No tears from me for a half-arsed, substandard and dangerously incompatible product. Yeah IntelliSense was good but I'd rather write stuff that is portable (which is the whole idea of Java in the first place).
It looks like they've given up trying to pollute, I mean "innovate" Java. What worries me is this:
Separately, Computing has been given an early preview of Visual Studio 7, which is heavily biased towards XML, formally called extensible mark-up language.
I wonder if XML will stand up to Microsoft "innovation" the way Java has?
With every release of Windows, Microsoft scraps the old APIs and introduces new ones. The new ones don't solve many problems but are gratuitously incompatible with everything else.
This is incorrect. The problem is just the opposite. Anyone who has programmed for Windows will tell you that there is so much kruft all over their API's (in order to remain compatible with Win16), the programming is an nightmare. Its Microsoft's marketing dumps technology every six months, renames it and resurrects it.
DCOM was going to be the future of MS Windows IPC, but this article mentions that MS is depreciating DCOM in favor of some XML/HTTP based system. And DCOM hasn't even been fully realized yet!
Nope. DCOM is an extension of COM which is an extension of that old technology, OLE. Microsoft is further extending it to COM+. (arrgh! Just kill it and start again). Whether it runs over RPC or HTTP is entirely separate.
For more info on COM and how it relates to ActiveX have a look here
That way you'd understand that the article's purpose is not to debunk RISC, but to point out that the distiction today is almost meaningless in the framework of the old RISC v CISC debate.
The author's "main evidence" as you call it, is merely laying out the main question of the article, ie is there a difference nowadays? As you read on, there are numerous examples cited of the blurring distinction, eg G4's with the Velocity Engine (162 _extra_ instructions), and the Pentium II, a classic CISC CPU, with its internal microcode (RISC) architecture.
-------------------------------------------------- And wouldn't Monsanto just hike the price of buying seeds to cover the fact that every customer is going to buy the seeds only once? -------------------------------------------------- Monsanto should raise prices because people don't trust the new seed, and want to do things the way they've always been done? perhaps i'm misunderstanding you here.
What I'm saying is: Monsanto obviously expected to make lots of money buy re-selling seeds each season to the same customers. Now, they can't, so they might have to meet those budget expectations by raising the price of the seeds, seeing as now people will only buy them once.
Many people consider you to be one of the best programmers in the game/graphics scene, based on your ability to keep pushing the limits of current PC hardware.
I was wondering what measures you use to gauge the skill of a programmer, and who, if anyone, you look up to and consider to be a "great" programmer.
Nope. Read the document carefully. It actually points out that comparisons of OSS to Communism are flawed.
Is open source ideology "utopian balderdash" like communism? Bob Metcalfe - who expressed this sentiment most clearly - is dead wrong. Bryan Pfaffenberger described the errors in Mercalfe's reasoning in this way:...
I don't think the article was needlessly negative. I think it was needfully negative to balance a lot of hype out there. Then people can make up their own minds, unlike in communism.
Slashdot Mirror
Switch to BeOS.
Mmmmmm....no kruft. Actual OO design. Super fast.
Cheers,
Justin.
It looks like they've given up trying to pollute, I mean "innovate" Java. What worries me is this:
I wonder if XML will stand up to Microsoft "innovation" the way Java has?Cheers,
Justin
For more info on COM and how it relates to ActiveX have a look here
Cheers,
Justin
Cheers,
Justin
That way you'd understand that the article's purpose is not to debunk RISC, but to point out that the distiction today is almost meaningless in the framework of the old RISC v CISC debate.
The author's "main evidence" as you call it, is merely laying out the main question of the article, ie is there a difference nowadays? As you read on, there are numerous examples cited of the blurring distinction, eg G4's with the Velocity Engine (162 _extra_ instructions), and the Pentium II, a classic CISC CPU, with its internal microcode (RISC) architecture.
Cheers,
Justin.
Are you guys into necrophiliac bestiality or something? j.
Cheers,
Justin.
cheers,
Justin.
Cheers,
Justin.
And wouldn't Monsanto just hike the price of buying seeds to cover the fact that every customer is going to buy the seeds only once?
Cheers,
Justin.
Many people consider you to be one of the best programmers in the game/graphics scene, based on your ability to keep pushing the limits of current PC hardware.
I was wondering what measures you use to gauge the skill of a programmer, and who, if anyone, you look up to and consider to be a "great" programmer.
Cheers,
Justin
Read the document carefully. It actually points out that comparisons of OSS to Communism are flawed. I don't think the article was needlessly negative. I think it was needfully negative to balance a lot of hype out there. Then people can make up their own minds, unlike in communism.
Cheers, Justin.
cheers,
Justin.