C# is more of a superset of java - not quite, java has, off top of head, inner classes.
Calling it a dumbed-down java is misinformed IMIO.
But if you're just putting in a fig-leaf criticism to fend off the MS-haters, then forget I mentioned it;-)
Okay, I was quite rude wasnt I. I've got bad karma now, so somebody thought so. Anyway, let's look at the idea.
DVRs are still an expensive luxury item, so integrating them into the TV is completely against what the majority of the likely market would want - they want to buy the best TV and the best DVR, not some mishmash of the not-too-bad.
(Hint: combo TV/VCRs are generally small TVs for 'spare rooms')
When somebody wants to upgrade their DVR or TV, they cant concentrate on doing that, they have to throw away a perfectly good built-in TV/DVR.
Technically, it's terribly inflexible. People who buy DVRs are likely to want to record from a range of sources. Sticking the recorder in the TV makes no sense for these people. I for example, have a seperate decoder for digital channels that is seperate from the TV. etc etc.
A) if somebody writes a web-app that requires a.NET enabled client, then it will only run on.NET enabled clients.
hardly rocket science, and of course there's no way in the world that ".NET" on the server can force what bytes you serve to web clients to include.NET client-side components in some way.
B) If somebody writes a web browser in.NET then it will need.NET installed on the machine to run.
Cant argue with that, although the point seems a little pointless IYSWIM:-)
"Europe has a far freer press than any other continent."
A gross over-generalisation, and probably not true - the USA has a freer press and more freedom of information, dunno about Canada - Mexico I am less confident about.
Maybe you don't need Wine for your.NET server, but the client will.
Why? If your '.NET server' is serving a web-app (i.e. html) then why would you need WINE on the client?
If your '.NET server' is using remoting as the communications protocol, then again, why does this mandate the use of WINE?
Maybe you could clarify what you're talking about here.
The client will be dependent upon either Wine or a web browser. How long until that web browser is a.NET application that requires Wine?
Well, we all know what a web-browser is, why should viewing HTML suddenly require the use of WINE? Doesnt make sense to me...
Slashdot Mirror
C# is more of a superset of java - not quite, java has, off top of head, inner classes. Calling it a dumbed-down java is misinformed IMIO. But if you're just putting in a fig-leaf criticism to fend off the MS-haters, then forget I mentioned it ;-)
Okay, I was quite rude wasnt I. I've got bad karma now, so somebody thought so.
Anyway, let's look at the idea.
DVRs are still an expensive luxury item, so integrating them into the TV is completely against what the majority of the likely market would want - they want to buy the best TV and the best DVR, not some mishmash of the not-too-bad.
(Hint: combo TV/VCRs are generally small TVs for 'spare rooms')
When somebody wants to upgrade their DVR or TV, they cant concentrate on doing that, they have to throw away a perfectly good built-in TV/DVR.
Technically, it's terribly inflexible. People who buy DVRs are likely to want to record from a range of sources. Sticking the recorder in the TV makes no sense for these people. I for example, have a seperate decoder for digital channels that is seperate from the TV.
etc etc.
So, what your saying is:
.NET enabled client, then it will only run on .NET enabled clients.
.NET client-side components in some way.
.NET then it will need .NET installed on the machine to run.
:-)
A) if somebody writes a web-app that requires a
hardly rocket science, and of course there's no way in the world that ".NET" on the server can force what bytes you serve to web clients to include
B) If somebody writes a web browser in
Cant argue with that, although the point seems a little pointless IYSWIM
Ah. I see your point. Next thing I'll be proposing a heavier than air flying machine.
;-)
Given the cheesyness of your original 'amazing' idea, I somehow doubt it
That is a self evidently bloody awful idea. It's so bad I cant even be bothered explaining why.
Actually that is evidently bollocks, given the picture linked-to in another post.
Seems pretty obvious that the screen doesnt fold, just the stand.
'north european' - is that a language? I didnt notice they standardised that!
Plus, it's a big plane - handguns wont cut it. ;-)
Better make sure there's lots of automatic weapons on the plane, just so we're all nice and safe
"Europe has a far freer press than any other continent."
A gross over-generalisation, and probably not true - the USA has a freer press and more freedom of information, dunno about Canada - Mexico I am less confident about.
(BTW, I'm a European)
Maybe you don't need Wine for your .NET server, but the client will.
.NET application that requires Wine?
Why?
If your '.NET server' is serving a web-app (i.e. html) then why would you need WINE on the client?
If your '.NET server' is using remoting as the communications protocol, then again, why does this mandate the use of WINE?
Maybe you could clarify what you're talking about here.
The client will be dependent upon either Wine or a web browser. How long until that web browser is a
Well, we all know what a web-browser is, why should viewing HTML suddenly require the use of WINE? Doesnt make sense to me...