Not true..Net is only a set a libraries and a sandbox for running CLR images. The only new language Microsoft have introduced is c#, which is the preferred language for developing in (as it was written for the.NET framework, and so doesn't come with any 'legacy baggage' like many of the others do). Because of this fact, it is entirely possible to write.NET code in any other language - as long as it boils down to MSIL code at the end. For example, check - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_.NET_Langua ges - there's over 40. This means you get to use pre-written.NET libraries for your app in whatever language you feel the most comfortable with. You can even use Perl if you really insist.
In conclusion,.NET apps can be written in almost any language, but Perl can only be written in Perl.// todo: insert witty comment here
Doing.NET is actually good fun believe it or not; assuming you can use c# rather than any of the others (VB comes to mind). Also, bear in mind that.NET covers a multitude of sins - WWW, WinForms, Pocket PCs - not just the web, so any experience gained from the job is transferable to a degree.
php is a very popular language (even if, in my opinion, a badly structured one), thus by making Windows the most popular platform for it, you've suddenly got an increase in demand. Microsoft don't do anything for free, and this is no exception.
Well done Dean for going through with this, I say. I'd imagine it takes some guts to stand up to the/. crowd in your position.
I'd just point out though I'm not sure you quite answered my question - it was one I knew you wouldn't want to take on directly...
10 years ago, I was quite used to seeing a Netscape icon on the desktop, so I don't quite buy the "everyone's used to an IE icon" argument. Still, I agree that most people don't really care about what browser they use as long as it does the job, which in fact, would actually would lead me to ask the same question again - with all browser being equal; why IE?
I think i've re-activated my copy of XP about 5 times already - mostly because of new hardware. You call a free-phone number and they just ask you "how many computers have you installed it on?". If you're dumb enough to not say anything over 3, they'll give you a new key.
It's not like the big Billy G has tapped into the line with a lie detector ready to call in a SWAT team or anything. Well, if he was, it was very convincing - anything's possible I suppose.
Let's pretend for a moment that Internet Explorer isn't the default web-browser built into Windows and instead, users are presented with a choice on first login (e.g. a message asking 'How would you like to browse the internet? MSIE, Firefox, Opera').
Would you expect IE to become as dominant as it is now if users had to specifically choose it over another?
Ignoring the slight impracticalities, if so (I'm guessing you do), on what basis would this be?
http://secunia.com/advisories/22477/...not that I was going to install it anyway. It looks like all the jokes about introducing new vulnerabilities weren't unfounded then...
Believe it or not, there are actually some benefits from being part of the biggest trading-block in the world. Yes, there are pitfalls too (red-tape etc), but I sir, would rather be part of an imperfect Europe than an irrelevant Britain.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't patching the kernel an administrator-only function anyway?
If this is so, isn't the principal more or less achievable with Linux by installing a modified kernel under root access?
Either way, I wouldn't want anything tinkering with my kernel operation, so I see these API's as a negative thing - I just hope to God Windows will display some absolutely mammoth dialogue boxes should (heaven forbid) anything try and modify my kernel!
-Brief appraisal of Microsoft: check. -Imminent follow-on thrashing of Microsoft: several-times-check. -Mention of impending DRM: check. -Favourable view of Windows 2000: check. -Unfavourable view of Windows Vista: check. -Thread of 'moving on to Linux': check...........
"It looks like you're writing a Microsoft post!......"
Do you really expect to be supported running software with known problems? It's only been out since the beginning of Feb 2003, so it's not too much to ask, surely?
Bearing in mind for the majority of users, when presented with a question - they'll just click "yes" to make it go away, I suspect this is a very under-hand tactic to render non-IE browsers as non-default.
Think about it - a message will pop-up saying "Want to upgrade to the new shiny IE? (y/n)"....one restart later, and the next question will be "Want to make it your default browser? (y/n)".....and just like that, poor Firefox/Opera is sat there collecting dust.
It's funny; I have a good friend working in Microsoft. Apparently, Microsoft aren't worried about Windows being pushed to the side, nor Office, nor any of the "paid" stuff....it's IE and WMP that's getting Microsoft hot under the collar right now. I believe it's starting to show.
"This is where special software automatically exercises programs rapidly while looking for errors."
I for one would love to know more about the tools they use for automated testing.
In my company, we have a build & testing server running compiler and NUnit tests for all data-layer tests (complete tests like "load all of everything" and more specific tests like "authorise user with known bad credentials - expect login-failure") alongside NUnitForms tests for the application-layer (random, frantic clicking's everywhere and specific user-journey tests).
All in all, it's quite a good system for rooting out the majority of bugs, but I'm always looking for ways of improving this side of things.
I can only imagine Microsoft must use similar techniques, but obviously a tad more intensive; can anyone shed any light?
This isn't innovation! Anyone that lives in the UK will know that not only was this done yonks ago, but it even made it into the Top of the Pops when it came out.
Well, my point is that with Skype can call any land-line in any country at local rates, all natively supported by client, protocol, and provider seamlessly. I don't doubt it would be possible to do something involving SIP, but why bother when it's been handed to me on a plate?
I'm open-minded; if there's a package/client which allows me to call & text international numbers at local rates, and that just-so-happens to be running on SIP, then fine - I may switch over if it's any good. Otherwise Skype works just fine for what I need it for.
If I was doing Computer > Computer calls only, then we wouldn't be having this discussion of course.
I actually use Skype solely for it's paid-for services (SkypeOut, SMS, etc) as I live abroad, and don't want to pay extortionate rates for international calling. This isn't covered in any SIP clients that I'm aware of, thus making this debate irrelevant for me at least. My only gripe with Skype for Linux is that they haven't ported over the SMS functionality yet - it, for me is a reason on it's own to use Skype.
Windows XP & 2003 handles unresponsive programs just fine. The window contents will of course look awfull as the application won't be answering paint requests, but you can move, minimise, resize (i think); whatever you want. In fact, the title-bar of the application even changes too if you're trying to interact with to to "XYZ - Not Responding" until it wakes up again.
I gather Linux deal with these problems in a simular way.
"iPod", as a brand, or 'thing' has become so interwoven into everyday society that separating "iPod" from "the music player to own" is, in my opinion, almost impossible to envisage for the foreseeable future.
For the record - a quick skate around Google found this list of supported 'add-ons'....
For the record - a quick skate around google found this list of supported 'add-ons'....
When the Zune get's its own warship extension, then i'll start believing it has a chance.
Also, Microsoft's reputation to the public at large, seems to encompass little more than "The company that make my computer crash", whereas Apple actually have a well-earned consumer-friendly image about them. Maybe this will change, but I just can't see it right now.
Slashdot Mirror
Not true. .Net is only a set a libraries and a sandbox for running CLR images. The only new language Microsoft have introduced is c#, which is the preferred language for developing in (as it was written for the .NET framework, and so doesn't come with any 'legacy baggage' like many of the others do). .NET code in any other language - as long as it boils down to MSIL code at the end. For example, check - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_.NET_Langua ges - there's over 40. This means you get to use pre-written .NET libraries for your app in whatever language you feel the most comfortable with. You can even use Perl if you really insist.
.NET apps can be written in almost any language, but Perl can only be written in Perl. // todo: insert witty comment here
Because of this fact, it is entirely possible to write
In conclusion,
Doing .NET is actually good fun believe it or not; assuming you can use c# rather than any of the others (VB comes to mind). Also, bear in mind that .NET covers a multitude of sins - WWW, WinForms, Pocket PCs - not just the web, so any experience gained from the job is transferable to a degree.
Nearly half a meg in 2 seconds? That'll be the wonders of caching, my friend.
Stats for http://slashdot.org/ -
Request Count: 78
Bytes Sent: 50.871
Bytes Received: 436.121
RESPONSE CODES
--------------
HTTP/200: 78
RESPONSE BYTES (by Content-Type)
--------------
application/x-javascript: 288.162
application/x-shockwave-flash: 22.517
text/html: 17.348
image/png: 11.410
~headers: 21.942
text/css: 37.599
text/javascript: 9.026
image/gif: 28.117
That certainly takes longer than 4 seconds.
Also, I'm not sure how you consider Vista is a step backwards in 3D desktop rendering, when 3d and 2d interfaces have effectively been merged into one.
php is a very popular language (even if, in my opinion, a badly structured one), thus by making Windows the most popular platform for it, you've suddenly got an increase in demand. Microsoft don't do anything for free, and this is no exception.
Well done Dean for going through with this, I say. I'd imagine it takes some guts to stand up to the /. crowd in your position.
I'd just point out though I'm not sure you quite answered my question - it was one I knew you wouldn't want to take on directly...
10 years ago, I was quite used to seeing a Netscape icon on the desktop, so I don't quite buy the "everyone's used to an IE icon" argument. Still, I agree that most people don't really care about what browser they use as long as it does the job, which in fact, would actually would lead me to ask the same question again - with all browser being equal; why IE?
Anyway, thanks for your time. It's appreciated.
I think i've re-activated my copy of XP about 5 times already - mostly because of new hardware. You call a free-phone number and they just ask you "how many computers have you installed it on?". If you're dumb enough to not say anything over 3, they'll give you a new key.
It's not like the big Billy G has tapped into the line with a lie detector ready to call in a SWAT team or anything. Well, if he was, it was very convincing - anything's possible I suppose.
Let's pretend for a moment that Internet Explorer isn't the default web-browser built into Windows and instead, users are presented with a choice on first login (e.g. a message asking 'How would you like to browse the internet? MSIE, Firefox, Opera').
Would you expect IE to become as dominant as it is now if users had to specifically choose it over another?
Ignoring the slight impracticalities, if so (I'm guessing you do), on what basis would this be?
There were tab-based browsers before Mozilla or course (Opera for instance), but none where you could open pages in either a new tab or new window.
*sigh*
...not that I was going to install it anyway. It looks like all the jokes about introducing new vulnerabilities weren't unfounded then...
http://secunia.com/advisories/22477/
Believe it or not, there are actually some benefits from being part of the biggest trading-block in the world. Yes, there are pitfalls too (red-tape etc), but I sir, would rather be part of an imperfect Europe than an irrelevant Britain.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't patching the kernel an administrator-only function anyway?
If this is so, isn't the principal more or less achievable with Linux by installing a modified kernel under root access?
Either way, I wouldn't want anything tinkering with my kernel operation, so I see these API's as a negative thing - I just hope to God Windows will display some absolutely mammoth dialogue boxes should (heaven forbid) anything try and modify my kernel!
-Brief appraisal of Microsoft: check. ..........
-Imminent follow-on thrashing of Microsoft: several-times-check.
-Mention of impending DRM: check.
-Favourable view of Windows 2000: check.
-Unfavourable view of Windows Vista: check.
-Thread of 'moving on to Linux': check.
"It looks like you're writing a Microsoft post!......"
P.S - http://crouchingbadger.com/movie/paperclip.mpg
Do you really expect to be supported running software with known problems? It's only been out since the beginning of Feb 2003, so it's not too much to ask, surely?
Bearing in mind for the majority of users, when presented with a question - they'll just click "yes" to make it go away, I suspect this is a very under-hand tactic to render non-IE browsers as non-default.
Think about it - a message will pop-up saying "Want to upgrade to the new shiny IE? (y/n)"....one restart later, and the next question will be "Want to make it your default browser? (y/n)".....and just like that, poor Firefox/Opera is sat there collecting dust.
It's funny; I have a good friend working in Microsoft. Apparently, Microsoft aren't worried about Windows being pushed to the side, nor Office, nor any of the "paid" stuff....it's IE and WMP that's getting Microsoft hot under the collar right now. I believe it's starting to show.
I for one would love to know more about the tools they use for automated testing.
In my company, we have a build & testing server running compiler and NUnit tests for all data-layer tests (complete tests like "load all of everything" and more specific tests like "authorise user with known bad credentials - expect login-failure") alongside NUnitForms tests for the application-layer (random, frantic clicking's everywhere and specific user-journey tests).
All in all, it's quite a good system for rooting out the majority of bugs, but I'm always looking for ways of improving this side of things.
I can only imagine Microsoft must use similar techniques, but obviously a tad more intensive; can anyone shed any light?
This isn't innovation! Anyone that lives in the UK will know that not only was this done yonks ago, but it even made it into the Top of the Pops when it came out.
Well, my point is that with Skype can call any land-line in any country at local rates, all natively supported by client, protocol, and provider seamlessly. I don't doubt it would be possible to do something involving SIP, but why bother when it's been handed to me on a plate?
I'm open-minded; if there's a package/client which allows me to call & text international numbers at local rates, and that just-so-happens to be running on SIP, then fine - I may switch over if it's any good. Otherwise Skype works just fine for what I need it for.
If I was doing Computer > Computer calls only, then we wouldn't be having this discussion of course.
I actually use Skype solely for it's paid-for services (SkypeOut, SMS, etc) as I live abroad, and don't want to pay extortionate rates for international calling.
This isn't covered in any SIP clients that I'm aware of, thus making this debate irrelevant for me at least. My only gripe with Skype for Linux is that they haven't ported over the SMS functionality yet - it, for me is a reason on it's own to use Skype.
...on the visa card (green one) they pretty much ask you just that.
But the best one is...
"Do you intend to partake in any illegal or immoral activities while in the United States? (y/n)"
What counts as immoral anyway? And where's the "hopefully" option?
Windows XP & 2003 handles unresponsive programs just fine. The window contents will of course look awfull as the application won't be answering paint requests, but you can move, minimise, resize (i think); whatever you want. In fact, the title-bar of the application even changes too if you're trying to interact with to to "XYZ - Not Responding" until it wakes up again.
I gather Linux deal with these problems in a simular way.
Feel free to formulate your own thoughts and opinions - you are allowed, assuming you are capable.
Christ. Don't you just hate it when you spot the obvious mistake after you post?
*cries*
For the record - a quick skate around google found this list of supported 'add-ons'....
Cars!
Umbrellas!
Underwear!
Warships!
Dildos! (SFW)
When the Zune get's its own warship extension, then i'll start believing it has a chance.
Also, Microsoft's reputation to the public at large, seems to encompass little more than "The company that make my computer crash", whereas Apple actually have a well-earned consumer-friendly image about them. Maybe this will change, but I just can't see it right now.