Outlook *does* suck and it sucks big time. It loses information, it's an open gateway to allow malicious people to destroy your computer, it crashes constantly, and these days it takes longer to load than Word. I honestly dont know why people even use such a piece of crap.
sit down one day and analyze just how much time, productive time, you waste using windows in general and outlook in particular; rebooting several times a day, waiting eons for applications to start, wrestling with the clunky and cumbersome environment, trying to figure out why yesterday it worked the way you wanted and today it's doing strange things (ah, its because today is mother's day and outlook wants to take over and think for you). You'll see you probably would waste less time by using something other than outlook.
need to get organized? get a Palm, write a conduit for workgroup sync and do yourself a favor by putting outlook in the recycle bin.
What Bob doesn't seem to get is that free software is about choice. So what if Transmeta didn't choose to make their developments free/opensource. So what if Linus chose to "sell his soul" and work on a closed product. It's about "choice". Once you make a choice, you remain commited to it. Linus has kept Linux free. Now we would probably be agreeing with Bob if all of a sudden Linus pulled the plug and turned Linux into a closed product (not that it could happen anyway).
Wanting Linus to release everything *everything* he does as open source, even if he only wrote a part of it, just because he has released *some* of his work (ok, admittedly an important piece of his work) as open source/free.. would be like asking me to donate all my salary to charities because I was spotted the other day giving some spare change to a beggar on the street.
This is lame. Anyway, if you've ever installed red hat linux (beyond version 5.0 i believe) and have paid attention to the WAV sndconfig uses to verify correct hardware configuration, it's Linus, and he says he pronounces Linux as "Lee-Nucks".
The entire point is stupid. If my home's lock is so poorly designed that it can be opened with a screwdriver, and someone posts "Hey, this guy's lock can be opened with a screwdriver", it's stupid for me to go after this guy "hey, dont be posting that about my lock". These people need to shut up, accept that the DVD CCA messed up and CSS is not good enough to protect their precious intellectual property, and go sue the DVD CCA *instead*.
I, for one, was thinking of getting a DVD player. Since it looks like the DVD makers don't want me to be able to play DVDs on anything but what *they* dictate, and the movie makers are on their side, I guess I will stick with pirateable VHS tapes and keep my money in *my* pocket, because it looks like the "intellectual property owners" don't want my money in their pockets. </rant>
Um, maybe this is throwing another log into the fire, but did you look into PHP?
I personally have only used perl (and mod_perl) and I can tell you that mod_perl is *fast*. And it does encourage you to write cleaner perl code. But, as with most things perl, you can also twist it and kludge around mod_perl's requirements/limitations with even uglier code:)
Given that performance was similar, I would probably choose to use Java servlets, if only because Java is a cleaner language than perl (IMHO).
Well, it's not confusing for you because you *know* what you're talking about. So do I. Think about some newbie who has no clue as to why his version of Win95 looks and/or behaves differently from his neighbor's, even though, as per the package, or the program's name and version (95, aint it?) they should be the same. He then goes on and blames it on the fact that his processor is a Cyrix while the other guy has a WinChip, or blames it on y2k and goes out and buys Windows 2000 "because it goes with the year". It's just misleading. It's much easier, say, to understand they behave differently because I have Windows 4.0 and the neighbor got Windows 4.2.
Plus, dont be too confident about them always increasing the version numbers. Next thing ya know they'll say "version numbers are running out", and do what some countries did, start taking zeroes off release numbers, and you'll be using Windows 2.01 all over again.
Back when word leaked out that the then next release of Windows would be named after the year (95), there was a lot of talk that Microsoft would have to back off and return to standard versioning schemes. Those who said so cited the apparent failures of other attempts at year versioning (Mace Utilities 90 which later faded out of sight, and Illustrator 89, which was followed by Illustrator 5.0).
5 years later, it seems as if Microsoft succeeded in doing things their way, and now everybody is wondering whether this is where the industry will be headed.
I for one think year versioning is stupid. It doesn't, as Microsoft and others claimed, help customers unambiguously identify a product's latest release. Take a look at the (at least) four different versions of Win95. A major.minor versioning scheme would have been better for identifying the latest release.
Then you have the "year" releases of other products, and then you see the "clearer" year versioning scheme fail as you see people talking about "windows 97" (since a big "97" pops up when they run Word or Excel from Office97) or Windows 2000 (same thing, except they bought Office 2000). It makes knowing *what* version people have a nightmare.
Also, as with cars, you have year-named stuff being released before the year. How does a common mortal know that office 2000 was *not* released in 2000? How will it help when, in 2001, say they release Windows 3500 and Office 16384? And since they are no longer sticking to the "name it for the year it was released" scheme, how do I know whether my version of Office 2000 is the latest, or has been superseded by "Office 2048", released by microsoft heralding the coming of power-of-2-based versioning schemes?
I say just use the tried-and-true major.minor.revision scheme.. it has worked well for years.
How does this affect us, if at all, in other countries? We all know Microsoft's international presence is significant. Does whatever happen to Microsoft in the US affect their overseas divisions? Will this encourage other governments to look into applying their own monopoly legislation on MS?
This is ridiculous. I've had two guys with a linux box beat the pants off a whole team developing with ASP, we reimplemented their 2 months worth of work in 36 hours, and our solution didnt collapse under the workload. By the time they were finished rebooting their NT boxdue to an "overload crash", we were finishing installation of a second backup linux server to do load balancing. Point: Nothing as lousy as ASP is going to compete with perl, even at the interpreted CGI level.
Things change radically when using mod_perl. The thing really flies, and basically gets us rid of the "perl is too slow" argument.
If perl is too "slow" for you (because, granted, there's maybe too much of a chore to write a full perl program when all you want is a quick dump of a table), give PHP a try. This thing is impressive, it has great performance and I dont think I ever developed web applications faster than I do with PHP. Again, by the time you're finished firing up your ColdFusion or ASP fancy visual IDE, the average PHP dude will already be rolling out a working solution.
Well, the point is that the MS mouse's shape is supposed to be comfortable, but if you're lefthanded, its actually more uncomfortable. I prefer to stick to symmetrical mice myself. All this is an issue when doing long mousing sessions. Some games come to mind.. well this is untopical so lets cut it right here:)
It seems Microsoft wants to "standarize" on right-handers by simply forgetting about the existence of us left-handers. Hence Microsoft mice are useless and more painful for me. Or has anyone seen a lefty microsoft mouse? Logitech on the other hand used to make a lefty version of the MouseMan.
Modesty is a virtue for those who don't have others. Personally I'm one arrogant bastard but I think a lot of us are entitled to that, given that we actually have basis for being like that, unlike a lot of dudes who criticize us and label us as zealots.
One thing's for sure: The Road Ahead has got to be the worst book I've read in quite a while. Gathering popular knowledge and other people's ideas about the Net's evolution and future, slapping it all together and labeling it as vision, perhaps hoping that Gates' reputation will keep people from realizing what it's all about and disregarding the book as what it is: hype.
Slashdot Mirror
sit down one day and analyze just how much time, productive time, you waste using windows in general and outlook in particular; rebooting several times a day, waiting eons for applications to start, wrestling with the clunky and cumbersome environment, trying to figure out why yesterday it worked the way you wanted and today it's doing strange things (ah, its because today is mother's day and outlook wants to take over and think for you). You'll see you probably would waste less time by using something other than outlook.
need to get organized? get a Palm, write a conduit for workgroup sync and do yourself a favor by putting outlook in the recycle bin.
Wanting Linus to release everything *everything* he does as open source, even if he only wrote a part of it, just because he has released *some* of his work (ok, admittedly an important piece of his work) as open source/free.. would be like asking me to donate all my salary to charities because I was spotted the other day giving some spare change to a beggar on the street.
This is lame. Anyway, if you've ever installed red hat linux (beyond version 5.0 i believe) and have paid attention to the WAV sndconfig uses to verify correct hardware configuration, it's Linus, and he says he pronounces Linux as "Lee-Nucks".
I, for one, was thinking of getting a DVD player. Since it looks like the DVD makers don't want me to be able to play DVDs on anything but what *they* dictate, and the movie makers are on their side, I guess I will stick with pirateable VHS tapes and keep my money in *my* pocket, because it looks like the "intellectual property owners" don't want my money in their pockets.
</rant>
I personally have only used perl (and mod_perl) and I can tell you that mod_perl is *fast*. And it does encourage you to write cleaner perl code. But, as with most things perl, you can also twist it and kludge around mod_perl's requirements/limitations with even uglier code :)
Given that performance was similar, I would probably choose to use Java servlets, if only because Java is a cleaner language than perl (IMHO).
Plus, dont be too confident about them always increasing the version numbers. Next thing ya know they'll say "version numbers are running out", and do what some countries did, start taking zeroes off release numbers, and you'll be using Windows 2.01 all over again.
5 years later, it seems as if Microsoft succeeded in doing things their way, and now everybody is wondering whether this is where the industry will be headed.
I for one think year versioning is stupid. It doesn't, as Microsoft and others claimed, help customers unambiguously identify a product's latest release. Take a look at the (at least) four different versions of Win95. A major.minor versioning scheme would have been better for identifying the latest release.
Then you have the "year" releases of other products, and then you see the "clearer" year versioning scheme fail as you see people talking about "windows 97" (since a big "97" pops up when they run Word or Excel from Office97) or Windows 2000 (same thing, except they bought Office 2000). It makes knowing *what* version people have a nightmare.
Also, as with cars, you have year-named stuff being released before the year. How does a common mortal know that office 2000 was *not* released in 2000? How will it help when, in 2001, say they release Windows 3500 and Office 16384? And since they are no longer sticking to the "name it for the year it was released" scheme, how do I know whether my version of Office 2000 is the latest, or has been superseded by "Office 2048", released by microsoft heralding the coming of power-of-2-based versioning schemes?
I say just use the tried-and-true major.minor.revision scheme.. it has worked well for years.
Just for the record, I'm in Mexico...
Things change radically when using mod_perl. The thing really flies, and basically gets us rid of the "perl is too slow" argument.
If perl is too "slow" for you (because, granted, there's maybe too much of a chore to write a full perl program when all you want is a quick dump of a table), give PHP a try. This thing is impressive, it has great performance and I dont think I ever developed web applications faster than I do with PHP. Again, by the time you're finished firing up your ColdFusion or ASP fancy visual IDE, the average PHP dude will already be rolling out a working solution.
Well, the point is that the MS mouse's shape is supposed to be comfortable, but if you're lefthanded, its actually more uncomfortable. I prefer to stick to symmetrical mice myself. All this is an issue when doing long mousing sessions. Some games come to mind.. well this is untopical so lets cut it right here :)
It seems Microsoft wants to "standarize" on right-handers by simply forgetting about the existence of us left-handers. Hence Microsoft mice are useless and more painful for me. Or has anyone seen a lefty microsoft mouse? Logitech on the other hand used to make a lefty version of the MouseMan.
Modesty is a virtue for those who don't have others. Personally I'm one arrogant bastard but I think a lot of us are entitled to that, given that we actually have basis for being like that, unlike a lot of dudes who criticize us and label us as zealots.
One thing's for sure: The Road Ahead has got to be the worst book I've read in quite a while. Gathering popular knowledge and other people's ideas about the Net's evolution and future, slapping it all together and labeling it as vision, perhaps hoping that Gates' reputation will keep people from realizing what it's all about and disregarding the book as what it is: hype.