You can't get away with making up facts like that! That's just plain wrong. The Tandy100 was the size of a small notebook. It was 30 (w) x 21.5 (D) x 4.5 (H) CENTIMETERS.
Now, I know that Apple trains you folks to spread disinformation on blogs, but you won't get away with that here.
Not quite! I'm a big fan of PDAs and portable computing.
I've owned many PDAs, including Newton Messagepad 110 (which Apple gave me when I was working at Adobe), but before that I had a Tandy 100 and an HP 100 both of which pre-dated the Newton by quite a bit.
One of the reasons people don't want to drive smaller, alternative fuel, or just plain efficient cars, is that these smaller cars don't stand a chance when hit by some women gabbing on the phone in her SUV!
Maybe the real answer is to get these SUVs and minivans off the road, and establish weight and bumper-height limits for cars.
Basically it stacks up. But that's not the primary disadvantage of Objective-C. The primary disadvantage is that it's not kept pace with the times and nobody knows it. Why would you go for a C variant with wierd syntax that isn't fully garbage collected, when you can go for something very familiar, that is fully garbage collected?
Exactly right! And the more Apple keeps their head in the sand about this, the worse off they'll be! For some reason, Apple's policy is to have their staff "astroturf" sites like/. talking about how awful everything else is. Instead, they should be thinking about being the best platform for C#!
I remember that Microsoft used to be the best platform for Java until Sun foolishly sued them! I think the circumstances are different with C# and if Apple embraced it, Microsoft would have to (publicly) view it as a positive thing! Why else would they get the ECMA standardization of their language and CLI?
..from embracing (and extending!) C# and.NET. Programmers generally like C# and.NET for application development, and Objective-C has some serious flaws.
You're just not playing the game! I'll let you in on it:
A bunch of folks who got pissed off that their stories never got approved on/. got together on alt.syntax.tactical and devised a plan. What they're doing is finding OLD slashdot stories and resubmitting them.
So far, it's been moderatly successful with 4-5 dupes getting through each week. This story was particularly amusing because the article has a link to their/. mention! Good work to the folks at a.s.t!
I suggest you start playing along too! It's fun to show how worthless the/. editors are.
When I get a resume that says Java, I'm likely to throw it in the trash, especially if that was the bulk of their experience. I find that people raised on Java are very bad at debugging "system level" problems. Also for some reason (maybe because there's no first-class support for events and delagates, combined with garbage collection), Java Programmers tend to pass objects all over the place, even to unrelated classes that shouldn't need to know about them. It gives you the same "spaghetti" proglem that 70s era "BASIC" did.
Typically a senior software engineering resume doesn't enumerate languages, but if I see significant exprience in Python, Scheme, as well as C++, it's probably a good resume!
Many of these functions are new for SP2, for example the InetFWAuthorizedApplications interrface has a method to add a new application as "Authorized." Similar APIs allow the opening of ports, etc. (And most of these say Client: Requires Windows XP SP2. which indicates they were newly added.
Here's my question: What's to prevent programs from simply adding themselves as authorized and opening the ports they need? After all, if the Firewall control panel applet can do it, can't any other program? And since many, many XP users run all the time in the "Adminstrator" group, can this somehow be blocked?
Is it time for Microsoft to make a new "Super Administrator" level and start putting certain critical things (like changing the firewall) as needing that security level?
Now I need to write a program to see if my XP box won't indicate if I authorized myself and open up a port....
This appears to be nailing anyone who makes heavy network use of their machine, including especially users running P2P applications.
I'd hardly call having to go to a control panel and explicitly opening an (incoming) port "nailing" anyone. It's the right thing to do.
Microsoft did this well. The firewall has some nice options (like the ability to open ports only for the local network) and is very easy to use. Nobody got "nailed."
Why doesn't AOL even try to compete against Microsoft?
I'm a big fan of Microsoft (no kidding) and use Windows XP for almost everything (and FreeBSD for some specialized high-end servers). BUT I wonder why AOL--the company that OWNS Netscape--doesn't even try to compete agains Microsoft when it can?
I would have loved to see these PCs running FreeBSD (since they control the hardware, they can pick just the right video card and network card), with Mozilla/Netscape, and OpenOffice. Seems that they only got 1 out of 3 right!
And if users wanted Windows, they can sell them a disk. But for most of their target that just wants to browse the web and do email, it would be possible.
I suspect the main barrier is doing a FreeBSD version of their client software. It must be hard for AOL/TW to hire progammers and they can't/won't let their Indian sweatshops do a new version.
US Companies should be interested in hiring female computer programmers. After all, women make 67 cents for every dollar a man makes! Think of all the $$$ they can save!
This is a good point that many people forget. Back in 1989 or so, I used to see MANY more viruses on the Mac, all spread via software downloaded on BBSs and on floppy-disks.
Because the Mac community tended to swap software more (even back then it was like a private club) this stuff spread like wildfire. And the Pre os-X macintosh operating system had absolutely no protection against anything!
Does he have to give up "fallwell.com" or does he merely have to stop using a similar name to promote products that are related to the products offered by "falwell.com".
If so, the correct thing to do is to form a company like "Fallwells Rubber Dildoes" and sell them from Fallwell.com.
The malware is written in mobile java, and uses the standard, OS-independent, interface to the phone hardware itself to send the SMS messages.
Just a second! Sun's been telling me to use Java because it's secure!.
Certainly, we all know from reading/. that only Microsoft is vulnerable to these 'trojan horse' attacks because their software is poorly written!
Are you telling me that Java is poorly written? Or is there really no defense against tricking users into loading and running programs (as most Windows "viruses" of the past year or so have spread).
If that's true, then phones shouldn't be able to run software at all!
and gay activist don't seem to wanna stop disgusting me with their "pride" in flabby, pasty, acned, hairy and badly tanned bondage asses on their marches in the middle of my friggin' afternoon.
I've used cygwin. It's an amazing technical accomplishment, but frankly, using it sucks compared to being on an *IX box. It's quite slow (possibly because Windows lacks copy on write?)
I'm sick and tired of paid agents who work for Apple Computer coming here and spreading LIES about Microsoft's API.
While Windows 95 didn't implement copy-on-write, EVERY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM since then does, and Windows NT had it even earlier (1992). (IIRC, in 1995 Macintosh didn't even have virtual memory!)
Here, for example, is documentation explaining about Copy-On-Write in the 1992 Win-32 API for Windows NT.
For Windows XP, there are even more options. You can map ALL of Posix onto Win-32 with no problems.
Here's why I abandoned the Mac OS-X environment and Objective-C
The language lacks true support for exceptions and exception types
The Objective-C language lacks first-class support for Events
The Apple development environment crashes all the time
Apple has no unified API. Some things are QuickTime, some things are Cocoa, some things are carbon
Objective-C has no garbage collection
For a compiled language, Objective-C is very S-L-O-W because of the late binding. I get MUCH better performance from C# even though it's JIT compiled. (Why do you think that Final Cut Pro is written using C++ and CodeWarrior?)
I like C#'s support for XML serialization of objects, with tags and attributes that you control and that relate to the structure's type
The C# compiler is VERY fast and stable. In fact, it's available FREE from Microsoft
The Visual Studio environment is very powerful, has a wonderful class browser, has syntax directed editing that really works, and integrates with source code control.
Slashdot Mirror
You can't get away with making up facts like that! That's just plain wrong. The Tandy100 was the size of a small notebook. It was 30 (w) x 21.5 (D) x 4.5 (H) CENTIMETERS.
Now, I know that Apple trains you folks to spread disinformation on blogs, but you won't get away with that here.
Automator is simply Microsoft Bob.
Well, the folks on /. have proved history wrong again! Apple invented *everything*! All other companies do is copy them.
I love his show on Comedy Central!
Not quite! I'm a big fan of PDAs and portable computing. I've owned many PDAs, including Newton Messagepad 110 (which Apple gave me when I was working at Adobe), but before that I had a Tandy 100 and an HP 100 both of which pre-dated the Newton by quite a bit.
Can't you innovate?
Maybe the real answer is to get these SUVs and minivans off the road, and establish weight and bumper-height limits for cars.
Exactly right! And the more Apple keeps their head in the sand about this, the worse off they'll be! For some reason, Apple's policy is to have their staff "astroturf" sites like /. talking about how awful everything else is. Instead, they should be thinking about being the best platform for C#!
I remember that Microsoft used to be the best platform for Java until Sun foolishly sued them! I think the circumstances are different with C# and if Apple embraced it, Microsoft would have to (publicly) view it as a positive thing! Why else would they get the ECMA standardization of their language and CLI?
And don't forget that, unlike Java, C# and .NET are ECMA STANDARDS!
..from embracing (and extending!) C# and .NET. Programmers generally like C# and .NET for application development, and Objective-C has some serious flaws.
Microsoft used to have "Comic Chat" which turned IRC into comic strips. It's been put to good use by our friends at Jerkcity
A bunch of folks who got pissed off that their stories never got approved on /. got together on alt.syntax.tactical and devised a plan. What they're doing is finding OLD slashdot stories and resubmitting them.
So far, it's been moderatly successful with 4-5 dupes getting through each week. This story was particularly amusing because the article has a link to their /. mention! Good work to the folks at a.s.t!
I suggest you start playing along too! It's fun to show how worthless the /. editors are.
Typically a senior software engineering resume doesn't enumerate languages, but if I see significant exprience in Python, Scheme, as well as C++, it's probably a good resume!
Many of these functions are new for SP2, for example the InetFWAuthorizedApplications interrface has a method to add a new application as "Authorized." Similar APIs allow the opening of ports, etc. (And most of these say Client: Requires Windows XP SP2. which indicates they were newly added.
Here's my question: What's to prevent programs from simply adding themselves as authorized and opening the ports they need? After all, if the Firewall control panel applet can do it, can't any other program? And since many, many XP users run all the time in the "Adminstrator" group, can this somehow be blocked?
Is it time for Microsoft to make a new "Super Administrator" level and start putting certain critical things (like changing the firewall) as needing that security level?
Now I need to write a program to see if my XP box won't indicate if I authorized myself and open up a port....
I'd hardly call having to go to a control panel and explicitly opening an (incoming) port "nailing" anyone. It's the right thing to do.
Microsoft did this well. The firewall has some nice options (like the ability to open ports only for the local network) and is very easy to use. Nobody got "nailed."
I'm a big fan of Microsoft (no kidding) and use Windows XP for almost everything (and FreeBSD for some specialized high-end servers). BUT I wonder why AOL--the company that OWNS Netscape--doesn't even try to compete agains Microsoft when it can?
I would have loved to see these PCs running FreeBSD (since they control the hardware, they can pick just the right video card and network card), with Mozilla/Netscape, and OpenOffice. Seems that they only got 1 out of 3 right!
And if users wanted Windows, they can sell them a disk. But for most of their target that just wants to browse the web and do email, it would be possible.
I suspect the main barrier is doing a FreeBSD version of their client software. It must be hard for AOL/TW to hire progammers and they can't/won't let their Indian sweatshops do a new version.
Even better, hire women in INDIA!
They didn't call him a "computer genius" or a "Whiz Kid!"
Because the Mac community tended to swap software more (even back then it was like a private club) this stuff spread like wildfire. And the Pre os-X macintosh operating system had absolutely no protection against anything!
Does he have to give up "fallwell.com" or does he merely have to stop using a similar name to promote products that are related to the products offered by "falwell.com".
If so, the correct thing to do is to form a company like "Fallwells Rubber Dildoes" and sell them from Fallwell.com.
Just a second! Sun's been telling me to use Java because it's secure!. Certainly, we all know from reading /. that only Microsoft is vulnerable to these 'trojan horse' attacks because their software is poorly written!
Are you telling me that Java is poorly written? Or is there really no defense against tricking users into loading and running programs (as most Windows "viruses" of the past year or so have spread).
If that's true, then phones shouldn't be able to run software at all!
Not to mention their MACINTOSHES!
I'm sick and tired of paid agents who work for Apple Computer coming here and spreading LIES about Microsoft's API.
While Windows 95 didn't implement copy-on-write, EVERY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM since then does, and Windows NT had it even earlier (1992). (IIRC, in 1995 Macintosh didn't even have virtual memory!)
Here, for example, is documentation explaining about Copy-On-Write in the 1992 Win-32 API for Windows NT.
For Windows XP, there are even more options. You can map ALL of Posix onto Win-32 with no problems.
- The language lacks true support for exceptions and exception types
- The Objective-C language lacks first-class support for Events
- The Apple development environment crashes all the time
- Apple has no unified API. Some things are QuickTime, some things are Cocoa, some things are carbon
- Objective-C has no garbage collection
- For a compiled language, Objective-C is very S-L-O-W because of the late binding. I get MUCH better performance from C# even though it's JIT compiled. (Why do you think that Final Cut Pro is written using C++ and CodeWarrior?)
- I like C#'s support for XML serialization of objects, with tags and attributes that you control and that relate to the structure's type
- The C# compiler is VERY fast and stable. In fact, it's available FREE from Microsoft
- The Visual Studio environment is very powerful, has a wonderful class browser, has syntax directed editing that really works, and integrates with source code control.
That's a start!