Not emulation, but its still trailing the legacy luggage, and in this case, it wasn't even required. Its also possible to set ANYTHING as "My Document" in a corporate environment (like a folder on the network), and this can screw up your app, too, if you hardcode the path. Applications appending the path to document and settings to the user's name caused me insane headaches, and not just with Vista.
There's a freagin environment variable for it, use it (thats what you're supposed to do in Unix too, no?).
ITs just the same deal with everything... lousy wannabe VB6 devs coding like trash, and they're not done yet.... I see it everyday in.NET, too.
SELECT * FROM Table1 t1 join table2 t2 on t1.column = t1.column.
WHOOPS. Its such a easy mistake to make, too, especially if you use silly non-significant aliases like T1, T2, T3 instead of shortening the name to something meaningful.
Flash by using Flex can use other languages, even the CLR in Flex 3.0, if I did my research right (I'm no Flex dev, I just looked on their web site =P)
Data mining should be done on the datawarehouse's OLAP cubes, and the queries you do aren't pure SQL at that point (with all the MDX and whatsnot), so the tool become useless.
No one uses Mono in the fanboy-heavy businesses, such as web development, and the people that go toward Mono tend to be.NET Ninjas (since you have to know it well to deal with the quirks and stuff), so you won't see them on discussion forums all that much.
At the last place I worked (a.NET shop), it was pretty scary how many of our competitors were using Mono for their back end, to the point we considered switching too (didn't from lack of ressources)..NET stuff sells well to gullible CEOs, and.NET stuff that can be scaled up horizontally for the cost of a cluster of commodity hardware sells REALLY well.
Or so they say, I never used Mono myself, but said competitors were growing faster than us, customer-base wise, so meh.
This type of error would go unnoticed? Err? If the query returns -the wrong data- (as a cross join by mistake would), and it goes unnoticed, something worse than your database crashing on you is waiting.
Maybe my poor queries writing skills are bad:) Because I've seriously -tried- before... cross joins on 100+ tables, all of which containing several douzen gigs of data, totally multiple terabytes...the scheduling was good enough to give the query very low priority, leaving the server ok.
If you use (in SQL Server at least) the default settings, that will basically render your database useless... but if you use the newer locking strategies from 2005 (which had been available in Oracle for ages), the tables won't be locked, and everything will be fine. Laggish for sure, but the server definately won't tank.
Somewhere I used to work for, I would even run millions of inserts, continually, on our staging server (which was shared among a 50 or so devs) because I was testing an ETL routine... the server was slower for sure when I messed up and did a multi cross join on my insert source on a friday evening, but it never brought it down.
Not from where I'm standing. The query itself will be slow if it affects a lot of rows (if I use exactly the query you're giving, and that X is indexed, it will be near instant, no matter how many rows I have =P), but the server will purr along just fine with other queries (assuming its configured to use snapshot mode, else it could lock away other queries... but who doesn't use snapshot mode since its been available in SQL Server anyway? Especially after people been bitching about it from the day it was available in Oracle...)
Besides, for legacy applications that were coded like shit, there's already a bunch of tools that will scan them (either the application, black box style, though mostly for the web, or the code, white box style) to find sql injection vulnerabilities.
Still sad that even to this day, if you go to your favorite programming language XYZ forum, half of the newbies use concatenated strings, because a large amount of tutorials on the net do it that way...
I think Windows has no user interface guidelines really, or nobody reads them or has any sense of what kind of user interface guidelines.
Nobody reads them. The problem with Windows is that the developers totally sucks and don't even read the guidelines. I mean, Vista has to emulate the My Document folders because a ton of stupid devs hard coded the path to it, instead of using the system variables (so that when the document folder changes, the app would still work). Nevermind UI design guidelines.
But they are there, they're pretty detailed too (almost down to the pixel), and they're not bad (though the Vista ones aren't as good as the previous ones). Just, no one reads em. Most don't even know about them, they just fire up Visual Studio, start drag and dropping, and put on their resume that they are senior developers, and HR buys it.
There's a -lot- less designers attracted by open source than there are programmers... to the extent that, yes, programmers have to do UI design (not just in Open Source, but in most smaller scale commercial projects too, especially internal business software projects).
A lot of FOSS projects are affected by this, especially, again, smaller ones... If a project has less than 10 developers (which, if all of the devs are good, is more than enough for a medium to even semi-large scale project, sometimes), its almost sure that there's no designer in the bunch, or if there's one, its Joe-Blow Peanut Gallery with a pirate copy of photoshop that does design work on the side to complement his walmart job (I'm exagerating, of course, please don't kill me).
And it shows. The amount of FOSS projects that have UI designs that can rival even recent Microsoft projects (and thats not a very high goal to reach) is minimal. Compared to the amount of projects that can rival in raw code quality? Its no contest.
Not free as in Freedom, but definately free as in free beer. The SQL Management Studio Express version has the execution plan stuff, and it works quite peachy, for free.
No single query will ever bring a (real) RDBMS down. Even on a terrabyte of data or more, doing a crazy multi-hundred-table cross join, you're not going to bring it down.
Now, it could seriously slow down a production server, but... you're not pushing untested SQL on a production server now, are you? Right? Riiiiiiiiiiight?
So at worse, you're slowing down your own localhost development database engine for everyone else trying to access it (read: no one).
Learning to read is easy when you're young and its your priority, or one of em, on top of having the ressources to do so (books...). When your priority is not starving to death, and you're 20+ years old, and that a book can be worth several days of food,learning to read is one of the hardest thing you'll ever have to do.
And, as many people have posted already (including some developers themselves), to most programmers, coding functionality is a heck of a lot more interesting to your average programmer (especially with the current state of programming training, which is almost exclusively raw computer science), so most projects can't even get people who -want- to add usuability, nevermind have time to do it.
There's a reason most of the usuable pieces of free software are those with big corporate backing (Firefox comes to mind...)
The article said it was in their email address that they couldn't use bad language. I guess its to stop people from having stuff like "suck_my_cock@verizon.com" or something. And considering what the article said further, it seemed like it was configured that way in the system and they couldn't bypass it, thus they refused it. (But further down they DO state they make exceptions, and it was a big confusion that they didn't in this case...yeah, right).
you can scientifically prove that God doesn't exist
No, you cannot. Its impossible to show scientifically that anything doesn't exit. You can just show that something actually does exist. Thats why we were able to prove that, under condition XYZ, only valance electrons react. As long as we didn't test it in every possible scenario (and even then, we cannot prove that there aren't any other possibility), we cannot say that there aren't some ways where that theory doesn't hold. And as this showed, there was a scenario we hadn't tested.
Scientists (real ones) will never say that its impossible for God to exist. They'll just say that all of the currently provided evidence are bogus, and that there isn't any valid theory that shows its existance beyond wishful thinking by a few zealots. Doesn't change that God may exist. We just have nothing to lead us to think it does.
If some scientist claims to be able to prove that it doesn't exist (or that ANYTHING ELSE doesn't exist), they're doing faux-science.
And with all the wires and pieces making up that machine... what are the odds that there was one tiny little mistake somewhere in the assembly? Or is it made redundant, so that if a part fuck up, it doesn't matter? I mean, a little spark at the wrong place in these wires and...
People around here will only be happy if Microsoft donates Windows' source and all of its assets to Stallman, while bitching about how Windows sucks anyway and that GNU should drop it and let it die. Then they'll gloat about it for the next 20 years.
WCF can easily make basic profile compliant services, and I've successfully integrated them in basically every imaginable environments that support it (and some that don't, via web service RPC), including Axis, also an apache project.
So maybe the problem is CXF? Unless you're trying to do something very particular, it literally works out of the box with basically everything else.
hundreds of -thousands- of education institutions use apple -server-?
How many education institutions are there in the freagin world? I can count them on my fingers in my city of 150 thousand people. If there's just 200000 of em (required so it can be "hundredS" with an S), and we estimate 7 billion people on earth (thats much more than there actually is), and EVERY man, woman and child on earth, including babies, 3rd world country people, etc, attend on average 1 institution (I realise some people attend more than one, but many, many more don't attend any at all), we get 35 person per education institution.
And thats if every last one of them use Apple -Server- (which, while Macs are common now, servers running on them are quite a bit less common).
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed. I was quite careful to say "no -SINGLE- query..."
Well, unless you're running the database on a Pocket PC or something =P
Not emulation, but its still trailing the legacy luggage, and in this case, it wasn't even required. Its also possible to set ANYTHING as "My Document" in a corporate environment (like a folder on the network), and this can screw up your app, too, if you hardcode the path. Applications appending the path to document and settings to the user's name caused me insane headaches, and not just with Vista.
There's a freagin environment variable for it, use it (thats what you're supposed to do in Unix too, no?).
ITs just the same deal with everything... lousy wannabe VB6 devs coding like trash, and they're not done yet.... I see it everyday in .NET, too.
SELECT * FROM Table1 t1 join table2 t2 on t1.column = t1.column.
WHOOPS. Its such a easy mistake to make, too, especially if you use silly non-significant aliases like T1, T2, T3 instead of shortening the name to something meaningful.
Flash by using Flex can use other languages, even the CLR in Flex 3.0, if I did my research right (I'm no Flex dev, I just looked on their web site =P)
Data mining should be done on the datawarehouse's OLAP cubes, and the queries you do aren't pure SQL at that point (with all the MDX and whatsnot), so the tool become useless.
No one uses Mono in the fanboy-heavy businesses, such as web development, and the people that go toward Mono tend to be .NET Ninjas (since you have to know it well to deal with the quirks and stuff), so you won't see them on discussion forums all that much.
At the last place I worked (a .NET shop), it was pretty scary how many of our competitors were using Mono for their back end, to the point we considered switching too (didn't from lack of ressources). .NET stuff sells well to gullible CEOs, and .NET stuff that can be scaled up horizontally for the cost of a cluster of commodity hardware sells REALLY well.
Or so they say, I never used Mono myself, but said competitors were growing faster than us, customer-base wise, so meh.
This type of error would go unnoticed? Err? If the query returns -the wrong data- (as a cross join by mistake would), and it goes unnoticed, something worse than your database crashing on you is waiting.
Maybe my poor queries writing skills are bad :) Because I've seriously -tried- before... cross joins on 100+ tables, all of which containing several douzen gigs of data, totally multiple terabytes...the scheduling was good enough to give the query very low priority, leaving the server ok.
If you use (in SQL Server at least) the default settings, that will basically render your database useless... but if you use the newer locking strategies from 2005 (which had been available in Oracle for ages), the tables won't be locked, and everything will be fine. Laggish for sure, but the server definately won't tank.
Somewhere I used to work for, I would even run millions of inserts, continually, on our staging server (which was shared among a 50 or so devs) because I was testing an ETL routine... the server was slower for sure when I messed up and did a multi cross join on my insert source on a friday evening, but it never brought it down.
Not from where I'm standing. The query itself will be slow if it affects a lot of rows (if I use exactly the query you're giving, and that X is indexed, it will be near instant, no matter how many rows I have =P), but the server will purr along just fine with other queries (assuming its configured to use snapshot mode, else it could lock away other queries... but who doesn't use snapshot mode since its been available in SQL Server anyway? Especially after people been bitching about it from the day it was available in Oracle...)
Besides, for legacy applications that were coded like shit, there's already a bunch of tools that will scan them (either the application, black box style, though mostly for the web, or the code, white box style) to find sql injection vulnerabilities.
Still sad that even to this day, if you go to your favorite programming language XYZ forum, half of the newbies use concatenated strings, because a large amount of tutorials on the net do it that way...
Nobody reads them. The problem with Windows is that the developers totally sucks and don't even read the guidelines. I mean, Vista has to emulate the My Document folders because a ton of stupid devs hard coded the path to it, instead of using the system variables (so that when the document folder changes, the app would still work). Nevermind UI design guidelines.
But they are there, they're pretty detailed too (almost down to the pixel), and they're not bad (though the Vista ones aren't as good as the previous ones). Just, no one reads em. Most don't even know about them, they just fire up Visual Studio, start drag and dropping, and put on their resume that they are senior developers, and HR buys it.
In that case, your web farm and/or email server dies, while the database server is still purring along :)
There's a -lot- less designers attracted by open source than there are programmers... to the extent that, yes, programmers have to do UI design (not just in Open Source, but in most smaller scale commercial projects too, especially internal business software projects).
A lot of FOSS projects are affected by this, especially, again, smaller ones... If a project has less than 10 developers (which, if all of the devs are good, is more than enough for a medium to even semi-large scale project, sometimes), its almost sure that there's no designer in the bunch, or if there's one, its Joe-Blow Peanut Gallery with a pirate copy of photoshop that does design work on the side to complement his walmart job (I'm exagerating, of course, please don't kill me).
And it shows. The amount of FOSS projects that have UI designs that can rival even recent Microsoft projects (and thats not a very high goal to reach) is minimal. Compared to the amount of projects that can rival in raw code quality? Its no contest.
Not free as in Freedom, but definately free as in free beer. The SQL Management Studio Express version has the execution plan stuff, and it works quite peachy, for free.
No single query will ever bring a (real) RDBMS down. Even on a terrabyte of data or more, doing a crazy multi-hundred-table cross join, you're not going to bring it down.
Now, it could seriously slow down a production server, but... you're not pushing untested SQL on a production server now, are you? Right? Riiiiiiiiiiight?
So at worse, you're slowing down your own localhost development database engine for everyone else trying to access it (read: no one).
Not much for the DBA to scream about...
Learning to read is easy when you're young and its your priority, or one of em, on top of having the ressources to do so (books...). When your priority is not starving to death, and you're 20+ years old, and that a book can be worth several days of food,learning to read is one of the hardest thing you'll ever have to do.
Often, but not "always". In some poor countries, they sell a basic version of Windows with Office and some stuff for a few bucks.
And, as many people have posted already (including some developers themselves), to most programmers, coding functionality is a heck of a lot more interesting to your average programmer (especially with the current state of programming training, which is almost exclusively raw computer science), so most projects can't even get people who -want- to add usuability, nevermind have time to do it.
There's a reason most of the usuable pieces of free software are those with big corporate backing (Firefox comes to mind...)
The article said it was in their email address that they couldn't use bad language. I guess its to stop people from having stuff like "suck_my_cock@verizon.com" or something. And considering what the article said further, it seemed like it was configured that way in the system and they couldn't bypass it, thus they refused it. (But further down they DO state they make exceptions, and it was a big confusion that they didn't in this case...yeah, right).
God damn...wouldn't want a spark lighting up in that mess.
No, you cannot. Its impossible to show scientifically that anything doesn't exit. You can just show that something actually does exist. Thats why we were able to prove that, under condition XYZ, only valance electrons react. As long as we didn't test it in every possible scenario (and even then, we cannot prove that there aren't any other possibility), we cannot say that there aren't some ways where that theory doesn't hold. And as this showed, there was a scenario we hadn't tested.
Scientists (real ones) will never say that its impossible for God to exist. They'll just say that all of the currently provided evidence are bogus, and that there isn't any valid theory that shows its existance beyond wishful thinking by a few zealots. Doesn't change that God may exist. We just have nothing to lead us to think it does.
If some scientist claims to be able to prove that it doesn't exist (or that ANYTHING ELSE doesn't exist), they're doing faux-science.
And with all the wires and pieces making up that machine... what are the odds that there was one tiny little mistake somewhere in the assembly? Or is it made redundant, so that if a part fuck up, it doesn't matter? I mean, a little spark at the wrong place in these wires and...
People around here will only be happy if Microsoft donates Windows' source and all of its assets to Stallman, while bitching about how Windows sucks anyway and that GNU should drop it and let it die. Then they'll gloat about it for the next 20 years.
WCF can easily make basic profile compliant services, and I've successfully integrated them in basically every imaginable environments that support it (and some that don't, via web service RPC), including Axis, also an apache project.
So maybe the problem is CXF? Unless you're trying to do something very particular, it literally works out of the box with basically everything else.
hundreds of -thousands- of education institutions use apple -server-?
How many education institutions are there in the freagin world? I can count them on my fingers in my city of 150 thousand people. If there's just 200000 of em (required so it can be "hundredS" with an S), and we estimate 7 billion people on earth (thats much more than there actually is), and EVERY man, woman and child on earth, including babies, 3rd world country people, etc, attend on average 1 institution (I realise some people attend more than one, but many, many more don't attend any at all), we get 35 person per education institution.
And thats if every last one of them use Apple -Server- (which, while Macs are common now, servers running on them are quite a bit less common).
All that to say: I loled.