner. The Jesus portrayed in the bible would never DREAM of doing something like that to people. His whole belief system was about forgiveness. He saved an adulteress from getting stoned to death, saying "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Do you really think someone would would stand in the way of an angry mob to save, basically, a cheating wife, would then be willing to cast you into hell over a little nooky? I don't think so...
2. IF God is the way you religious guys think he is (again, clearly I don't buy into all that stuff), and he really IS putting all the slutty girls and guys in Hell, then you want to be in Hell, where all the FUN people are. So why not get laid and secure your reservation?
localman said: "Like it or not, infidelity is "the norm". And I'm thinking the less special sex is (i.e. the more partners you've had) the less that hurts. But that's really just a guess."
...We mustn't be inquisitive
That's true... My numbers are up there, although they're really low for a New Yorker (I've only had sex with about 35-40 different women in my entire life). And, at some point, you realize sex is just an activity, like shooting pool or playing a videogame. It's fun, and as long as you don't take it too seriously, it's fine. It really IS just sex, after all. And, infidelity has ALWAYS been the norm. Consider Chaucer's The Miller's Tale (written between 1387 and 1400 AD):
"...It's he who has no wife who is no cuckold.
About God's secret doings, or our wives'.
So long as you can find God's plenty there,
About the rest, you've no call to inquire."
I tend to agree with Chaucer on this; as long as my girlfriend still wanted to get naked with me, I would probably get over it if she told me she'd cheated. I'd nag her about it for a while, get on her nerves, etc. But eventually I'd get over it I think. It really depends on how fond of her I would be, you know?
Really, the only thing I'd be upset about would be the potential for disease. That's just plain dangerous these days.
Yeah, no kidding... Recently I read an article in some science-news site, I don't remember where... The gist of it was that the scientists did a study in which one group of women screwed their boyfriends with condoms, and one group used other methods of birth control, like the pill, or the sponge, or whatever. Then they tested the mood and general happiness of the groups over time.
They found that the group that was in actual contact with sperm tended to be much more upbeat, with an elevated mood, regardless of which end the sperm found itself in. This was true across the board, and they said the only possible explanation for it is that the women were somehow absorbing hormones from the sperm that were affecting their systems. So it's like, we evolved in such a way that when we have lots of sex with a woman, the woman is happier! Not just "I got laid" happy, but actually, altered-consciousness happy. If that's not an endorsement of sex, I don't know what is.
Prozac? We don't need no stinkin' prozac!
It's not shallow at all to dump someone who doesn't want to have sex with you. If you really love sex, and you want it, and she doesn't, and she's not about to change her mind on that, it's time to move on. You're just not sexually compatible.
It may be "only one part of a multifaceted interaction", but it's a pretty CENTRAL part, and I can have "multi-faceted interactions" with anyone I want. Remember, there are plenty of fish in the sea, and most of them like to get naked.
Ah, but he'll die HAPPY!
If she's got VD, she's already given her geek the Gift That Keeps on Giving.
Blowjobs, dirty sex, and beer.
That's all us guys EVER want. Playing with naked women beats just about all other activities hands down. Playing with them while you're both drunk as lords is even MORE fun. I know no one likes to admit this, everyone's always talking about the "hearts and flowers" thing (No, baby, I love you because of your principles -- yeah, right!), but as a guy who's more honest than most, let me tell it like it is: we guys, especially when we're in love with someone, think about screwing them whenever our minds aren't busy doing something else. Waiting for a meeting to start? Thinking about the girlfriend, naked, in bed. Waiting for the subway? Thinking about the girlfriend's new bikini wax (Oh, yeah! Baby!). Buying a bagel? Thinking about the girlfriends breasts -- they're pretty cute, aren't they? They WANT to be held...
It's like a screensaver!
YAWN.
Ok, setting aside fun and all things amusing.
You're just puffing up your ego by arguing about something completely pointless and trivial. Since both uses are roughly equivalent, your anal-retentive insistence on your approved usage makes you look like a putz. Really; everyone knew what he was talking about. Who cares about a two or three letter difference? Who, indeed, except some long-headed type who gets his rocks off by correcting other people's grammar, like some idiot 4th grade schoolteacher who can't leave her work at work and ends up a divorced cat lady?
Chill out. It really truly doesn't matter whether he says "deprecated" or "depreciated". Not even remotely.
Well, ok, I see why you might find this annoying, but look at it from another perspective:
;)
First of all, because you're compiling to CLI and using a runtime, you don't have to recompile your code every time a vulnerability comes out and you decide your users should patch. They patch the runtime and the app keeps working (knock on wood). A related benefit is that as the runtime improves, your users get a performance boost without you having to lift a finger, if, that is, they're keeping up with their patches (I know, I KNOW).
Look at a related technology to see this in action: Between Java's JRE 1.3 and JRE 1.4, Sun added a feature that compiles classes to native code and caches them. This is basically an improvement to a runtime that ends up benefitting all code that uses the runtime, without recompiles or rollouts. Users just upgrade their JRE, and poof. Performance boost.
Ok, another benefit of a runtime is, you don't have to worry about installed libraries, DLL Hell, or any other similar thing. You just make sure your users have the most recent copy of the runtime, and you're set. No more having to figure out dependencies and make sure they get into your MSI. No more having to run RegCrawler on user machines to strip out a dozen instances of the same DLL because some brainiac sysadmin kept re-registering the same dll over and over again (YES, I've had to clean up this kind of thing before, when updating legacy code that hadn't been installed with an MSI -- Ugh). Everything is clean and easy, and everything is where you would expect it to be. Nice for a change, after years of VB6 and dll hell.
Finally, since the runtime is really only a 25MB download or so, as pointed out by another poster, you can put the install on a mini-cd along with your code MSI and write a script that installs one, then the other -- can't you? It seems to me that that would be relatively trivial. And, everyone who makes a runtime grants developers some form of redistribution rights, don't they? It seems to come with the SDK most of the time.
I think you're underestimating the value of this approach. Plus, you're overestimating the difficulty of working with it.
Come on, Strangelove... LOVE the bomb.
Ah, my pointy-headed friend! Do not let your fish-belly-white complexion turn red with anger, for you are getting all excited about nothing and need to relax, get laid, have a beer, or all three!
The meaning of these two words is so similar that either can be used in common usage, and both have been used in one volume or another. A reasonable man would argue that it hardly matters at all WHICH word you use, because you can consider a language feature to be "deprecated" in that you desire its removal, or "depreciated" in that you feel its value is diminished compared with newer features.
Lighten up. I know it's a geek tradition to show off your vast vocabulary while insulting others (comparing the parent post's thinking to that of "a rather stupid translator AI program"), but at some point you cease to impress and begin to look like that kid whose shorts were always run up the flagpole after gym.
Thank you. At least SOMEONE has a thesaurus... ;)
I stand corrected. I'll have to write up the depreciation of my geek cred on my next income taxes, if that is, they haven't deprecated the tax forms in lieu of a new interface, like those fancy little postcards they waved around in the last election...
Sun (to Eclipse): Hey, knock that crap off!
Eclipse (with exaggerated innocence): Moi? Whatever do you mean?
Sun: You know.
Eclipse: Actually, no, I don't.
Sun: Don't be coy!
Eclipse: YAWN. Do you have something to say or what?
Sun: You know damn well we're working on Swing, and Netbeans, and all that, and here you come out with SWT and start going off on weird tangents, I mean, hell, who's in charge here? I thought you were going to be cool about this.
Eclipse: I am. People really dig java, and they're having a blast using Eclipse to work on it.
Sun: Yeah, thanks a lot, poor Forte...
Eclipse: I didn't tell you to charge so much for it.
Sun: I didn't tell you to be free!
Eclipse: No, that was my idea. But it's cool anyway. Anyway, you've got problems of your own. It's like, make up your mind already.
Sun: What the hell are you talking about???
Eclipse: Java 1.1.8, then Java 1.2, then Java 1.3, then 1.4, and every five minutes you "depreciate" something, driving your developers nuts...
Sun: You... How can you... You...
Eclipse: And then there's AWT, no, it's Swing, no, it's going to be some kind of weird beany scheme...
Sun: You... OOOOH you make me SO MAD! Swing was a good idea! So were the beans!
Eclipse: Well, so's SWT. Deal.
Sun: It's not the same thing!
Eclipse: Sure it is.
Sun: Is not!
Eclipse: Is too!
Sun: Is not!
Eclipse: Is too! Anyway, what's the difference? SWT is based on AWT, so it works everywhere, doesn't it? You should really dig it.
Sun: (Sulks)
Eclipse: Aw, come on, join the board of directors. You know you want to. You can even keep your Netbeans. I promise.
Sun: I'll think about it...
Eclipse: Yep. I know.
I stand corrected; but in my own defense, I never knew about MPW so it's not entirely my fault. Of course, since I didn't know about it, it's possible the author didn't, so he would have thought there wasn't one. Hence the pascal-like feelings of not being worthy, etc -- so the thesis is still good. ;)
Out of curiosity, how did MPW work? Did it pop up a shell or something? I remember the old MrJ was more dialog based than anything else; you'd drag java files onto an icon, which kinda turned me off a little.
Wow... Interesting! That explains it. Thanks!
Thank you. I'm hoping to.
;)
:)
I just got something that made it even better. Up until now, I've only had the software development tools I got from Apple Developer Connection. They're great, and they would produce great code for a mac, but I also wanted an IDE that would let me do plain-vanilla java, that would run anywhere. I got a copy of Eclipse (it's free, www.eclipse.org) and added that to my system.
I really think this is the best setup for java development I've ever had. I've got a little bit of everything now. I can write Carbon or Cocoa apps, or plain-jane Java, or applets, or whatever. Cool. And all the tools were free. You just HAVE to love an environment that takes care of developers like that. It's just plain friendly.
P.S. I know someone is going to yell at us and say "Hey! Linux tools are free!" This is true, but the Mac OS/X tools are SO comfortable. I think the difference is like this:
Linux tools: a souped up '69 Mustang Mach 1 with a hearst shifter that's a lot of work to drive and maintain but powerful. The mufflers are "cherry-bomb" brand, the car is loud as hell. The faster you go, the louder the roar.
Mac OS/X tools: a gorgeous and powerful 2004 Jaguar, maxed out with all the options, automatic transmission, A/C, creamy tan leather seats and a walnut dash. No work to drive and maintain at all! In fact, it just purrs along no matter how fast you go.
Both cars are about equally fast and powerful. Which one you drive depends on what kind of thing you're into.
P.S. I almost forgot Windows: a '2000 Ford Crown Victoria. Looks ok, plain vinyl seats and dash, tape player, the engine and transmission are from a Pinto and the locks are all broken. Heh heh heh...