You only get warnings. It doesn't prevent you from installing any unsupported driver. I've install the beta nVdia 14.2 drivers as well.
If Microsoft prevented you from installing ANY unsupported driver in XP it would mean 3rd parties can't write custom drivers without going through microsoft. I see nothing that mentions this will ever happen in the DDK docs.
Now, I suppose it's the natural order of things for the Unix userbase to fragment and fight civil wars. But, when you have two gigantic semis, one labeled "Sun" and the other labeled "Microsoft" and they start barrelling towards each other in a game of enterprise chicken, I wouldn't want to be in the VW Bug with the stuffed penguin hanging in the back window that happens to be caught between them.
That sounds kind of like the way Linux sat a few years ago. Maybe they should have giveen up on Linux like you're suggesting with Mono? After all, you wouldn't what to get caught between Microsoft and Everyone else.
Yes. But my point is it won't matter whatsoever. Linux will still have a good managed programming and execution enviroment. It should also be able to interoperate with other non MS CLI implementations.
Right... and could you open a remote file from within the included Windows text editor 7 years ago? And would selecting the "save" option cause it to be uploaded back to the remote location? Did you have a command prompt that supported scrollback and multiple tabbed sessions? Could you disable popup windows, but keep the rest of Javascript in your web browser? Could you log your windowing events to stderr? Can you do any of this with even the latest version of Windows? I think not.
Um just some corrections.... In Windows 2000 you can open edit and close remote files (sitting on an ftp site, website or smb server) from notepad.
Windows 2000 also has a scrollback in the command prompt (yes, I too prefer bash which is what cygwin is for).
Um. Do you know what.NET (the part Ximian is porting) is? It has very little to do with the W3C. The standards have ALREADY been submitted to ECMA (not W3C).
What do you think Ximian is basing Mono on? Decompiled MS code? Nope. The specs.
It is unbelievable. 95% of people who post about.NET and flame Ximian have no idea what is going on (or what the CLI is).
If Microsoft changes their implementation of their CLI (the CLR), who cares? Linux will still have a completely open CLI implementation. It's basically a better java without any strings. Microsoft can't do anything about it because it will be a standard.
Let say Microsoft decides to mutate their CLR to do non standard stuff and Mono can't interoperate with Microsoft's.NET binaries. It is unlikely that this would happen, and if it did it would be a shame, but it wouldn't be a disaster. You can still use Mono to write secure managed code to run on every platform except windows (people are already doing that with right?).
Whatever Microsoft decides to do, Mono will still be good for developing on both windows and non windows platform.
This is in contrast to WinCE's use of its power on a feeble attempt to replace a desktop computer.
Nah. I don't see why you think it will replace the desktop. it complements it.
This moves us onto the second question, which was about feature count. WinCE's trying to do much more than is appropriate for a handheld machine; things (like word processing) which are honestly better left to a desktop computer. The point I was making about "waaay too overpriced for too little functionality" was in comparison to the desktop machine that WinCE's apparently trying to overtake.
Pocket PCs come with Pocket Word not fully fledged word. It's hardly what I'd call something for word processing. It's not even trying to do that. It's just there so you can view your word documents. If you compare the functionality of a CE machine to a Palm, and then compare the prices, I think you'll find Palm is far too expensive.
That's just it. The pocketPC is simply overpowered for what's needed from a handheld.
Sure you could make a handheld computer that does everything a desktop does, but you'll pay for it in weight, size, battery life, cost, and complexity.
Like I said, Pocket PCs are very modular. Compaq have a very light grey scale Pocket PC that is on par (size wize) to the Palm V. Pocket PCs are as complex as you want them to be. Just don't buy the gadgets and install the right app launcher programs (like you would on a Palm).
The Palm handheld is simple. The core applications that it comes with it don't have complex user interfaces, don't require megabytes of ram (the original palm came with what, 128K?), and don't ask much of the user in order for them to find use for it.
Try out the latest Pocket PCs. The interface is much more simplified. That's the reason why since the update to the UI, Pocket PCs have been gaining in popularity faster than Palm.
Also I don't buy your memory argument. If small and simple is so good why are some of the latest palms equiped with 8MB of ram and colour?
Also remember that Pocket PCs aren't just for personal organizing. They have many other uses. The milatary use them. Trimble Navigation use them for their GPS MAP navigation systems. Stock taking is often done using Pocket PCs with bar code scanners...the list goes on...
BTW, the trimble systems are cool. One of the packages lets you hook a Pocket PC to a GPS receiver. You use a base site to map out plans for street lights and then the Pocket PC guides city planners as they patrol the streets.
Palm's probably going to use the new CPU power for things like a prettier GUI, voice recognition, MP3 playing, and perhaps some multimedia. At the end of the day, just improving what it does now: assists you with your life's tasks, not taking them over like CE.
I see. First you say that CE is crappy cause it has ubergeek-toys. What exactly are they (that aren't part of of the list you just made - voice recognition, MP3 etc). Looks like mindless CE bashing without thought to me.
Care to explain what features CE has that takes over your life?
CE's just turning into another Apple Newton: a handheld computer that's waaay too overpriced for too little functionality; useful only to those.1% of the computer buying population that can't possibly sit down and use a desktop for the majority of their real work.
Too little functionality? Didn't you just complain about all it's features? They aren't just 'toys'. Lets see, high resolution display (twice the resolution of Plams makes text much easier to read), colour, sound, mp3, voice recognition, web browsing, 1GB disk drives etc etc. There is more choice on Pocket PCs. You don't have to have the extra gadgets if you don't want. They are very modular.
Does Palm have any killer app Pocket PC doesn't have? If it does, why not just run the PalmOS emulator on a Pocket PC? I doubt there is any killer app that CE doesn't have though.
Lally Singh, Palm Software Developer.
Ahh I understand it all now.
Mmmmmm, J/Direct. Unfortunately, it's really not very cross-platform. Now, sure, you're going to be calling into native code, so your app won't be "write once, run anywhere" regardless. But at least if I use RNI (Sun's is RNI, right, not JNI? Not that it matters.), I don't have to modify my Java for the Linux version.
I was talking about the language extensions being good. J/Direct was not cross platform only cause Microsoft were the only ones who implemented it (except for some experimental stuff from Transvirtual). That doesn't mean they were BAD. They were GOOD extensions. What I mean by this is that if Java (all Java) had RNI and J/Direct instead of JNI it would have been much better. Microsoft wasn't stopping anyone from doing that. I think apple have a similar thing to J/Direct in their VM(interestingly enough, it's called JDirect!).
Still, I will admit to a bit of a love affair with J/Direct. Or at least a lack of hate affair, after dealing with those other ridiculous kludges.
Me too.
Yes I think including the VM in XP would have been better. I just don't think it is as big a deal as everyone is making it out to be. I too write a pretty large java application based on 1.1 so it'll run on MS's VM. But I'm starting to migrate it to Java 1.2 cause I can saw relying on Microsoft's VM and Java 1.1 wasn't too smart considering the outcome of the Sun/MS case.
BTW, I believe it is only a 5MB download, not a 10MB download.
What case?
Hardly anything java works nowdays in Microsoft's VM.
Hardly anything java works nowdays on Microsoft's VM cause they all use Java 1.2. Microsoft's version of java *was* the fastest and supported the spec even better than sun's implementation (there were ofcourse non standard extensions).
Everyone knows that Microsoft's language additions to Java were good.
Here I'm talking about the new language features Microsoft added to Java back in 97/98. These are delegates, multicast delegates and J/Direct. These WERE good LANGUAGE EXTENSIONS for Java.
The good language extensions have anything to do with how sucky Microsoft's VM is for modern client side java that usually uses Swing, Collections and other Java 1.2 features. This ofcourse isn't Microsoft's fault. They aren't allowed to update their VM anymore (only bug fixes).
Basically all Microsoft's 1.1.4 VM would be good for now days is vewing java applets (since many still use AWT over Swing). How many websites still use those over DHTML/Flash?
Like any other plugin (e.g. flash), IE will prompt you to download the VM if you do happen to find a site that still uses Java.
Hardly anything java works nowdays in Microsoft's VM which is frozen in 1.1.4 cause of the litigation between Microsoft and Sun. Running any decent client applications requires at least 1.2 now days.
BTW Sun didn't win. They settled.
Everyone knows that Microsoft's language additions to Java were good. Other people started to copy them. Sun just doesn't want to admit it, and java will still have the most horrible event handling syntax in the world.
Windows XP also allows multiusers to be logged on (graphically) at the same time. It's called fast-user-switching. User A can log on and work. User B can then log on and work (without logging A off). User A can then switch back from user B's session have have their desktop from where they left off again.
Great, there goes every single bit of hope that the PC industry may recover in Q4.
This is exactly why Microsoft should be punished severely, when an entire sector of the economy revolves around a single company
Right on the button. I feel the same way about the United States of America. America should be punished severely, when the world economy revolves around a single country.
I also know a few people personally that should be severely punished cause they're too successful as well.
Many, many setup programs still attempt to do this, including the Microsoft ones.
Like? I haven't seen an instance of DLL hell since the early days of 95. Most setup programs use InstallShield or MSI. Both of which do versioning checks.
You neglect that Microsoft caused this problem. Letting developers 'upgrade' Windows willy-nilly was their solution to how to avoid distributing service packs for Windows 3.
They can't exactly NOT let developers 'upgrade' windows without something like SFP. Oh hang on. SFP isn't a fix, it's a cover up. Oh well.
SFP exists in Windows ME (the last version of the 9x line) and 2000/XP, the latest versions of the NT line.
I don't expect Microsoft to patch 5 year old operating systems. They were designed for a different era. Adding SFP and all the new Windows 2000 features to Win95 would basically mean you'd end up with Windows 2000 (running on 486s).
But stuff doesn't break just because you installed other stuff.
Unless the stuff that installs overwrites old libaries. It's not windows or linux's fault.
I still say it's nuts to allow the system to be broken, and then blindly repair it every time. That's papering over the problem, not fixing it.
It is fixing the problem. The problem is that some setup programs (very rare now days though) overwrite critical system files. Windows prevents this. How is this not 'fixing the problem'. What do you think Microsoft should do? Take all developers and put them through Microsoft programming camp? What's your 'fix'?
Microsoft could innovate their way out of this one.
Yes. They did with system file protection. They also have many articles on the new windows installer APIs etc. Since the early 90s they've also been describing how to use versioning APIs to make sure DLL Hell doesn't exist.
People will be people and some people don't listen.
What's your proposal for innovating a fix? I assume since you think what Microsoft has done isn't a fix, you have a better idea? Perhaps maybe cutting the fingers off bad developers who don't follow conventions?
Has this Miguel guy ever actually used Linux? (yes, I'm aware he's the Gnome god, it's a rhetorical question.) Linux has almost none of the DLL problems of Windows; you may have extra versions of old libraries, but if that's what your apps want it's not a bad thing.
Ditto in Windows. BTW if Linux doesn't have DLL problems why do I have to download different packages for different versions of Redhat or other distributions? What's with this you must have blah_blah_x_x.so. What's with glibc and libc?
Microsoft, on the other hand, just recently gave us the technological advance of keeping track of the libraries needed and replacing them on you if you zapped them during another software install. Yes, that's right, just paper over that DLL Hell and keep on going.
Um no. That is system file protection. Fusion lets applications have "personal" dlls etc. Windows has always allowed multiple DLLs. Ever heard of GetVersion() and GetVersionEx()?
Re:The real question: Why Ruby?
on
Why not Ruby?
·
· Score: 1
If Perl or Python were controlled by a single entity (as is the case with C#, and even to some extent Java.
Um wrong. Java is controlled totally by sun. You can't make any extensions to Java (look at the trouble microsoft got into).
C# on the other hand is totally open. Just look at the ECMA submissions:
Slashdot Mirror
Name a single feature in C# that hasn't appeared in at least 3 languages prior to it.
Um, show me another language that features attributes.
As far as I know, C# is the first to have them.
(that is, the device creates a gravitational push away from it), or in Trekkie terms, a repulsor beam.
When did star trek ever refer to anything called a "repulsor" beam? Is it similar to the enterprise's death ray gun?
The 14.2 drivers rock under RC2, dont they? Those bad boys solved all of my problems
Yes. That's why i installed them
Funny. DivX works fine on XP RC2 here.
You only get warnings. It doesn't prevent you from installing any unsupported driver. I've install the beta nVdia 14.2 drivers as well.
If Microsoft prevented you from installing ANY unsupported driver in XP it would mean 3rd parties can't write custom drivers without going through microsoft. I see nothing that mentions this will ever happen in the DDK docs.
Uh. Since when was Itanium a CISC-based processor?
I was responding to this:
Can you do any of this with even the latest version of Windows? I think not.
Now, I suppose it's the natural order of things for the Unix userbase to fragment and fight civil wars. But, when you have two gigantic semis, one labeled "Sun" and the other labeled "Microsoft" and they start barrelling towards each other in a game of enterprise chicken, I wouldn't want to be in the VW Bug with the stuffed penguin hanging in the back window that happens to be caught between them.
That sounds kind of like the way Linux sat a few years ago. Maybe they should have giveen up on Linux like you're suggesting with Mono? After all, you wouldn't what to get caught between Microsoft and Everyone else.
Well, the CLI is a standard (unlike Java) and it has more features that Java hasn't got yet (though it is SLOWLY getting them).
There's stuff in the CLI that improves speed (like structs) and others which improve simplicity (like boxing - so everything is an object).
Reverse engineering a 'free' java would be quite an effort, whereas the CLI is clearly and openly documented - making the porting effort much easier.
We could just all use Sun's JVM for Linux, but isn't compeition 'a good thing'?
Yes. But my point is it won't matter whatsoever. Linux will still have a good managed programming and execution enviroment. It should also be able to interoperate with other non MS CLI implementations.
Right... and could you open a remote file from within the included Windows text editor 7 years ago? And would selecting the "save" option cause it to be uploaded back to the remote location? Did you have a command prompt that supported scrollback and multiple tabbed sessions? Could you disable popup windows, but keep the rest of Javascript in your web browser? Could you log your windowing events to stderr? Can you do any of this with even the latest version of Windows? I think not.
Um just some corrections.... In Windows 2000 you can open edit and close remote files (sitting on an ftp site, website or smb server) from notepad.
Windows 2000 also has a scrollback in the command prompt (yes, I too prefer bash which is what cygwin is for).
Um. Do you know what .NET (the part Ximian is porting) is? It has very little to do with the W3C. The standards have ALREADY been submitted to ECMA (not W3C).
.NET and flame Ximian have no idea what is going on (or what the CLI is).
.NET binaries. It is unlikely that this would happen, and if it did it would be a shame, but it wouldn't be a disaster. You can still use Mono to write secure managed code to run on every platform except windows (people are already doing that with right?).
What do you think Ximian is basing Mono on? Decompiled MS code? Nope. The specs.
The current submissions (and mirrors) can be found here:
Ecma Standardization (MSDN)
It is unbelievable. 95% of people who post about
If Microsoft changes their implementation of their CLI (the CLR), who cares? Linux will still have a completely open CLI implementation. It's basically a better java without any strings. Microsoft can't do anything about it because it will be a standard.
Let say Microsoft decides to mutate their CLR to do non standard stuff and Mono can't interoperate with Microsoft's
Whatever Microsoft decides to do, Mono will still be good for developing on both windows and non windows platform.
Next on Fox, "When good Geeks Go Bad"
Funny. You just described slashdot perfectly. Maybe we should petition for a slogan change?
This is in contrast to WinCE's use of its power on a feeble attempt to replace a desktop computer.
Nah. I don't see why you think it will replace the desktop. it complements it.
This moves us onto the second question, which was about feature count. WinCE's trying to do much more than is appropriate for a handheld machine; things (like word processing) which are honestly better left to a desktop computer. The point I was making about "waaay too overpriced for too little functionality" was in comparison to the desktop machine that WinCE's apparently trying to overtake.
Pocket PCs come with Pocket Word not fully fledged word. It's hardly what I'd call something for word processing. It's not even trying to do that. It's just there so you can view your word documents. If you compare the functionality of a CE machine to a Palm, and then compare the prices, I think you'll find Palm is far too expensive.
That's just it. The pocketPC is simply overpowered for what's needed from a handheld.
Sure you could make a handheld computer that does everything a desktop does, but you'll pay for it in weight, size, battery life, cost, and complexity.
Like I said, Pocket PCs are very modular. Compaq have a very light grey scale Pocket PC that is on par (size wize) to the Palm V. Pocket PCs are as complex as you want them to be. Just don't buy the gadgets and install the right app launcher programs (like you would on a Palm).
The Palm handheld is simple. The core applications that it comes with it don't have complex user interfaces, don't require megabytes of ram (the original palm came with what, 128K?), and don't ask much of the user in order for them to find use for it.
Try out the latest Pocket PCs. The interface is much more simplified. That's the reason why since the update to the UI, Pocket PCs have been gaining in popularity faster than Palm.
Also I don't buy your memory argument. If small and simple is so good why are some of the latest palms equiped with 8MB of ram and colour?
Also remember that Pocket PCs aren't just for personal organizing. They have many other uses. The milatary use them. Trimble Navigation use them for their GPS MAP navigation systems. Stock taking is often done using Pocket PCs with bar code scanners...the list goes on...
BTW, the trimble systems are cool. One of the packages lets you hook a Pocket PC to a GPS receiver. You use a base site to map out plans for street lights and then the Pocket PC guides city planners as they patrol the streets.
Palm's probably going to use the new CPU power for things like a prettier GUI, voice recognition, MP3 playing, and perhaps some multimedia. At the end of the day, just improving what it does now: assists you with your life's tasks, not taking them over like CE.
.1% of the computer buying population that can't possibly sit down and use a desktop for the majority of their real work.
I see. First you say that CE is crappy cause it has ubergeek-toys. What exactly are they (that aren't part of of the list you just made - voice recognition, MP3 etc). Looks like mindless CE bashing without thought to me. Care to explain what features CE has that takes over your life?
CE's just turning into another Apple Newton: a handheld computer that's waaay too overpriced for too little functionality; useful only to those
Too little functionality? Didn't you just complain about all it's features? They aren't just 'toys'. Lets see, high resolution display (twice the resolution of Plams makes text much easier to read), colour, sound, mp3, voice recognition, web browsing, 1GB disk drives etc etc. There is more choice on Pocket PCs. You don't have to have the extra gadgets if you don't want. They are very modular.
Does Palm have any killer app Pocket PC doesn't have? If it does, why not just run the PalmOS emulator on a Pocket PC? I doubt there is any killer app that CE doesn't have though.
Lally Singh, Palm Software Developer.
Ahh I understand it all now.
So basically you're saying the price of the OS is irrelevant?
Mmmmmm, J/Direct. Unfortunately, it's really not very cross-platform. Now, sure, you're going to be calling into native code, so your app won't be "write once, run anywhere" regardless. But at least if I use RNI (Sun's is RNI, right, not JNI? Not that it matters.), I don't have to modify my Java for the Linux version.
RNI = Raw native interface = Microsoft.
JNI = Java native interface = Sun.
I was talking about the language extensions being good. J/Direct was not cross platform only cause Microsoft were the only ones who implemented it (except for some experimental stuff from Transvirtual). That doesn't mean they were BAD. They were GOOD extensions. What I mean by this is that if Java (all Java) had RNI and J/Direct instead of JNI it would have been much better. Microsoft wasn't stopping anyone from doing that. I think apple have a similar thing to J/Direct in their VM(interestingly enough, it's called JDirect!).
Still, I will admit to a bit of a love affair with J/Direct. Or at least a lack of hate affair, after dealing with those other ridiculous kludges.
Me too.
Yes I think including the VM in XP would have been better. I just don't think it is as big a deal as everyone is making it out to be. I too write a pretty large java application based on 1.1 so it'll run on MS's VM. But I'm starting to migrate it to Java 1.2 cause I can saw relying on Microsoft's VM and Java 1.1 wasn't too smart considering the outcome of the Sun/MS case.
BTW, I believe it is only a 5MB download, not a 10MB download.
let's see the manufacturers strike a blow for competition, and compatibility
Yes competition is good.
...and including a non-"extended and embraced" JRE.
Yes. God forbid there be any compeitition and innovation in the Java marker.
What case?
Hardly anything java works nowdays in Microsoft's VM.
Hardly anything java works nowdays on Microsoft's VM cause they all use Java 1.2. Microsoft's version of java *was* the fastest and supported the spec even better than sun's implementation (there were ofcourse non standard extensions).
Everyone knows that Microsoft's language additions to Java were good.
Here I'm talking about the new language features Microsoft added to Java back in 97/98. These are delegates, multicast delegates and J/Direct. These WERE good LANGUAGE EXTENSIONS for Java.
The good language extensions have anything to do with how sucky Microsoft's VM is for modern client side java that usually uses Swing, Collections and other Java 1.2 features. This ofcourse isn't Microsoft's fault. They aren't allowed to update their VM anymore (only bug fixes).
Basically all Microsoft's 1.1.4 VM would be good for now days is vewing java applets (since many still use AWT over Swing). How many websites still use those over DHTML/Flash?
Like any other plugin (e.g. flash), IE will prompt you to download the VM if you do happen to find a site that still uses Java.
I really don't see a problem with this.
No. What you just said is horseshit.
Hardly anything java works nowdays in Microsoft's VM which is frozen in 1.1.4 cause of the litigation between Microsoft and Sun. Running any decent client applications requires at least 1.2 now days.
BTW Sun didn't win. They settled.
Everyone knows that Microsoft's language additions to Java were good. Other people started to copy them. Sun just doesn't want to admit it, and java will still have the most horrible event handling syntax in the world.
Uh.
Windows 2000 AND XP have "runas".
Windows XP also allows multiusers to be logged on (graphically) at the same time. It's called fast-user-switching. User A can log on and work. User B can then log on and work (without logging A off). User A can then switch back from user B's session have have their desktop from where they left off again.
Great, there goes every single bit of hope that the PC industry may recover in Q4.
This is exactly why Microsoft should be punished severely, when an entire sector of the economy revolves around a single company
Right on the button. I feel the same way about the United States of America. America should be punished severely, when the world economy revolves around a single country.
I also know a few people personally that should be severely punished cause they're too successful as well.
Maybe we should start a gang?
Many, many setup programs still attempt to do this, including the Microsoft ones.
Like? I haven't seen an instance of DLL hell since the early days of 95. Most setup programs use InstallShield or MSI. Both of which do versioning checks.
You neglect that Microsoft caused this problem. Letting developers 'upgrade' Windows willy-nilly was their solution to how to avoid distributing service packs for Windows 3.
They can't exactly NOT let developers 'upgrade' windows without something like SFP. Oh hang on. SFP isn't a fix, it's a cover up. Oh well.
SFP exists in Windows ME (the last version of the 9x line) and 2000/XP, the latest versions of the NT line.
I don't expect Microsoft to patch 5 year old operating systems. They were designed for a different era. Adding SFP and all the new Windows 2000 features to Win95 would basically mean you'd end up with Windows 2000 (running on 486s).
But stuff doesn't break just because you installed other stuff.
Unless the stuff that installs overwrites old libaries. It's not windows or linux's fault.
I still say it's nuts to allow the system to be broken, and then blindly repair it every time. That's papering over the problem, not fixing it.
It is fixing the problem. The problem is that some setup programs (very rare now days though) overwrite critical system files. Windows prevents this. How is this not 'fixing the problem'. What do you think Microsoft should do? Take all developers and put them through Microsoft programming camp? What's your 'fix'?
Microsoft could innovate their way out of this one.
Yes. They did with system file protection. They also have many articles on the new windows installer APIs etc. Since the early 90s they've also been describing how to use versioning APIs to make sure DLL Hell doesn't exist.
People will be people and some people don't listen.
What's your proposal for innovating a fix? I assume since you think what Microsoft has done isn't a fix, you have a better idea? Perhaps maybe cutting the fingers off bad developers who don't follow conventions?
Has this Miguel guy ever actually used Linux? (yes, I'm aware he's the Gnome god, it's a rhetorical question.) Linux has almost none of the DLL problems of Windows; you may have extra versions of old libraries, but if that's what your apps want it's not a bad thing.
Ditto in Windows. BTW if Linux doesn't have DLL problems why do I have to download different packages for different versions of Redhat or other distributions? What's with this you must have blah_blah_x_x.so. What's with glibc and libc?
Microsoft, on the other hand, just recently gave us the technological advance of keeping track of the libraries needed and replacing them on you if you zapped them during another software install. Yes, that's right, just paper over that DLL Hell and keep on going.
Um no. That is system file protection. Fusion lets applications have "personal" dlls etc. Windows has always allowed multiple DLLs. Ever heard of GetVersion() and GetVersionEx()?
If Perl or Python were controlled by a single entity (as is the case with C#, and even to some extent Java.
Um wrong. Java is controlled totally by sun. You can't make any extensions to Java (look at the trouble microsoft got into).
C# on the other hand is totally open. Just look at the ECMA submissions:
Monash University
Microsoft
Better luck bashing Microsoft next time.