McBride says he and his company have become targets of both physical and virtual aggression. A man allegedly called his office to challenge him to a fistfight, he says. When McBride's secretary called back to get time and place, and the guy said he was just kidding.
This McBride fellow has HUGE bulgy balls. He trash talks like pool hall operator. I love this guy!
It still comes with.bat batch file support too if you're going to count VBScript.
There is really no comparison between VBScript and batch files. You can actually a LOT with VBScript since it's easy to use all of the windows COM objects that are lying around.
If you had bought a Lindows system, why would you wanna buy XP. You've obviously made a choice not to buy windows.
Because you purchased it to save money (and not make a polical statement) and then found out that it just didn't work that well and life would be easier if you shelled out the 50 bucks and payed for the real thing?
Well, really the compiler itself does not do it. Visual Studio studio does. I should have corrected the parent poster on this, but figured most people would understand that it was the IDE doing it and not the compiler itself. My bad.
Yep, the framework uses about 20mb of memory. But it's one time hit and not per application. Not going to be much of an issue soon since explorer.exe is being re-written using the framework. (That means that 20mb is going to be used whether you run any other framework apps or not).
And really, I'm not sure that a 20mb baseline would stop the adoption of a peice of software. *shrug*
Well I think he meant stable winforms, ADO.net, ASP.net api's. It is progressing but its not here yet on Mono at the same level as Windows.
I never said it had Winforms. I said it had ASP.NET and ADO.NET. And that's all I said in direct rebuttal to the person who said they were non-existant.
I also did not comment on MS world domination, the state of the ECMA standard, or Patent issues.
When it runs faster than compiled ANSI C and is truly cross-platform without a performance hit to the OS for the framework, give me a call.
When ANSI C is truly cross-platform (assuming you want something other than stdout for display and stdin for input) give ME a call.
Fact is that as soon as you need to write any non-trival code that interfaces with the user all that cross platform compatibility of the language goes bye bye.
Sounds like the M$ are feeling left out of the biannual forced-upgrade cycle.
M$, eh? So witty.
So why not join the bandwagon instead by introducing a new programming language every 2 years to replace the previous one?
Except it's not a replacement for anything. It'll run within the.NET framework and interoperate with the existing languages.
That way you obsolesce both the existing codebase and the existing developers (not to mention all those MC$E certifications) and obliterate any mindshare built up during that period.
Again, not so. Again, it's not being marketed as a replacement. It also interoperates with other.NET framework languages. And there are already a lot of.NET languages. Microsoft has already released three. Other vendors have released more. And even though Microsoft is doing it this is a Good Thing(tm). Something tells me that if some OSS development group was releasing this language and it targeted Java bytecode (and could take advantage of the existing Java type library) that you would consider it is such.
It's thinking like this that has made Windows the stable, long-haul product it is today.
It's uneducated comments like yours that lead people to believe that OSS/Linux advocates are all a bunch of overzealous retards who are totally divorced from reality. You do the real advocates quite a dis-service with your FUD.
This is not about security. It is about good programming.
You'll get no argument from me there. For purposes other than writing a class browser I'd certainly NOT go around mucking with private members of classes. They're private for a reason and all you do is increase the chance that when the next version of the widget that you are "hacking" is released that your code is going to end up broken.
This data is private, but can actualy be read if you don't have the security system set up to deny attempts at accessing private data.
Yeap, and in the.NET framework you can also set security to disallow using the reflection classes so I'd guess there is not a problem and we can safely call the majority of the messages in this thread FUD spread by the uneducated.
It means that Joe Blow can't run untrusted code unless Joe Blow has no files of value on the system.
Well, first things first. I was talking about writing/running a client side.NET _application_ (and I sure as shit called it an _application_, no?). I don't know a thing about.NET's capacity to run as an applet.
So, if Joe Blow downloads a.NET application and installs it then he'd better trust the source of his program because by default it sure will have access to all of his files.
And it could send emails threatening the death of the president. Which is fine. I was not aware that the.NET framework was supposed to do handle this in an application that a user runs from his security context. I've downloaded and run a few Java applications. They wrote files and used network connections just fine.
Regarding private data in Java: so, go ahead. Write a Java applet that munges private data in a system class when running in a browser. Post it here when you're done. You'll be famous!
Do the same thing with.NET for me first. I tend to think that while running under a browser that the System.Security.Permissions.Reflection* classes would stop you. But who knows, give a try.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bet you were a real fun roomate.
Two words for ya, stumpy: "Sticky Keys"
McBride says he and his company have become targets of both physical and virtual aggression. A man allegedly called his office to challenge him to a fistfight, he says. When McBride's secretary called back to get time and place, and the guy said he was just kidding.
This McBride fellow has HUGE bulgy balls. He trash talks like pool hall operator. I love this guy!
The owner of a webhosting company that wound up with L.A. County's /16 called it 'borrowed space,' and said he paid $500 for it to a guy he met online.
That's like getting stopped with a tractor trailer full of stolen goods and saying you bought it from some homeless guy on 82nd for 30 bucks.
It still comes with .bat batch file support too if you're going to count VBScript.
There is really no comparison between VBScript and batch files. You can actually a LOT with VBScript since it's easy to use all of the windows COM objects that are lying around.
If you had bought a Lindows system, why would you wanna buy XP. You've obviously made a choice not to buy windows.
Because you purchased it to save money (and not make a polical statement) and then found out that it just didn't work that well and life would be easier if you shelled out the 50 bucks and payed for the real thing?
The disk subsystem did lack refinement. But it could act as a second audio channel. ;-)
:)
I actually had a program that would play mary had a little lamb on the 1541 by "knocking the head". I was hard on my equipment
'No publisher will ever pay you enough to successfully sue them' - Dave Sim
Holy cow, a Cerebus fan.
Although I bet the hot chick gets replaced by a "fully functional", linux powered android.
:>
Why? She'd be ugly!
I'd want the sexy Windows based android. As a bonus she would crash occasionally, thus giving me some time to rest.
And this could not be done with lat/long today?
Oh, simpler for everyone except us those who aren't in the postal and geographic industries.
Simpler for programmers, too. Imagine you are writing a system where a user enters an address and you are required to validate. For every country.
Quick, go look up the postal code rules for every country on earth!
Much easier to handle a unified system.
You call *those* decent euro beers?
That euro-lager crap is a sligh cut above bud. A very slight cut.
New York Times?
MSFT'ers recommending Linux?
I thought they fired that reporter who was making things up
I lived in england. It was great. I'd go to the pub and *every* englishman would be having a bottle of budweiser.
The whole bit about there being ethical higher beings and them simulating a sort of heaven or hell are similiar.
Suggest any SCI-FI fans out there pick up some of the series (Philip Jose Farmer, Riverworld).
Well, really the compiler itself does not do it. Visual Studio studio does. I should have corrected the parent poster on this, but figured most people would understand that it was the IDE doing it and not the compiler itself. My bad.
Yep, the framework uses about 20mb of memory. But it's one time hit and not per application. Not going to be much of an issue soon since explorer.exe is being re-written using the framework. (That means that 20mb is going to be used whether you run any other framework apps or not).
And really, I'm not sure that a 20mb baseline would stop the adoption of a peice of software. *shrug*
Well I think he meant stable winforms, ADO.net, ASP.net api's. It is progressing but its not here yet on Mono at the same level as Windows.
I never said it had Winforms. I said it had ASP.NET and ADO.NET. And that's all I said in direct rebuttal to the person who said they were non-existant.
I also did not comment on MS world domination, the state of the ECMA standard, or Patent issues.
When it runs faster than compiled ANSI C and is truly cross-platform without a performance hit to the OS for the framework, give me a call.
When ANSI C is truly cross-platform (assuming you want something other than stdout for display and stdin for input) give ME a call.
Fact is that as soon as you need to write any non-trival code that interfaces with the user all that cross platform compatibility of the language goes bye bye.
Perhaps to upload the just built assemblies to a web project?
Beats the hell out of having to FTP all of the changes over every time you hit the build button.
Actually, you may want to go check the Mono site. There are ASP.NET and ADO.NET implementations.
Sounds like the M$ are feeling left out of the biannual forced-upgrade cycle.
.NET framework and interoperate with the existing languages.
.NET framework languages. And there are already a lot of .NET languages. Microsoft has already released three. Other vendors have released more. And even though Microsoft is doing it this is a Good Thing(tm). Something tells me that if some OSS development group was releasing this language and it targeted Java bytecode (and could take advantage of the existing Java type library) that you would consider it is such.
:P
M$, eh? So witty.
So why not join the bandwagon instead by introducing a new programming language every 2 years to replace the previous one?
Except it's not a replacement for anything. It'll run within the
That way you obsolesce both the existing codebase and the existing developers (not to mention all those MC$E certifications) and obliterate any mindshare built up during that period.
Again, not so. Again, it's not being marketed as a replacement. It also interoperates with other
It's thinking like this that has made Windows the stable, long-haul product it is today.
It's uneducated comments like yours that lead people to believe that OSS/Linux advocates are all a bunch of overzealous retards who are totally divorced from reality. You do the real advocates quite a dis-service with your FUD.
Wow, did I ever just get trolled or what?
Good post.
This is not about security. It is about good programming.
You'll get no argument from me there. For purposes other than writing a class browser I'd certainly NOT go around mucking with private members of classes. They're private for a reason and all you do is increase the chance that when the next version of the widget that you are "hacking" is released that your code is going to end up broken.
This data is private, but can actualy be read if you don't have the security system set up to deny attempts at accessing private data.
.NET framework you can also set security to disallow using the reflection classes so I'd guess there is not a problem and we can safely call the majority of the messages in this thread FUD spread by the uneducated.
Yeap, and in the
It means that Joe Blow can't run untrusted code unless Joe Blow has no files of value on the system.
.NET _application_ (and I sure as shit called it an _application_, no?). I don't know a thing about .NET's capacity to run as an applet.
.NET application and installs it then he'd better trust the source of his program because by default it sure will have access to all of his files.
.NET framework was supposed to do handle this in an application that a user runs from his security context. I've downloaded and run a few Java applications. They wrote files and used network connections just fine.
.NET for me first. I tend to think that while running under a browser that the System.Security.Permissions.Reflection* classes would stop you. But who knows, give a try.
Well, first things first. I was talking about writing/running a client side
So, if Joe Blow downloads a
And it could send emails threatening the death of the president. Which is fine. I was not aware that the
Regarding private data in Java: so, go ahead. Write a Java applet that munges private data in a system class when running in a browser. Post it here when you're done. You'll be famous!
Do the same thing with