Except for any violations that Microsoft may have made with regarding their agreement with sun (which I'm not familiar with), I don't see ANYTHING wrong in trying to make Java useful in windows. I mean they did it both ways.
I can use Windows APIs from java (extremely useful - do it all the time), or use java from other programming languages easily.
I mean, what's with the blind devotion to WORA concept? I mean, what's wrong with taking the nice language java is and allowing it to take advantage of the underlying platform. sure java was intended to be WORA, but why stop other people from being able to make it do *more things*.
Like I can do this from windows scripts using microsoft java.
var javaobject = GetObject("java:java.util.Vector");
Download the Windows NT resource kit from micro soft's website, it has a kill utility that can force a process to die.
I never have problems using task manager myself.
Or you like write a windows script using WMI to do the same thing... Here's a nice script I just whipped up that'll kill all processes whose name contains a string. Works over networks (using WMI and DCOM too)...just supply the script a process name, and the server.
var i, server, service, process, processname, processes;
That's why I actually really like Windows Foundation Classes. That's right, the windows classes for java. They're actually pretty neat...and basically as simple as that. And they support data bound controls (unlike Swing).
Pretty neat if you don't like MFC.
What I do is split my project into components, use VC++/ATL to write the COM objects for all the logic, then I usually use J++ or VB for the UI.
I pointed out the big flora of tools for manipulating files and text, I pointed out the stability of the system
I see, I really love it how Unix has 10000 text editors. But I'd prefer one that works, and is easy to use. Does XEmacs support intellisense? No, I didn't think so. What's XEmac's goal? To demonstrate bad HCI by having the most deeply nested menus ever seen on the face of the earth.
And stability isn't an issue for many windows developers who use NT/2000. Which is overall more stable when you consider using X on linux.
I can say that I would highly prefer the freedom of developing with Open Source rather than depending on a closed environment
Yes I have some friends who can't program that well who refuse to use anything WITHOUT the source code. When I ask them what they do with the source code, they say, they use it to build the binary. Oooooh, I wish I could do that on windows.
The thing about Windows development is it's blackbox. You shouldn't need to know anything about the components except thru the interfaces. Makes things much more stable....guesss what Unix is starting to do. That's right, copy Windows...so far - poorly.
(and ActiveX's dependence on the Registry)
Hello? Mcfly!
So what? Oh damn, I really hate it how Unix relies so much on the file system. Talk about dimented understanding.
I prefer makefiles and source code, where everything is specified in text and there's an open syntax describing all aspects of the build process.
I see, so you've never looked at your project settings? All the compiler options, build options are explained there with controls AND with plain text.
MFC SDI (single-window) project and convert it to an MDI (multi-window in a single pane) project? If it doesn't involve creating a new project from scratch, I'd be highly surprised.
Maybe you should like learn MFC in addition to using the wizards?
WHY do they continue with this ridiculous.doc format in all of it's endless change-it-just-enough-to-break-the-converters versions, instead of switching to an open format like TeX?
Because they think that a modern extensible format like XML is more sensible?
I haven't been able to get to the site, but if it uses the windows codec, isn't there like some kind of legal issue involved?
Anyone want to tell me how fast this is? e.g. does it play fullscreen/scretched etc with decent speed like the windows media player?
Cause I think it's funny how windows can like play full screen or scaled MPEG with 20% CPU time while linux uses 100% CPU playing a postage stamp sized MPEG.
What program are you tring to use to import DOC files?
Staroffice should be able to handle tables and images.
Formatting might get you into trouble as different programs have different ideas. (Compare Word, StarOffice, Abiword and Word Perfect and notice the differences).
Sure python is open, but how many users on all platforms will have a python engine that'll be compatable with any future KOffice implementation?
Or what about xpaint? How many people will be pissed when they open their KWord document in Word for Windows and can't edit the image cause they don't have xpaint or an xbm compatible editor?
We are talking about comptiblility across platforms here right?
I'm saying it's not that easy cause of the generalisation and extensibility of the DOC format.
I'm sorry but many MS engineers are probably smarter than Linus.
All Linus did was copy a 30yr old OS using well known algorithms and code.
I need not remind you that Linux is NOT the best implementation of Unix out there - in fact it's one of the poorest. It pulled a Homer.
To suggest things like he could have fixed bugs in Win2k (good software engineers wouldn't even suggest that anyway)...is just retarded.
Windows 2000 is the best product Microsoft has released, sure it has some 'bugs', but we all know EVERYTHING has bugs.
And Microsoft might not have come up with any product centred around a "new" concept on their own. But they certainly are damned good at implementing existing ideas with some damn good software engineering.
They do things which other software engineers don't bother doing cause it's too hard.
I mentioned elsewhere in this thread an example about the ability to 'draw tables' in frontpage/word/excel etc as opposed to just specifying rows/cols. Other things I can think of are edit-and-continue in VC++, intellisense in Visual Studio (including autoprompting of C++, Java, HTML, JavaScript, ASP etc).
These are the things which make their products stand out from the competition, and that's what counts.
Tony Hoare (Came up with Quicksort). Dave Cutler (Original architect of NT).
Most of the people developing and research at Microsoft probably deserve mention too.
I'm continually suprised at how sophisticated the software they release are, and how well they work despite the sophistication (this is especially true when it comes to creating UIs for their apps).
I've found creating application logic is simple, but trying to actually design and implement a UI that people can use is extrodinarily difficult. Even just the programming of the UI is difficult.
Like, I'd like to see any Unix application that allows me to 'draw' tables. Even frontpage lets you grab a pen tool and draw an HTML table line by line.
Takes a few lines of code to have a dialog request rows/col. Takes skill and dedication to do what Microsoft often do.
Slashdot Mirror
Except for any violations that Microsoft may have made with regarding their agreement with sun (which I'm not familiar with), I don't see ANYTHING wrong in trying to make Java useful in windows. I mean they did it both ways.
I can use Windows APIs from java (extremely useful - do it all the time), or use java from other programming languages easily.
I mean, what's with the blind devotion to WORA concept? I mean, what's wrong with taking the nice language java is and allowing it to take advantage of the underlying platform. sure java was intended to be WORA, but why stop other people from being able to make it do *more things*.
Like I can do this from windows scripts using microsoft java.
var javaobject = GetObject("java:java.util.Vector");
etc
useful.
Where did you get the april platform sdk from?
Excuse me? how is this a 'hack'.
NT has had CreateProcessAsUser since it's creation.
If you want to see hacks and copies of another OS. Look to JAVA, GNOME and KDE.
Um, I'd suggest you update to the latest Platform SDK (June 2000 I think).
If you don't bother to give examples, don't bother at all.
Windows APIs are rarely consistant and always changing.
What kind of aboslutely CRAP is that?
Give an example please.
Download the Windows NT resource kit from micro soft's website, it has a kill utility that can force a process to die.
t e}!//" + server + "/root/cimv2");
I never have problems using task manager myself.
Or you like write a windows script using WMI to do the same thing...
Here's a nice script I just whipped up that'll kill all processes whose name contains a string.
Works over networks (using WMI and DCOM too)...just supply the script a process name, and the server.
var i, server, service, process, processname, processes;
if (WScript.arguments.length > 0)
{
processname = WScript.arguments.Item(0);
}
else
{
WScript.Quit();
}
if (WScript.arguments.length > 1)
{
server = WScript.arguments.Item(1);
}
else
{
server = "localhost";
}
service = GetObject("winmgmts:{impersonationLevel=impersona
processes = new Enumerator(service.InstancesOf("Win32_Process"));
for (; !processes.atEnd(); processes.moveNext())
{
process = processes.item();
if (process.Name.indexOf(processname) != -1)
{
process.terminate(0);
}
}
Um duh?
Seeing as VSS is integrated into visual studio, it's much easier to use than other systems like CVS.
Right click on the file in your project tree, and check it out when you want to use it. After you've finished editing, check it back in.
What's the problem?
That's why I actually really like Windows Foundation Classes. That's right, the windows classes for java. They're actually pretty neat...and basically as simple as that. And they support data bound controls (unlike Swing).
Pretty neat if you don't like MFC.
What I do is split my project into components, use VC++/ATL to write the COM objects for all the logic, then I usually use J++ or VB for the UI.
I pointed out the big flora of tools for manipulating files and text, I pointed out the stability of the system
I see, I really love it how Unix has 10000 text editors. But I'd prefer one that works, and is easy to use. Does XEmacs support intellisense? No, I didn't think so. What's XEmac's goal? To demonstrate bad HCI by having the most deeply nested menus ever seen on the face of the earth.
And stability isn't an issue for many windows developers who use NT/2000. Which is overall more stable when you consider using X on linux.
I can say that I would highly prefer the freedom of developing with Open Source rather than depending on a closed environment
Yes I have some friends who can't program that well who refuse to use anything WITHOUT the source code. When I ask them what they do with the source code, they say, they use it to build the binary. Oooooh, I wish I could do that on windows.
The thing about Windows development is it's blackbox. You shouldn't need to know anything about the components except thru the interfaces. Makes things much more stable....guesss what Unix is starting to do. That's right, copy Windows...so far - poorly.
(and ActiveX's dependence on the Registry)
Hello? Mcfly!
So what? Oh damn, I really hate it how Unix relies so much on the file system. Talk about dimented understanding.
I prefer makefiles and source code, where everything is specified in text and there's an open syntax describing all aspects of the build process.
I see, so you've never looked at your project settings? All the compiler options, build options are explained there with controls AND with plain text.
MFC SDI (single-window) project and convert it to an MDI (multi-window in a single pane) project? If it doesn't involve creating a new project from scratch, I'd be highly surprised.
Maybe you should like learn MFC in addition to using the wizards?
Yes it can.
Running windows 2000 here (333 celery). 8 MPEG videos in WMP, no problems.
I didn't mean the kernel when i said Linux.
Yes, but in order to use the DLL, don't you have to own a copy of Windows.
Not good for many people around here who only use Linux and most probably don't own a copy of windows.
WHY do they continue with this ridiculous
Because they think that a modern extensible format like XML is more sensible?
And behold! Office 2000 supports XML.
And the output even looks good in mozilla.
I don't think the incomptabilities is really Word's fault.
Like the new version of the equation editor must be able to load older versions' data streams, but isn't equiped to save as the older version.
So word is helpless, it can only ask the EE to save, and the EE will save as the new data format...which can't be read by the old version.
I haven't been able to get to the site, but if it uses the windows codec, isn't there like some kind of legal issue involved?
Anyone want to tell me how fast this is? e.g. does it play fullscreen/scretched etc with decent speed like the windows media player?
Cause I think it's funny how windows can like play full screen or scaled MPEG with 20% CPU time while linux uses 100% CPU playing a postage stamp sized MPEG.
You don't know what you're talking about at all.
We're talking about embedding these custom objects inside a compound document.
And why the hell should microsoft output LaTeX files? Microsoft Word is based on COM/OLE, why would they go backwards to LaTeX?
The future of verbose file formats and office formats is in XML NOT TeX.
That's what I'm wondering too.
Heaps of people tell me BeOS is the best MM OS. But when I play around with it, and go looking for good multimedia software, there isn't any!
Anyone want to point to something better than Photoshop or Cooledit Pro that runs on BeOS?
No, this is DivX as in Microsoft's MPEG4+MP3/WMA implementation.
What program are you tring to use to import DOC files?
;)
Staroffice should be able to handle tables and images.
Formatting might get you into trouble as different programs have different ideas. (Compare Word, StarOffice, Abiword and Word Perfect and notice the differences).
I suppose you could say Word is the right one
Um, do you even know what you're talking about?
Sure python is open, but how many users on all platforms will have a python engine that'll be compatable with any future KOffice implementation?
Or what about xpaint? How many people will be pissed when they open their KWord document in Word for Windows and can't edit the image cause they don't have xpaint or an xbm compatible editor?
We are talking about comptiblility across platforms here right?
I'm saying it's not that easy cause of the generalisation and extensibility of the DOC format.
Maybe I should have asked for only say 5 examples?
The number was obviously supposed to be funny (W2K, 65K bugs and all), that much was obvious.
I'm sorry but many MS engineers are probably smarter than Linus.
All Linus did was copy a 30yr old OS using well known algorithms and code.
I need not remind you that Linux is NOT the best implementation of Unix out there - in fact it's one of the poorest. It pulled a Homer.
To suggest things like he could have fixed bugs in Win2k (good software engineers wouldn't even suggest that anyway)...is just retarded.
Windows 2000 is the best product Microsoft has released, sure it has some 'bugs', but we all know EVERYTHING has bugs.
And Microsoft might not have come up with any product centred around a "new" concept on their own. But they certainly are damned good at implementing existing ideas with some damn good software engineering.
They do things which other software engineers don't bother doing cause it's too hard.
I mentioned elsewhere in this thread an example about the ability to 'draw tables' in frontpage/word/excel etc as opposed to just specifying rows/cols.
Other things I can think of are edit-and-continue in VC++, intellisense in Visual Studio (including autoprompting of C++, Java, HTML, JavaScript, ASP etc).
These are the things which make their products stand out from the competition, and that's what counts.
I'd say so.
Search the net for "quicksort" and "tony hoare" and you'll get quite a few results from various universities etc.
Dr. Hoare's website is here
Two of the most famous are..
Tony Hoare (Came up with Quicksort).
Dave Cutler (Original architect of NT).
Most of the people developing and research at Microsoft probably deserve mention too.
I'm continually suprised at how sophisticated the software they release are, and how well they work despite the sophistication (this is especially true when it comes to creating UIs for their apps).
I've found creating application logic is simple, but trying to actually design and implement a UI that people can use is extrodinarily difficult. Even just the programming of the UI is difficult.
Like, I'd like to see any Unix application that allows me to 'draw' tables. Even frontpage lets you grab a pen tool and draw an HTML table line by line.
Takes a few lines of code to have a dialog request rows/col. Takes skill and dedication to do what Microsoft often do.