I remember using #WinProg a few years ago when I started learning Win32. Sure enough, it was a helpful resource, but at the time the regulars (not all though) were some of the most arrogant, egotistical (and in many cases, unhelpful) people I had ever come across.
Typical conversations:
[ilitirit] how do i check the class styles for a certain FOOBAR?
[winprogger] learn to use Spy++, n00b
[ilitirit] ok, where do i can get Spy++?
[winprogger] AARGH!!! are you stupid or something? it's PART OF VS 98!!!
[ilitirit] i'm using Borland's commandline compiler.
[winprogger]....
[ilitirit] how do i create window without a titlebar?
[winprogger] how do not run into tree and smash your nose?
[ilitirit] ????
[winprogger] YOU JUST DON'T DO IT!!! don't specify that it should have one!! sheesh. is everyone suddenly getting dumber or something?
[ilitirit] erm... i don't think you can do that
[winprogger] lol
[winprogger]...
[winprogger] ok
not too mention the countless "IT'S IN THE DAMN TUTORIAL FFS!!!" responses...
> Why are MS proponents not capable of understanding that?
Why are MS opponents not capable of understanding that just because someone does not demonize MS at every given opportunity, it does not make them a proponent?
You claim to be something that strongly, then you better be able to properly back up that claim or people will call you out on it.
People? Don't you mean sheep? Because judging by the responses to this article (and the mod point allocation), that's exactly what they are.
IMO it's normal for a few people to allude to the anti-trust cases and their business practices in any given M$ thread, but an entire forum? And in every thread? Does that not strike anyone as odd?
It's not that I'm new, it's that these "innovation" arguments are old. And sure, like many other companies out there, M$ has crappy business practices. But to bring it up whenever they make a technology announcement is, for the lack of a better word, lame.
I'm not even sure why I'm bothering though because I'm pretty sure these words are going to fall on deaf ears.
What's with all this talk of innovation? Is the *nix crowd feeling threatened? From what I gather, symlinks were introduced with the SMB2 protocol, and nowhere in the article does it claim that Microsoft invented either of these technologies.
I'm not sure I follow? Are you implying that something be novel in order to be useful?
If you mean that there's a possibility that Microsoft will wage a legal patent/copyright war against any OSS development that chooses to implement similar functionality, then you might have a reason to worry. But then of course you've just blown your initial statement about Microsoft not doing anything new out of the water...
Another downside (for me) is that it's too verbose. I'm used to short commands like 'cat' instead of something like 'get-contents'.
From the article: MSH also includes an alias feature that allows users to associate additional names with available Cmdlets. By default, MSH comes with a complete set of aliases that bind typical Linux command names to comparable MSH Cmdlets, and an additional set of aliases that provide simple two or three letter abbreviations for most commands. In this article, I use the complete Cmdlet names rather than the abbreviations for the sake of clarity.
And the.NET implementation just looks really ugly, IMHO
IMHO, "ugliness" is an inherent property of shell scripting languages.
There's a (relative) wealth of information on there (and yes I do know other companies provide online access to their research projects) in the form of reseach papers, technology previews, and yep, you guessed it, source code.
Slashdot Mirror
I remember using #WinProg a few years ago when I started learning Win32. Sure enough, it was a helpful resource, but at the time the regulars (not all though) were some of the most arrogant, egotistical (and in many cases, unhelpful) people I had ever come across.
....
...
Typical conversations:
[ilitirit] how do i check the class styles for a certain FOOBAR?
[winprogger] learn to use Spy++, n00b
[ilitirit] ok, where do i can get Spy++?
[winprogger] AARGH!!! are you stupid or something? it's PART OF VS 98!!!
[ilitirit] i'm using Borland's commandline compiler.
[winprogger]
[ilitirit] how do i create window without a titlebar?
[winprogger] how do not run into tree and smash your nose?
[ilitirit] ????
[winprogger] YOU JUST DON'T DO IT!!! don't specify that it should have one!! sheesh. is everyone suddenly getting dumber or something?
[ilitirit] erm... i don't think you can do that
[winprogger] lol
[winprogger]
[winprogger] ok
not too mention the countless "IT'S IN THE DAMN TUTORIAL FFS!!!" responses...
> Why are MS proponents not capable of understanding that?
Why are MS opponents not capable of understanding that just because someone does not demonize MS at every given opportunity, it does not make them a proponent?
You claim to be something that strongly, then you better be able to properly back up that claim or people will call you out on it.
People? Don't you mean sheep? Because judging by the responses to this article (and the mod point allocation), that's exactly what they are.
IMO it's normal for a few people to allude to the anti-trust cases and their business practices in any given M$ thread, but an entire forum? And in every thread? Does that not strike anyone as odd?
It's not that I'm new, it's that these "innovation" arguments are old. And sure, like many other companies out there, M$ has crappy business practices. But to bring it up whenever they make a technology announcement is, for the lack of a better word, lame.
I'm not even sure why I'm bothering though because I'm pretty sure these words are going to fall on deaf ears.
What's with all this talk of innovation? Is the *nix crowd feeling threatened? From what I gather, symlinks were introduced with the SMB2 protocol, and nowhere in the article does it claim that Microsoft invented either of these technologies.
Microsoft is doing NOTHING that is new here
I'm not sure I follow? Are you implying that something be novel in order to be useful?
If you mean that there's a possibility that Microsoft will wage a legal patent/copyright war against any OSS development that chooses to implement similar functionality, then you might have a reason to worry. But then of course you've just blown your initial statement about Microsoft not doing anything new out of the water...
Another downside (for me) is that it's too verbose. I'm used to short commands like 'cat' instead of something like 'get-contents'.
.NET implementation just looks really ugly, IMHO
From the article:
MSH also includes an alias feature that allows users to associate additional names with available Cmdlets. By default, MSH comes with a complete set of aliases that bind typical Linux command names to comparable MSH Cmdlets, and an additional set of aliases that provide simple two or three letter abbreviations for most commands. In this article, I use the complete Cmdlet names rather than the abbreviations for the sake of clarity.
And the
IMHO, "ugliness" is an inherent property of shell scripting languages.
Microsoft releasing tech previews with source code
Why is this such a big deal to everyone all of a sudden? Have a look at their online research lab.
There's a (relative) wealth of information on there (and yes I do know other companies provide online access to their research projects) in the form of reseach papers, technology previews, and yep, you guessed it, source code.
Link to downloads
This shouldn't really surprise anyone. His opinion is reflective his "hacker" roots, and of the care-free attitude of the Linux movement.
This is a program for hackers by a hacker
- Linus Torvalds
Perhaps he believes that a move like that would not be consistent with the Spirit of Linux.