How about that fact that mormonism is not monotheistic, according to various writings of Young and Smith? That a good enough reason for you? Hard to be Christian when you aren't monotheistic, it's kind of like being a big-government, pro-lawyer, pro-welfare Republican. You can claim to be all you want, but you aren't.
Uhh, Christianity is very distinctly monotheistic. Mormonism is demonstrably (see Young and Smiths writings on the matter) not monotheistic. Therefore, Mormonism is not Christianity. It's related and the Mormon beliefs are consistent with a majority of Christian beliefs, but it's not Christianity no matter how much they try to claim it is.
Don't forget the undeniable racism inherent to the religion. Basically if you have dark skin you were punished by God. Yet another thing they laughably try to excise from their "religion" like polygamy. Apparently God changes his mind, you know.
I'm doing some C++ in Eclipse right now, I was also surprised at how well it works. I'd give it a 6/10 myself, though, just because of some missing stuff like the code completion doesn't always work right, and some of the refactoring helper code isn't there in C++/Eclipse version. But using C++/Boost and other available C++ libraries sure is a lot easier than developing C++ code was 5+ years ago.
VS2005/VS2008 are pigs, I'll give you that, but really if you have 2G memory and good disk IO it's fine. Netbeans is actually surprisingly nice now, I just used it again after a long stint with Eclipse. The Glassfish/Metro integration was what sold me. Still, it's got about 1/10th the functionality/consistency of VS2008+TFS+Guidance IMHO. Go look at MSDN under 'patterns&practices' for some of the cool stuff they're making for VS2008. Entlib, the web services guidance packages, etc...
I find C# to be a more expressive language than Java and better in almost every way, but what really sells me is the.NET framework itself. It just feels more modern and it has more programmer goodies.
I think if you took two equally experienced developers and gave them a task like "create a system to do X, and use a similar architecture with Y web services, supporting Z protocols and this set of features and functionality" the one using C# and the.NET environment would get it done more quickly and with better quality and maintainability than the Java, Perl, PHP, or Ruby developer. That's my basic point. Now, as you simplify the task this changes - the smaller it is the less advantage the.NET guy will have.
BTW - why the antipathy for Mono? I haven't checked it out for a while, but it seems to work well. I was able to copy a.NET DLL over (one that parsed FlexLM license files and output semantic HTML diffs) and run it with no work on Mono, and that was like 1.5-2 years ago. If Linux had as rich/integrated a development platform as VS2008 + all the.NET/TFS goodies I think you'd see a huge spike in the rate at which it grew, above its already fast rate.
You're right. I should have qualified my statement, I can only really speak for commodity shrinkwrap software, general purpose app type stuff, and enterprise apps. Just as linux is much better suited for some areas, other languages are for other areas. I wouldn't write a 100 line perl script to automate some Linux tasks in Java (or C#/Mono).
But really those encompass the large majority of medium to large scale software being developed out there.
^perfectly legal^perfectly fine. I'm under no ethical obligation to allow you to use something I own to convey a message I disagree with or which isn't in my best interests. You're free to use another medium if you don't like it.
You're right, it's my opinion but it's an opinion based on personal experience. I work in an environment with thousands of Linux computer servers. I've developed a lot of automation for that environment in mostly Perl, C/C++, and Java. Then a few years ago I started doing more "enterprise app" type development. I was just dumbfounded at how much fun it was on the Windows side of the fence to develop software. On the web services front, they had a huge lead with the WCF stuff (Sun only just now catching up with Metro/Glassfish) in terms of supported web standards, ease of development, integration, etc... IIS 7 is really quite nice, and SQL server especially since SQL2005 is also very nice to developers in terms of integration. C# as a language blows Java away. VS2008 just works. It's just night and day compared to trying to make 10 different tools developed by 10 different groups of people interoperate on the Linux side.
We also haven't had many interop issues. We have our Linux machines authenticating against Active Directory for single sign on, our web services can talk to eachother, etc...
On the other side of the coin, we run EDA tools on those thousands of Linux compute servers. There was a (hairbrained) scheme several years ago to switch those over to run on Windows. It was a laughable disaster. EDA design on a large scale is best done on Linux - period. By all means pick the right tool for the job. For enterprise application development, many types of web development in fact, and a whole lot of other internally developed software Microsoft is usually the right tool.
Going back to the original post, the sad thing is that most MS bashers aren't qualified to know what the right tool for the job is because they don't really know anything about modern MS environments or development tools ("probably wr0t3 it in VB lolz").
And...? What's your point? The only bad censorship is government censorship. Any other form is perfectly legal. I'm "censoring" someone if I don't let them scrawl graffiti on my house, am I now the boogeyman? Your right not to be censored ends at my property, and sometimes well before.
There are other factors, "fall of Rome" type factors. We have a welfare state, and ours is paltry compared to others in the world. In most of the past, if you couldn't fend for yourself and contribute to society moving forward, you died. Now you simply drag down your fellow man in this case. Birth rates. There is no penalty for having a kid you can't take care of, poor people breed like rats. Women in the workplace - the most intelligent and worthy women are the least likely to have children now because they are out in the workforce (the numbers don't lie on this, go look them up).
The build up of industrialization (and its concurrent population and quality of life increase) based on a finite resource (oil) is another one. Tell me what would happen if you created a safe-haven (the industrialized age) for deer (people) with all the food (oil) they wanted. Why, the population would boom and those deer would be happy as shit. Now, get rid of 90% of the food (oil). What do you think happens? Mass die off.
I'm not a big believer in deus ex machina coming to save us, this isn't a scifi novel it's real life. Sure, it won't wipe out humanity but I have a very pessimistic view of the next 100 years.
We also produce more by an order of magnitude. We're rich and they're poor for a reason. Look at birth rates in any place in the world. Now filter by education and income. Notice anything? Poor people breed like rats. I may have sympathy for an individual poor person as a human being, but the poor as a "class" I have no sympathy for. Having 5 kids who will each them go on to be poor and miserable and each have 2-8 more kids isn't exactly a good plan. I'm not going to feel guilty about someone being poor when their parents put them in that position and when they will more than likely put more people (their children) in that position. Fuck them.
In the end, like overabundant deer, there's going to be a mass die-off. The best thing the first world can do is the massive diffusion of effective birth control.
Explain exactly how they're leveraging monopoly power? They're offering a discounted version of their product should the manufacturer choose to meet their requirements. They aren't leveraging anything. If the manufacturers don't like it, they can continue with their original plans and use Linux.
I must be missing something. What makes this insightful? I can run that command right now (after 'setenv whatever vim') and it will install something for me. So either you're being ironic, or maybe you're unfamiliar with installing software on some Linux distributions?
The fact is that it's quicker to develop high quality software on the MS platform. Their server OS's are generally quite good, and they have a superior level of integration compared to a similar Linux server performing similar duties (e.g. IIS, SQL, Exchange type stuff). I've developed a whole lot of Linux/UNIX software and a moderate amount of Windows software. Developing in Java is reasonably nice, I'd give the experience a 7/10. Developing in.NET I'd give a 9/10. Most Linux people who blather on about Microsoft aren't real developers, or have little or no experience developing modern application software in Windows. Typically they're sysadmin-cum-developers who made the move from sh/perl to PHP/Ruby type environments and now consider themselves uber-developers.
There are things Linux excels at. Scientific computing. EDA. Supercomputing. Batch systems running certain types of afforementioned applications. "glueware". When we do write Java services for specific reasons (deployment issues into a predominately Linux environment, for example) we do prefer to host them on Linux.
Microsoft continues to hold hearts and minds of developers simply because they've made.NET so nice and because there's nothing like VS2008+TFS. Continued ranting from the SlashDot crowd isn't ever going to change that, no matter how many stars you wish upon.
How is this insightful. By this retarded interpretation of the law, an IM that doesn't let me send you messages when you're marked "away" is breaking the law. Or one that doesn't let me send a.exe file as a link. Spam filters would break this law by your "logic". In short, your interpretation of the law is retarded.
I call bullshit. People always look at history and say "well, we're always coming up with something new I'm sure we'll be OK". We aren't. Think "dark ages".
There is absolutely no rational reason to think history will repeat itself. There is just as much (actually, much much more) logic to saying that current population growth is unsustainable and there will be a worldwide catastrophe. The simple truth is that poor people breed like rats, and they're going to drag down the rest of the world. Your assumption that we'll just be fine based on some pollyanna view of humanit's history is baseless.
You're basing your view of the future on what happened in the past, which begs the question. There has never been a time in the past when we've had this large a population and this fast a population growth. So your argument is based on the faulty assumption that point A (now) is the same as point B (sometime in the past) and hence point C (sometime in the future) will be something like point D (sometime in our past, and point B's future).
Sun didn't invent anything either, there were all kinds of people who came up with the "gee, let's containerize computing components", including the military. Your irrational, asshaterific hatred for Microsoft is boring me. Most of the shit you dweebs hold dear, like Linux, isn't original by any stretch of the imagination. The business world isn't about ideas, it's about execution.
Well, fortunately nobody "thinks" the way you do. And I agree on hanging/execution. I would hold to a higher standard of evidence for that. More like "beyond any rational doubt" versus "beyond reasonable doubt". Nobody would ever agree to a standard of evidence that a murder requires a body or a witness, it's inherently ridiculous.
Haha, that's...quaint. If you're managing 10,000 machines using ssh and bash scripts, you're an idiot. There's nothing anti-gui about UNIX, it's just about functional interfaces and not window-washing.
Cute and all, but..no. The "floating point accelerator" is a massively parallel CPU. It would either become the CPU itself, or remain an add-in. You don't add a "massively parallel CPU" to a "CPU".
You're basically arguing the untenable point that if the body is sufficiently hidden or destroyed, anyone can get away with murder. Shit, just take whoever you want out in the desert, shoot them, then bury them. When the prosecution says "he was the last person seen alive with person X", you can just say "but there's no body". It's ridiculous. As humans, we can apply reason and assess quantitatively or intuitively. A missing person + a spouse with a reason + circumstantial evidence + various pieces evidence + no alibi = murder. That's the way it works.
I can't believe you douchebags are sticking up for this murderer. You should all go riot and shit. That ought to be good for a few laughs seeing a bunch of geeky dweebs rampaging in the streets getting the hell beat out of them by middle aged 40 year old women and 12 year old kids.
Hopefull he gets raped in prison and squeals like a bitch. On the other hand, if his dead wife shows up alive in Russia I'll publicly apologize. I'll also eat a shit sandwich. Needless to say, I'm not too worried. At least he didn't get the death penalty, even I wouldn't give that in this case. Beyond a reasonable doubt = life in prison, beyond _any_ doubt = death.
This is all horribly wrong. What's your next argument - "This just in, Java faster than assembly code programming!". Well, sure, if your assembly code programmer is a moron. By definition the closer to the metal you are, the faster the code you can write. You will be hard pressed to find _anything_ that's IO or computationally intensive that performs better for any length of run in Java than in C. The idea that "anything that needs a long time to run will probably be faster in Java" is quite simply ridiculous. There may be a few special cases where the JVM (which _is_ mostly written in C, by the way) may be able to optimize a few local cases better, but that's few and far between.
As for JVM in Java, of course not. Seriously, how do you think your Java program interfaces with the OS? Hint: There is no Java call to "open()" or "exec()". Everything used by your JVM that's in Java is in the jar files that come with your runtime. The java binary and all the shared libraries you see in your JRE directory are written in C.
Slashdot Mirror
How about that fact that mormonism is not monotheistic, according to various writings of Young and Smith? That a good enough reason for you? Hard to be Christian when you aren't monotheistic, it's kind of like being a big-government, pro-lawyer, pro-welfare Republican. You can claim to be all you want, but you aren't.
Uhh, Christianity is very distinctly monotheistic. Mormonism is demonstrably (see Young and Smiths writings on the matter) not monotheistic. Therefore, Mormonism is not Christianity. It's related and the Mormon beliefs are consistent with a majority of Christian beliefs, but it's not Christianity no matter how much they try to claim it is.
Don't forget the undeniable racism inherent to the religion. Basically if you have dark skin you were punished by God. Yet another thing they laughably try to excise from their "religion" like polygamy. Apparently God changes his mind, you know.
I'm doing some C++ in Eclipse right now, I was also surprised at how well it works. I'd give it a 6/10 myself, though, just because of some missing stuff like the code completion doesn't always work right, and some of the refactoring helper code isn't there in C++/Eclipse version. But using C++/Boost and other available C++ libraries sure is a lot easier than developing C++ code was 5+ years ago.
I find C# to be a more expressive language than Java and better in almost every way, but what really sells me is the .NET framework itself. It just feels more modern and it has more programmer goodies.
BTW - why the antipathy for Mono? I haven't checked it out for a while, but it seems to work well. I was able to copy a .NET DLL over (one that parsed FlexLM license files and output semantic HTML diffs) and run it with no work on Mono, and that was like 1.5-2 years ago. If Linux had as rich/integrated a development platform as VS2008 + all the .NET/TFS goodies I think you'd see a huge spike in the rate at which it grew, above its already fast rate.
But really those encompass the large majority of medium to large scale software being developed out there.
^perfectly legal^perfectly fine. I'm under no ethical obligation to allow you to use something I own to convey a message I disagree with or which isn't in my best interests. You're free to use another medium if you don't like it.
We also haven't had many interop issues. We have our Linux machines authenticating against Active Directory for single sign on, our web services can talk to eachother, etc...
On the other side of the coin, we run EDA tools on those thousands of Linux compute servers. There was a (hairbrained) scheme several years ago to switch those over to run on Windows. It was a laughable disaster. EDA design on a large scale is best done on Linux - period. By all means pick the right tool for the job. For enterprise application development, many types of web development in fact, and a whole lot of other internally developed software Microsoft is usually the right tool.
Going back to the original post, the sad thing is that most MS bashers aren't qualified to know what the right tool for the job is because they don't really know anything about modern MS environments or development tools ("probably wr0t3 it in VB lolz").
And...? What's your point? The only bad censorship is government censorship. Any other form is perfectly legal. I'm "censoring" someone if I don't let them scrawl graffiti on my house, am I now the boogeyman? Your right not to be censored ends at my property, and sometimes well before.
The build up of industrialization (and its concurrent population and quality of life increase) based on a finite resource (oil) is another one. Tell me what would happen if you created a safe-haven (the industrialized age) for deer (people) with all the food (oil) they wanted. Why, the population would boom and those deer would be happy as shit. Now, get rid of 90% of the food (oil). What do you think happens? Mass die off.
I'm not a big believer in deus ex machina coming to save us, this isn't a scifi novel it's real life. Sure, it won't wipe out humanity but I have a very pessimistic view of the next 100 years.
In the end, like overabundant deer, there's going to be a mass die-off. The best thing the first world can do is the massive diffusion of effective birth control.
Explain exactly how they're leveraging monopoly power? They're offering a discounted version of their product should the manufacturer choose to meet their requirements. They aren't leveraging anything. If the manufacturers don't like it, they can continue with their original plans and use Linux.
I must be missing something. What makes this insightful? I can run that command right now (after 'setenv whatever vim') and it will install something for me. So either you're being ironic, or maybe you're unfamiliar with installing software on some Linux distributions?
There are things Linux excels at. Scientific computing. EDA. Supercomputing. Batch systems running certain types of afforementioned applications. "glueware". When we do write Java services for specific reasons (deployment issues into a predominately Linux environment, for example) we do prefer to host them on Linux.
Microsoft continues to hold hearts and minds of developers simply because they've made .NET so nice and because there's nothing like VS2008+TFS. Continued ranting from the SlashDot crowd isn't ever going to change that, no matter how many stars you wish upon.
How is this insightful. By this retarded interpretation of the law, an IM that doesn't let me send you messages when you're marked "away" is breaking the law. Or one that doesn't let me send a .exe file as a link. Spam filters would break this law by your "logic". In short, your interpretation of the law is retarded.
There is absolutely no rational reason to think history will repeat itself. There is just as much (actually, much much more) logic to saying that current population growth is unsustainable and there will be a worldwide catastrophe. The simple truth is that poor people breed like rats, and they're going to drag down the rest of the world. Your assumption that we'll just be fine based on some pollyanna view of humanit's history is baseless.
You're basing your view of the future on what happened in the past, which begs the question. There has never been a time in the past when we've had this large a population and this fast a population growth. So your argument is based on the faulty assumption that point A (now) is the same as point B (sometime in the past) and hence point C (sometime in the future) will be something like point D (sometime in our past, and point B's future).
To put it bluntly - we're fucked.
Sun didn't invent anything either, there were all kinds of people who came up with the "gee, let's containerize computing components", including the military. Your irrational, asshaterific hatred for Microsoft is boring me. Most of the shit you dweebs hold dear, like Linux, isn't original by any stretch of the imagination. The business world isn't about ideas, it's about execution.
Well, fortunately nobody "thinks" the way you do. And I agree on hanging/execution. I would hold to a higher standard of evidence for that. More like "beyond any rational doubt" versus "beyond reasonable doubt". Nobody would ever agree to a standard of evidence that a murder requires a body or a witness, it's inherently ridiculous.
Haha, that's...quaint. If you're managing 10,000 machines using ssh and bash scripts, you're an idiot. There's nothing anti-gui about UNIX, it's just about functional interfaces and not window-washing.
Hmm.. What is the least offensive shit? Maybe guano.
Cute and all, but..no. The "floating point accelerator" is a massively parallel CPU. It would either become the CPU itself, or remain an add-in. You don't add a "massively parallel CPU" to a "CPU".
You're basically arguing the untenable point that if the body is sufficiently hidden or destroyed, anyone can get away with murder. Shit, just take whoever you want out in the desert, shoot them, then bury them. When the prosecution says "he was the last person seen alive with person X", you can just say "but there's no body". It's ridiculous. As humans, we can apply reason and assess quantitatively or intuitively. A missing person + a spouse with a reason + circumstantial evidence + various pieces evidence + no alibi = murder. That's the way it works.
Hopefull he gets raped in prison and squeals like a bitch. On the other hand, if his dead wife shows up alive in Russia I'll publicly apologize. I'll also eat a shit sandwich. Needless to say, I'm not too worried. At least he didn't get the death penalty, even I wouldn't give that in this case. Beyond a reasonable doubt = life in prison, beyond _any_ doubt = death.
This is all horribly wrong. What's your next argument - "This just in, Java faster than assembly code programming!". Well, sure, if your assembly code programmer is a moron. By definition the closer to the metal you are, the faster the code you can write. You will be hard pressed to find _anything_ that's IO or computationally intensive that performs better for any length of run in Java than in C. The idea that "anything that needs a long time to run will probably be faster in Java" is quite simply ridiculous. There may be a few special cases where the JVM (which _is_ mostly written in C, by the way) may be able to optimize a few local cases better, but that's few and far between. As for JVM in Java, of course not. Seriously, how do you think your Java program interfaces with the OS? Hint: There is no Java call to "open()" or "exec()". Everything used by your JVM that's in Java is in the jar files that come with your runtime. The java binary and all the shared libraries you see in your JRE directory are written in C.