There's a product called VS PHP. I've never tried it, but since it claims to plug into VS, I'd assume it allows anything VS does. But I don't know that for a fact.
I would love to see PHP.net (or PHP#.net). A standardized framework and huge code library would beat the hell out of the billion frameworks and Pear that we have today.
WordPress is brutal with HTML. It treats < as a tag delimiter, < as a tag delimiter. The numeric entity < (I think) is the only one it won't explode into a raw character.
Blogger is much easier to do code in. < by itself is treated as HTML but < works.
For what it's worth.
Reagan is not responsible. It was classified as a vegetable in the 1880s -- A century before Reagan was president and even a few decades before Reagan was born.
Tomato: Fruit or Vegetable (Wikipedia
In PHP, I've taken to using a database purely as a persistent store. A few hundred lines of reflective code to ascertain the data model and generate the SQL for it has now saved me weeks of work across many applications.
The trouble with it is generic code of that nature doesn't scale especially well. To make it scale, you lose the reflection, which pushed you right back to 25-lines of SQL to a model.
Personally, I'd rather save that time during initial development and then re-visit it later in the production cycle when obsticles are more clear. Many inevitably disagree.
I don't know enough about.net's implementation of reflection to provide code, but if you'd like to email me I can provide my PHP implementation.
Other people want the reliability and the dependability that comes from a commercial software model.
Not once did he say that OSS was unreliable. He only said commercial software was reliable. "Perhaps you'd like the reliability that comes with BMW, but some people like the value that comes with Kia." Read closely. There's no comparison in the article or my example. And your quote does not appear in the article. At all.
The Firefox and Opera browsers come with Google set as the default, but Mayer said Google would support unfettered choice on those as well.
Yes, Google is only complaining about IE. But it's not like they're trying to force a double standard. They're looking out in their best interests, yes, but they are certainly OK with IE, FF and Opera playing by the same rules.
What about Server 2003? I just want to find a platform that will run DirectX9 natively. If Server '03 runs under EFI, I'd just assume do that compared to XP or Vista or whatever else
That could be. A common interface for applications does quite a bit for user-portability. Mozilla and Firefox, for instance, have long had near identical rendering. As Firefox started gaining momentum, some people (I seem to remember Scott Finney of www.scotsnewsletter.com fame claiming a difference in near-1.0 days) claimed differences, but if existant at all, they were certainly not what held back Firefox converts. No, the interface similarities between Firefox and Internet Explorer are what allowed FF to succeed where Mozilla (suite) failed.
IE still has an enormous bulk of users, but those they've lost are power users and web developers. Web developers, more than anyone, are the ones who have controlled browser success. They're not OSS fanboys, they are the ones that want the best working conditions available. They took IE4 over Netscape 4, and FF over IE6. They have no issue reverting to IE if IE resumes its best-of-category status.
But these are also the people who couldn't convert to FF until it was IE-like enough. And now that they've adopted to FF conventions, IE needs to be sufficently FF-like to allow their return. These are the people who use things like RSS, and anyone new to the scene that knows ANYTHING is going to default to FF at this point. Therefore, Microsoft has nothing to lose by conceeding RSS to Firefox. They won't get any new users locked into their approach and existing users want it a certain way.
There is one significant difference. I'm a knowledgable user. I program and sys-admin. I practice good security. Regardless of the number of exploits out there, I've never been hit by a FF exploit. I have been hit by IE exploits.
But the submitter is right. Though code security is important, the number of users is also a huge factor.
Cue someone to mention Apache.
Yes, Apache is everywhere, exploit-free. So are lots and lots of other binaries. It's only when you compare Apache to IIS 4/5 that it's really such a perfect example. Compare it to WinAMP, or Bash, or Finder, and its no more, no less secure.
2000 is still compatible with every piece of new hardware I've thrown at it. The driver model might as well be identical to XP's. To be fair, I've found some virtual device drivers that aren't 2k compatible (and likewise with 2k virtual devices that aren't XP compatible) but those are the exception. For the vast majority of what I do, I pick 2000 over XP even still. I eventually gave in and upgraded my laptop to take advantage of clear type and the other supposed power enhancements, but the preformance hit is big enough that I'll eventually roll it back.
But yeah, every XP hardware driver I've ever tried works in 2k.
I've relented to prouncing www "dub dub dub" in speech. I feel like a bloody fool for saying that, but when I compare it to "double u double u double u," there's little, if any, comparisor. dubdubdub is three times faster to say, and I've yet to speak with anyone who didn't know what I was talking about.
Whilst I did have to slow down toward the end, I found that easy enough to read. Though I have no major problem with current spelling and grammar rules (except for definitely, which I spell with an 'A' more often than not) if changes like that are what standardization necessitates, than I am all in favor of them.
Really? My Compaq Portable III also has a handle, and weighs only 27 LBS. It's a portable, but you could set it on its side if you really want a tower.
Spotlight is decidedly not the instant search it claims to be. I still use it frequently, and it's still faster than any other search I've ever used on Mac or Windows, but it's not instant. It could be a RAM issue (I've only got 512MB) or a slow HDD (My mini has only a 4200 RPM HDD) but that doesn't change the fact it's slow. That, however, is the only problem I've noticed.
This can't be emphasized enough. General users aren't adopting Firefox because its open source, they're adopting it because of the security features. Most non-technical people I introduce Firefox to don't ever deal with extensions or tabs - just the fact that their homepage doesn't get reset to a porn site every time it starts up and because they don't get popups.
Abiword is much closer to the Firefox model. It's smaller, faster, feels more native on more platforms than OOo. But beyond cost, it offers nothing more (even less, in fact) than Word. And that's because Word is good enough. There haven't been any major innovations to word processing since real time spell and grammer checking from roughly 10 years ago - and as I remember, that was Word introducing the feature.
Whether normal users need them or not, new features are what drive geeks to new products. Any free ($ or OSS) product will acquire a following, but you need something new and better to get the rest of the world to pick up on it. Firefox found that feature set. OOo hasn't.
Is called X11. The existance of X11 for 'nix has meant this is not a neccessary product on that platform. Worst case would be to set up Cygwin/X on the clients, and tunnel the connections through SSH (which is perhaps the most complicated way possible to say "put a '-x' on the ssh command"). Put a 'gnome-session &' or the KDE equivelent in their startup script, and you're set.
Lots of times on these sorts of questions, people will say "that's not neccessary, just do ____". But in this case, the Windows terminal servers are themselves a way of simulating X11. Short of an X11 server for Windows (like Cygwin) needing installed, everything's already there.
It's as if icons peaked 2-4 years ago
on
A History of Icons
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
In the last handful of years, icons have started making a transformation from functional to stylish. Specifically, look at the differences between Windows 2000->XP icons, and Jaguar->Panther icons. In both cases, the Calculator icon illustrates specifically what I mean. In Jaguar and W2k, it was completly clear what the icon was. In Panther, however, the buttons became grayer, and as a result, the overall icon is less clear. The XP icon is much worse - it is not even distinctly a calculator.
There are many more examples in the 2k->xp comparison. The address book, for instance. What was once clearly an Address book is now just an open book. The control panel, while not exactly clear in 2k, is now a Todo list! The desktop icon went from a desk with a letter in draft to a _vertical_ oriented surface.
There are a number of refresh rates that I notice.
60 Hz is painful
72 and 75 are usable, but I notice
85 looks natural
90 is similar to 75
100 and 120 looks similar to 85
It doesn't make sense that 90 is worse than anything else at 85+, so perhaps it's just the particular monitor. And I won't claim I can identify everything. I can't differentiate 85/100/120, or 72/75/90. But amongst the three groups of refresh rates, I can identify the group.
I'm a programmer. I easily spend 30 hours a week online, and I don't game at all. Whilst holding my last job (tech support) I figure I spent about 70 hours a week online.
As writing this, I've realized that I am addicted the the Internet, and I can't just stop, unless surfing at work doesn't count. But it doesn't change the fact the racking up those kinds of hours is easy to do, even without gaming.
The default Mini optical drive is a combo drive - that's a DVD-ROM/CD-RW. Since that's all the Dell has, its fair. And coincidentally, that makes the price match.
BTW - the Mini actually uses DDR400. Yes - it does say 333 everywhere, but 333 does not work (at least when I tried it in mine). They ship with DDR400.
Admitaddly, my circle of friends ARE more technically apted than the average students. But, one thing I've noticed is that people don't really cringe over installing or trying software. I don't know anyone who hasn't at least tried a browser besides IE. Most of them have Seamonkey or Firefox, even if they don't use it. One has Wordperfect Suite, one has an old version of Lotus Smartsuite. I'm not suggesting that these people are ready to sit down and install an OS, but I tend to think installing or trying software just doesn't doesn't have such a negative stigma anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm talking about ASP.net being Microsoft's standard PHP framework. .net is a library/framework, not a language.
.net .net
Platform: Windows
Language: C#/PHP/VB
Library:
Framework:
Sorry -- that has a wrong link. Try http://www.jcxsoftware.com/vs.php .
There's a product called VS PHP. I've never tried it, but since it claims to plug into VS, I'd assume it allows anything VS does. But I don't know that for a fact.
I would love to see PHP.net (or PHP# .net). A standardized framework and huge code library would beat the hell out of the billion frameworks and Pear that we have today.
WordPress is brutal with HTML. It treats < as a tag delimiter, < as a tag delimiter. The numeric entity < (I think) is the only one it won't explode into a raw character. Blogger is much easier to do code in. < by itself is treated as HTML but < works. For what it's worth.
Reagan is not responsible. It was classified as a vegetable in the 1880s -- A century before Reagan was president and even a few decades before Reagan was born. Tomato: Fruit or Vegetable (Wikipedia
In PHP, I've taken to using a database purely as a persistent store. A few hundred lines of reflective code to ascertain the data model and generate the SQL for it has now saved me weeks of work across many applications.
.net's implementation of reflection to provide code, but if you'd like to email me I can provide my PHP implementation.
The trouble with it is generic code of that nature doesn't scale especially well. To make it scale, you lose the reflection, which pushed you right back to 25-lines of SQL to a model.
Personally, I'd rather save that time during initial development and then re-visit it later in the production cycle when obsticles are more clear. Many inevitably disagree.
I don't know enough about
Not once did he say that OSS was unreliable. He only said commercial software was reliable. "Perhaps you'd like the reliability that comes with BMW, but some people like the value that comes with Kia." Read closely. There's no comparison in the article or my example. And your quote does not appear in the article. At all.
Yes, Google is only complaining about IE. But it's not like they're trying to force a double standard. They're looking out in their best interests, yes, but they are certainly OK with IE, FF and Opera playing by the same rules.
What about Server 2003? I just want to find a platform that will run DirectX9 natively. If Server '03 runs under EFI, I'd just assume do that compared to XP or Vista or whatever else
That could be. A common interface for applications does quite a bit for user-portability. Mozilla and Firefox, for instance, have long had near identical rendering. As Firefox started gaining momentum, some people (I seem to remember Scott Finney of www.scotsnewsletter.com fame claiming a difference in near-1.0 days) claimed differences, but if existant at all, they were certainly not what held back Firefox converts. No, the interface similarities between Firefox and Internet Explorer are what allowed FF to succeed where Mozilla (suite) failed.
IE still has an enormous bulk of users, but those they've lost are power users and web developers. Web developers, more than anyone, are the ones who have controlled browser success. They're not OSS fanboys, they are the ones that want the best working conditions available. They took IE4 over Netscape 4, and FF over IE6. They have no issue reverting to IE if IE resumes its best-of-category status.
But these are also the people who couldn't convert to FF until it was IE-like enough. And now that they've adopted to FF conventions, IE needs to be sufficently FF-like to allow their return. These are the people who use things like RSS, and anyone new to the scene that knows ANYTHING is going to default to FF at this point. Therefore, Microsoft has nothing to lose by conceeding RSS to Firefox. They won't get any new users locked into their approach and existing users want it a certain way.
There is one significant difference. I'm a knowledgable user. I program and sys-admin. I practice good security. Regardless of the number of exploits out there, I've never been hit by a FF exploit. I have been hit by IE exploits.
But the submitter is right. Though code security is important, the number of users is also a huge factor.
Cue someone to mention Apache.
Yes, Apache is everywhere, exploit-free. So are lots and lots of other binaries. It's only when you compare Apache to IIS 4/5 that it's really such a perfect example. Compare it to WinAMP, or Bash, or Finder, and its no more, no less secure.
2000 is still compatible with every piece of new hardware I've thrown at it. The driver model might as well be identical to XP's. To be fair, I've found some virtual device drivers that aren't 2k compatible (and likewise with 2k virtual devices that aren't XP compatible) but those are the exception. For the vast majority of what I do, I pick 2000 over XP even still. I eventually gave in and upgraded my laptop to take advantage of clear type and the other supposed power enhancements, but the preformance hit is big enough that I'll eventually roll it back.
But yeah, every XP hardware driver I've ever tried works in 2k.
I've relented to prouncing www "dub dub dub" in speech. I feel like a bloody fool for saying that, but when I compare it to "double u double u double u," there's little, if any, comparisor. dubdubdub is three times faster to say, and I've yet to speak with anyone who didn't know what I was talking about.
Whilst I did have to slow down toward the end, I found that easy enough to read. Though I have no major problem with current spelling and grammar rules (except for definitely, which I spell with an 'A' more often than not) if changes like that are what standardization necessitates, than I am all in favor of them.
Really? My Compaq Portable III also has a handle, and weighs only 27 LBS. It's a portable, but you could set it on its side if you really want a tower.
Spotlight is decidedly not the instant search it claims to be. I still use it frequently, and it's still faster than any other search I've ever used on Mac or Windows, but it's not instant. It could be a RAM issue (I've only got 512MB) or a slow HDD (My mini has only a 4200 RPM HDD) but that doesn't change the fact it's slow. That, however, is the only problem I've noticed.
This can't be emphasized enough. General users aren't adopting Firefox because its open source, they're adopting it because of the security features. Most non-technical people I introduce Firefox to don't ever deal with extensions or tabs - just the fact that their homepage doesn't get reset to a porn site every time it starts up and because they don't get popups.
Abiword is much closer to the Firefox model. It's smaller, faster, feels more native on more platforms than OOo. But beyond cost, it offers nothing more (even less, in fact) than Word. And that's because Word is good enough. There haven't been any major innovations to word processing since real time spell and grammer checking from roughly 10 years ago - and as I remember, that was Word introducing the feature.
Whether normal users need them or not, new features are what drive geeks to new products. Any free ($ or OSS) product will acquire a following, but you need something new and better to get the rest of the world to pick up on it. Firefox found that feature set. OOo hasn't.
Is called X11. The existance of X11 for 'nix has meant this is not a neccessary product on that platform. Worst case would be to set up Cygwin/X on the clients, and tunnel the connections through SSH (which is perhaps the most complicated way possible to say "put a '-x' on the ssh command"). Put a 'gnome-session &' or the KDE equivelent in their startup script, and you're set. Lots of times on these sorts of questions, people will say "that's not neccessary, just do ____". But in this case, the Windows terminal servers are themselves a way of simulating X11. Short of an X11 server for Windows (like Cygwin) needing installed, everything's already there.
In the last handful of years, icons have started making a transformation from functional to stylish. Specifically, look at the differences between Windows 2000->XP icons, and Jaguar->Panther icons. In both cases, the Calculator icon illustrates specifically what I mean. In Jaguar and W2k, it was completly clear what the icon was. In Panther, however, the buttons became grayer, and as a result, the overall icon is less clear. The XP icon is much worse - it is not even distinctly a calculator.
There are many more examples in the 2k->xp comparison. The address book, for instance. What was once clearly an Address book is now just an open book. The control panel, while not exactly clear in 2k, is now a Todo list! The desktop icon went from a desk with a letter in draft to a _vertical_ oriented surface.
- 60 Hz is painful
- 72 and 75 are usable, but I notice
- 85 looks natural
- 90 is similar to 75
- 100 and 120 looks similar to 85
It doesn't make sense that 90 is worse than anything else at 85+, so perhaps it's just the particular monitor. And I won't claim I can identify everything. I can't differentiate 85/100/120, or 72/75/90. But amongst the three groups of refresh rates, I can identify the group.I'm a programmer. I easily spend 30 hours a week online, and I don't game at all. Whilst holding my last job (tech support) I figure I spent about 70 hours a week online.
As writing this, I've realized that I am addicted the the Internet, and I can't just stop, unless surfing at work doesn't count. But it doesn't change the fact the racking up those kinds of hours is easy to do, even without gaming.
The default Mini optical drive is a combo drive - that's a DVD-ROM/CD-RW. Since that's all the Dell has, its fair. And coincidentally, that makes the price match. BTW - the Mini actually uses DDR400. Yes - it does say 333 everywhere, but 333 does not work (at least when I tried it in mine). They ship with DDR400.
Admitaddly, my circle of friends ARE more technically apted than the average students. But, one thing I've noticed is that people don't really cringe over installing or trying software. I don't know anyone who hasn't at least tried a browser besides IE. Most of them have Seamonkey or Firefox, even if they don't use it. One has Wordperfect Suite, one has an old version of Lotus Smartsuite. I'm not suggesting that these people are ready to sit down and install an OS, but I tend to think installing or trying software just doesn't doesn't have such a negative stigma anymore.
And when the US Government dragged an antitrust case against IBM out for close to 20 years? Should the Feds have to pay IBM for taking so long?
Both sides do it. That's all the more there is to it.