It's a monstrosity that does nothing much but add technical debt. Yes, people have made tons of money with it. I pity the poor sods who have to maintain these solutions.
But who's going to do the 10% of the work that can't be done by machines?
My niece asked me once, how can you sit in front of a computer and a keyboard all day? My answer: They pay me well, but I'd do it even if they didn't pay.
Wait for a company who you've hurt to be on the ropes financially
Microsoft hurt B&N? And here was me thinking it was a comination of Amazon and people not buying books anymore that was the problem. What was it specifically that Microsoft did? Cripple that horrible Nook thing?
Them's pretty big words considering they still spend a huge amount of money developing and maintaining Windows on various different form factors
Ponder this: Would a Microsoft that was fully committed to pushing Windows everywhere, release mobile Microsoft Office on iOS and Android a full year before they released it on Windows? The current Microsoft does. GP is correct, the new Microsoft is not a company that is "Windows only". Certain things in.Net are not going OS. WPF is a notable mention. Why? Because WPF is tightly integrated with DirectX, and porting DirectX to Linux is not going to happen.
Look for open-source equivalents of WPF coming down the line. Probably not from Microsoft though.
WinForms is not part of WPF, and it seems rather unlikely that WPF will ever be ported to anything but the Microsoft platform since it is tightly integrated with, and wholly dependent on, DirectX.
Visual Studio hasn't really cost "a pretty penny" in a long time, but now it is also free. Not a crippled version. Not a dumbed-down version. The Community Edition (ready for you to download) is equivalent to the old "Pro" offering.
Azure is pulling in billions each quarter. Apple has a significant portion of its infrastructure (iCloud is at least partly) on Azure. Without anyone noticing, Microsoft has gone cloud in a big way, and will probably be the worlds largest cloud vendor by summer (with current growth they'll pass Amazon somewhere in 1Q2015. If people move to.Net, Azure is going to be quite difficult to beat at least in the short term.
Also note that for the mobile platform, the Office group now targets mainly iOS and Android, mobile Windows is apparently way down the list, getting Office at least one year later than the other two. The Office groups is not an insignificant Microsoft department.
We have a right, I think, to be a tad suspicious of their motives
Since this is open-sourcing of their own software, please elaborate on how the final E in EEE is even theoretically possible. I don't care about their motives, I do however notice that they are making irreversible changes to their product portfolio that can only be beneficial to the community as such.
EEE is possible only if you take an open standard, build your product around it, then, after having some success, subtly change your product not to work with the open standard any more. Example Active Directory. Then the last of the three E's is possible. If they open source AD on the other hand, the final E isn't even remotely theoretically possible.
There is a difference between being suspicious and being raving mad paranoid. Most of/. posters come in the last category whenever there is the word "microsoft" somewhere in a post.
Microsoft is the best thing that ever happened and will ever happen to computers
It isn't. Never has been (I'd love for QNX to take over the world). That doesn't mean that the retarded EEE mantra of paranoid and rather ignorant/. trolls are not worthy of being modded trolls though. They comments are fully retarded. With the direction that Microsoft is going now, the final E in the EEE simply isn't possible. Not even theoretically. Don't agree - please elaborate on how it could be.
Retarded trolls are retarded trolls, irrespective of what they are trolling about.
Windows on portable devices (there you go...) is the major new up and coming platform (according to marketing) and Microsoft typically fights to the death
You haven't been paying attention. Mobile Office or Touch Office or whatever, is available for iOS and (I think) Android at least a full year than any Microsoft mobile device.
You are absolutely correct in this one. The people at MS are not dumb, the "one and only stack" is no longer. Microsoft is therefore, in a rather pragmatic manner, moving to stay relevant. You can see this in their open-sourcing a lot of their stuff, not only the.Net stack but also their C# compiler (Roslyn) etc. For anyone who is not a paranoid, retarded/. lunatic, this is a good thing. It also makes EEE basically impossible.
Are there other signs that Microsoft is moving in this direction? Yes, there is. The iPad (and probably also Android phones and tablets) are getting their touch-enabled versions of Microsoft Office at least a full year before any Windows tablet or phone. Given the importance of Office inside MS, there is no doubt that abandoning their own platform as the "most important" one is a huge flag of surrender to realities.
This simply isn't the Microsoft of the 1990s, and that's a good thing. No matter what the paranoid nuts go on about.
Oh, and as the "only" other managed software development environment, we should all be happy. C# and.Net is more than Java ever dreamed about being, and more than Java ever will be as long as Oracle uses a community process to manage the development. To me, a combo of.Net on the server and Angular and (at the moment, but that stuff changes all the time) Ionic on the client is fantastic. Cordova makes my life a good one, and.Net on the server blows Java out of the water every day of the week and 22 times on Sunday. Speaking here as someone being part of a team that delivered enterprise software (had it deployed at many customers) on the Java platform back in 1997-98 or so. JDK 1.0.2.
It's existence, size and importance. Any group, once it grows big enough, and no matter it's original motives, will be primarily concerned with its own existence once it grows past a handful of members. This is true in government, where the bureaucracy will, after a short while, be primarily interested in growing the bureaucracy. It is true in religious institutions who all eventually (quickly) lose sight of the religious aspects they are supposedly preaching and start concerning them selves primarily with growth, power and maintaining their own importance. It certainly happens in voluntary organizations like Greenpeace, which fast go on the same path as religious organizations.
Companies, to a degree, have some oversight. If they do not make enough money as they grow big, their growth will sooner or later be limited by stock holders demanding profit. Not at first, for sure, but over time. So companies will be allowed to stroke their own egos for a while but not indefinitely. Since a government bureaucracy caters to politicians, and the general electorate is retarded, there is no oversight over the bureaucracy. Since there is no God/Allah/Your favorite sky fairy there is no real oversight over religious institutions, and their membership is even more retarded than the average electorate. For organizations like Greenpeace the only oversight that exists is the internal oversight, and they are to busy in their own circle jerk to notice or care.
Yeah, you are right. BP set out to kill a bunch of its employees, then they wanted to wreck a platform, spill huge amounts of valuable product and finally pay for trying to clean it up. You are absolutely right, BP was malicious. Or perhaps you have no f*cking idea what the word "malicious" means.
trying to save the earth from the likes of BP, which is the motive that drives Greenpeace
This is not the motive of Greenpeace and it hasn't been for at least a decade, perhaps more. The motive of Greenpeace is to stroke the egos of the members of Greenpeace while they all sit in a huge circle jerking off to their own over-inflated images. Sadly they were not all inside the boat that the French sunk.
Sure, but when you have outages and stability issues which impact your business, is it really a good trade off?
Yeah, and in-house stuff never fails, right? Honestly, I am willing to bet that for the vast majority of corporations out there, their own infrastructure is nowhere near as reliable as the cloud infrastructure from any of the main suppliers. The main reason they would not be able to reach the cloud would be that some dimwit had re-configured a router somewhere again (which would also have knocked out any in-house stuff).
Also, again, read it in context. The reply with the silly 100% was in reply to someone pointing out that in the non-Windows/Office space, Microsoft has to, and is, competing on merits. In other words, context.
Yeah. Right. That's what was meant. Sure. Office profits are astonishingly unforeseen. Every single year. Comes as a shock to both Microsoft and everybody else.
On the other hand, I am seriously amazed that you have mind-reading capabilities like that. You can know what someone else meant without even meeting them. I'm impressed. Good for you.
Slashdot Mirror
BP was convicted for failing to properly install and inspect legally mandated safety equipment
Here let me google something for you: Hanlon's razor
It's a monstrosity that does nothing much but add technical debt. Yes, people have made tons of money with it. I pity the poor sods who have to maintain these solutions.
So, how do they hurt the competition with such a move? Elaborate please. Who suffers?
But who's going to do the 10% of the work that can't be done by machines?
My niece asked me once, how can you sit in front of a computer and a keyboard all day? My answer: They pay me well, but I'd do it even if they didn't pay.
Wait for a company who you've hurt to be on the ropes financially
Microsoft hurt B&N? And here was me thinking it was a comination of Amazon and people not buying books anymore that was the problem. What was it specifically that Microsoft did? Cripple that horrible Nook thing?
do you think PHP would ever be popular if it were closed?
PHP is only popular because there are more retards than intelligent people in the world.
Them's pretty big words considering they still spend a huge amount of money developing and maintaining Windows on various different form factors
Ponder this: Would a Microsoft that was fully committed to pushing Windows everywhere, release mobile Microsoft Office on iOS and Android a full year before they released it on Windows? The current Microsoft does. GP is correct, the new Microsoft is not a company that is "Windows only". Certain things in .Net are not going OS. WPF is a notable mention. Why? Because WPF is tightly integrated with DirectX, and porting DirectX to Linux is not going to happen.
Look for open-source equivalents of WPF coming down the line. Probably not from Microsoft though.
WinForms is not part of WPF, and it seems rather unlikely that WPF will ever be ported to anything but the Microsoft platform since it is tightly integrated with, and wholly dependent on, DirectX.
Visual Studio hasn't really cost "a pretty penny" in a long time, but now it is also free. Not a crippled version. Not a dumbed-down version. The Community Edition (ready for you to download) is equivalent to the old "Pro" offering.
Azure is pulling in billions each quarter. Apple has a significant portion of its infrastructure (iCloud is at least partly) on Azure. Without anyone noticing, Microsoft has gone cloud in a big way, and will probably be the worlds largest cloud vendor by summer (with current growth they'll pass Amazon somewhere in 1Q2015. If people move to .Net, Azure is going to be quite difficult to beat at least in the short term.
Also note that for the mobile platform, the Office group now targets mainly iOS and Android, mobile Windows is apparently way down the list, getting Office at least one year later than the other two. The Office groups is not an insignificant Microsoft department.
We have a right, I think, to be a tad suspicious of their motives
Since this is open-sourcing of their own software, please elaborate on how the final E in EEE is even theoretically possible. I don't care about their motives, I do however notice that they are making irreversible changes to their product portfolio that can only be beneficial to the community as such.
EEE is possible only if you take an open standard, build your product around it, then, after having some success, subtly change your product not to work with the open standard any more. Example Active Directory. Then the last of the three E's is possible. If they open source AD on the other hand, the final E isn't even remotely theoretically possible.
There is a difference between being suspicious and being raving mad paranoid. Most of /. posters come in the last category whenever there is the word "microsoft" somewhere in a post.
Microsoft is the best thing that ever happened and will ever happen to computers
It isn't. Never has been (I'd love for QNX to take over the world). That doesn't mean that the retarded EEE mantra of paranoid and rather ignorant /. trolls are not worthy of being modded trolls though. They comments are fully retarded. With the direction that Microsoft is going now, the final E in the EEE simply isn't possible. Not even theoretically. Don't agree - please elaborate on how it could be.
Retarded trolls are retarded trolls, irrespective of what they are trolling about.
Windows on portable devices (there you go...) is the major new up and coming platform (according to marketing) and Microsoft typically fights to the death
You haven't been paying attention. Mobile Office or Touch Office or whatever, is available for iOS and (I think) Android at least a full year than any Microsoft mobile device.
You are absolutely correct in this one. The people at MS are not dumb, the "one and only stack" is no longer. Microsoft is therefore, in a rather pragmatic manner, moving to stay relevant. You can see this in their open-sourcing a lot of their stuff, not only the .Net stack but also their C# compiler (Roslyn) etc. For anyone who is not a paranoid, retarded /. lunatic, this is a good thing. It also makes EEE basically impossible.
Are there other signs that Microsoft is moving in this direction? Yes, there is. The iPad (and probably also Android phones and tablets) are getting their touch-enabled versions of Microsoft Office at least a full year before any Windows tablet or phone. Given the importance of Office inside MS, there is no doubt that abandoning their own platform as the "most important" one is a huge flag of surrender to realities.
This simply isn't the Microsoft of the 1990s, and that's a good thing. No matter what the paranoid nuts go on about.
Oh, and as the "only" other managed software development environment, we should all be happy. C# and .Net is more than Java ever dreamed about being, and more than Java ever will be as long as Oracle uses a community process to manage the development. To me, a combo of .Net on the server and Angular and (at the moment, but that stuff changes all the time) Ionic on the client is fantastic. Cordova makes my life a good one, and .Net on the server blows Java out of the water every day of the week and 22 times on Sunday. Speaking here as someone being part of a team that delivered enterprise software (had it deployed at many customers) on the Java platform back in 1997-98 or so. JDK 1.0.2.
I wonder how they will prove that, for the duration of the supposed criminal activity, it was me wearing it, and not someone I lent it to.
Hoping not to get killed. By the cops you are recording
I am willing to bet most of the people reading /. are white, so that's not really an issue.
What interest is that?
It's existence, size and importance. Any group, once it grows big enough, and no matter it's original motives, will be primarily concerned with its own existence once it grows past a handful of members. This is true in government, where the bureaucracy will, after a short while, be primarily interested in growing the bureaucracy. It is true in religious institutions who all eventually (quickly) lose sight of the religious aspects they are supposedly preaching and start concerning them selves primarily with growth, power and maintaining their own importance. It certainly happens in voluntary organizations like Greenpeace, which fast go on the same path as religious organizations.
Companies, to a degree, have some oversight. If they do not make enough money as they grow big, their growth will sooner or later be limited by stock holders demanding profit. Not at first, for sure, but over time. So companies will be allowed to stroke their own egos for a while but not indefinitely. Since a government bureaucracy caters to politicians, and the general electorate is retarded, there is no oversight over the bureaucracy. Since there is no God/Allah/Your favorite sky fairy there is no real oversight over religious institutions, and their membership is even more retarded than the average electorate. For organizations like Greenpeace the only oversight that exists is the internal oversight, and they are to busy in their own circle jerk to notice or care.
Accessing the sacred site and co-opting it for their message was not a mistake.
Damaging the sacred site was a mistake.
Your statement is self-contradictory. Accessing and co-opting the site was damaging the site, so damaging was not a mistake.
So really, both acts were malicious.
Yeah, you are right. BP set out to kill a bunch of its employees, then they wanted to wreck a platform, spill huge amounts of valuable product and finally pay for trying to clean it up. You are absolutely right, BP was malicious. Or perhaps you have no f*cking idea what the word "malicious" means.
trying to save the earth from the likes of BP, which is the motive that drives Greenpeace
This is not the motive of Greenpeace and it hasn't been for at least a decade, perhaps more. The motive of Greenpeace is to stroke the egos of the members of Greenpeace while they all sit in a huge circle jerking off to their own over-inflated images. Sadly they were not all inside the boat that the French sunk.
Yeah, that's why Apple chose them as their iCloud provider. Are you always this retarded or only when Linus blows you?
Sure, but when you have outages and stability issues which impact your business, is it really a good trade off?
Yeah, and in-house stuff never fails, right? Honestly, I am willing to bet that for the vast majority of corporations out there, their own infrastructure is nowhere near as reliable as the cloud infrastructure from any of the main suppliers. The main reason they would not be able to reach the cloud would be that some dimwit had re-configured a router somewhere again (which would also have knocked out any in-house stuff).
so scary
Yes, there is no way a thin piece of paper would shield against such radiation, you'd need a thick piece of paper.
Also, again, read it in context. The reply with the silly 100% was in reply to someone pointing out that in the non-Windows/Office space, Microsoft has to, and is, competing on merits. In other words, context.
Yeah. Right. That's what was meant. Sure. Office profits are astonishingly unforeseen. Every single year. Comes as a shock to both Microsoft and everybody else.
On the other hand, I am seriously amazed that you have mind-reading capabilities like that. You can know what someone else meant without even meeting them. I'm impressed. Good for you.
So, you are just uninformed, uneducated and somewhat retarded. Thanks for clearing that up.