Don't know if that is still a core part of their technology; certainly makes sense, as lots of high-performance applications avoid creating lots of threads in order to scale--especially when there's IO involved. Thus, Stackless Python also takes the same approach to logical concurrency as Erlang.
I upgraded to Leopard with my LaCie drive attached via Firewire, so that Time Machine would recognize it. I also let it set over night to do the full backup (which I think it did--saw 150GB disappear from that disk). Now today, that same LaCie drive is back where it belongs attached to Airport Extreme, and anytime that that volume shows up on the network, Time Machine seems to recognize it. That is, I am able to enter the Time Machine restore interface, and I can start or stop a backup.
I want to plug that drive back into my laptop directly over night, then see how it goes tomorrow. I am optimistic that as long as the initial set of backups are completed, the incrementals may be manageable via AEBS. Given that Macs always recognize volumes as the same regardless of whether they are attached directly or over the network, I'm hoping Time Machine won't mind.
Huh, I guess I wasn't paying attention to when Slashdot turned into Digg, even though I read both. Here's a link to the original article, rather than what might be a splog. Especially since the article text was copied verbatim.
That is, because American society does not yet fully appreciate the validity of gay relationships, the word "husband" (indicative of a committed legal bond sanctioned by the state) can't be used, so he has to say "partner."
Yet, if he had said "wife," also indicative of a commited legal bond sanctioned by the state, would anyone have questioned whether his wife had really received these calls, when the poster didn't indicate as such? Is somehow a gay relationship less "committed" or less "trustworthy" than a straight relationship? I think not.
Discrimination shows up in the oddest ways, even among the educated and tolerant (yeah, I know this is Slashdot, yada, yada,...). It's important to recognize the possibility of it for what it is, so that we can all grow.
The real story is downloadable TV content with good quality at a good price.
By making the whole announcement about video iPod, Jobs is avoiding a clash (or premature announcement) with the movie studios about downloadable movies. Instead, he is making a case for how downloadable movies could work, using TV content as a proxy.
With the whole FrontRow bit on the new iMacs, he is also starting (stealthily) the assault on the living room: what is FrontRow but a potential alternative to Windows Media Center Edition? Sure, there's no built in HDTV frame grabber, there's no DVR, but almost all the parts are in place. Through in a 30" Cinema Display and a Mac Mini and you have an all-Apple digital hub (the Mini) ready in your living room ready and waiting to deliver content--whenever it is ready.
Now that I've written it all out, this has echoes of "if you build it, they will come..."
Please remember, Java is still supported, it is simply the Cocoa-Java bridge that will no longer be improved. If you are not clear on what the Cocoa-Java bridge is (or event Cocoa), then here is a quick primer: Cocoa is the preferred API for Mac OS X, specifically for applications written in Objective-C. The Cocoa-Java bridge was a similar API that exposed essentially the same object model to Java based applications. As the API was specific to Mac OS X, any application written on top of the Java Cocoa APIs was specific to Mac OS X and thus not portable.
I would expect the impact to Java developers on OS X to be quite low. Most probably use Swing or SWT for cross-platform support, so the impact of this decision should be negligible.
Quite the contrary: when I speak of a "balanced" market, I mean that neither side is truly desperate--that is both employer and job seeker have approximately the same level of "power" in the negotiation. Desperation is a sure sign that the desperate party doesn't have as much power in the process as they would like--and that's not what I am seeing.
To be fair I can't tell if it is 100% balanced. Employers right now do (generally) have the luxury of waiting if they aren't finding just the right candidate--that's where an employer has an edge, with their deeper pockets and control over the filling of positions. Having said that (and thinking about my earlier posting), it is pretty darn balanced, because the "counter" an employers ability to wait is a candidate's ability to refuse a lower offer than they are willing to take or just take another, better offer. And I am seeing all of those behaviors, so that is pretty close to balanced.
Don't forget, that labor markets have a way of sorting themselves out. And that happens by participants in that market changing their behavior to match market conditions. So, if a company isn't finding the right candidates, they'll need to eithe revise the job description or check that they are offering competitive compensation. Job seekers need to check that their skills are sufficiently current and attractive, or that they are not looking too narrowly into the market for opportunities.
"Change or die" is still the engine of any free market, and that applies to labor markets especially. Anyone feeling desperate (e.g., about to die) should truly ask themselves if they have made all the changes that they will need to match the market in which they are participating.
One form of change (besides the transition from pure IT to customer-savvy, business skills): relocation. A very good friend of mine was in advertising at the end of the dot com crash, and he was out of work for almost 2 years before finding a job. He lost his job in San Francisco, moved to Boston near family to job hunt and recoup, then finally relocated to Atlanta, because that's where the good job offer was located. Fast forward 2 years, that same company gets ripped apart (management changes--most anyone hired in prior 5 years lost their job, through no fault of their own). 3 months later, he has a job in St. Louis. Sure, he has to be willing to relocate, but things have to be better when the 2nd time looking for a job takes 3 months--not 2 years.
Speaking as a hiring manager, and one who has friends in the recruiting profession, the market for tech skills is actually not that bad. It feels like a roughly balanced market--with any edge probably on the side of employers, albeit a slight one.
I say this because I've hired several positions in the last 2 years, and there just aren't that many qualified candidates out there. As the AC said, the good ones are employed, and that is the sign of a healthy, balanced market.
I've personally written the job descriptions to hire my employees in the last 5 years, and I typically separate the years of experience from the skills--seasoning is different from the toolset. And, like most skill lists, the skills are just "desirable qualities," not at all a comprehensive list of mandatory skills. Yet I find few good candidates (on average).
You're right, an HR department can be terrible at throwing away the wheat and giving you the chaff, but I disagree there as well. Since I have friends in the recruiting biz, they have helped me considerably with hiring over the last few years--and they *do* hand over just the bits of wheat they are able to find.
I've even seen very good candidates decline reasonable offers, because they had good offers elsewhere. Again, that's a sign of a healthy (or healthier, at least) job market, and certainly supports the ACs comment that good people are fully employed. They are not only fully employed, but they have options when they switch.
Finally, the recruiters that I know have told me that the last few months have been crazy busy, contrary to typical trends for this time of year. Plus, when year over year comparisons are made, about the last 15-18 months have been far better for them than the prior 15-18 months. And economic recovery does typically hit recruiters early in the game, as they are direct recipients of the benefits of companies feeling flush enough to not only hire but pay a premium for it.
Seriously. That's where programmers (can) go when they get old, they don't just fade away. They don't have to get outsourced, they don't all retire at the age of 35 worth zillions accumulated from stock options at half a dozen companies, they can go into management. If you really do have those kinds of leanings, you should seriously consider adjusting your career path towards the management track. Bear in mind that typically companies don't hire you in as a manager (or department head, or whatever) unless you have previous management experience. Instead, you should build up your leadership profile where you are: take on team lead roles, take on architect roles (if you have the chops), be willing to carry the project plan around and be the project manager. I once had a group of jovial senior developers refer to me as the "elevator runner." Our project team was split between 2 floors of a high-rise office building, and since I was the "team lead" for that batch, I was the one who got in the elevator to go upstairs to see the project manager. It wasn't a derogatory comment, it was just a humorous description of my role--and just recognizing that it was a different role than theirs, which was to be senior developers.
Yet perhaps not so much for the art of movies. Alas, because I enjoyed the original trilogy so much in my childhood.
He created one of the greatest (and first, I believe) movie merchandizing businesses in history. I would question whether there would be so many "Power Ranger Toys" or "Barney" tie-ins if the Star Wars franchise hadn't done been so successful.
He has continually expanded the frontier of digital effects in film-making, and although in recent years his studio's work has been eclipsed by other films (e.g., The Matrix, Shrek, Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, etc.), I do believe that nevertheless he deserves credit for the push towards effective uses of digital imagery in cinema.
He has enhanced the audio experience in most large cinemas in operation today (at least in the US). I can't say how many times I've seen "THX-1138" digital surround sound by Dolby--that sound system was developed in conjunction with Lucas' team.
He was first to expand the idea of film sequels (and series) in modern cinema. Would we have had Die Hard, Die Harder were it not for Lucas? Would we have The Matrix, The Matrix Reloaded, The Matrix Revolutions were it not for Lucas? What about Star Trek the Movie I-IV? Back to the Future I-II? If the original trilogy had not been so popular with audiences, would subsequent sequels & series concepts have been developed other major film studios?
There may be other such achievements as well, but with the above I think there is a strong case that Lucas reshaped how the business of movies does it's business.
Although you do make good points about debug symbols mostly taking a space instead of slowing things down, one can't forget the compiler optimizations that are often enabled in release builds but not enabled in debug builds. Without those optimizations (particularly for C++ apps, as many commercial software products are still C++), some operations may be orders of magnitude slower.
Hence, not suprising that debug builds are often perceived as slower.
I've used the OLAP stuff on SQL Server, and I honestly didn't find it much help. From what I saw, it was practically a *report writer* front-end on top of the underlying database--not nearly enough power for the problems my company has.
True OLAP often involves many layers of analysis, with many steps of processing. I had hoped that SQL Server OLAP would help manage all that, but it doesn't do enough. To be fair, there are some nice tools to graphically create what amouont to some stored procedures, but after a while, an experienced SQL developer will just revert to lots and lots of stored procedures chained together in a job that runs on a regular basis. Consequently, all that mysterious logic about *how* a number in the middle of an OLAP report came to be calculated is still stored in a procedure that can't easily be modified. OLAP in SQL Server gives the illusion that analysis is easy, but, alas, it is not.
I'd be curious to hear from others who have used SQL Server's OLAP and other tools like Cognos, Oracle, or Siebel, etc. What OLAP features *should* PostgreSQL adopt?
Google relies on their own custom filesystem that provides similar features: massively distributed and scalable, supporting clusters 3 orders of magnitude higher (100,000 nodes) than Red Hat GFS. Further, many life sciences companies have very large computing problems requiring large amounts of storage and hundreds of nodes to solve--hence, GFS (as could XSan from Apple) can be useful in these classes of problems.
I think you are likely correct--typical IT shops in your average enterprise will not find this useful. Any solution that depends on heavy IT administration is falling out of favor in the marketplace. But is it clear that this solution does require heavy IT administration, for the amount of nodes actually managed in a single GFS cluster? In fact, this solution may *increase* the leverage of IT admins--allowing them to manage far more resources with the same staff. That's what Google is able to do.
So, you do raise an interesting point, but I don't know if there is evidence in the marketplace suggest you are 100% correct.
And I also agree that the current Windows.Forms (incomplete though it is) will be used for 2-3 years by real applications prior to anyone ever really seeing Longhorn.
I guess I'm concerned that requiring WINE to run Windows.Forms is a *huge* amount of overhead just to throw up a GUI. Especially since WINE isn't completely perfectly compatible with Windows, despite many years of trying very, very hard (perhaps I'm ignoring CrossOver Office? Begin laughter now, if I'm being too glib).
So where would I use Windows.Forms? If I were an IT Director (oh, right, I've done that!), then I wouldn't have my folks writing rich client apps, I had have them right web apps. If I were a Director of Software Development (oh, right, I am that!), then I would think very carefully about where my product is going and who it's for.
I would argue that there are only a small number of firms who need rich client development, and they should think very, very carefully about their cross-platform needs. This isn't the world of 1992, when cross-platform was hard (and only for C/C++) and desktops were still a wide-open game. Desktops are fairly locked up, except for specific markets, and desktops aren't even the most interesting markets anymore. Consequently, the utility of locking into a desktop-only, non-portable, stillborn API is low--not zero by any means (it's damn easy to create apps with Windows.Forms, I confess), but not as high as I would like to justify heavy use of it my organizations.
Take the above for what it's worth: just one man's opinion. I'd love to know if I've oversimplified, or if I really am missing the cases where the risk of choosing a dead-end technology is worth the benefits received (and there are certainly benefits to Windows.Forms, no dbout).
Even Microsoft is abandoning Windows.Forms as they move towards Longhorn, which is based on a completely different GUI programming model (Avalon,XAML). Windows.Forms was always very Windows-specific, being little more than wrappers for the Win32 API. Without a complete Win32 API implementation, it's nearly impossible to bring up a 100% compatible Windows.Forms implementation on any other platform. And given that 1) again, Microsoft itself is abandoning it, and 2) there are alternatives for cross-platform development (Gtk#), you may want to branch out a little bit sooner rather than later.
Although there may be other limiting factors, SharpDevelop depends on WinForms, so until WinForms is successfully emulated on non-Windows platforms, that alone will prevent running it anywhere but on Windows.
The bounce backs themselves are probably not legit; I've been seeing a few bounce backs, but my best interpretation of them is that they are spoofed. Just another tactic to get you to read and possibly interact with the e-mail (e.g., click on a link, reply, etc.)
The proposed design asserts that man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks can be eliminated by using SSL. However, SSL suffers from man in the middle vulnerabilities; see Netscape's SSL documentation and this paper from the SANS institute.
I think I was hoping for an algorithm with the handshaking complexity of Kerberos or SSL, because unfortunately a good security algorithm typically requires that level of sophistication, I would assert. Perhaps the design was aiming for a simpler starting point, with furthe refinement in the future; if so, it has met the goal nicely.
Amen. If you like Linux, there are reasons to like Apple.
I ran a Linux server and a Linx laptop at home for 2+ years (both Debian, up to 3.0 at the end), and although I had a ton of fun, my new PowerBook with OS X beats the pants off that experience. I *still* get to tinker with open source software *and* have a great, gorgeous GUI and devices that just work when attached. It's like having my cake and eating it, too.
That the article was written in Darl McBride's own backyard (Utah) is particularly telling. Any company worth it's salt knows that you at least keep your local press on your side: that's who your employees, your suppliers, and your closetst customers and partners read.
It's called QuickTime Streaming Server 5 and it comes bundled with Panther Server. Checking out Apple's website, in addition to supporting video it also handles MP3 audio, among many other formats.
To be fair, I haven't used QTSS so I can't speak to it's utility. And you did say "lightweight," so it's possible this isn't it....;)
The 40 GB iPod is almost targeting a different market: yes, it really is good for the hard core music lover, but it has so much storage that it really becomes useful as a second hard drive. I have found the 40 GB to be an excellent back up device for most of the files in my home directory. Anything smaller, and I would have had to choose whether the iPod should be music-only or backup-only. With this much room, I don't have to choose. If I were a professional musician or photographer, I can see how the sheer size would be handy as portable storage.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I read the headline and the biggest "DUH!!" came out of my mouth.
Thank god I have a private office....
http://www.stackless.com/wiki/Applications
Don't know if that is still a core part of their technology; certainly makes sense, as lots of high-performance applications avoid creating lots of threads in order to scale--especially when there's IO involved. Thus, Stackless Python also takes the same approach to logical concurrency as Erlang.
I upgraded to Leopard with my LaCie drive attached via Firewire, so that Time Machine would recognize it. I also let it set over night to do the full backup (which I think it did--saw 150GB disappear from that disk). Now today, that same LaCie drive is back where it belongs attached to Airport Extreme, and anytime that that volume shows up on the network, Time Machine seems to recognize it. That is, I am able to enter the Time Machine restore interface, and I can start or stop a backup.
I want to plug that drive back into my laptop directly over night, then see how it goes tomorrow. I am optimistic that as long as the initial set of backups are completed, the incrementals may be manageable via AEBS. Given that Macs always recognize volumes as the same regardless of whether they are attached directly or over the network, I'm hoping Time Machine won't mind.
Huh, I guess I wasn't paying attention to when Slashdot turned into Digg, even though I read both. Here's a link to the original article, rather than what might be a splog. Especially since the article text was copied verbatim.
- EurekAlert
- ScienceDaily
Enjoy!That is, because American society does not yet fully appreciate the validity of gay relationships, the word "husband" (indicative of a committed legal bond sanctioned by the state) can't be used, so he has to say "partner."
Yet, if he had said "wife," also indicative of a commited legal bond sanctioned by the state, would anyone have questioned whether his wife had really received these calls, when the poster didn't indicate as such? Is somehow a gay relationship less "committed" or less "trustworthy" than a straight relationship? I think not.
Discrimination shows up in the oddest ways, even among the educated and tolerant (yeah, I know this is Slashdot, yada, yada,...). It's important to recognize the possibility of it for what it is, so that we can all grow.
The real story is downloadable TV content with good quality at a good price.
By making the whole announcement about video iPod, Jobs is avoiding a clash (or premature announcement) with the movie studios about downloadable movies. Instead, he is making a case for how downloadable movies could work, using TV content as a proxy.
With the whole FrontRow bit on the new iMacs, he is also starting (stealthily) the assault on the living room: what is FrontRow but a potential alternative to Windows Media Center Edition? Sure, there's no built in HDTV frame grabber, there's no DVR, but almost all the parts are in place. Through in a 30" Cinema Display and a Mac Mini and you have an all-Apple digital hub (the Mini) ready in your living room ready and waiting to deliver content--whenever it is ready.
Now that I've written it all out, this has echoes of "if you build it, they will come..."
Please remember, Java is still supported, it is simply the Cocoa-Java bridge that will no longer be improved. If you are not clear on what the Cocoa-Java bridge is (or event Cocoa), then here is a quick primer: Cocoa is the preferred API for Mac OS X, specifically for applications written in Objective-C. The Cocoa-Java bridge was a similar API that exposed essentially the same object model to Java based applications. As the API was specific to Mac OS X, any application written on top of the Java Cocoa APIs was specific to Mac OS X and thus not portable.
I would expect the impact to Java developers on OS X to be quite low. Most probably use Swing or SWT for cross-platform support, so the impact of this decision should be negligible.
Desperation? On which side?
Quite the contrary: when I speak of a "balanced" market, I mean that neither side is truly desperate--that is both employer and job seeker have approximately the same level of "power" in the negotiation. Desperation is a sure sign that the desperate party doesn't have as much power in the process as they would like--and that's not what I am seeing.
To be fair I can't tell if it is 100% balanced. Employers right now do (generally) have the luxury of waiting if they aren't finding just the right candidate--that's where an employer has an edge, with their deeper pockets and control over the filling of positions. Having said that (and thinking about my earlier posting), it is pretty darn balanced, because the "counter" an employers ability to wait is a candidate's ability to refuse a lower offer than they are willing to take or just take another, better offer. And I am seeing all of those behaviors, so that is pretty close to balanced.
Don't forget, that labor markets have a way of sorting themselves out. And that happens by participants in that market changing their behavior to match market conditions. So, if a company isn't finding the right candidates, they'll need to eithe revise the job description or check that they are offering competitive compensation. Job seekers need to check that their skills are sufficiently current and attractive, or that they are not looking too narrowly into the market for opportunities.
"Change or die" is still the engine of any free market, and that applies to labor markets especially. Anyone feeling desperate (e.g., about to die) should truly ask themselves if they have made all the changes that they will need to match the market in which they are participating.
One form of change (besides the transition from pure IT to customer-savvy, business skills): relocation. A very good friend of mine was in advertising at the end of the dot com crash, and he was out of work for almost 2 years before finding a job. He lost his job in San Francisco, moved to Boston near family to job hunt and recoup, then finally relocated to Atlanta, because that's where the good job offer was located. Fast forward 2 years, that same company gets ripped apart (management changes--most anyone hired in prior 5 years lost their job, through no fault of their own). 3 months later, he has a job in St. Louis. Sure, he has to be willing to relocate, but things have to be better when the 2nd time looking for a job takes 3 months--not 2 years.
Speaking as a hiring manager, and one who has friends in the recruiting profession, the market for tech skills is actually not that bad. It feels like a roughly balanced market--with any edge probably on the side of employers, albeit a slight one.
I say this because I've hired several positions in the last 2 years, and there just aren't that many qualified candidates out there. As the AC said, the good ones are employed, and that is the sign of a healthy, balanced market.
I've personally written the job descriptions to hire my employees in the last 5 years, and I typically separate the years of experience from the skills--seasoning is different from the toolset. And, like most skill lists, the skills are just "desirable qualities," not at all a comprehensive list of mandatory skills. Yet I find few good candidates (on average).
You're right, an HR department can be terrible at throwing away the wheat and giving you the chaff, but I disagree there as well. Since I have friends in the recruiting biz, they have helped me considerably with hiring over the last few years--and they *do* hand over just the bits of wheat they are able to find.
I've even seen very good candidates decline reasonable offers, because they had good offers elsewhere. Again, that's a sign of a healthy (or healthier, at least) job market, and certainly supports the ACs comment that good people are fully employed. They are not only fully employed, but they have options when they switch.
Finally, the recruiters that I know have told me that the last few months have been crazy busy, contrary to typical trends for this time of year. Plus, when year over year comparisons are made, about the last 15-18 months have been far better for them than the prior 15-18 months. And economic recovery does typically hit recruiters early in the game, as they are direct recipients of the benefits of companies feeling flush enough to not only hire but pay a premium for it.
Seriously. That's where programmers (can) go when they get old, they don't just fade away. They don't have to get outsourced, they don't all retire at the age of 35 worth zillions accumulated from stock options at half a dozen companies, they can go into management. If you really do have those kinds of leanings, you should seriously consider adjusting your career path towards the management track. Bear in mind that typically companies don't hire you in as a manager (or department head, or whatever) unless you have previous management experience. Instead, you should build up your leadership profile where you are: take on team lead roles, take on architect roles (if you have the chops), be willing to carry the project plan around and be the project manager. I once had a group of jovial senior developers refer to me as the "elevator runner." Our project team was split between 2 floors of a high-rise office building, and since I was the "team lead" for that batch, I was the one who got in the elevator to go upstairs to see the project manager. It wasn't a derogatory comment, it was just a humorous description of my role--and just recognizing that it was a different role than theirs, which was to be senior developers.
Yet perhaps not so much for the art of movies. Alas, because I enjoyed the original trilogy so much in my childhood.
He created one of the greatest (and first, I believe) movie merchandizing businesses in history. I would question whether there would be so many "Power Ranger Toys" or "Barney" tie-ins if the Star Wars franchise hadn't done been so successful.
He has continually expanded the frontier of digital effects in film-making, and although in recent years his studio's work has been eclipsed by other films (e.g., The Matrix, Shrek, Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, etc.), I do believe that nevertheless he deserves credit for the push towards effective uses of digital imagery in cinema.
He has enhanced the audio experience in most large cinemas in operation today (at least in the US). I can't say how many times I've seen "THX-1138" digital surround sound by Dolby--that sound system was developed in conjunction with Lucas' team.
He was first to expand the idea of film sequels (and series) in modern cinema. Would we have had Die Hard, Die Harder were it not for Lucas? Would we have The Matrix, The Matrix Reloaded, The Matrix Revolutions were it not for Lucas? What about Star Trek the Movie I-IV? Back to the Future I-II? If the original trilogy had not been so popular with audiences, would subsequent sequels & series concepts have been developed other major film studios?
There may be other such achievements as well, but with the above I think there is a strong case that Lucas reshaped how the business of movies does it's business.
Although you do make good points about debug symbols mostly taking a space instead of slowing things down, one can't forget the compiler optimizations that are often enabled in release builds but not enabled in debug builds. Without those optimizations (particularly for C++ apps, as many commercial software products are still C++), some operations may be orders of magnitude slower.
Hence, not suprising that debug builds are often perceived as slower.
I've used the OLAP stuff on SQL Server, and I honestly didn't find it much help. From what I saw, it was practically a *report writer* front-end on top of the underlying database--not nearly enough power for the problems my company has.
True OLAP often involves many layers of analysis, with many steps of processing. I had hoped that SQL Server OLAP would help manage all that, but it doesn't do enough. To be fair, there are some nice tools to graphically create what amouont to some stored procedures, but after a while, an experienced SQL developer will just revert to lots and lots of stored procedures chained together in a job that runs on a regular basis. Consequently, all that mysterious logic about *how* a number in the middle of an OLAP report came to be calculated is still stored in a procedure that can't easily be modified. OLAP in SQL Server gives the illusion that analysis is easy, but, alas, it is not.
I'd be curious to hear from others who have used SQL Server's OLAP and other tools like Cognos, Oracle, or Siebel, etc. What OLAP features *should* PostgreSQL adopt?
Google relies on their own custom filesystem that provides similar features: massively distributed and scalable, supporting clusters 3 orders of magnitude higher (100,000 nodes) than Red Hat GFS. Further, many life sciences companies have very large computing problems requiring large amounts of storage and hundreds of nodes to solve--hence, GFS (as could XSan from Apple) can be useful in these classes of problems.
I think you are likely correct--typical IT shops in your average enterprise will not find this useful. Any solution that depends on heavy IT administration is falling out of favor in the marketplace. But is it clear that this solution does require heavy IT administration, for the amount of nodes actually managed in a single GFS cluster? In fact, this solution may *increase* the leverage of IT admins--allowing them to manage far more resources with the same staff. That's what Google is able to do.
So, you do raise an interesting point, but I don't know if there is evidence in the marketplace suggest you are 100% correct.
And I also agree that the current Windows.Forms (incomplete though it is) will be used for 2-3 years by real applications prior to anyone ever really seeing Longhorn.
I guess I'm concerned that requiring WINE to run Windows.Forms is a *huge* amount of overhead just to throw up a GUI. Especially since WINE isn't completely perfectly compatible with Windows, despite many years of trying very, very hard (perhaps I'm ignoring CrossOver Office? Begin laughter now, if I'm being too glib).
So where would I use Windows.Forms? If I were an IT Director (oh, right, I've done that!), then I wouldn't have my folks writing rich client apps, I had have them right web apps. If I were a Director of Software Development (oh, right, I am that!), then I would think very carefully about where my product is going and who it's for.
I would argue that there are only a small number of firms who need rich client development, and they should think very, very carefully about their cross-platform needs. This isn't the world of 1992, when cross-platform was hard (and only for C/C++) and desktops were still a wide-open game. Desktops are fairly locked up, except for specific markets, and desktops aren't even the most interesting markets anymore. Consequently, the utility of locking into a desktop-only, non-portable, stillborn API is low--not zero by any means (it's damn easy to create apps with Windows.Forms, I confess), but not as high as I would like to justify heavy use of it my organizations.
Take the above for what it's worth: just one man's opinion. I'd love to know if I've oversimplified, or if I really am missing the cases where the risk of choosing a dead-end technology is worth the benefits received (and there are certainly benefits to Windows.Forms, no dbout).
Even Microsoft is abandoning Windows.Forms as they move towards Longhorn, which is based on a completely different GUI programming model (Avalon,XAML). Windows.Forms was always very Windows-specific, being little more than wrappers for the Win32 API. Without a complete Win32 API implementation, it's nearly impossible to bring up a 100% compatible Windows.Forms implementation on any other platform. And given that 1) again, Microsoft itself is abandoning it, and 2) there are alternatives for cross-platform development (Gtk#), you may want to branch out a little bit sooner rather than later.
Although there may be other limiting factors, SharpDevelop depends on WinForms, so until WinForms is successfully emulated on non-Windows platforms, that alone will prevent running it anywhere but on Windows.
Open source .NET IDE:
The bounce backs themselves are probably not legit; I've been seeing a few bounce backs, but my best interpretation of them is that they are spoofed. Just another tactic to get you to read and possibly interact with the e-mail (e.g., click on a link, reply, etc.)
The proposed design asserts that man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks can be eliminated by using SSL. However, SSL suffers from man in the middle vulnerabilities; see Netscape's SSL documentation and this paper from the SANS institute.
I think I was hoping for an algorithm with the handshaking complexity of Kerberos or SSL, because unfortunately a good security algorithm typically requires that level of sophistication, I would assert. Perhaps the design was aiming for a simpler starting point, with furthe refinement in the future; if so, it has met the goal nicely.
Amen. If you like Linux, there are reasons to like Apple.
I ran a Linux server and a Linx laptop at home for 2+ years (both Debian, up to 3.0 at the end), and although I had a ton of fun, my new PowerBook with OS X beats the pants off that experience. I *still* get to tinker with open source software *and* have a great, gorgeous GUI and devices that just work when attached. It's like having my cake and eating it, too.
That the article was written in Darl McBride's own backyard (Utah) is particularly telling. Any company worth it's salt knows that you at least keep your local press on your side: that's who your employees, your suppliers, and your closetst customers and partners read.
It's called QuickTime Streaming Server 5 and it comes bundled with Panther Server. Checking out Apple's website, in addition to supporting video it also handles MP3 audio, among many other formats.
;)
To be fair, I haven't used QTSS so I can't speak to it's utility. And you did say "lightweight," so it's possible this isn't it....
The 40 GB iPod is almost targeting a different market: yes, it really is good for the hard core music lover, but it has so much storage that it really becomes useful as a second hard drive. I have found the 40 GB to be an excellent back up device for most of the files in my home directory. Anything smaller, and I would have had to choose whether the iPod should be music-only or backup-only. With this much room, I don't have to choose. If I were a professional musician or photographer, I can see how the sheer size would be handy as portable storage.