Did you checked V 1.3 of Java? Swing got really performance there. The upcoming version 1.4 will be faster, too.
On Linux, Java isn't that fast in GUI because of the way it handles the graphics with X. Java 1.4 will get his own leap there.
I think JBuilder4 is the best example which can proof GUI-speed. And for me it's fast enough to develop with it.
OTOH Java-GUI's along their ideas are quite more complex to build than clicking some VB-Frames together (where you'll get more "what you expect to be get"). In Java it's useful to know what you would like to have BEFORE you'll begin with the GUI.
For the cross-platform: I don't know how "usual" we are, but we really need it to get it on more than one platform.
You have a P200 with 64 MByte RAM. Try Windows 2000 with IE5 on this machine and if it is faster and more stable than Mozilla0.7, I'll spend you a beer or so...;-)
I think Internet C++ is as useful as GCC is, with the difference, that the compiled code is NOT native. So what's the advantage then?
You have to write with "Multiplatform C++ style" anyway if you're using Internet C++. Nobody will be able to make the MFC available on Unix, except Wine maybe. But that's at the end the native way too.
So I think Internet C++ fails the point (nice try...).
There are many people here who states that Java (and C#) is actually a bad thing and Internet C++ was what they've been waiting for.
I'll promise you: you're skills will have no advantages in this as it has no real advantage in any C Interpretors. It is not possible to do all "dirty" and "not so dirty" things possible in C++ on all machines. Alpha, PowerPC and Intel architecture are so different in so many ways, it's not possible to hold all the good things in C++ up while to not care about the platforms you'll support at the end. So it will be not possible to keep this in Internet C++ in that way you would like to have. There is also no way for Assembler, expect you'll allow this (which would be a break in multiplatform). As we all know, systems like Linux have allways an ASM-part, which is completely machine dependent.
I'm a full time C++ programmer here and I like Java, because it tries to make the core idea of C++ and OO easy available for everyone (as most would say: Visual Basic programmers...). I can't imagine a better language for a beginner in programming. Also for prototyping, Java is for me really a cool thing to test architectural ideas.
I don't like C# because it tries to make a new proprietary language mixing up with C++, Pascal and Java, instead of just enhancing C++ with garbage collection and such good things, but still back-compatible with my C++ and C sources (as Stroustroup would do).
I'm sure the most C++ programmers will agree in this.
Cheers
Bössu
It's just the question how you'll develop yourself
on
Too Old To Code?
·
· Score: 1
Hello,
I know alot of programmers around the 50ties. The main point is that all programmers who didn't educate themself in new programming paradigmas (OO is a cute example) become more and more obsolete. Most of them are just tired to learn again and again new things. The other ones who has the flexibility to always learn new things and combine this new knowledge in the right way with the existing experience are the most worthful and powerful programming people in a firm.
Of course, this aren't alot. But I think to say "to be obsolete with 50" is at the end an own decision you'll do in some ways yourself...
Hello all people who'll freak out about Linuses trademark,
I can't believe that there is only one person out there who don't understand the position of Linus with his trademark Linux. What Linus tells us about the problematic position of a trademark is well known... worldwide. And Linus is really the best person I can imagine to hold this trademark.
Would you like to see a company like Red Hat as the holder of the trademark Linux??
If Linus wouldn't catch up the name, who knows what would happen with this name today in the general Linux-hype. For me it was a wise decision to save the name as a trademark.
Well, it seems like an interesting part of slashdot is again overloaded with alot of messages on the root. Is it not possible to REPLY to such answers? I have also questions here, but how can I find the answers in this way?
So I think we should use again more the "reply to this" link instead of generate that huge IGSRP (Incredible Growing Slashdot Reply Pages;-).
For this 640x480 thing: I can't imagine any reason why they limit to that. I'll definitively first ask them why there is this limit. In the point of view of a programmer I don't see any reason to limit the resolution like this (not to mention the problems you'll get if you'll edit PAL DV-videos in the future).
For the product himself: I would like to try it, but how should I? I have only a DV-equippment at home and since Firewire driver support on Linux is still in the very early stages, I can't use and test this program now really seriously.
But it's still very good to see this kind of programs as GPL. All nonlinear cutting systems out there are massively overpriced; except you'll be lucky with very downcutted LE-versions (I doubt so). And the only reason why this price is so high is because there are only a few usable programs to make nonlinear cutting in a professional way. MainActor isn't stable since years, but could be a great product too. Broadcast 2000 is the first "light in the tunnel" for me.
I have the strange feeling, that nobody ever talked with Troll Tech people kindly enough to see their point of view.
It's some time ago I've asked Troll Tech to make Qt cheaper aviable let's say for Shareware programmers. I told them I understand the fact that Qt is their business and they need to get money in a way from it (which is simply a fact! Troll tech is not university driven...). So to make a sort of "shareware"-licence to spread their product over the world and give poeople working with Qt the chance to build a business would be a way to get more money in a long term.
And what they told me? They told me they HAD a shareware-licence for cheap products made with Qt. The licence cost 100 $ (which is really cheap). With this licence you where even be able to sell the product instead to just give it away GPLed.
But they don't have this package anymore.
Why?
They sold only one (!) package. It was a total desaster!
So I think instead to always getting down Troll Tech and tell them how they could do it better and how they could make money instead of selling the package in any way: please be realistic. It seems like there is no better chance to get money out of Qt instead of selling it for 1000$ per package on Windows.
KDE uses Qt for widgets because it is a good library. But just because KDE is GPL means not that Troll tech has to be fully GPLed too.
Windows is not GPL and I think this is the bigger problem than Qt.
BTW if you don't like the whole Qt-business, use GTK+, which is aviable on Windows too and you'll find GTK+ on every serious Linux-machine because of GIMP.
There is absolutely no reason to use Qt under KDE and Windows if you don't like their licence.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you checked V 1.3 of Java? Swing got really performance there. The upcoming version 1.4 will be faster, too.
;-)
On Linux, Java isn't that fast in GUI because of the way it handles the graphics with X. Java 1.4 will get his own leap there.
I think JBuilder4 is the best example which can proof GUI-speed. And for me it's fast enough to develop with it.
OTOH Java-GUI's along their ideas are quite more complex to build than clicking some VB-Frames together (where you'll get more "what you expect to be get"). In Java it's useful to know what you would like to have BEFORE you'll begin with the GUI.
For the cross-platform: I don't know how "usual" we are, but we really need it to get it on more than one platform.
Okay, maybe a bank is not a usual case...
Hello,
;-)
You have a P200 with 64 MByte RAM. Try Windows 2000 with IE5 on this machine and if it is faster and more stable than Mozilla0.7, I'll spend you a beer or so...
Cheers
Bössu
I think Internet C++ is as useful as GCC is, with the difference, that the compiled code is NOT native. So what's the advantage then?
You have to write with "Multiplatform C++ style" anyway if you're using Internet C++. Nobody will be able to make the MFC available on Unix, except Wine maybe. But that's at the end the native way too.
So I think Internet C++ fails the point (nice try...).
There are many people here who states that Java (and C#) is actually a bad thing and Internet C++ was what they've been waiting for.
I'll promise you: you're skills will have no advantages in this as it has no real advantage in any C Interpretors. It is not possible to do all "dirty" and "not so dirty" things possible in C++ on all machines. Alpha, PowerPC and Intel architecture are so different in so many ways, it's not possible to hold all the good things in C++ up while to not care about the platforms you'll support at the end. So it will be not possible to keep this in Internet C++ in that way you would like to have. There is also no way for Assembler, expect you'll allow this (which would be a break in multiplatform). As we all know, systems like Linux have allways an ASM-part, which is completely machine dependent.
I'm a full time C++ programmer here and I like Java, because it tries to make the core idea of C++ and OO easy available for everyone (as most would say: Visual Basic programmers...). I can't imagine a better language for a beginner in programming. Also for prototyping, Java is for me really a cool thing to test architectural ideas.
I don't like C# because it tries to make a new proprietary language mixing up with C++, Pascal and Java, instead of just enhancing C++ with garbage collection and such good things, but still back-compatible with my C++ and C sources (as Stroustroup would do).
I'm sure the most C++ programmers will agree in this.
Cheers
Bössu
Hello,
I know alot of programmers around the 50ties. The main point is that all programmers who didn't educate themself in new programming paradigmas (OO is a cute example) become more and more obsolete. Most of them are just tired to learn again and again new things.
The other ones who has the flexibility to always learn new things and combine this new knowledge in the right way with the existing experience are the most worthful and powerful programming people in a firm.
Of course, this aren't alot. But I think to say "to be obsolete with 50" is at the end an own decision you'll do in some ways yourself...
Cheers
Boessu
Hello all people who'll freak out about Linuses trademark,
I can't believe that there is only one person out there who don't understand the position of Linus with his trademark Linux.
What Linus tells us about the problematic position of a trademark is well known... worldwide.
And Linus is really the best person I can imagine to hold this trademark.
Would you like to see a company like Red Hat as the holder of the trademark Linux??
If Linus wouldn't catch up the name, who knows what would happen with this name today in the general Linux-hype. For me it was a wise decision to save the name as a trademark.
Cheers and peace for the GPL-community...
Boessu
Hello,
;-).
;-)
Well, it seems like an interesting part of slashdot is again overloaded with alot of messages on the root. Is it not possible to REPLY to such answers? I have also questions here, but how can I find the answers in this way?
So I think we should use again more the "reply to this" link instead of generate that huge IGSRP (Incredible Growing Slashdot Reply Pages
For this 640x480 thing: I can't imagine any reason why they limit to that. I'll definitively first ask them why there is this limit. In the point of view of a programmer I don't see any reason to limit the resolution like this (not to mention the problems you'll get if you'll edit PAL DV-videos in the future).
For the product himself: I would like to try it, but how should I? I have only a DV-equippment at home and since Firewire driver support on Linux is still in the very early stages, I can't use and test this program now really seriously.
But it's still very good to see this kind of programs as GPL. All nonlinear cutting systems out there are massively overpriced; except you'll be lucky with very downcutted LE-versions (I doubt so). And the only reason why this price is so high is because there are only a few usable programs to make nonlinear cutting in a professional way. MainActor isn't stable since years, but could be a great product too. Broadcast 2000 is the first "light in the tunnel" for me.
So let's do another revolution out there.
Cheers
Boessu
This is the same like the article how to migrate from Oracle to SQL 6.5/7.
To be honest: Who would really do that???
Cheers
Boessu
Hello all,
I have the strange feeling, that nobody ever talked with Troll Tech people kindly enough to see their point of view.
It's some time ago I've asked Troll Tech to make Qt cheaper aviable let's say for Shareware programmers. I told them I understand the fact that Qt is their business and they need to get money in a way from it (which is simply a fact! Troll tech is not university driven...). So to make a sort of "shareware"-licence to spread their product over the world and give poeople working with Qt the chance to build a business would be a way to get more money in a long term.
And what they told me? They told me they HAD a shareware-licence for cheap products made with Qt. The licence cost 100 $ (which is really cheap). With this licence you where even be able to sell the product instead to just give it away GPLed.
But they don't have this package anymore.
Why?
They sold only one (!) package. It was a total desaster!
So I think instead to always getting down Troll Tech and tell them how they could do it better and how they could make money instead of selling the package in any way: please be realistic. It seems like there is no better chance to get money out of Qt instead of selling it for 1000$ per package on Windows.
KDE uses Qt for widgets because it is a good library. But just because KDE is GPL means not that Troll tech has to be fully GPLed too.
Windows is not GPL and I think this is the bigger problem than Qt.
BTW if you don't like the whole Qt-business, use GTK+, which is aviable on Windows too and you'll find GTK+ on every serious Linux-machine because of GIMP.
There is absolutely no reason to use Qt under KDE and Windows if you don't like their licence.
Cheers
Boessu