the license determines which developers work on the project. It is widely known that GPL attracts a bette quality of developer. Given that fact, it is understandable that BIND and X Windows are pieces of crap.
Not, I find BSD development to be much more focused. Everyone who's not blinded knows BSD is superior to Linux in terms of stability and scalability. Apache (which linux advocates love to hug) is under a BSD license too if i recall correctly.
Maybe the GUI really is the difference. In NT I go start>programs>administrative tools>user manager. In Linux I find a command prompt and type useradd. Or I can hunt through the new Gnome based tools...
Or you could bother to learn Windows Scripting, WIndows Programming or even the commandline "net user" command.
There is a windows standard recommendation that apps have to pass to get ceritication.
And I NEVER hav eany troubles using keyboard nav in any apps i use (or prolly will use), Alt-F4 and Alt-Space-Close are all provded by windows. Alt-F-X are based on menu commands, so it's pretty obvious what they are on the app (look for the underlined neumonic in the menu).
That copy and past thing I've told you before, Ctrl-C & Ctrl-Insert are standard, Ctrl-V and Shift-Insert are standard. They're both supported by every application I'ver used (never used quicken).
And I use keyboard shortcuts all the time, it's completely feasible, if you don't know what the nav keys are for close, look at the menu (or use the two standard Alt-F4 and Alt-S-C). If you want to close an MDI window, use Ctrl-F4, if you want to cycle thru mdi windows, use Ctrl-Tab, cycle thru top level windows, use Alt-Tab, look up help, F1, search for something, Ctrl-F or F3.
It's easy. And if it's an app like (quickken) which you use often, it shouldn't be hard to learn, knowing both ways of doing it is an advantage since other apps support both, and you can use which ever is closest to your fingers:)
Ctrl-C and Ctrl-Insert are both copy in windows (both are supported by default windows common controls) and Ctrl-V and Shift-Insert are past in windows.
You seem to mistaken by the fact that there are many ways to do things, you seem to think that means that each app only allows one (and a different one) way of doing things. You are wrong.
And Microsoft doesn't say they're 'technically part of the OS', they're part of the Windows OS.
UIs are already Open source, look where that got us....look at X, KDE, Gnome etc, copies of Windows (they are!).
More like 99.9% of the time for top level applications (apps that are on the taskbar).
The X(close) button on the top right of a window is also there 99.9% of the time.
I find it funny how so many unix people here actually complain that windows gives you so many ways to do things, so what? The average user only needs to know one (most use the close button on the top right), power users can use whatever suits their needs at the time. Giving heaps of options (ones that don't clutter up the screen) is neither counterintuitive or stupid. I doesn't confuse any users, since it never shows up, and it's not 'hidden' as such since the most obvious ways to close a window are available.
I've never seen a windows app that only allows one way to quit. Alt-space-close, Atl-f4 are STANDARD on ALL windows applications. It is very rare to find any application that overrides these. Then there's Alt-F-X which is extremely standard across almost all applications too. And Alt-G-X is very rare, sure pinball has it, name another though. Your ignorance (on purpose or not) makes me disregard everything you say.
So basically what you are saying is that just because computers have got better it is more acceptable to produce poorly-written code?
If by poorly written code, you mean code that isn't as optimized as it can be, then yes, by all means. This is not the 70s anymore. Any software engineer will tell you that writing software is always a compromise between many goals. Speed is no where near as important as it was say 10-30 years ago. Neither is size. The software industry seems to understand this, and you do not.
Ever wonder why it took NOW before Unix got decent desktop enviroments and applications that people can use (eg. lots of GUI options). It's cause of 'bloated' GTK+ and QT, that make it much easier to write applications. And 'bloated' technologies like KOM/OpenParts/Bonobo are making things even easier. You can't do everything, and there's no point spending 5 years developing something with gcc & vi that could not do half the job that spending 1 year one year on Delphi could do.
So you are saying that a 2cv is better than a BMW because a Porsche or Ferrari is faster than the BMW???? I must be missing something......
Yes you are, we aren't talking about cars. I'm saying IE is better than Netscape because it's faster, more stable and supports much more standards. Examples of mozilla and opera were not to say they were 'better', it was an example of how fast non microsoft applications can be if written properly, an example of how poorly netscape engineers did their stuff back in the pre mozilla days. Follow the thread. This isn't a matter of just SPEED, it's a matter being slow with absolutely no reason for it except for poor software engineering. Hell, I prefer to use Hotjava on unix machines over netscape.
Ahh, being microsoft means being a 'troll'. I now know your intelligence, but I'll bite anyway.
1) There's no reason why other vendors can't "preload DLLs" (most DLLs are shared in memory and most apps use those DLLs anyway, like mscomctl). And besides, there's no such thing as 'preloading' DLLs, you can have apps that loads a library, and another app that needs to use it won't take as long to load it cause it's already in memory. And what's this "system" dlls thing? To me system dlls are things like gdi32.dll etc.
2) Windows 2000 boots faster than Redhat Linux on the same machine here.
3) Windows bloated? Uh, what's netscape/staroffice?
I take it you don't know ANYTHING about the Active desktop. That has nothing to do with it, Explorer starts whether or not you have an Active Desktop. But like I said, it's irrelevant, IE starts in a new process. And there's no reason why Netscape can't do any 'magical preloading'.
Please show me any undocumented features in windows dlls netscape can't. you mean MSHTML.DLL? oh wait, that _is_ IE and anyone can use it.
And that doesn't explain why other browsers (mozilla5 and opera are also many times faster than netscape at starting and rendering).
That's crap. Word, IE etc all start in new processes, the DLL memory sharing is done on ALL applications, so it doesn't explain why netscape is so slow at loading (as well as star office). also there's NO reason why netscape can't do any preloading either (hey they go around installing AOL IM and change your default hompage in IE etc without asking).
Netscape is BLOATED. eg. it's HUGE, SLOW, UNMAINTANABLE and doesn't do what it's supposed to do properly.
Why do you think the source for netscape was quickly 'disposed' of.
You don't know what you're talking about. Office loaads slowly and never does what you want it to? And you're using Star Office too ROFL. Show me ANY machine that will load up StarOffice faster than Office and I'll be extremely suprised.
On the machines I have here, Star Office consistantly takes over 30 seconds to start, whereas on the same machines, Word takes 2 seconds, and usually less after the first try (usually less than a second). Star Office like Netscape is SLOOOOW to load, and an excellent example of when Microsoft can make applications that aren't as 'bloated' as the competition.
It's not unlikely that Windows apps will be ported to Linux. Seeing as Linux is the 'thing to do' (stamp Linux on anything and it'll sell).
This is ESPECIALLY true now that Mainsoft have released MainWin for Linux (basically a complete port of Win32 to Linux - includes COM/ODBC/MFC etc). This is the porting tool Microsoft used to get Internet Explorer and Outlook Express on Slowlaris a HP-UX.
Ofcourse, I'm refusing to use any Offfice product on Linux until X has antialiasing:P.
BTW, these people who thinks MS Office is 'bloated', should try Star Office. 30 second load time comapred to 2 second load time....not to mention the way it pretends to be a shell...
Uh, if you mean that it adds services and applications to the OS then yes, that's what software does. I'd hardly refer to it as "modifies NT OS" like that, sure you could think of it that way, but then it's nothing more than an addition.
Just cause Unix distributions generally come with QOTD, doesn't mean it's part of the OS. Anyone could write a service to add QOTD etc to Office. Gee hard. I mean look at VMWare, they managed to write VMWare for NT without any access to NT source code. It's extending the OS without source that windows is good at.
The latest benchmark utility from Ziff Davis, Content Creation, is described as a system-level, application-based benchmark. Using Adobe Photoshop 5.0, Adobe Premiere 5.1, Macromedia Director 7.0, DreamWeaver 2.0, Netscape Navigator 4.6, and Sonic Foundry's Sound Forge 4.5, CC Winstone 2000 applies stress on a system's CPU to determine real-world content creation performance.
Heh, what better way to see how stressed a processor can get than to throw Netscape 4.x at it?
That's a highly warped example. It's just as valid to say this:
User: My copy of MS Word crashed in such-and-such a situation and lost all of my work. Tech Support: Sure, the problem is known and has been fixed in SP1, you can download it here and you might want to refer to the KB article 12345, I'll email you a copy.
versus
User: My copy of Gimp crashed on me when I tried to print with my new laser printer. I think it's a kernel or driver problem. Linux Gure Tech Support: It's your fault. Fix it yourself, you have the source. Your laser printer is a crappy windows printer, buy a new one. The next kernel release will fix all this and also make green eggs and ham sandwiches.
See my point? Basically, you can warp anything out of proportion. Obviously there can be some bad support, but then that happens everywhere, not just in windows, and not just with Microsoft. BTW, since when was the software industry called "The M$ Model"?
Well, actually it's most prolly cause I love VC++ and couldn't think of using anything else;), but why not port KDevelop to Windows? I mean all the unix tools needed by KDevelop are available in one form or another (either a direct port or with cygwin).
As for the general idea of Windows based open source projects, I think it's a great idea. One thing I noticed about SourceForge last time I looked was that it lacked areas for windows projects...yeah, VA is a Linux company, but hey...you know:).
Someone said that most people don't know of gcc for windows etc, and that's so true. Hell, most people don't realise that just about everything on Unix is avilable on windows as well, you just gotta know where to look:).
that's not what i was saying. I was saying I wouldn't trust ONE administrator writing some script to do this opposed to hundreds of smart engineers, mathematicians and scientists from microsoft research.
And compared to other software and what Microsoft software does, yes I trust Microsoft engineers. Any idiot who's ever developed large software knows it's impossible to develop something bug free. Look at how other companies are trying to reproduce the kind of work Microsoft has done. Sun's Java (microsoft had COM), look at the HUGE bugs in Java, what about star office as opposed to MS Office? And star office doens't even do half the things MS Office does, and then there's Gnome/KDE, which has been under 'open source' deevelopment for over 3 years and still is buggy. What about Netscape?
Yes I do trust Microsoft more than most other software companies, and certainly more than some administrator.
So lets see, you would be happier if Microsoft developed their own propprietry protocol?
Besides, this is no more embracing and extending than as if Microsoft created their own XML schema for word documents. It's allowed in kerberos to do this, it's just 'unaware' servers won't be able to handle it, no problem if someone decides to implement this on a Unix KDC tho.
Slashdot Mirror
the license determines which developers work on the project. It is widely known that GPL attracts a bette quality of developer. Given that fact, it is understandable that BIND and X Windows are pieces of crap.
Not, I find BSD development to be much more focused. Everyone who's not blinded knows BSD is superior to Linux in terms of stability and scalability. Apache (which linux advocates love to hug) is under a BSD license too if i recall correctly.
No, it's under a REAL free license. BSD is really freedom, GPL is kindda supposed to be free but has clauses (kindda like communism :P).
Maybe the GUI really is the difference. In NT I go start>programs>administrative tools>user manager. In Linux I find a command prompt and type useradd. Or I can hunt through the new Gnome based tools...
Or you could bother to learn Windows Scripting, WIndows Programming or even the commandline "net user" command.
Um, smart menus let you access the few features you want to use quickly.
What are you talking about?
What's wrong with Microsoft's implementation?
No complaints there, but they're hardly doing it for free.
Which platform has the most games?
There is a windows standard recommendation that apps have to pass to get ceritication.
:)
And I NEVER hav eany troubles using keyboard nav in any apps i use (or prolly will use), Alt-F4 and Alt-Space-Close are all provded by windows. Alt-F-X are based on menu commands, so it's pretty obvious what they are on the app (look for the underlined neumonic in the menu).
That copy and past thing I've told you before, Ctrl-C & Ctrl-Insert are standard, Ctrl-V and Shift-Insert are standard. They're both supported by every application I'ver used (never used quicken).
And I use keyboard shortcuts all the time, it's completely feasible, if you don't know what the nav keys are for close, look at the menu (or use the two standard Alt-F4 and Alt-S-C). If you want to close an MDI window, use Ctrl-F4, if you want to cycle thru mdi windows, use Ctrl-Tab, cycle thru top level windows, use Alt-Tab, look up help, F1, search for something, Ctrl-F or F3.
It's easy. And if it's an app like (quickken) which you use often, it shouldn't be hard to learn, knowing both ways of doing it is an advantage since other apps support both, and you can use which ever is closest to your fingers
Again you're mistaken.
Ctrl-C and Ctrl-Insert are both copy in windows (both are supported by default windows common controls) and Ctrl-V and Shift-Insert are past in windows.
You seem to mistaken by the fact that there are many ways to do things, you seem to think that means that each app only allows one (and a different one) way of doing things. You are wrong.
And Microsoft doesn't say they're 'technically part of the OS', they're part of the Windows OS.
UIs are already Open source, look where that got us....look at X, KDE, Gnome etc, copies of Windows (they are!).
More like 99.9% of the time for top level applications (apps that are on the taskbar).
The X(close) button on the top right of a window is also there 99.9% of the time.
I find it funny how so many unix people here actually complain that windows gives you so many ways to do things, so what? The average user only needs to know one (most use the close button on the top right), power users can use whatever suits their needs at the time.
Giving heaps of options (ones that don't clutter up the screen) is neither counterintuitive or stupid. I doesn't confuse any users, since it never shows up, and it's not 'hidden' as such since the most obvious ways to close a window are available.
You don't know what you're talking about.
I've never seen a windows app that only allows one way to quit.
Alt-space-close, Atl-f4 are STANDARD on ALL windows applications. It is very rare to find any application that overrides these.
Then there's Alt-F-X which is extremely standard across almost all applications too.
And Alt-G-X is very rare, sure pinball has it, name another though.
Your ignorance (on purpose or not) makes me disregard everything you say.
So basically what you are saying is that just because computers have got better it is more acceptable to produce poorly-written code?
If by poorly written code, you mean code that isn't as optimized as it can be, then yes, by all means. This is not the 70s anymore. Any software engineer will tell you that writing software is always a compromise between many goals. Speed is no where near as important as it was say 10-30 years ago. Neither is size. The software industry seems to understand this, and you do not.
Ever wonder why it took NOW before Unix got decent desktop enviroments and applications that people can use (eg. lots of GUI options). It's cause of 'bloated' GTK+ and QT, that make it much easier to write applications. And 'bloated' technologies like KOM/OpenParts/Bonobo are making things even easier.
You can't do everything, and there's no point spending 5 years developing something with gcc & vi that could not do half the job that spending 1 year one year on Delphi could do.
So you are saying that a 2cv is better than a BMW because a Porsche or Ferrari is faster than the BMW???? I must be missing something......
Yes you are, we aren't talking about cars.
I'm saying IE is better than Netscape because it's faster, more stable and supports much more standards. Examples of mozilla and opera were not to say they were 'better', it was an example of how fast non microsoft applications can be if written properly, an example of how poorly netscape engineers did their stuff back in the pre mozilla days. Follow the thread.
This isn't a matter of just SPEED, it's a matter being slow with absolutely no reason for it except for poor software engineering. Hell, I prefer to use Hotjava on unix machines over netscape.
Ahh, being microsoft means being a 'troll'. I now know your intelligence, but I'll bite anyway.
1) There's no reason why other vendors can't "preload DLLs" (most DLLs are shared in memory and most apps use those DLLs anyway, like mscomctl). And besides, there's no such thing as 'preloading' DLLs, you can have apps that loads a library, and another app that needs to use it won't take as long to load it cause it's already in memory. And what's this "system" dlls thing? To me system dlls are things like gdi32.dll etc.
2) Windows 2000 boots faster than Redhat Linux on the same machine here.
3) Windows bloated? Uh, what's netscape/staroffice?
I take it you don't know ANYTHING about the Active desktop. That has nothing to do with it, Explorer starts whether or not you have an Active Desktop. But like I said, it's irrelevant, IE starts in a new process. And there's no reason why Netscape can't do any 'magical preloading'.
Please show me any undocumented features in windows dlls netscape can't. you mean MSHTML.DLL? oh wait, that _is_ IE and anyone can use it.
And that doesn't explain why other browsers (mozilla5 and opera are also many times faster than netscape at starting and rendering).
That's crap. Word, IE etc all start in new processes, the DLL memory sharing is done on ALL applications, so it doesn't explain why netscape is so slow at loading (as well as star office). also there's NO reason why netscape can't do any preloading either (hey they go around installing AOL IM and change your default hompage in IE etc without asking).
Netscape is BLOATED. eg. it's HUGE, SLOW, UNMAINTANABLE and doesn't do what it's supposed to do properly.
Why do you think the source for netscape was quickly 'disposed' of.
LOL.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Office loaads slowly and never does what you want it to? And you're using Star Office too ROFL. Show me ANY machine that will load up StarOffice faster than Office and I'll be extremely suprised.
On the machines I have here, Star Office consistantly takes over 30 seconds to start, whereas on the same machines, Word takes 2 seconds, and usually less after the first try (usually less than a second).
Star Office like Netscape is SLOOOOW to load, and an excellent example of when Microsoft can make applications that aren't as 'bloated' as the competition.
You have NO idea what you're on about.
It's not unlikely that Windows apps will be ported to Linux. Seeing as Linux is the 'thing to do' (stamp Linux on anything and it'll sell).
:P.
This is ESPECIALLY true now that Mainsoft have released MainWin for Linux (basically a complete port of Win32 to Linux - includes COM/ODBC/MFC etc). This is the porting tool Microsoft used to get Internet Explorer and Outlook Express on Slowlaris a HP-UX.
Ofcourse, I'm refusing to use any Offfice product on Linux until X has antialiasing
BTW, these people who thinks MS Office is 'bloated', should try Star Office. 30 second load time comapred to 2 second load time....not to mention the way it pretends to be a shell...
Uh, if you mean that it adds services and applications to the OS then yes, that's what software does. I'd hardly refer to it as "modifies NT OS" like that, sure you could think of it that way, but then it's nothing more than an addition.
Just cause Unix distributions generally come with QOTD, doesn't mean it's part of the OS. Anyone could write a service to add QOTD etc to Office. Gee hard. I mean look at VMWare, they managed to write VMWare for NT without any access to NT source code. It's extending the OS without source that windows is good at.
The latest benchmark utility from Ziff Davis, Content Creation, is described as a system-level, application-based benchmark. Using Adobe Photoshop 5.0, Adobe Premiere 5.1, Macromedia Director 7.0, DreamWeaver 2.0, Netscape Navigator 4.6, and Sonic Foundry's Sound Forge 4.5, CC Winstone 2000 applies stress on a system's CPU to determine real-world content creation performance.
Heh, what better way to see how stressed a processor can get than to throw Netscape 4.x at it?
I'd say that they'd probably be using a cluster level link, not symlinking.
That's a highly warped example.
It's just as valid to say this:
User: My copy of MS Word crashed in such-and-such a situation and lost all of my work.
Tech Support: Sure, the problem is known and has been fixed in SP1, you can download it here and you might want to refer to the KB article 12345, I'll email you a copy.
versus
User: My copy of Gimp crashed on me when I tried to print with my new laser printer. I think it's a kernel or driver problem.
Linux Gure Tech Support: It's your fault. Fix it yourself, you have the source. Your laser printer is a crappy windows printer, buy a new one. The next kernel release will fix all this and also make green eggs and ham sandwiches.
See my point? Basically, you can warp anything out of proportion. Obviously there can be some bad support, but then that happens everywhere, not just in windows, and not just with Microsoft. BTW, since when was the software industry called "The M$ Model"?
Well, actually it's most prolly cause I love VC++ and couldn't think of using anything else ;), but why not port KDevelop to Windows? I mean all the unix tools needed by KDevelop are available in one form or another (either a direct port or with cygwin).
:).
:).
As for the general idea of Windows based open source projects, I think it's a great idea. One thing I noticed about SourceForge last time I looked was that it lacked areas for windows projects...yeah, VA is a Linux company, but hey...you know
Someone said that most people don't know of gcc for windows etc, and that's so true. Hell, most people don't realise that just about everything on Unix is avilable on windows as well, you just gotta know where to look
*rolls eyes*
that's not what i was saying. I was saying I wouldn't trust ONE administrator writing some script to do this opposed to hundreds of smart engineers, mathematicians and scientists from microsoft research.
And compared to other software and what Microsoft software does, yes I trust Microsoft engineers.
Any idiot who's ever developed large software knows it's impossible to develop something bug free. Look at how other companies are trying to reproduce the kind of work Microsoft has done. Sun's Java (microsoft had COM), look at the HUGE bugs in Java, what about star office as opposed to MS Office? And star office doens't even do half the things MS Office does, and then there's Gnome/KDE, which has been under 'open source' deevelopment for over 3 years and still is buggy. What about Netscape?
Yes I do trust Microsoft more than most other software companies, and certainly more than some administrator.
So lets see, you would be happier if Microsoft developed their own propprietry protocol?
Besides, this is no more embracing and extending than as if Microsoft created their own XML schema for word documents. It's allowed in kerberos to do this, it's just 'unaware' servers won't be able to handle it, no problem if someone decides to implement this on a Unix KDC tho.
There's still no evidence that what they're doing really is symbolic links. For all you know it could be cluster level.