Erm...so your grandma can install an OS but can't turn the computer off?
And how the frack is grandma supposed to send an email in Word or PDF from a fresh Windows install? Did she also install Microsoft Office or Adobe Acrobat, or was she supposed to use Wordpad?
It seems I was not alone with that impression. I agree that many of the replies qualified as trolling, but some of the 'insightful' replies are now marked as such.
It seems that every post that points out the Novell/Microsoft deal are marked as troll or flamebait.
I know it's a hot issue and the Microsoft/Novell deal still bothers me, but anyone bringing up this issue is automatically tagged as troll. Care to explain?
And where are the specs for the codecs? Why is Silverlight being developed behind closed doors and early access specs are laden with NDA?
Yes, _part_ of SilverLight 2.0 is free, but Microsoft still holds the chains.
The reason why I'm a programmer and I use Linux is that I'm lazy and cheap.
And if you want to loose even more respect for me, you can add that I'm also a commie bastard who participates and donates code to various open-source projects. I just choose which projects I donate my time and efforts to.
Maybe the reason why Linux user (like myself) will never install/use a product by Microsoft is exactly because of that -- No specs, no source code, no freedom.
I think you know which major platform I'm referring to -- the same one that Adobe, Sun, Oracle, IBM and other players support. True, not all their products are supported on Linux, but at least it's not ignored.
As for moonlight, I'm looking for version 1.0. What you send me is version 0.8 -- yet Microsoft is already at version 2.0.
And here what the site says:
"Up-to-date packages ready to _test_ are available from:
These builds do not include media codecs (video or audio), for that, you must currently build Moonlight from source code. The Microsoft Media Pack for Moonlight should be available in October of 2008.
Warning: These are test installers and are not complete or bug free. They are snapshots from our development tree and might not work.
Note: These are currently built without multimedia support. No video or mp3 playback is enabled on these binaries."
Talk about crippled!
Let's face the music. Microsoft wants the world to think that Silverlight is 'crossplaform,' but in reality, all non-Windows OSes are third class citizens.
Wanna bet how long before they drop support for the Mac? For Firefox?
I'm sure that Microsoft kindly shared the specs for SilverLight 2.0 with Mono/Novell during the development so that the Mono project would not have to play catch-up once 2.0 came out. Right?
Otherwise, Microsoft would be releasing a technology that will only work reliably on Windows and shun the other major platforms.
Hum... I wonder why they just don't do like Adobe or Sun and release a version for Linux, Mac and Windows?
Surely, I must be misinterpreting Microsoft's intentions with Silverlight!
As opposed to Mono, Java is built-in to the PS3. For that matter, Java is also built-in to many blue-ray players, and is available on many more modern and legacy platform than Mono (or.NET).
How long has IronPython & IronRuby existed on Windows? Sounds like Mono is still playing catch-up to the Windows version of.NET...
Today, I can use 100% Java, Python & Ruby on more platforms than all the versions of.NET/Mono combined. Why should I even bother with.NET when there are already superior technologies that works out-of-the-box on my favourite OSes?
You haven't answered the question: Why not use Java...or for that reason, why use.NET for cross-platform development over Java?
There are many IDEs written in Java, and I refuse to run Silverlight/Moonlight on my machine as long as it's a MS proprietary solution (ie: let's-trap-the-customer-into-another-windows-only-solution).
If I'm not mistaken, our civilization is only about 10,000 years old.
If the Neanderthal had bigger brain, there is a possibility that they had a civilization. That civilization might have discovered fire, internal combustion engines, rockets and even 27KM long particle accelerator.
The last traces of the neanderthal is about 30,000 years ago.
What I want to know is whether or not they found the Higgs boson before they went extinct!
It's not the first time Microsoft creates a new OS from the ground up, NT being the prime example. However, I think that based on history, I would like to predict two things:
1. To ensure that it doesn't suffer from lack of software, a 'Windows' compatibility layer will be added. 2. To ensure lock-in, the clean and efficient design will be turned upside-down to ensure that only Midori is compatible with Midori.
Thus, at the end of the day, what you have is just another Microsoft product.
I hope you're not getting me wrong. I'm not excited about MS offering Office for less/free. Even if MS offered OFfice on Linux for free as in beer, I would still use OpenOffice because it's free as in speech.
Also, after having the 'pleasure' of writing a manual with Office 2007, I quickly downgraded to Office 2003 (I wish I could have been using OpenOffice). The ribbon interface is cool for new users, but for power users, it's a hindrance more than help.
Give it a few more years and I'm willing to bet that Microsoft will start offering Word _Basic_ or Excel _Basic_ for free (as in beer), or nearly free to compete with the tidal rise of free (as in beer & speech) office suites.
Slashdot Mirror
Erm...so your grandma can install an OS but can't turn the computer off?
And how the frack is grandma supposed to send an email in Word or PDF from a fresh Windows install? Did she also install Microsoft Office or Adobe Acrobat, or was she supposed to use Wordpad?
It seems I was not alone with that impression. I agree that many of the replies qualified as trolling, but some of the 'insightful' replies are now marked as such.
For instance: http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1062891&cid=26122539
It seems that every post that points out the Novell/Microsoft deal are marked as troll or flamebait.
I know it's a hot issue and the Microsoft/Novell deal still bothers me, but anyone bringing up this issue is automatically tagged as troll. Care to explain?
And where are the specs for the codecs? Why is Silverlight being developed behind closed doors and early access specs are laden with NDA?
Yes, _part_ of SilverLight 2.0 is free, but Microsoft still holds the chains.
The reason why I'm a programmer and I use Linux is that I'm lazy and cheap.
And if you want to loose even more respect for me, you can add that I'm also a commie bastard who participates and donates code to various open-source projects. I just choose which projects I donate my time and efforts to.
Maybe the reason why Linux user (like myself) will never install/use a product by Microsoft is exactly because of that -- No specs, no source code, no freedom.
Fool me once...
I think you know which major platform I'm referring to -- the same one that Adobe, Sun, Oracle, IBM and other players support. True, not all their products are supported on Linux, but at least it's not ignored.
As for moonlight, I'm looking for version 1.0. What you send me is version 0.8 -- yet Microsoft is already at version 2.0.
And here what the site says:
"Up-to-date packages ready to _test_ are available from:
These builds do not include media codecs (video or audio), for that, you must currently build Moonlight from source code. The Microsoft Media Pack for Moonlight should be available in October of 2008.
Warning: These are test installers and are not complete or bug free. They are snapshots from our development tree and might not work.
Note: These are currently built without multimedia support. No video or mp3 playback is enabled on these binaries."
Talk about crippled!
Let's face the music. Microsoft wants the world to think that Silverlight is 'crossplaform,' but in reality, all non-Windows OSes are third class citizens.
Wanna bet how long before they drop support for the Mac? For Firefox?
And where is Moonlight 2.0?
Who is 'surprised' that Microsoft is not contributing more code/resources to a Linux version?
Just like .NET (and so many other Microsoft 'cross-platform' techs), it will become more and more Windows centric.
I'm sure that Microsoft kindly shared the specs for SilverLight 2.0 with Mono/Novell during the development so that the Mono project would not have to play catch-up once 2.0 came out. Right?
Otherwise, Microsoft would be releasing a technology that will only work reliably on Windows and shun the other major platforms.
Hum... I wonder why they just don't do like Adobe or Sun and release a version for Linux, Mac and Windows?
Surely, I must be misinterpreting Microsoft's intentions with Silverlight!
As opposed to Mono, Java is built-in to the PS3. For that matter, Java is also built-in to many blue-ray players, and is available on many more modern and legacy platform than Mono (or .NET).
To nit pick I can also name one big platform that is .NET but none of the three you suggest (Xbox360).
Then let's add the PS3 to the Java list of platforms ;)
How long has IronPython & IronRuby existed on Windows? Sounds like Mono is still playing catch-up to the Windows version of .NET...
Today, I can use 100% Java, Python & Ruby on more platforms than all the versions of .NET/Mono combined. Why should I even bother with .NET when there are already superior technologies that works out-of-the-box on my favourite OSes?
You haven't answered the question: Why not use Java...or for that reason, why use .NET for cross-platform development over Java?
There are many IDEs written in Java, and I refuse to run Silverlight/Moonlight on my machine as long as it's a MS proprietary solution (ie: let's-trap-the-customer-into-another-windows-only-solution).
Being myself a 'master' of both Java & .NET (C# & VB.NET), I am under the impression that you tried to make your Java code .NETish.
First mistake: Java is _NOT_ anything like C#. Syntactically, they look similar, but they have too many differences to perform a 1-to-1 transition.
It's almost like comparing Objective-C and C++. They share similar syntax, but require two different mindset and skillset to use.
Personally, I choose Java before C#. Among other reasons, there is less surprises (like passing by ref vs. by value).
Java has JEE.
What's the equivalent in .NE^H^H^HMono?
Yes, the learning curve may be steeper with JEE, but onces you got the basics down, there is nothing that compares to it, IMHO.
.NET 3.0 is WCF, WPF, WF & CardSpace. .NET 3.5 is LINQ, amongst many other things.
One way or another, Java & C++ will remain my bitch as long as MS remains the sole party that controls .NET (ie: proprietary technology).
I for one welcome our new Hubble-Telescope-Disabling overlords!
(Please forgive me...You know that someone had to say that!)
...and Gates stole/copied tons from Apple. What goes around...
I do.
I run Linux.
I hope everyone realizes that my above post was meant to be humourous, and not to be taken seriously.
It's Friday after all!
If I'm not mistaken, our civilization is only about 10,000 years old.
If the Neanderthal had bigger brain, there is a possibility that they had a civilization. That civilization might have discovered fire, internal combustion engines, rockets and even 27KM long particle accelerator.
The last traces of the neanderthal is about 30,000 years ago.
What I want to know is whether or not they found the Higgs boson before they went extinct!
Though Aurora may never see the light of day, the ideas brought forth may find themselves in future iteration of the browser, and even the web.
At the very least, open-source innovations like those provide previous art when a troll patents the very same idea years later.
It's not the first time Microsoft creates a new OS from the ground up, NT being the prime example. However, I think that based on history, I would like to predict two things:
1. To ensure that it doesn't suffer from lack of software, a 'Windows' compatibility layer will be added.
2. To ensure lock-in, the clean and efficient design will be turned upside-down to ensure that only Midori is compatible with Midori.
Thus, at the end of the day, what you have is just another Microsoft product.
I hope you're not getting me wrong. I'm not excited about MS offering Office for less/free. Even if MS offered OFfice on Linux for free as in beer, I would still use OpenOffice because it's free as in speech.
Also, after having the 'pleasure' of writing a manual with Office 2007, I quickly downgraded to Office 2003 (I wish I could have been using OpenOffice). The ribbon interface is cool for new users, but for power users, it's a hindrance more than help.
That's the whole point: the customer has a choice. Competition is driving innovation and competitive pricing.
Give it a few more years and I'm willing to bet that Microsoft will start offering Word _Basic_ or Excel _Basic_ for free (as in beer), or nearly free to compete with the tidal rise of free (as in beer & speech) office suites.
Who wins? The customer...finally!
Up next: Microsoft Window for Free.