would stop isolating Microsoft and Microsoft supporters/developers/partners maybe Microsoft would seriously consider writing software for Linux like they do for MacOS. I remember downloading a version of windows media (can't remember what it was called then, DirectMovie or something) for Linux _written_ by Microsoft, it must of been one of their first Linux projects, and it was free. I don't see any reason why Microsoft wouldn't write IE or Media player for free for Linux (Linux isn't seriously going to threaten Windows on the desktop for a while - just like MacOS). Except for that fact that every childish linux geek wannabe keeps cracking jokes about microsoft, using halarious dollar signs when writing MS or Microsoft, and making stupid jokes about BSOD when Windows/MS isn't even involved. Then there's blaming Microsoft for things that weren't there fault (eg. Ebay) and then saying "oh well, it was Sun and Oracle after all, they're good, Microsoft is evil, so that's ok".
I really do get sick of this. I read slashdot to keep up with geek news and trivia, not to hear constant Microsoft bashing. If that would stop, I bet Microsoft would be more willing to write more apps for Linux.
Save the "Microsoft wants to keep it's windows monopoly" replies, cause in this case windows media is what they want to promote...and keep in mind, they did write a media player for linux only a year or so ago.
integrated means it's an important part of windows, IE technology is used in other features of windows like IIS, HTML Help etc.
It's like saying X, Gnome and Bash are important to Redhat Linux...and that KFM is 'integrated' into Corel Linux. The term 'integrated' just means it's part of windows and removing it would make windows not the windows they want it to be.
Isn't that the problem? W2k is so large that it's now next to impossible to do good QA on it. I can't speak for BSD, but in Linux most pieces of software are relatively independent, so that QA only needs to be done on that particular piece of software.
Well duh Windows 2000 is big, but it's also highly componentized, even the kernel is. Windows 2000 isnt' one bug source file you know, there are many divisions working on various parts of Windows 2000. COM+, WTS, Explorer, GDI etc etc.
Ofcourse the average genetic differences between black and white people are are quite often less than the differences between 2 people of the same race.
And Tigers and Lions do share a similar genetic path, but they are different species because their offsprings are sterile. The differences between difference human races are so small that healthy babies arise from mixed relationships.
Um, no. It's actually not at all like that. It's like saying I should be allowed to (for example) feel like killing you for posting this. Sure, feeling like that would be incredibly unreasonable. But as long as I don't act on it, are you arguing that I should be penalized for that? If I should, why? Should Spock be the only person not in violation of your law?
Nah, it's more like being penalized for publicly encouraging people to kill me for making that post. Eg. cigarette advertising on tv is illegal, but it isn't illegal to advertise killing . This may or may not apply to the internet, I'll leave that up to the UN.
What would you propose doing about it? About anti-diverse speech? About anti-diverse thought? And would your solution to anti-diverse thought really be any better than what it replaces. (What exactly is anti-diverse thought? Who decides? Also see my questions about censorship above.)
Advocating racism is advocating anti-diversity. Um, I have nothing to propose to prevent this. Ofcourse people would question whether it's right to prevent people from wanting to act be racists. Yes, I suppose I did mean "speech" instead of "thought" considering we really can't monitor someone's thought in the first place:P.
It's really a changing position for me, sometimes I think, hrm stopping people from being able to encourage 'XXX' would be good, but then would the action of doing that be just as bad. But then, in a 'diverse' society it's never going to work if you let everyone do and say and encourage whatever they want. It sounds horrifically undemocratic etc etc but humans aren't perfect, and no system (society) is ever going to be perfect for humans. You don't think the goverment would try to stop certain 'groups' which could destroy society?
Ofcourse, saying ANYTHING that remotely sounds like limiting someone's ability to do or say anything in the US is akin to being communist, so I gotta be careful:P.
Whatever happened to diversity? Diversity of opinion is just as important as any other kind of diversity.
If this diversity of thought includes thoughts that are anti-diviverse (eg. racism) then it is unacceptable. It's like saying murder should be allowed cause everyone should be free to do what ever the hell they want. Sure racism doesn't (usually) directly cause the death of someone, but it indirectly causes the death of a global society, progress and humanity. There are and should be limits to freedom of thought. Thought can be more destructive sometimes than the act - thought usually leads to the act too, and it should be discouraged.
Hrm looks pretty neat. Shouldn't actually be that hard to intercept CoCreateInstance at runtime using DLL injection and actually have Explorer/Winamp etc use Mozilla. See, Netscape could have done their own 'web integration' like Microsoft but they chose whine to the goverment >:|.
So while it might seem profoundly counter-intuitive can anyone actually give me a good reason why Java + JIT should be slower than Good Programmertm + Assembler?
There are many things that slow java down, that I'm sure you're aware of, but I'll outline some of them here as they come to me:).
Limited stack, all java objects are created on the heap, and thus is considerably slower. Microsoft Research actually have a division working on speeding up java by putting some objects onto the thread stack.
Runtime checking, array bounds checking etc can not be turned off. Good for stability, bad for speed.
Late binding, can be rather slow:), it's always best avoided when using java, but sometimes you can't. This affects other languages too ofcourse.
Coding practise. I don't know about many people here, but when I program in C, I usually know exactly what's going in memory, so I spend a bit more time optimizing this and that saving a few extra cycles, especially if the code is in a loop. I'm sure this is even more true of most ASM programmers. In java, I just don't care, I don't really know what's going on in memory, and I don't really care, I just do what makes the tidiest code, I also tend to use inheritance a bit more:) hmmm.
Also, java's thread synchronization is easy, but extraordinarily slow compared to what you could do if you were to use Win32 for example, since you have a lot more control. A JIT is not going to help that. Come to think of that, that's where JIT can fail with high level languages, there are things that these languages restrict you from doing, which prevent such cool optimizations that a JIT couldn't possibly do - I'm not talking about instruction level optmization, I'm talking about things like being able to manipulate memory directly.
The idea that Java + JIT can be faster than traditional ASM is interesting, but never will happen I'm afraid:P. It's nice throwing around O notations about how much more efficient garbage collection can be etc, but you have to realise than you're assuming that memory freeing is the most costly process, it may not be. With JIT, GC etc, you have the additional overhead of the JIT and GC. I haven't seen any proof so far that these overheads aren't overheads at all.
There are additional 'optimizations' that can be done at runtime, but does using a JIT really improve performance (taking into account the overhead of the JIT)? How many cases are there when a compiler can not optimize the code as much as a JIT, and the JIT can actually give any kind of improvement. I doubt there are many, and unless the improvements are like 10% improvements, I doubt it would matter much. What's the diff between a 433Mhz and a 476Mhz celeron? Nothing any average user would notice. The only place you would notice the speed difference is when you're running something like VMWare, 3DSMax or compiling Linux....and in those cases would a JIT improve or just hinder performance?
Ofcourse, as we get faster, and faster processors, we can move to higher and higher level languages like Java. They drastically reduce development times, and in many cases, will be the better choice. I doubt you'll see Quake or any OS written in Java anytime soon....hell, I doubt you'll see Office or CorelDraw written in java anytime soon;).
Crusoe is fast and super cool, but it's not as fast as a real 666Mhz x86. And if Transmeta adds official java support, I'd love to get my hands on one:)~.
I should also stress here, I have nothing again'st java/jit etc. There're all cool stuff, but I think the concept of Java beating good programmer + asm a bit, uh, unrealistic:).
It's usable, certainly much more than NS4.7 which I can't stand. Like previous versions, you can resize the window (eg. max/min) without the browser reloading the page from the server, just like IE & Opera has been doing for over 2 years:P. It's nicely done, a bit slower than IE, but I guess the reason for that is the same reason why the drop down menus, and just about everything in the UI seems abnormally sluggish.
The thing on the left (a copy of window's extensible explorer bands?) doesn't expand properly after it's colapsed, it kindda dissapears and doesn't draw itself properly.
Fonts, does Mozilla not support native windows fonts? I now portability is an issue, but I'd kind of like mozilla to honour my exotic fonts if they're installed in windows.
CSS seems to work nicely now, like IE:P.
I'm going to start testing web pages now with mozilla as well as IE (i gave up on NS4.7 ages ago).
I know mozilla is supposed to be 'standards compliant' and all, but I still find that IE always seems to be able to render and support the more exotic parts of the standards while mozilla is till 'getting there'.
Oh well, looks promising. Anyone know if there's an ActiveX wrapper for mozilla yet (IE has had that since IE3)....which is why so many apps have integrated HTML (WinAmp, Neoplanet, Office, and other 3rd party ones I can't remember:)).
I used to like putting braces at the end of lines - java convinced me of that - for a while. i went back to C++ and now i always have braces on their own lines. IMHO it's tider...for some reason code looks all sloped with braces at the end. My reasoning is that braces have nothing to do with the the code on the line, a brace simply should be used to identify a block, and as such it should start and end on the same indentation level.
And yes, I probably will be flamed to hell;)
I normally use what VC++ gives me for indentation too;), it's prolly around 4.
After reading the linux kernel recommended coding style i'm absolutely horrified.
starting braces at the end of lines...except for function declartions? yes ofcourse, this is cause functions can't be embedded. talk about MUNTED. And 8 character tabs? geee....he talks about saving lines by not having braces take their own lines,b ut talks about how saving horizontal space is irrelevant.
ALL braces should start on new lines. If you look at handwriting, you'll notice that consistancy is what makes something look 'nice' and readable. And that recommendation is NOT consistant. it's horrific.
I remember when I first saw enlightenment almost 3 years ago now, and I thought WOW.
Then when I installed it, I figured out it was ALL just about eye candy. And I could get more functionality by just taking those candy screenshots and making them my desktop background.
In the 3 years since then, enlightenment has made *some* progress but about 0.2% of the progress I'd expect from 3 years.
I'm sure rasterman has a lot of fun developing the HUGE open source project that is enlightenment. I'm sure the other guy on the E team is also having fun.
I'm sick of hearing some of these ignorant remarks.
"Ohhh, microsoft/m$/micros~1 wants to make their java the standard java".
What a load of crap, Microsoft's _changes_ to java or more specifically, J++, to the programmer just ads some packages that you can choose or not choose to use. True their are some keywords (again additions) to make it easy to access libraries without having to write stub libraries for JNI. These things are all additions, any java programmer (unless they're 11 year old wannabes) knows what is java and what isn't. It's not as if Microsoft have changed all the keywords, or that they've restructured the language. They've added some features. If you write _JUST_ java and compile it, it will work on other JVMs. If you want to use the java languge to write windows apps (say, as an alternative to VB) you can, but it will only run on windows. If you're stupid enough to think that it will run on Linux too, then well...uh...you shouldn't be programming. And If you use microsoft's language extensions to make it easier to access, say, dlls/so, then it won't run on other JVMs...with some exceptions (like Transvirtual's clean room java "Kaffe"). Using J++, it's perfectly easy to make 100% pure java apps, but it's also super easy to make windows apps. When you make windows apps, treat Java like a language.
A file system with the functionality of Oracle 8. Um, Oracle isn't a file system. And NTFS has features oracle doesn't have, cluster level compression, encryption etc. Anyway, you can't compare a filesystem to a database, they're meant for different things, tho have many similarities.
And you don't need to use "NFS" to share files (note, this is different from a filesystem itself, you can't tell me that NFS and NTFS are the same thing, except one if 'networked') you can use Samba.
It was written in a diferent culture with a different target and a different purpose ( make B.G. richer?). Two of the base assumtions you can make are that NT is not modular you cannot plug in a new file system because the rest of the OS expects an "NTFS" file system to be there
What utter bullshit. NT is a heck of a lot more modular than Linux. It's got a HAL (hardware abstration layer) and is a microkernel...have you EVER tried to even use the NT DDK? The kernel is compeltely modular, and writing your own Filesystem is supported. NT expects NTFS? uh huh, I guess NT's support for FAT16 and FAT32 are just imaginary.
"NTFS" specific calls are embedded in MFC classes, and, therefore most programs. The second assumption is that the underlying file system and the widley distributed MFS classes will be subject to change at the whim of engineers in Redmond.
ROFL, NTFS specific calls are embedded into MFC? Are you a complete utter idiot or what? Firstly, MFC source code is compeltely free, download the Windows 2000 SDK and you'll notice the 64bit versions of MFC are there too. If they are 'subject' to change, you can alwayus change them back. The filesystem in NT is 'transparent' there are no NTFS specific calls in MFC to make MFC work. That's the funniest thing I've read for a while now.
This should probably be implemneted as an NT service, not as device drivers. Anyone who can read and understand a manual and who can program (surpisingly few computer "profesionals" in my experience;-) ) could write a viable NT service program.
Excuse me? An NT Service? Oh, and how the heck is he supposed to write a filesystem driver without writing a driver, but by writing a serice? Do you know what an NT service is?
The defualt NT file system is pretty good and can easily be distributed to other platforms via the various "NFS" on NT products. Plus NT installations have a culture of using databases when the underlying file system is not enough. I mean could you provide a File System with more functionality than Oracle V8.0?
Well, you seemed to have lost some of that ignorance here.
Re:What are the Differences?
on
Free Solaris 8
·
· Score: 1
If you need to do Java work, no surprise, the environment for Solaris is MUCH better.
Uh, well Sun support Java on Solaris (well they support Linux now too), but Solaris is one of the worse enviroments for java - ironically. NT, 9x kicks it's ass. Linux kicks it's ass too if you use TowerJ (but they do native compiling).
NT has CMD.EXE a command interpretor, but it also comes with command.com (c:\winnt\system32) for running old DOS programs. Even windows 2000 comes with command.com.
Maybe you should try to know what you're talking about before saying anything.
Slashdot Mirror
would stop isolating Microsoft and Microsoft supporters/developers/partners maybe Microsoft would seriously consider writing software for Linux like they do for MacOS.
I remember downloading a version of windows media (can't remember what it was called then, DirectMovie or something) for Linux _written_ by Microsoft, it must of been one of their first Linux projects, and it was free.
I don't see any reason why Microsoft wouldn't write IE or Media player for free for Linux (Linux isn't seriously going to threaten Windows on the desktop for a while - just like MacOS). Except for that fact that every childish linux geek wannabe keeps cracking jokes about microsoft, using halarious dollar signs when writing MS or Microsoft, and making stupid jokes about BSOD when Windows/MS isn't even involved.
Then there's blaming Microsoft for things that weren't there fault (eg. Ebay) and then saying "oh well, it was Sun and Oracle after all, they're good, Microsoft is evil, so that's ok".
I really do get sick of this. I read slashdot to keep up with geek news and trivia, not to hear constant Microsoft bashing. If that would stop, I bet Microsoft would be more willing to write more apps for Linux.
Save the "Microsoft wants to keep it's windows monopoly" replies, cause in this case windows media is what they want to promote...and keep in mind, they did write a media player for linux only a year or so ago.
don't be such a fool.
integrated means it's an important part of windows, IE technology is used in other features of windows like IIS, HTML Help etc.
It's like saying X, Gnome and Bash are important to Redhat Linux...and that KFM is 'integrated' into Corel Linux.
The term 'integrated' just means it's part of windows and removing it would make windows not the windows they want it to be.
Duh. Think.
Isn't that the problem? W2k is so large that it's now next to impossible to do good QA on it. I can't speak for BSD, but in Linux most pieces of software are relatively independent, so that QA only needs to be done on that particular piece of software.
Well duh Windows 2000 is big, but it's also highly componentized, even the kernel is. Windows 2000 isnt' one bug source file you know, there are many divisions working on various parts of Windows 2000. COM+, WTS, Explorer, GDI etc etc.
Yeesh
Ofcourse the average genetic differences between black and white people are are quite often less than the differences between 2 people of the same race.
And Tigers and Lions do share a similar genetic path, but they are different species because their offsprings are sterile.
The differences between difference human races are so small that healthy babies arise from mixed relationships.
Just wait until your grandchildren look nothing like you. Then think again
So? Who the hell cares?
I'm sure most of your ancestors looked nothing like you. How would you like it if they were disgusted by you?
that's very undemocratic of you :P
Um, no. It's actually not at all like that. It's like saying I should be allowed to (for example) feel like killing you for posting this. Sure, feeling like that would be incredibly unreasonable. But as long as I don't act on it, are you arguing that I should be penalized for that? If I should, why? Should Spock be the only person not in violation of your law?
Nah, it's more like being penalized for publicly encouraging people to kill me for making that post. Eg. cigarette advertising on tv is illegal, but it isn't illegal to advertise killing .
This may or may not apply to the internet, I'll leave that up to the UN.
What would you propose doing about it? About anti-diverse speech? About anti-diverse thought? And would your solution to anti-diverse thought really be any better than what it replaces. (What exactly is anti-diverse thought? Who decides? Also see my questions about censorship above.)
Advocating racism is advocating anti-diversity. Um, I have nothing to propose to prevent this. Ofcourse people would question whether it's right to prevent people from wanting to act be racists.
Yes, I suppose I did mean "speech" instead of "thought" considering we really can't monitor someone's thought in the first place
It's really a changing position for me, sometimes I think, hrm stopping people from being able to encourage 'XXX' would be good, but then would the action of doing that be just as bad. But then, in a 'diverse' society it's never going to work if you let everyone do and say and encourage whatever they want. It sounds horrifically undemocratic etc etc but humans aren't perfect, and no system (society) is ever going to be perfect for humans.
You don't think the goverment would try to stop certain 'groups' which could destroy society?
Ofcourse, saying ANYTHING that remotely sounds like limiting someone's ability to do or say anything in the US is akin to being communist, so I gotta be careful
Whatever happened to diversity? Diversity of opinion is just as important as any other kind of diversity.
If this diversity of thought includes thoughts that are anti-diviverse (eg. racism) then it is unacceptable.
It's like saying murder should be allowed cause everyone should be free to do what ever the hell they want. Sure racism doesn't (usually) directly cause the death of someone, but it indirectly causes the death of a global society, progress and humanity.
There are and should be limits to freedom of thought. Thought can be more destructive sometimes than the act - thought usually leads to the act too, and it should be discouraged.
Hijacking IE's ProgID and CLASSID is a BIG nono.
:P.
and no I wouldn't do it for practicallity, just as proof that web integration doesn't just mean IE integration
Most things wouldn't work well (like HTML help) cause Mozilla's DHTML support is cruddy.
Hrm looks pretty neat. Shouldn't actually be that hard to intercept CoCreateInstance at runtime using DLL injection and actually have Explorer/Winamp etc use Mozilla.
:).
See, Netscape could have done their own 'web integration' like Microsoft but they chose whine to the goverment >:|.
I think i'll play
So while it might seem profoundly counter-intuitive can anyone actually give me a good reason why Java + JIT should be slower than Good Programmertm + Assembler?
:).
:), it's always best avoided when using java, but sometimes you can't. This affects other languages too ofcourse.
:) hmmm.
:P. It's nice throwing around O notations about how much more efficient garbage collection can be etc, but you have to realise than you're assuming that memory freeing is the most costly process, it may not be. With JIT, GC etc, you have the additional overhead of the JIT and GC. I haven't seen any proof so far that these overheads aren't overheads at all.
;).
:)~.
:).
There are many things that slow java down, that I'm sure you're aware of, but I'll outline some of them here as they come to me
Limited stack, all java objects are created on the heap, and thus is considerably slower. Microsoft Research actually have a division working on speeding up java by putting some objects onto the thread stack.
Runtime checking, array bounds checking etc can not be turned off. Good for stability, bad for speed.
Late binding, can be rather slow
Coding practise. I don't know about many people here, but when I program in C, I usually know exactly what's going in memory, so I spend a bit more time optimizing this and that saving a few extra cycles, especially if the code is in a loop. I'm sure this is even more true of most ASM programmers. In java, I just don't care, I don't really know what's going on in memory, and I don't really care, I just do what makes the tidiest code, I also tend to use inheritance a bit more
Also, java's thread synchronization is easy, but extraordinarily slow compared to what you could do if you were to use Win32 for example, since you have a lot more control. A JIT is not going to help that. Come to think of that, that's where JIT can fail with high level languages, there are things that these languages restrict you from doing, which prevent such cool optimizations that a JIT couldn't possibly do - I'm not talking about instruction level optmization, I'm talking about things like being able to manipulate memory directly.
The idea that Java + JIT can be faster than traditional ASM is interesting, but never will happen I'm afraid
There are additional 'optimizations' that can be done at runtime, but does using a JIT really improve performance (taking into account the overhead of the JIT)? How many cases are there when a compiler can not optimize the code as much as a JIT, and the JIT can actually give any kind of improvement. I doubt there are many, and unless the improvements are like 10% improvements, I doubt it would matter much. What's the diff between a 433Mhz and a 476Mhz celeron? Nothing any average user would notice. The only place you would notice the speed difference is when you're running something like VMWare, 3DSMax or compiling Linux....and in those cases would a JIT improve or just hinder performance?
Ofcourse, as we get faster, and faster processors, we can move to higher and higher level languages like Java. They drastically reduce development times, and in many cases, will be the better choice. I doubt you'll see Quake or any OS written in Java anytime soon....hell, I doubt you'll see Office or CorelDraw written in java anytime soon
Crusoe is fast and super cool, but it's not as fast as a real 666Mhz x86. And if Transmeta adds official java support, I'd love to get my hands on one
I should also stress here, I have nothing again'st java/jit etc. There're all cool stuff, but I think the concept of Java beating good programmer + asm a bit, uh, unrealistic
M13 just crashed :)
:P
It is just a milestone, so I'll forgive it
Before IE5, IE was known to crash once or twice too.
It's usable, certainly much more than NS4.7 which I can't stand. Like previous versions, you can resize the window (eg. max/min) without the browser reloading the page from the server, just like IE & Opera has been doing for over 2 years :P. It's nicely done, a bit slower than IE, but I guess the reason for that is the same reason why the drop down menus, and just about everything in the UI seems abnormally sluggish.
:P.
:)).
The thing on the left (a copy of window's extensible explorer bands?) doesn't expand properly after it's colapsed, it kindda dissapears and doesn't draw itself properly.
Fonts, does Mozilla not support native windows fonts? I now portability is an issue, but I'd kind of like mozilla to honour my exotic fonts if they're installed in windows.
CSS seems to work nicely now, like IE
I'm going to start testing web pages now with mozilla as well as IE (i gave up on NS4.7 ages ago).
I know mozilla is supposed to be 'standards compliant' and all, but I still find that IE always seems to be able to render and support the more exotic parts of the standards while mozilla is till 'getting there'.
Oh well, looks promising. Anyone know if there's an ActiveX wrapper for mozilla yet (IE has had that since IE3)....which is why so many apps have integrated HTML (WinAmp, Neoplanet, Office, and other 3rd party ones I can't remember
It's braces actually ;).
...for some reason code looks all sloped with braces at the end.
;)
;), it's prolly around 4.
I used to like putting braces at the end of lines - java convinced me of that - for a while. i went back to C++ and now i always have braces on their own lines. IMHO it's tider
My reasoning is that braces have nothing to do with the the code on the line, a brace simply should be used to identify a block, and as such it should start and end on the same indentation level.
And yes, I probably will be flamed to hell
I normally use what VC++ gives me for indentation too
After reading the linux kernel recommended coding style i'm absolutely horrified.
starting braces at the end of lines...except for function declartions? yes ofcourse, this is cause functions can't be embedded. talk about MUNTED.
And 8 character tabs? geee....he talks about saving lines by not having braces take their own lines,b ut talks about how saving horizontal space is irrelevant.
ALL braces should start on new lines. If you look at handwriting, you'll notice that consistancy is what makes something look 'nice' and readable. And that recommendation is NOT consistant. it's horrific.
Um, why wouldn't you be able to use SAX or DOM to pass XHTML?
enlightenment?
I remember when I first saw enlightenment almost 3 years ago now, and I thought WOW.
Then when I installed it, I figured out it was ALL just about eye candy. And I could get more functionality by just taking those candy screenshots and making them my desktop background.
In the 3 years since then, enlightenment has made *some* progress but about 0.2% of the progress I'd expect from 3 years.
I'm sure rasterman has a lot of fun developing the HUGE open source project that is enlightenment. I'm sure the other guy on the E team is also having fun.
Um, the keywords are more like "@dll" etc, and you can turn them off....
I'm sick of hearing some of these ignorant remarks.
"Ohhh, microsoft/m$/micros~1 wants to make their java the standard java".
What a load of crap, Microsoft's _changes_ to java or more specifically, J++, to the programmer just ads some packages that you can choose or not choose to use. True their are some keywords (again additions) to make it easy to access libraries without having to write stub libraries for JNI.
These things are all additions, any java programmer (unless they're 11 year old wannabes) knows what is java and what isn't. It's not as if Microsoft have changed all the keywords, or that they've restructured the language. They've added some features. If you write _JUST_ java and compile it, it will work on other JVMs. If you want to use the java languge to write windows apps (say, as an alternative to VB) you can, but it will only run on windows. If you're stupid enough to think that it will run on Linux too, then well...uh...you shouldn't be programming.
And If you use microsoft's language extensions to make it easier to access, say, dlls/so, then it won't run on other JVMs...with some exceptions (like Transvirtual's clean room java "Kaffe").
Using J++, it's perfectly easy to make 100% pure java apps, but it's also super easy to make windows apps. When you make windows apps, treat Java like a language.
Whoops, point number 3 was stupid too.
A file system with the functionality of Oracle 8. Um, Oracle isn't a file system. And NTFS has features oracle doesn't have, cluster level compression, encryption etc. Anyway, you can't compare a filesystem to a database, they're meant for different things, tho have many similarities.
And you don't need to use "NFS" to share files (note, this is different from a filesystem itself, you can't tell me that NFS and NTFS are the same thing, except one if 'networked') you can use Samba.
NT is not UNIX.
It was written in a diferent culture with a different target and a different purpose ( make B.G. richer?). Two of the base assumtions you can make are that NT is not modular you cannot plug in a new file system because the rest of the OS expects an "NTFS" file system to be there
What utter bullshit. NT is a heck of a lot more modular than Linux. It's got a HAL (hardware abstration layer) and is a microkernel...have you EVER tried to even use the NT DDK? The kernel is compeltely modular, and writing your own Filesystem is supported. NT expects NTFS? uh huh, I guess NT's support for FAT16 and FAT32 are just imaginary.
"NTFS" specific calls are embedded in MFC classes, and, therefore most programs. The second assumption is that the underlying file system and the widley distributed MFS classes will be subject to change at the whim of engineers in Redmond.
ROFL, NTFS specific calls are embedded into MFC? Are you a complete utter idiot or what? Firstly, MFC source code is compeltely free, download the Windows 2000 SDK and you'll notice the 64bit versions of MFC are there too. If they are 'subject' to change, you can alwayus change them back. The filesystem in NT is 'transparent' there are no NTFS specific calls in MFC to make MFC work. That's the funniest thing I've read for a while now.
This should probably be implemneted as an NT service, not as device drivers. Anyone who can read and understand a manual and who can program (surpisingly few computer "profesionals" in my experience
Excuse me? An NT Service? Oh, and how the heck is he supposed to write a filesystem driver without writing a driver, but by writing a serice? Do you know what an NT service is?
The defualt NT file system is pretty good and can easily be distributed to other platforms via the various "NFS" on NT products. Plus NT installations have a culture of using databases when the underlying file system is not enough. I mean could you provide a File System with more functionality than Oracle V8.0?
Well, you seemed to have lost some of that ignorance here.
If you need to do Java work, no surprise, the environment for Solaris is MUCH better.
Uh, well Sun support Java on Solaris (well they support Linux now too), but Solaris is one of the worse enviroments for java - ironically. NT, 9x kicks it's ass. Linux kicks it's ass too if you use TowerJ (but they do native compiling).
If you want to call anyone a dork, make sure you say "You're" and not "Your".
that last comment i made was uncalled for.
;\
sorry. guilt caught up with me
NT has CMD.EXE a command interpretor, but it also comes with command.com (c:\winnt\system32) for running old DOS programs.
Even windows 2000 comes with command.com.
Maybe you should try to know what you're talking about before saying anything.