Yea I like cute volunteer chicks like that. "I wish everybody would stop fighting and polluting the environment. It'd make me feel much safer and secure."
They're just dying to find a nice highly-paid computer programmer like me. Then they can afford a hybrid car and go out to lunch with all their cute volunteer friends. And when I come home she'll tell me about all of the important volunteer activities she did that day. And I'll tell her about my day. About how my ideas are helping my huge company become more profitable and expand their energy-hunry operations. But she'll feel all cozy and safe and secure knowing that I've got a good job allowing her to do her volunteer work with Greenpeace.
It will be a great day when there is a non-propriatary solution that is equal or better in every respect to today's popular propriatary ones. I just think it'll take longer than 6 months for that to happen. The report the minister gets in six months will no doubt have two categories: 1) Stuff we can use open standards for 2) Stuff for which there is no suitable open standard for. It's nice to see a whole country (albiet a small one) taking a stand on this issue.
Yea I'd like to see where you pulled those stats from. I was on a JSP development team for 2 years. We were developing web apps in Visual Age and I've used several other apps written in Java during that time. I can tell you from experience that Java apps do tend to be slower than apps not based on Java. That's just my experience with real Java apps.
I suppose there could be some things that you could get Java to do faster than the alternatives (.NET, etc.). But when it comes down to a real application with a GUI, etc. it is definately slooooooooow.
Yep. Just more complaining. I didn't see a single solution to today's problem in your post.
I'll help you out and describe the implied solution that you were getting at.
MASKLINN's solution: M$ should invent a time machine to go back in time about 10 years and stop it's developers from implementing non-standard, undocumented features.
We're all still waiting for a better solution to today's problem!
If you want a cheap and easy solution just switch to IE. The "great plan" I proposed is much cheaper than overhauling hundreds of thousands of websites.
What would your solution be?
BTW: Making stupid developers code to standards == overhauling hundreds of thousands of websites. That's my point. The Firefox crowd seems to prefer sitting around and complaining about the problem (lack of standards compliance). STOP WHINING AND PROPOSE A SOLUTION! My solution was to update Firefox. M$' solution enabled sloppy HTML to render properly. What's your solution? We're waiting!
businesses don't run to make Firefox users happy, they run to make a profit
Wow! Finally a post from someone who understands what's going on in the real world!
Here's another concept. Instead of 10% of the world's web developers rewriting their websites, why doesn't Firefox just spend it's time and money to develop support for the extra non-standard features that IE already supports??
Think about it: Firefox hires 10 new developers VS Rewrite 300,000 websites
Which do you think would be a better solution given the situation the world is CURRENTLY in?
Aww c'mon, PornMaster. You gotta know this is just the first step. In a few years CA will come out and say, "Since you now trust our numbers we won't require you to check the website and give your approval. It'll be even more simple. We'll just figure out how much you owe us and send you the bill. If you want to dispute it after the fact we'll have another website you can go to."
That's step #2. The IRS is pretty firm when you goof? We'll see how easy it is to get money back when they goof.
The only people who will always have cutting edge software are those who are willing to view their software as a utility (pay monthly for it). If software isn't updated on a continual basis it is always obsolete.
IBM's clients are big businesses (as far as their cash cow consulting services go). All of these businesses pay IBM tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars every month. The average Longhorn user isn't prepared to do that.
So, IBM claiming that Longhorn will be obsolete as soon as it is released is only pointing out the fact that Longhorn caters to a different market than IBM's products do. Mac's next OS will be obsolete as soon as it is put out as well as about 99.999% of all other software.
Just putting it in perspective. It's not an open source thing, it's just the way the software market works.
Apple saves a ton of money by not having to support propriatary hardware. Their staff is trained on just a few types of hardward in a small number of configurations. Besides I don't think Jobs has ever wanted to have the biggest market share. He wouldn't mind it. But if he's gonna get it he'll get it his way. He's not going to change Apple's business model just to get market share. He is proud of the respect that Apple has earned and his geek nature loves putting out fancy innovative hardware products. He could care less about Apple dominating the world. Apple is Jobs' own little adventure. As long as he's having fun he's happy. He wouldn't enjoy running a software company so that's why Apple won't be primarily a software company (at least while Jobs is there).
I bet the special component will be the BIOS chip. There will probably be others too. But if Macs use a special bios chip that would pretty much require you to buy a Mac just to get the chip. Does this make sense?
So I just can't help but ask the question. If IE 7.0 went truely Open Source under the GPL who's fault would it be if there was a security problem? Who's to blame if a feature is missing?
C'mon guys, it's much more fun for MS to stay on the Dark Side and keep all it's code out of the Open Source community! Seriously though, isn't it?
Here's the deal. 99.9999% of computer users could care less about being able to look at the underlying code. So why go to the trouble of making it available? Alright, this may be one reason why.
If anybody speaks ill of Firefox they are insulting an entire community of open source developers who generously donate their skills and time to all of humanity How could any decent human being say such a thing!. Imagine if IE was suddenly an Open Source app. If a bug is discovered who's fault is it? If features are missing who can you blame. After all if you want a feature, "you can develop it yourself"!!! Wow, Open Source is now M$ way to get on the good side of the Open Source community while transferring any blame from bugs, vulnerabilities, etc. to them at the same time!!
I don't believe this should be viewed as MS trying to join the Open Source world. MS certainly doesn't want to share it's cash-cow apps (Windows, Office, etc.) and still views Linux as competition. MS already gives out a bunch of it's software though. So maybe they are thinking, "Hey if it's free anyways maybe we can get some good publicity and cheap volunteer labor from just making it Open Source."
You're an Anonymous Coward. Be a man and post under your account. I am not a windpws zealot. I just don't believe that a one-size-fits-all solution exists. Use the best tool for the job whether it's Linux, Win or Mac.
Does anybody have a link to an article about the process that Firefox uses? I'd be interested to compare the two.
Re:Congratulations are in order!
on
A Decade of PHP
·
· Score: 1
90% of apps don't need to use custom db functionality or need to be ported to other databases. On rare occasions you need generic queries/db connectivity. On rare occasions you need to tap into the custom db functions. Just do what the situation calls for and don't preach a "One-Db-Technique-Fits-All" gospel.
Support? Yea, but as soon as Mac support discovers that you're running Win on their box they'll say, "Hmm. . . Mr. Smith Mac guarantees the quality of their entire package. If you decide to put a lower quality operating system on our suprerior quality hardware that voids the waranty." Click.
And besides I've always thought the weird non-standard case shapes and designs kill upgradability.
So could somebody please tell me why they would want Mac hardware? If you want a pretty case there are all type of cool aftermarket/custom cases out there for standard non-mac boxes. Mac hardware is hardly upgradable. Mac has a monopoly on Mac hardware too (read $$$$). And NOW their processor isn't even unique.
Mac hardware is an all-around bad choice compared to similar quality generic hardware.
Just depends on which OS you're loyal to
on
A Decade of PHP
·
· Score: 1
PHP is to Unix/Linux.
what
ASP is to Windows.
PHP is more powerful than ASP but in the end it's popularity is due to its short learning curve. As a project grows and requires better performance, scalability and maintainability PHP/ASP really starts to suck.
If you expect your project to become large you'll want to bite the bullet and go with JSP/ASP.NET.
--
This post is 100% free of zealotry and techo-religion.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm glad I gave you a chance to vent a little frustration at people who work hard to make good money. So what do you do for a living, Refrag?
Yea I like cute volunteer chicks like that. "I wish everybody would stop fighting and polluting the environment. It'd make me feel much safer and secure."
They're just dying to find a nice highly-paid computer programmer like me. Then they can afford a hybrid car and go out to lunch with all their cute volunteer friends. And when I come home she'll tell me about all of the important volunteer activities she did that day. And I'll tell her about my day. About how my ideas are helping my huge company become more profitable and expand their energy-hunry operations. But she'll feel all cozy and safe and secure knowing that I've got a good job allowing her to do her volunteer work with Greenpeace.
It will be a great day when there is a non-propriatary solution that is equal or better in every respect to today's popular propriatary ones. I just think it'll take longer than 6 months for that to happen. The report the minister gets in six months will no doubt have two categories: 1) Stuff we can use open standards for 2) Stuff for which there is no suitable open standard for. It's nice to see a whole country (albiet a small one) taking a stand on this issue.
Yea I'd like to see where you pulled those stats from. I was on a JSP development team for 2 years. We were developing web apps in Visual Age and I've used several other apps written in Java during that time. I can tell you from experience that Java apps do tend to be slower than apps not based on Java. That's just my experience with real Java apps.
I suppose there could be some things that you could get Java to do faster than the alternatives (.NET, etc.). But when it comes down to a real application with a GUI, etc. it is definately slooooooooow.
I've got a Socket 939 motherboard. Will any AMD 939 CPU always work perfectly with my MB (after bios flash)?
Or will there come a time when it may be a 939 cpu but won't work with my MB?
Yep. Just more complaining. I didn't see a single solution to today's problem in your post.
I'll help you out and describe the implied solution that you were getting at.
MASKLINN's solution: M$ should invent a time machine to go back in time about 10 years and stop it's developers from implementing non-standard, undocumented features.
We're all still waiting for a better solution to today's problem!
If you want a cheap and easy solution just switch to IE. The "great plan" I proposed is much cheaper than overhauling hundreds of thousands of websites.
What would your solution be?
BTW: Making stupid developers code to standards == overhauling hundreds of thousands of websites. That's my point. The Firefox crowd seems to prefer sitting around and complaining about the problem (lack of standards compliance). STOP WHINING AND PROPOSE A SOLUTION! My solution was to update Firefox. M$' solution enabled sloppy HTML to render properly. What's your solution? We're waiting!
Last time I checked, software developers were not getting paid a million dollars a year.
businesses don't run to make Firefox users happy, they run to make a profit
Wow! Finally a post from someone who understands what's going on in the real world!
Here's another concept. Instead of 10% of the world's web developers rewriting their websites, why doesn't Firefox just spend it's time and money to develop support for the extra non-standard features that IE already supports??
Think about it:
Firefox hires 10 new developers
VS
Rewrite 300,000 websites
Which do you think would be a better solution given the situation the world is CURRENTLY in?
Aww c'mon, PornMaster. You gotta know this is just the first step. In a few years CA will come out and say, "Since you now trust our numbers we won't require you to check the website and give your approval. It'll be even more simple. We'll just figure out how much you owe us and send you the bill. If you want to dispute it after the fact we'll have another website you can go to."
That's step #2. The IRS is pretty firm when you goof? We'll see how easy it is to get money back when they goof.
This is only going on in California (right now). So H&R Block stock is probably okay for now.
I love the logic! "Firefox stinks at rendering X so X must be no good." I'm glad somebody finally established that profound truth.
The only people who will always have cutting edge software are those who are willing to view their software as a utility (pay monthly for it). If software isn't updated on a continual basis it is always obsolete.
IBM's clients are big businesses (as far as their cash cow consulting services go). All of these businesses pay IBM tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars every month. The average Longhorn user isn't prepared to do that.
So, IBM claiming that Longhorn will be obsolete as soon as it is released is only pointing out the fact that Longhorn caters to a different market than IBM's products do. Mac's next OS will be obsolete as soon as it is put out as well as about 99.999% of all other software.
Just putting it in perspective. It's not an open source thing, it's just the way the software market works.
Apple saves a ton of money by not having to support propriatary hardware. Their staff is trained on just a few types of hardward in a small number of configurations. Besides I don't think Jobs has ever wanted to have the biggest market share. He wouldn't mind it. But if he's gonna get it he'll get it his way. He's not going to change Apple's business model just to get market share. He is proud of the respect that Apple has earned and his geek nature loves putting out fancy innovative hardware products. He could care less about Apple dominating the world. Apple is Jobs' own little adventure. As long as he's having fun he's happy. He wouldn't enjoy running a software company so that's why Apple won't be primarily a software company (at least while Jobs is there).
I bet the special component will be the BIOS chip. There will probably be others too. But if Macs use a special bios chip that would pretty much require you to buy a Mac just to get the chip. Does this make sense?
what MS product would you like to see ported to Linix?
So I just can't help but ask the question. If IE 7.0 went truely Open Source under the GPL who's fault would it be if there was a security problem? Who's to blame if a feature is missing?
C'mon guys, it's much more fun for MS to stay on the Dark Side and keep all it's code out of the Open Source community! Seriously though, isn't it?
Here's the deal. 99.9999% of computer users could care less about being able to look at the underlying code. So why go to the trouble of making it available? Alright, this may be one reason why.
If anybody speaks ill of Firefox they are insulting an entire community of open source developers who generously donate their skills and time to all of humanity How could any decent human being say such a thing!. Imagine if IE was suddenly an Open Source app. If a bug is discovered who's fault is it? If features are missing who can you blame. After all if you want a feature, "you can develop it yourself"!!! Wow, Open Source is now M$ way to get on the good side of the Open Source community while transferring any blame from bugs, vulnerabilities, etc. to them at the same time!!
I don't believe this should be viewed as MS trying to join the Open Source world. MS certainly doesn't want to share it's cash-cow apps (Windows, Office, etc.) and still views Linux as competition. MS already gives out a bunch of it's software though. So maybe they are thinking, "Hey if it's free anyways maybe we can get some good publicity and cheap volunteer labor from just making it Open Source."
You're an Anonymous Coward. Be a man and post under your account. I am not a windpws zealot. I just don't believe that a one-size-fits-all solution exists. Use the best tool for the job whether it's Linux, Win or Mac.
Complete with flight schedules too!
Does anybody have a link to an article about the process that Firefox uses? I'd be interested to compare the two.
90% of apps don't need to use custom db functionality or need to be ported to other databases. On rare occasions you need generic queries/db connectivity. On rare occasions you need to tap into the custom db functions. Just do what the situation calls for and don't preach a "One-Db-Technique-Fits-All" gospel.
Support? Yea, but as soon as Mac support discovers that you're running Win on their box they'll say, "Hmm. . . Mr. Smith Mac guarantees the quality of their entire package. If you decide to put a lower quality operating system on our suprerior quality hardware that voids the waranty." Click.
And besides I've always thought the weird non-standard case shapes and designs kill upgradability.
So could somebody please tell me why they would want Mac hardware? If you want a pretty case there are all type of cool aftermarket/custom cases out there for standard non-mac boxes. Mac hardware is hardly upgradable. Mac has a monopoly on Mac hardware too (read $$$$). And NOW their processor isn't even unique.
Mac hardware is an all-around bad choice compared to similar quality generic hardware.
PHP is to Unix/Linux.
what
ASP is to Windows.
PHP is more powerful than ASP but in the end it's popularity is due to its short learning curve. As a project grows and requires better performance, scalability and maintainability PHP/ASP really starts to suck.
If you expect your project to become large you'll want to bite the bullet and go with JSP/ASP.NET.
--
This post is 100% free of zealotry and techo-religion.