MS's.NET languages are all hamstrung by the CLR they're running on. Yes, it's relatively easy to drop into the "unsafe" native calls, but that's not a feature that makes it better - it's a feature required by short comings of the CLR, otherwise known by various terms such as "compromise", "band-aid", or "failure".
"crap MS language that MS can't even internally agree on what it should be and do."... couldn't make sense of this? are you talking about the Net platform, or a specific language,... or what.
.NET's primary feature is multi-language support. C# was supposed to bring the wonders of Java managed memory to Windows developers, and of course better it. MS itself originally stated that C# (.NET, C# with C++/CLI were the only two languages really supported at that time) was to be the one and future language for programming in windows, including the system. Recall Longhorn?
While Mono's original creation was to bring C# and families to Linux, it's grown beyond that since then and may actually be a better platform than.NET. I don't know enough about it to really say. My opinion about it broadening the base of MS's misguided language still holds. While you can code apps in C#, there are some serious shortcomings if you want to do any specific system calls or anything relating to security contexts, at least under MS's latest offering. I don't know how Mono handles either of those categories, but I'm guessing it's better than MS's approach, it'd be hard to be worse.
I seems more like you know nothing of it and should stick to the regular set of complains about Mono being a trap or a way to expand MS ground.
Yep, pretty easy to throw those ad hominems around. Catch.... Oh crap, I actually proved my case while disproving yours.
Hey, if someone wants to use Mono and it works for them, great. I dislike Mono because it validates and extends the base of a crap MS language that MS can't even internally agree on what it should be and do. (Try doing system coding with any.NET language - no fair dropping to MFC or Win32, I can achieve the same effects by linking native code in any other language, except the interface will be better) I do like the HIB, but this one would have been nice for full disclosure. I've got several bundles, but not all, primarily because I don't need multiple copies and some of the games don't interest me. (The best package was bundle 1 or 2, with Samorost and Machinarium - those were pretty cool, just IMHO of course)
Are you sure about that? The article does not say "about 54 million processor hours". Instead it implies an exact amount. If they are inaccurate, I fail to see why you are complaining to me
54,000,000.0 would be an accurate. 54 million processor hours is only accurate to 2 digits and could mathematically be between 53,500,000.000000000000000.........1 to 54,499,999.9999..........
I use chrome on OSX daily and Safari is a turd in comparison. It's slower, the searching is poorer and the UX just isn't as good as it is in Chrome. Oh and Chrome just updates without needing to restart the whole os to update the browser that's a total plus.
Google paying you much? I'll agree to the update needing to restart the OS is ridiculous in my opinion too. There's no call for that. But other than that, the UX is not much different, performance is on par with Chrome or better, depending on the tests, and search... really? How on earth is search any different between the two since they both use Google? Unless you're talking search on your mac, in which case Spotlight is about as fast as you can go.
I have no idea why would anyone use Safari over Chrome or Opera. That said, I agree with you and it's a major point: IE9 is a good browser. It's just inferior. It's definitely better than Firefox nowadays.
Because Safari generally works better on macs than Chrome, some people aren't comfortable with running a Google browser since they feel Google has enough tendrils in them already, and Firefox isn't a bad browser, I still use it occasionally for development. Firefox's major flaw (and Safari's too, Chrome fixes this by running each window/tab? in a separate process IIRC) is the single thread running the JS engine across all pages. One badly written JS script can lock up all windows and tabs. In Firefox it's worse because of the memory leaks that abound in the JS engine implementation. (Note: stopped using FF as main browser around the 4 release, so no idea what they've done since with the JS engine, it was supposed to be replaced) Safari has significantly fewer JS leak issues, and Chrome virtually none if you open new windows and close existing ones (or tabs, again, haven't researched this in depth). A good way to see how badly your browser's JS implementation leaked used to be to use the ebay auction countdown timer, and let it run to 0 and leave the page open (available in the last ten minutes or so of an auction) I believe they've fixed whatever the bug was that caused GB of swap page use over the course of a few hours after an auction ended.
Besides, modern IE isn't exactly that difficult to support. Most browsers are much more forgiving and less picky than they were just a couple of years ago so if it displays right in Chrome/Firefox, chances are it does actually work just as well in say, IE7+ anyway.
I wish this lie would simply go away.
There is something fundamentally broken when your web browser requires non-standard markup in order to display standards-based markup.
IE 9+ maybe.... pre 9 I no longer bother for flashiness unless someone wants to pay. But, even then, since we're doing truly standards based development or utilizing supported toolsets on 99% of our websites anyways, we have very good odds of a large percentage of the website working all the way back to IE7, and the important workflows, i.e., ordering and purchasing, are tested thoroughly. That image flyover on hover, not so much.
Polygamous Mormons make a habit of ditching the excess boys on the streets of nearby cities.
I'm afraid that Mormons haven't been polygamist since the late 1800s (when the US outlawed the practice.) I'm thinking you are referring to the splinter group that split off from the larger Church back then and refused to obey the law. They are collectively known as the FLDS Church and do not use the name Mormon.
Basically the bully that got to boss around and fuck over all the nerds, but doesn't actually possess much along the lines of ability, at least i had some respect for bill gates and his skills.
Really? What skills? BASIC? MS BASIC sucked so bad they replaced it with GW Basic in MS DOS 3.x (3.3 came with GW Basic, don't recall if it was put in earlier than that). After that, I'm kinda hazy on what he may have worked on that required technical skills. Conning skills - definitely.
You get insightful for a revisionist historical post, and I get a troll for stating two facts and a one line opinion? The mods are unkind.
As has already been pointed out, Japan was engaged in crimes against humanity under the guise of war prior to PH, hence the sanctions. It's irrelevant what Japan considered the embargo - they could have ended the embargo by stopping their inhumane treatment of the Chinese. So because they were poking the world in the eye to get a response so they could claim "war" is just a bit self-serving, don't you think?
As for what the US knew when, please provide some citations. The only conspiracy theorist here is you.
I'm pretty sure that was the Japanese view on war - win and it's all yours, the people that used to live in country 'x' were just chattel. It's how they fought, and in defending Japan, who knows how far they'd have gone?
as for the GGP, if they tried it again, it'd be pretty freaking foolish, don't you think? Perhaps signs of a rabid society?
Small nitpick, Japan actually offered two surrenders before the bomb was dropped, they just weren't unconditional surrenders like the US wanted.
I can't remember the exact details, but they included stuff like the upper reaches of the government remaining in place.
That's like offering to "lose" at poker while keeping all your winnings. Not much of a surrender considering what had been happening the previous 8 or so years.
The rape of Nanking and the Bataan death march on the other hand were pretty good reasons for retaliation.
Nanking was a a good reason for China to retaliate beyond reasonable measure. Bataan was post Pearl Harbor and merely an additional checkbox in a long list of issues for the US. It's kind of hard to top 2000+ dead and and utter devastation of a fleet while not officially at war. Your reasoning is about as illogical as it can get. So, Biff goes around his high school, busts a few chops, extorts money and lunches, and has his way with a girl here or there. He gets sent to the principal's office and punished. So now Biff considers this an act of war, and can go kill the principal's family? You're slightly off from mainstream thought, logic, reality, hell, even reality TV.
Next you'll be telling us that N Korea or Iran are perfectly justified in nuking the rest of the world.( Hint: both are under sanctions)
Yep, made total sense to decimate your secret but soon to be out of the closet enemy's forces without officially declaring war first. I do seem to recall Congress declaring war not soon after the attack.
I forgot one thing: Pearl Harbor being a sneak attack violated all aspect of diplomacy and civilized international law. So yes, wiping them off the map was warranted.
IIRC, there was a great deal of debate on whether to drop the bomb. It was decided to because of the way the Japanese fought throughout the Pacific, ceding island by island fighting to the last man. So instead of risking 100s of thousand of US troops, they asked Japan to surrender. They refused and it was decided to drop 1 bomb. The US then requested Japan to surrender again. Japan still refused. They dropped #2 and promised more unless there was a surrender. A bit of a bluff since there were only 3 in existence at the time. Japan surrendered. The net effect - probably less Japanese dead, and a whole lot less US dead, and Japan surrendered instead of being wholly defeated and possibly wiped from history. Conventional war was not pretty with the Japanese fight to the last man ethics, it makes for great movies but horrible wars, as all sorts of atrocities start being carried out by the ever more desperate losing side. And Japan was losing, and would lose. There was little doubt as at that time civilians were just considered collateral damage - unfortunate that they were caught between two warring parties even though both sides would claim they tried to avoid hitting civilians but, weapons just weren't that accurate.
Personally I think the girl ought to sue them for false statements, libel and slander, since they'd have had to made all three to file the suit in court. And yes, their actions deserve just such a response, and she'd walk out in a heartbeat with a win, and will send a "message" in doing so that baselessly suing others to send a message is a bad idea and will result in bad things happening to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Get a clue, if you need to pawn your piggy bank.
MS's .NET languages are all hamstrung by the CLR they're running on. Yes, it's relatively easy to drop into the "unsafe" native calls, but that's not a feature that makes it better - it's a feature required by short comings of the CLR, otherwise known by various terms such as "compromise", "band-aid", or "failure".
"crap MS language that MS can't even internally agree on what it should be and do."... couldn't make sense of this? are you talking about the Net platform, or a specific language, ... or what.
.NET's primary feature is multi-language support. C# was supposed to bring the wonders of Java managed memory to Windows developers, and of course better it. MS itself originally stated that C# (.NET, C# with C++/CLI were the only two languages really supported at that time) was to be the one and future language for programming in windows, including the system. Recall Longhorn? While Mono's original creation was to bring C# and families to Linux, it's grown beyond that since then and may actually be a better platform than .NET. I don't know enough about it to really say. My opinion about it broadening the base of MS's misguided language still holds. While you can code apps in C#, there are some serious shortcomings if you want to do any specific system calls or anything relating to security contexts, at least under MS's latest offering. I don't know how Mono handles either of those categories, but I'm guessing it's better than MS's approach, it'd be hard to be worse.
I seems more like you know nothing of it and should stick to the regular set of complains about Mono being a trap or a way to expand MS ground.
Yep, pretty easy to throw those ad hominems around. Catch.... Oh crap, I actually proved my case while disproving yours.
Hey, if someone wants to use Mono and it works for them, great. I dislike Mono because it validates and extends the base of a crap MS language that MS can't even internally agree on what it should be and do. (Try doing system coding with any .NET language - no fair dropping to MFC or Win32, I can achieve the same effects by linking native code in any other language, except the interface will be better) I do like the HIB, but this one would have been nice for full disclosure. I've got several bundles, but not all, primarily because I don't need multiple copies and some of the games don't interest me. (The best package was bundle 1 or 2, with Samorost and Machinarium - those were pretty cool, just IMHO of course)
but it's Steam... (although the Humble Bundle also allows you to use Steam as well) Some of us would just like the packages, no extras thank you.
No, no they're not. Sometimes they should pay you for your wasted time.
I could do it with a sundial - ~1M CPU hours / 8192 cores ~ 122 hours.
Are you sure about that? The article does not say "about 54 million processor hours". Instead it implies an exact amount. If they are inaccurate, I fail to see why you are complaining to me
54,000,000.0 would be an accurate. 54 million processor hours is only accurate to 2 digits and could mathematically be between 53,500,000.000000000000000.........1 to 54,499,999.9999..........
I use chrome on OSX daily and Safari is a turd in comparison. It's slower, the searching is poorer and the UX just isn't as good as it is in Chrome. Oh and Chrome just updates without needing to restart the whole os to update the browser that's a total plus.
Google paying you much? I'll agree to the update needing to restart the OS is ridiculous in my opinion too. There's no call for that. But other than that, the UX is not much different, performance is on par with Chrome or better, depending on the tests, and search... really? How on earth is search any different between the two since they both use Google? Unless you're talking search on your mac, in which case Spotlight is about as fast as you can go.
Just write to the standards. WebKit happens to support them, as do several other browsers. The one left in the cold? IE.
I have no idea why would anyone use Safari over Chrome or Opera. That said, I agree with you and it's a major point: IE9 is a good browser. It's just inferior. It's definitely better than Firefox nowadays.
Because Safari generally works better on macs than Chrome, some people aren't comfortable with running a Google browser since they feel Google has enough tendrils in them already, and Firefox isn't a bad browser, I still use it occasionally for development. Firefox's major flaw (and Safari's too, Chrome fixes this by running each window/tab? in a separate process IIRC) is the single thread running the JS engine across all pages. One badly written JS script can lock up all windows and tabs. In Firefox it's worse because of the memory leaks that abound in the JS engine implementation. (Note: stopped using FF as main browser around the 4 release, so no idea what they've done since with the JS engine, it was supposed to be replaced) Safari has significantly fewer JS leak issues, and Chrome virtually none if you open new windows and close existing ones (or tabs, again, haven't researched this in depth). A good way to see how badly your browser's JS implementation leaked used to be to use the ebay auction countdown timer, and let it run to 0 and leave the page open (available in the last ten minutes or so of an auction) I believe they've fixed whatever the bug was that caused GB of swap page use over the course of a few hours after an auction ended.
Besides, modern IE isn't exactly that difficult to support. Most browsers are much more forgiving and less picky than they were just a couple of years ago so if it displays right in Chrome/Firefox, chances are it does actually work just as well in say, IE7+ anyway.
I wish this lie would simply go away. There is something fundamentally broken when your web browser requires non-standard markup in order to display standards-based markup.
IE 9+ maybe.... pre 9 I no longer bother for flashiness unless someone wants to pay. But, even then, since we're doing truly standards based development or utilizing supported toolsets on 99% of our websites anyways, we have very good odds of a large percentage of the website working all the way back to IE7, and the important workflows, i.e., ordering and purchasing, are tested thoroughly. That image flyover on hover, not so much.
Polygamous Mormons make a habit of ditching the excess boys on the streets of nearby cities.
I'm afraid that Mormons haven't been polygamist since the late 1800s (when the US outlawed the practice.) I'm thinking you are referring to the splinter group that split off from the larger Church back then and refused to obey the law. They are collectively known as the FLDS Church and do not use the name Mormon.
but they call themselves true mormons.
Basically the bully that got to boss around and fuck over all the nerds, but doesn't actually possess much along the lines of ability, at least i had some respect for bill gates and his skills.
Really? What skills? BASIC? MS BASIC sucked so bad they replaced it with GW Basic in MS DOS 3.x (3.3 came with GW Basic, don't recall if it was put in earlier than that). After that, I'm kinda hazy on what he may have worked on that required technical skills. Conning skills - definitely.
Blue Gene uses quad core PowerPCs, with 8192 cores on the Argonne system. That's a heck of a lot of days of maxing out your CPUs!
Egads - that's just....
I'll bet you think "Hi-Fi" is what comes out of your earbuds.
You get insightful for a revisionist historical post, and I get a troll for stating two facts and a one line opinion? The mods are unkind.
As has already been pointed out, Japan was engaged in crimes against humanity under the guise of war prior to PH, hence the sanctions. It's irrelevant what Japan considered the embargo - they could have ended the embargo by stopping their inhumane treatment of the Chinese. So because they were poking the world in the eye to get a response so they could claim "war" is just a bit self-serving, don't you think?
As for what the US knew when, please provide some citations. The only conspiracy theorist here is you.
I'm pretty sure that was the Japanese view on war - win and it's all yours, the people that used to live in country 'x' were just chattel. It's how they fought, and in defending Japan, who knows how far they'd have gone?
as for the GGP, if they tried it again, it'd be pretty freaking foolish, don't you think? Perhaps signs of a rabid society?
Small nitpick, Japan actually offered two surrenders before the bomb was dropped, they just weren't unconditional surrenders like the US wanted.
I can't remember the exact details, but they included stuff like the upper reaches of the government remaining in place.
That's like offering to "lose" at poker while keeping all your winnings. Not much of a surrender considering what had been happening the previous 8 or so years.
The rape of Nanking and the Bataan death march on the other hand were pretty good reasons for retaliation.
Nanking was a a good reason for China to retaliate beyond reasonable measure. Bataan was post Pearl Harbor and merely an additional checkbox in a long list of issues for the US. It's kind of hard to top 2000+ dead and and utter devastation of a fleet while not officially at war. Your reasoning is about as illogical as it can get. So, Biff goes around his high school, busts a few chops, extorts money and lunches, and has his way with a girl here or there. He gets sent to the principal's office and punished. So now Biff considers this an act of war, and can go kill the principal's family? You're slightly off from mainstream thought, logic, reality, hell, even reality TV.
Next you'll be telling us that N Korea or Iran are perfectly justified in nuking the rest of the world.( Hint: both are under sanctions)
Yep, made total sense to decimate your secret but soon to be out of the closet enemy's forces without officially declaring war first. I do seem to recall Congress declaring war not soon after the attack.
I forgot one thing: Pearl Harbor being a sneak attack violated all aspect of diplomacy and civilized international law. So yes, wiping them off the map was warranted.
IIRC, there was a great deal of debate on whether to drop the bomb. It was decided to because of the way the Japanese fought throughout the Pacific, ceding island by island fighting to the last man. So instead of risking 100s of thousand of US troops, they asked Japan to surrender. They refused and it was decided to drop 1 bomb. The US then requested Japan to surrender again. Japan still refused. They dropped #2 and promised more unless there was a surrender. A bit of a bluff since there were only 3 in existence at the time. Japan surrendered. The net effect - probably less Japanese dead, and a whole lot less US dead, and Japan surrendered instead of being wholly defeated and possibly wiped from history. Conventional war was not pretty with the Japanese fight to the last man ethics, it makes for great movies but horrible wars, as all sorts of atrocities start being carried out by the ever more desperate losing side. And Japan was losing, and would lose. There was little doubt as at that time civilians were just considered collateral damage - unfortunate that they were caught between two warring parties even though both sides would claim they tried to avoid hitting civilians but, weapons just weren't that accurate.
So you still haven't gotten "lossless" digital yet? When you do, let me know. I'll be the second to jump on that bandwagon.
Lossy recordings aren't worth $0.05. And that '$' can be in any denomination that carries it.
Personally I think the girl ought to sue them for false statements, libel and slander, since they'd have had to made all three to file the suit in court. And yes, their actions deserve just such a response, and she'd walk out in a heartbeat with a win, and will send a "message" in doing so that baselessly suing others to send a message is a bad idea and will result in bad things happening to you.