IE 4 was quite an impressive browser at the time. Mozilla and KHTML didn't exist. Opera has little CSS support.
Fair enough, but what about the case with IE5 and IE6? So, I suppose, that's where they "should have done the job right."
There was a poster back in the MS-making-an-iPod-competitor thread that reminded us that MS, in general, follows the disappointing pattern of always playing catch-up, rather than playing the leader. As he put it, "Way to go Microsoft--aim low."
Interesting! I've been a freeware and shareware developer since 98. See my tagline, ace.
Of course you're right about FLOSS developers working on what interests them, but the point I was trying to make was that to develop something like BeOS seems like building a ship in your basement--you know it'll never see the "real" high seas.
I'm returning to work on the Internet Explorer team. A team that I used to work on a few years ago andI'm very excited to be returning to the team where we clearly have much work to do.
Yes, you do have a lot of work to do, Dave. Maybe you guys should have done the job right years ago rather than be in catch-up as well as damage-control mode.
That isn't a haiku. 1 too many syllables in the last part.
Cmon--like I don't know how to count syllables?? Dunno what dev community you come from but everyone I know pronounces it, "bee-aws"--two syllables total, and it's been like that for years.
What wonderful news! So in a few years, when modern industrial society has seized up and American life as we've known it comes to halt as a result of the rapidly diminishing fossil fuel supply, our cars will still be shiny!
I apologize for being off topic--mod me down--but the American car/suv/prettiness craze has gotten way out of hand...
More seriously, I urge people to plug into the facts and realties of the worlds fossil fuels, and how the American way of life and economy is presently overly-dependent on this resource.
Harry J. Longwell, executive vice-president of Exxon Mobil, made an unprecedented admission recently when he wrote: To put a number on it, we expect that by 2010 about half the daily volume needed to meet projected demand is not on production today... Even the necessarily conservative International Energy Agency (IEA), in its World Energy Outlook, 1998, concurred for the first time that global output could top out between 2009 and 2012, and decline rapidly thereafter.
We can only hope to elect policymakers that have the courage to make the right decisions and foster international cooperation (rather than, say, invade and occupy oil-producing regions).
I actually meant it to be funny and didn't mean to insult anyone, but it looks like folks are taking it seriously--it's gotten the ol smackdown already. That reminds me, I heard that if someone mods you funny and another mods you down, the net result is -1, not 0. Anyone know if this is a true statement?
Separately, I'm amazed that people still do dev work for BeOS. By that, I mean, of all the open source projects to spend time on, why choose this one?! It seems there's a lot of open source projects that offer the world more value than BeOS does.
As the old saying goes, what do you call a doctor that graduated from the worst medical school on earth at the bottom of his class?
Doctor.
There is also another saying... If the bare minimum wasn't the bare minimum, then it wouldn't be the bare minimum.
Would an employer rather have a network ace than a trained guy for the same price? Absolutely--of course he would. Would that same employer keep a trained guy on the payroll that returns his worth in pay? Again, absolutely--your assumption is that every employer has unrestricted access to a bunch of talented net geeks.
I'm not saying I'm disagreeing w/ all of your post, but to say that all certs is a "joke" is a gross overstatement.
There's basically no reason to allocate a single object using new and delete it within the same scope. Allocating arrays, or allocating an object for use in a different scope, are okay.
Sigh. See my other post to the guy who jabbered this--you don't want to put certain objects on the stack.
Ok, I hate to feed the trolls but fuck it... He posted:
Why allocate and deallocate an object within the scope of a function? Well, in C++, there's no reason, so this is bad code.
Now look at my post--I wasn't addressing the heap vs. stack issue directly--I was just answering his question. Indirectly I did address the stack issue because, pesumably, a big and nasty object with more than a couple k worth of instance data would never want to be put on the stack anyway! Stop acting like a lawyer, dude.
Your code is making the same mistake because it should instead declare the object on the stack, like this:
AReallyNastyObject temp;
Look, no delete required, and it's faster, too.
You have made clear you don't have a solid idea of what C++ code generation looks like. .
Re:I don't actually care hugely about performance
on
Java Faster Than C++?
·
· Score: 1
I would prefer that a better C++ (a C-like memory model, powerful generic programming, inheritance, and polymorphism) that lacked C++'s current nightmare of strangely interacting features and syntax.
Objective-C is really impressive with the only shortcoming that there's no well-supprted Obj-C compiler that tagets x86 (that I know of). As I share with others, Obj-C is best described as taking the performance and power of C/C++ with all the safety and language correctness/elegance of java.
I'm a vet C and C++ guy, and I swear by metrowerks codewarrior (its IDE and its x86 and PPC compilers). It'll be a big day if/when metrowerks makes a Objective-C compiler that targets x86 (for Win32).
Re:One example of why the tests are BS
on
Java Faster Than C++?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Why allocate and deallocate an object within the scope of a function?
You would do it if you need a scrap object only sometimes (and didn't want to pay the overhead penalty of instantiating it every time the proc got called). Here's an example:
void foo() {
...
if ( SomeRareCondition() ) {
AReallyNastyObject* temp = new AReallyNastyObject;
...
delete temp;
1) This guy is the most dedicated console collector the world has ever seen!
2) This guy is the most fucked up collector the world has ever seen!
3) Imagine a Beowulf Cluster made out of them...
4) (Obligatory MS dig for the white Xbox at the end)
5) (Obligatory all you base belong to us joke)
6) Sure, but don't they support Ogg!
7) In Soviet Russia, the consoles buy you!
8) I have an Atari 2600, you insensitive clod!
9) Let's get this out of the way
10) ???
11) Not Profit!
That was a good link--I wish other posters would have a tighter knowledge about stuff before spoutin off. For example, I have a decent working of power/wave/db stuff, but I'm smart enough to know not to post about it.
That's precisely why you sound naive when you say things like "meanwhile, there's absolutely no risk of security." And you mislead newbies into thinking that there is such a thing as "absolutely no risk of security."
Open Keychain Access, go up to the toolbar, and click on the "Note" icon.
*sigh* Sure, but the util mentioned steamlines things more by having a variety of fields already there, already labled, right in front of you, and everything gets encrypted (including the item title). And b/c it has separate fields, there's none of having to cram your data/pin/passwords/URL into the single note's edit field and have it look nasty.
Don't get me wrong, i'd love to see keychain streamlined in how i've described, but the reality is that the current version is not (and I *still* don't wan't people to see the names/titles of my keychain entry. If you have a item named "Money Safe Combo", an intruder could see that title and know you have a money safe nearby!
Lastly, there are a couple of security settings that really ought to be on by default, but aren't: Lock when sleeping and lock after 5 (or 10 or 15) minutes of inactivity.
There is still a security risk. What if someone gets you Pasotr password. Then they can have them all.
You must be new here. You can *always* use that argument. Someone can *always* install a key recorder or watch you type in your password. Security is about raising barriers, not about thinking/searching for somthing that will solve the impossible.
I know you said you don't like the Keychain, but by using it, you surf to the webpage and... it's already filled in from an encrypted database. Why reinvent the wheel, especially for web logins and such?
Keychain expects/assumes that all the stuff you store in there is conventional logins at certain URLs, etc. A lot of the entries I store don't fit that mold: my local router login/pass, my credit card pins, and some server logins that have unconventional fields. Most importantly, I want all those fields to be encrypted, not just the password field--that's a huge issue. If someone is logged in w/ my Mac OS X acct, i don't want them to just browse my keychain's non-password fields.
Ah, funny this story was posted--I just had to address this issue the other day. I run Mac OS X and I happened to be doing a fresh install, moving all my data over from an old HD. Before this, I had always stored my slew of account info in a text file in an obscure and unlabeled file (I know, I know--very careless of me--that's way I was ready to change my ways!).
Mac OS X's built-in "Keychain" services/util isn't streamlined for
repeated user use, not to mention it doesn't have several auxiliary/free-form fields (that are also fully encrypted with the password field). After some research and trying a few of the freeware and shareware apps out there, I came across Pastor, a freeware, super-lightweight and user-friendly app that basically lets you maintain a catalog of username, pass, and about 6 auxiliary fields, stored in an encrypted file (when you go to open a file, it prompts you for the password and decodes it on the fly). If for some reason you don't dig this particular app, there's a couple others like it as well with increasingly levels of features (I happen to prefer lightweight).
So I went w/ this model and it's had great payoffs--when I need a particular login, I click on an alias to my main password (Pastor) file, enter the file's password to decrypt it, look for what I need (it alphabetizes), and I'm all set--meanwhile, there's absolutely no risk of security--I love it.
...but it's my impression that overwhelming majority of people in CS programs are white guys. I know I can count the number of females I've seen in my CS classes on my hands. One hand, come to think of it, and I'm hardly polydactic.
Fair enough. And you're right--along with other poster who pointed out the percise definition of diveristy--there is often a narrow spectrum of social demographics in the CS/math/tech/engineer community. Is this really a "problem" per se? Sure, it's not preferrable all things being equal, but in Turing's case, it's was tragic backwardness of that day's society/culture/norms that forced him to his suicide, not--I wager--any of his fellow work or class mates. I will say that I don't have any hard facts to back that up, so I'll end here.
I am merely grateful that I and others have such a man to look up to in a field that so often seems at present to have so little diversity.
Friend, you are mistaken. "This field" may have "little diversity" in its clothes, hairstyle, and fiction preferences, yes. But, in the arena in the mind, you are very mistaken. I've never seen some beautiful things--come in so many forms--from the minds of tech/CS/math people. It's just that, by mainstream's standards, many of their works and endeavors are dismissed over more glamorous and glittery things such as Britney Spears new video, crap prime time TV, a hot new sports car, a stylish outfit, or looking buf on the beach.
IMHO, it's the artists, super-engineers, and super-scientists/academics who have the most diversity--it's just that, as you no doubt know, that diversity and pusle of life isn't seen with the eyes. It's seen with keen insight into their words, works, and actions. If the people you hang with are truely talented and driven but aren't "diverse" enough for you, then it's because you don't really know them.
Me: You know, I want to try some different software that MS doesn't offer in their archive.
MS: OK, fine, give us your computer back.
Me: What? No way, dude, all of my personal files are on here.
MS: Gee, sucks to be you. Guess you're stuck giving us money just to read your own data. Neener neener!
Hrm, you could add the following step and all your problems are solved:
Me: Ok, I'll burn all my personal files to a DVD and I'll have the computer back to you in an hour.
Slashdot Mirror
IE 4 was quite an impressive browser at the time. Mozilla and KHTML didn't exist. Opera has little CSS support.
Fair enough, but what about the case with IE5 and IE6? So, I suppose, that's where they "should have done the job right."
There was a poster back in the MS-making-an-iPod-competitor thread that reminded us that MS, in general, follows the disappointing pattern of always playing catch-up, rather than playing the leader. As he put it, "Way to go Microsoft--aim low."
You obviously aren't a developer.
Interesting! I've been a freeware and shareware developer since 98. See my tagline, ace.
Of course you're right about FLOSS developers working on what interests them, but the point I was trying to make was that to develop something like BeOS seems like building a ship in your basement--you know it'll never see the "real" high seas.
Here's a great short factual piece that's chuck-full of info, references, and key quotes (such as the Exxon vice-president quote).
I'm returning to work on the Internet Explorer team. A team that I used to work on a few years ago andI'm very excited to be returning to the team where we clearly have much work to do.
Yes, you do have a lot of work to do, Dave. Maybe you guys should have done the job right years ago rather than be in catch-up as well as damage-control mode.
That isn't a haiku. 1 too many syllables in the last part.
Cmon--like I don't know how to count syllables?? Dunno what dev community you come from but everyone I know pronounces it, "bee-aws"--two syllables total, and it's been like that for years.
What wonderful news! So in a few years, when modern industrial society has seized up and American life as we've known it comes to halt as a result of the rapidly diminishing fossil fuel supply, our cars will still be shiny!
I apologize for being off topic--mod me down--but the American car/suv/prettiness craze has gotten way out of hand...
More seriously, I urge people to plug into the facts and realties of the worlds fossil fuels, and how the American way of life and economy is presently overly-dependent on this resource.
We can only hope to elect policymakers that have the courage to make the right decisions and foster international cooperation (rather than, say, invade and occupy oil-producing regions).
/rant
You are a funny troll aren't you...
I actually meant it to be funny and didn't mean to insult anyone, but it looks like folks are taking it seriously--it's gotten the ol smackdown already. That reminds me, I heard that if someone mods you funny and another mods you down, the net result is -1, not 0. Anyone know if this is a true statement?
Separately, I'm amazed that people still do dev work for BeOS. By that, I mean, of all the open source projects to spend time on, why choose this one?! It seems there's a lot of open source projects that offer the world more value than BeOS does.
Many years have passed,
Developers, go elsewhere.
Please die, BeOS, die.
As the old saying goes, what do you call a doctor that graduated from the worst medical school on earth at the bottom of his class?
Doctor.
There is also another saying... If the bare minimum wasn't the bare minimum, then it wouldn't be the bare minimum.
Would an employer rather have a network ace than a trained guy for the same price? Absolutely--of course he would. Would that same employer keep a trained guy on the payroll that returns his worth in pay? Again, absolutely--your assumption is that every employer has unrestricted access to a bunch of talented net geeks.
I'm not saying I'm disagreeing w/ all of your post, but to say that all certs is a "joke" is a gross overstatement.
There's basically no reason to allocate a single object using new and delete it within the same scope. Allocating arrays, or allocating an object for use in a different scope, are okay.
Sigh. See my other post to the guy who jabbered this--you don't want to put certain objects on the stack.
You didn't understand what he was saying.
Ok, I hate to feed the trolls but fuck it... He posted:
Why allocate and deallocate an object within the scope of a function? Well, in C++, there's no reason, so this is bad code.
Now look at my post--I wasn't addressing the heap vs. stack issue directly--I was just answering his question. Indirectly I did address the stack issue because, pesumably, a big and nasty object with more than a couple k worth of instance data would never want to be put on the stack anyway! Stop acting like a lawyer, dude.
Your code is making the same mistake because it should instead declare the object on the stack, like this:
AReallyNastyObject temp;
Look, no delete required, and it's faster, too.
You have made clear you don't have a solid idea of what C++ code generation looks like.
.
I would prefer that a better C++ (a C-like memory model, powerful generic programming, inheritance, and polymorphism) that lacked C++'s current nightmare of strangely interacting features and syntax.
Objective-C is really impressive with the only shortcoming that there's no well-supprted Obj-C compiler that tagets x86 (that I know of). As I share with others, Obj-C is best described as taking the performance and power of C/C++ with all the safety and language correctness/elegance of java.
I'm a vet C and C++ guy, and I swear by metrowerks codewarrior (its IDE and its x86 and PPC compilers). It'll be a big day if/when metrowerks makes a Objective-C compiler that targets x86 (for Win32).
You would do it if you need a scrap object only sometimes (and didn't want to pay the overhead penalty of instantiating it every time the proc got called). Here's an example:
void foo() {
}
12) I, for one, welcome our new console Overlords
Let's get this out of the way:
1) This guy is the most dedicated console collector the world has ever seen!
2) This guy is the most fucked up collector the world has ever seen!
3) Imagine a Beowulf Cluster made out of them...
4) (Obligatory MS dig for the white Xbox at the end)
5) (Obligatory all you base belong to us joke)
6) Sure, but don't they support Ogg!
7) In Soviet Russia, the consoles buy you!
8) I have an Atari 2600, you insensitive clod!
9) Let's get this out of the way
10) ???
11) Not Profit!
(standard mythical man-month rant elided)
MOD PARENT UP.
Finally, someone with sense has reminded the manger/rookie/non-veteran type of this paramount principle. Glad to see everyone here isn't a slashbot.
However, I fear the lesson of the mythical man month will continue to go unlearned by most and history will repeat itself, as it always has.
for a quick definition of sound pressure level: http://arts.ucsc.edu/EMS/Music/tech_background/TE- 06/teces_06.html
That was a good link--I wish other posters would have a tighter knowledge about stuff before spoutin off. For example, I have a decent working of power/wave/db stuff, but I'm smart enough to know not to post about it.
That's precisely why you sound naive when you say things like "meanwhile, there's absolutely no risk of security." And you mislead newbies into thinking that there is such a thing as "absolutely no risk of security."
Fair enough, I shouldn't have said it that way.
Open Keychain Access, go up to the toolbar, and click on the "Note" icon.
*sigh* Sure, but the util mentioned steamlines things more by having a variety of fields already there, already labled, right in front of you, and everything gets encrypted (including the item title). And b/c it has separate fields, there's none of having to cram your data/pin/passwords/URL into the single note's edit field and have it look nasty.
Don't get me wrong, i'd love to see keychain streamlined in how i've described, but the reality is that the current version is not (and I *still* don't wan't people to see the names/titles of my keychain entry. If you have a item named "Money Safe Combo", an intruder could see that title and know you have a money safe nearby!
Lastly, there are a couple of security settings that really ought to be on by default, but aren't: Lock when sleeping and lock after 5 (or 10 or 15) minutes of inactivity.
Good points--you should submit those.
...must...not...feed....the trolls.....
...breaking down....
There is still a security risk. What if someone gets you Pasotr password. Then they can have them all.
You must be new here. You can *always* use that argument. Someone can *always* install a key recorder or watch you type in your password. Security is about raising barriers, not about thinking/searching for somthing that will solve the impossible.
I know you said you don't like the Keychain, but by using it, you surf to the webpage and... it's already filled in from an encrypted database. Why reinvent the wheel, especially for web logins and such?
Keychain expects/assumes that all the stuff you store in there is conventional logins at certain URLs, etc. A lot of the entries I store don't fit that mold: my local router login/pass, my credit card pins, and some server logins that have unconventional fields. Most importantly, I want all those fields to be encrypted, not just the password field--that's a huge issue. If someone is logged in w/ my Mac OS X acct, i don't want them to just browse my keychain's non-password fields.
Ah, funny this story was posted--I just had to address this issue the other day. I run Mac OS X and I happened to be doing a fresh install, moving all my data over from an old HD. Before this, I had always stored my slew of account info in a text file in an obscure and unlabeled file (I know, I know--very careless of me--that's way I was ready to change my ways!).
Mac OS X's built-in "Keychain" services/util isn't streamlined for repeated user use, not to mention it doesn't have several auxiliary/free-form fields (that are also fully encrypted with the password field). After some research and trying a few of the freeware and shareware apps out there, I came across Pastor, a freeware, super-lightweight and user-friendly app that basically lets you maintain a catalog of username, pass, and about 6 auxiliary fields, stored in an encrypted file (when you go to open a file, it prompts you for the password and decodes it on the fly). If for some reason you don't dig this particular app, there's a couple others like it as well with increasingly levels of features (I happen to prefer lightweight).
So I went w/ this model and it's had great payoffs--when I need a particular login, I click on an alias to my main password (Pastor) file, enter the file's password to decrypt it, look for what I need (it alphabetizes), and I'm all set--meanwhile, there's absolutely no risk of security--I love it.
...but it's my impression that overwhelming majority of people in CS programs are white guys. I know I can count the number of females I've seen in my CS classes on my hands. One hand, come to think of it, and I'm hardly polydactic.
Fair enough. And you're right--along with other poster who pointed out the percise definition of diveristy--there is often a narrow spectrum of social demographics in the CS/math/tech/engineer community. Is this really a "problem" per se? Sure, it's not preferrable all things being equal, but in Turing's case, it's was tragic backwardness of that day's society/culture/norms that forced him to his suicide, not--I wager--any of his fellow work or class mates. I will say that I don't have any hard facts to back that up, so I'll end here.
I am merely grateful that I and others have such a man to look up to in a field that so often seems at present to have so little diversity.
Friend, you are mistaken. "This field" may have "little diversity" in its clothes, hairstyle, and fiction preferences, yes. But, in the arena in the mind, you are very mistaken. I've never seen some beautiful things--come in so many forms--from the minds of tech/CS/math people. It's just that, by mainstream's standards, many of their works and endeavors are dismissed over more glamorous and glittery things such as Britney Spears new video, crap prime time TV, a hot new sports car, a stylish outfit, or looking buf on the beach.
IMHO, it's the artists, super-engineers, and super-scientists/academics who have the most diversity--it's just that, as you no doubt know, that diversity and pusle of life isn't seen with the eyes. It's seen with keen insight into their words, works, and actions. If the people you hang with are truely talented and driven but aren't "diverse" enough for you, then it's because you don't really know them.
Me: You know, I want to try some different software that MS doesn't offer in their archive.
MS: OK, fine, give us your computer back.
Me: What? No way, dude, all of my personal files are on here.
MS: Gee, sucks to be you. Guess you're stuck giving us money just to read your own data. Neener neener!
Hrm, you could add the following step and all your problems are solved:
Me: Ok, I'll burn all my personal files to a DVD and I'll have the computer back to you in an hour.
No need to thank me.