They don't need cross-platform toolkits. They hire cross-platform programmers, who are experienced in coding in native apis like Xlib and Windows API.
Or, if Qt is an issue, why not Java ?
Maybe because Java requires the end-user to install a Java Virtual Machine? Remember, we're dealing with the desktop market here. The less things the average user has to install to get things running, the better.
And don't tell me Java is already intalled everywhere, ok? It isn't.
Mac's Cult is Small....
on
The Cult of Mac
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Compared to Grand High Emperor Linus and his Linux empire! He's aided by Arch Supreme Bishop Stallman and his army of F/OSS programmers!!
Microsoft won't see any need to add new features as long as it's users don't find out, and it's market share remains 90%-ish.
Once it DOES feel threatened though, it'll pour resources and add all the features to it's OS that it thinks will maintain it's dominance. (think Mac/Windows, Netscape/IE, Java/C#).
But it'll probably ultimately fail this time. I'm a Windows fan, but I'm realistic: Linux will win in the long run.
Does anybody know if they're going to release a Personal version for download, just like they did for 9.1? Also, is it actually necessary to purchase 9.2, or could I just download the new RPMs for my 9.1?
let the code monkeys in India have it, anyone can write code, but they will still need a good software engineer to develop a piece of quality software.
Yes, because we all know Indians can't do software engineering.
It's this kind of thinking that made you lose your programming job to them in the first place.:-)
Flaws in both Languages
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Neither are open source.
Both require virtual machines.
Despite being marketed as portable, but have portability issues. Java is not backward compatible with older versions. C# has problems with porting some of the graphics stuff to Linux.
We don't really need them. PHP/Perl serve my needs on the web/server side. C++ and Python server my needs on the desktop side.
They're closely tied to their respective companies.
If you think this is flame-bait, check out this article's title.
so why don't all the versions of ms office that look different confuse windows users?
Really, only the colours have changed. The shortcuts/etc remain the same. =)
And the changes aren't as drastic as Motif to KDE.
Linux is plagued by too many toolkits. We've got Tcl/TK, Java, Motif, Athena Widgets or the old X toolkit, GTK, and Qt, and all of them look and feel totally different. Applications written in those toolkits do not follow the same standards and guidelines and are a mess to use. Especially if you have them side by side or you need to use them frequently.
- Chris Schlaeger from Novell/SUSE
This has been said many times before, but I have to agree because there hasn't been much improvement in this area.
To an experienced Linux user, multiple applications using different toolkits doesn't pose much of a problem. But for Average-Joe, who is used to most applications having the same look-n-feel on Mac OS or Windows, this is a BIG deal.
We really need some simple standards, e.g. standard shortcuts. But alot of people think this would kill the flexibility of Linux.
I'm taking a long shot here but...
New PSP
- Final Fantasy [Insert Number] [Insert Fantasy Title]
New Gameboy
- Pokemon [Insert Name of some Gem]: Gotta catch them all!
- Zelda [Insert Mythical Title]
I think I haven't explained the meaning of my post well enough. I'm just saying that today's standards are pretty tough to a newcomer (not a web designer as you say). The syntax is getting more complicated. Standards are good, but I believe if we got more people on the W3C committee, we would get something just as effective, but requires less learning to pick up.
P.S. I know I'm rambling but I'm just thinking of my kids in the future when I try to teach them how to create their first standards-compliant webpage.
Imagine if the Internet had started out with today's newest XML standards back in the early 90s. Imagine that browsers were strict and accepted only standards-compliant code. To design a site you'd have to know strict XML and understand DOCTYPES and all that. The layout of your webpage would be strictly defined by CSS 2.0, which means you'd have to learn that too.
Would the Internet have flourished? Maybe. But I bet adoption would have been slower. It would have certainly put off alot of people trying to create a simple functioning webpage.
Heck, it might have caused some genius to invent a simpler alternative to XML/CSS
New to Java, old stuff to C++.
This was Sun's plan for Java. Grab some features from existing languages, and market it as a simple strip-down version to attract programmers who can't understand pointers, enums, operator-overloading and templates.
10 years later, add in these features (but call them generics, not templates! or people will be on to us!) and call them "New".
Oh wait, they still haven't added in operator overloading. Let's wait another 5 years, release Java Panther then we add them and call them "New!"
Slashdot Mirror
They don't need cross-platform toolkits. They hire cross-platform programmers, who are experienced in coding in native apis like Xlib and Windows API.
Or, if Qt is an issue, why not Java ?Maybe because Java requires the end-user to install a Java Virtual Machine? Remember, we're dealing with the desktop market here. The less things the average user has to install to get things running, the better.
And don't tell me Java is already intalled everywhere, ok? It isn't.
Compared to Grand High Emperor Linus and his Linux empire! He's aided by Arch Supreme Bishop Stallman and his army of F/OSS programmers!!
...yet.
Microsoft won't see any need to add new features as long as it's users don't find out, and it's market share remains 90%-ish.
Once it DOES feel threatened though, it'll pour resources and add all the features to it's OS that it thinks will maintain it's dominance. (think Mac/Windows, Netscape/IE, Java/C#).
But it'll probably ultimately fail this time. I'm a Windows fan, but I'm realistic: Linux will win in the long run.
Does anybody know if they're going to release a Personal version for download, just like they did for 9.1? Also, is it actually necessary to purchase 9.2, or could I just download the new RPMs for my 9.1?
How different is this from my Preview Release? Should I download it? Or just wait until Nov 9th?
I was watching an old episode of Triumph of the Nerds yesterday, and they mentioned how Gary Kildall didn't seize the opportunity.
I have never had a problem with my Firefox crashing (ever). But now thanks to this article, I can correct that. =)
Microsoft's revenues/profits have been positive so far. Maybe they will face "oblivion"...but not in this decade.
Aren't engineers, mechanics and construction workers today's names for blacksmiths? Job description seems the same.
kaze = Wind
So kamikaze actually means something like the Wind God.
Off-topic? I guess. Just though I'd share anyway.
let the code monkeys in India have it, anyone can write code, but they will still need a good software engineer to develop a piece of quality software. Yes, because we all know Indians can't do software engineering. It's this kind of thinking that made you lose your programming job to them in the first place. :-)
It's free and it works great! =)
Neither are open source.
Both require virtual machines.
Despite being marketed as portable, but have portability issues. Java is not backward compatible with older versions. C# has problems with porting some of the graphics stuff to Linux.
We don't really need them. PHP/Perl serve my needs on the web/server side. C++ and Python server my needs on the desktop side.
They're closely tied to their respective companies.
If you think this is flame-bait, check out this article's title.
Shaquille O'Neal and Yao Ming would kung fu their asses.
Wolverine: Foolish humans. My adamantium claws would rip your nanocrap into shreds.
so why don't all the versions of ms office that look different confuse windows users? Really, only the colours have changed. The shortcuts/etc remain the same. =) And the changes aren't as drastic as Motif to KDE.
I think Konqi looks much better in that photo than in SUSE's log-off screen.
This has been said many times before, but I have to agree because there hasn't been much improvement in this area.
To an experienced Linux user, multiple applications using different toolkits doesn't pose much of a problem. But for Average-Joe, who is used to most applications having the same look-n-feel on Mac OS or Windows, this is a BIG deal.
We really need some simple standards, e.g. standard shortcuts. But alot of people think this would kill the flexibility of Linux.
I just installed SUSE 9.1 !!!!!! =O
I'm taking a long shot here but... New PSP - Final Fantasy [Insert Number] [Insert Fantasy Title] New Gameboy - Pokemon [Insert Name of some Gem]: Gotta catch them all! - Zelda [Insert Mythical Title]
Does that mean the copyright industry is an enemy of the USA and Americans? Why else would it be waging wrath upon them?
I think I haven't explained the meaning of my post well enough. I'm just saying that today's standards are pretty tough to a newcomer (not a web designer as you say). The syntax is getting more complicated. Standards are good, but I believe if we got more people on the W3C committee, we would get something just as effective, but requires less learning to pick up. P.S. I know I'm rambling but I'm just thinking of my kids in the future when I try to teach them how to create their first standards-compliant webpage.
Imagine if the Internet had started out with today's newest XML standards back in the early 90s. Imagine that browsers were strict and accepted only standards-compliant code. To design a site you'd have to know strict XML and understand DOCTYPES and all that. The layout of your webpage would be strictly defined by CSS 2.0, which means you'd have to learn that too.
Would the Internet have flourished? Maybe. But I bet adoption would have been slower. It would have certainly put off alot of people trying to create a simple functioning webpage.
Heck, it might have caused some genius to invent a simpler alternative to XML/CSS
I'm shocked.
New to Java, old stuff to C++. This was Sun's plan for Java. Grab some features from existing languages, and market it as a simple strip-down version to attract programmers who can't understand pointers, enums, operator-overloading and templates. 10 years later, add in these features (but call them generics, not templates! or people will be on to us!) and call them "New". Oh wait, they still haven't added in operator overloading. Let's wait another 5 years, release Java Panther then we add them and call them "New!"