CPAC 2005
Posted on 03/13/2005 6:00:05 PM PST by baseball_fan
CPAC 2005
I think you're at the wrong site. You want Soros.
If all the complaints you hear about .NET are from "terrible hacks", then that's one thing. But if they come from reasonable men and women who code, and design, and see that is made more difficult in some ways by the babyless bathtub, then not only ought they complain but reasonably they might seek 'solutions', tools, programs to help them write programs, elsewhere. It's just the free market.
Did you guys swap Linux stories, LOL.
Speaking of your name, if you want it to be worth anything, you need to drop this sort of crap right away:
you're a gay pedophile
I send the albatross of ignorance to decorate your neck.
I rain dog chow on your ancestors.
I throw potatoes of pestilence at your hat.
I shall send the crab lice of indigence to infest your sheets.
I shower your face with ploplets of puppy poop.
Those are just from one thread lately. I guess you need to be told, it's beyond pathetic. But if you want to keep ruining not only your reputation but that of this site, go right ahead I suppose.
>>Hmmm. I thought that one of the main reasons for using
an interpreted or run-time-compiled language like BASIC
was that the source WAS the executable ... <<
Only the very earliest versions of Basic worked like that. I am pretty sure all versions of VB have seperate source and executable. If you lose the source, you are in trouble.
Yeah. Good engineers love a challenge like that, but you rarely get anything you can use. I love managers with more testosterone/estrogen than brains.
I hope the guy in your example didn't get fired. It's like being out of pitchers and having your third basemen volunteer to pitch the ninth, then firing him for losing the game.
I will take your advice under advisement. In the meantime I hurl spitballs of fire at your flammable nose.
WHY are you so angry at me?
Why not direct your anger and discontent at DOING SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR not wanting to change and learn new technology?
There's no reason you can't join a start up or create one. THese people with noney that you despiste, venture capitalists could help you get going. Then again, it might no be for you since you don't want to upgrade yourself to something other than what you are doing now.
You see, you've determined your own fate. All you want to do is whine about things. This seems to make you the happiest. I really thing you'd find more comfort on the DU. At the DU they have the same tired, bitter outlook, complete with class envy.
I've wasted enough time on you. BTW, did you know your anger and bitterness affect your health? It does! It shortens your life and causes other health problems. Need I mention how others will or are starting to avoid you? Let me be the first to let you know that's why I'm moving on from your circular rant.
MicroSoft is under no obligation to hand over their IP, I agree. On the other hand, MicroSoft has a history of shelving (long before all of the value has been harvested from) products rather than selling or giving away their source.
MicroSoft also has a bad habbit of listening to its in-house developers instead of to its customers out in the field. DDE, ADO, VB.Net, Windows ME, the Registry, and a host of other "upgrades" were ill-advised, and in general broke things that were working in older versions.
Of course, these things happen; no firm is perfect and I expect little better from a firm as large and successful as MicroSoft.
However, it would be *nice* if MicroSoft made a few tiny, very minor changes in how they played.
For instance, instead of shelving Windows 95 to let it gather dust, Windows shops would dig it if MicroSoft killed Linux by releasing Windows 95 into the Public Domain as open source. Instead of killing support for VB 6, Windows shops would be overjoyed if MicroSoft would sell the source and rights to the VB 6 engine to a motivated 3rd party who would come out with enhancements and updates.
Of course, these things are mere *wishes* on my part, I don't really expect them to come true. But I hope that the "MicroSoft can do no wrong" crowd doesn't feel so threatened by the mere wishes of a Windows shop that they have to bash the voicing of such wishful thinking.
I'd actually take the other side of that argument. Vb.Net for the most part forces old hierarchical and event-driven programmers into a purely object-oriented paradigm that actually encourages the writing of poor object methods. Your old VB 6 teams probably aren't trained in writing class drivers, for instance.
So those teams are going to be writing classes that get introduced into production code without first being fully exercised in your pre-production environment...simply because they don't know (how) to test all of their class properties and methods.
"Object Oriented" doesn't magically obliterate spaghetti code, after all. If you don't exercise your pre-production classes with professional class drivers, then your new object oriented software project is going to be more kludgy than whatever it was that your team was writing prior to their jump into OO.
That's been my point all along. VB.Net is *not* an enhanced VB 6; VB.Net is a different beast altogether, trading off of VB's name and reputation.
...And it isn't just "some editing," the software *architectures* between those two languages are different. So you aren't just talking about "some editing" of code, but of fundamental *design* changes...something that should be dealt with prior to coding for OO systems, not put together after the fact as migrating exisitng VB 6 projects over to VB.Net demands.
...Unless you want a lousy Object-Oriented system, of course. In which case, who cares about design or class exercising?!
There's truth in that... people who are used to writing spaghetti code will write more of it after they learn how to define a class. But I think one of the issues on the table here is whether Microsoft made a conscious decision to leave some of the dumber ones behind when moving to .NET. If you've ever put an ad in the paper for a VB programmer, you know what kind of crap is out there. There are former shoe salesmen with IQ's of 55 writing VB. The scientists probably have a chimp that can do it.
Linux suffers from the Chicken and Egg syndrome, aka Catch 22. You've got to have marketshare in order to convince big game and application developers to write for your OS, and you don't get big marketshare without first having lots of good games and applications.
So where Linux makes sense is where the big games and applications don't factor in (e.g. servers, driving proprietary stand alone devices, etc.).
Linux also suffers from the perception that its existing customer base won't pay for games and applications, but will gladly steal them. A pirate OS is only going to go so far...unless something big happens such as a change in the equation for stand alone devices and/or available games/applications.
Such a change could be that MicroSoft releases Win95 into the public domain with the properly tailored license agreement. Developers who needed a "free" OS would go that route in order to be in the larger marketshare with more applications and available games, which would also allow MicroSoft to eat up the current Linux marketshare and sell MS apps to that group without the expense of porting MS apps and games over to Linux itself.
Another potential change would be if a Sony or an Apple started making its Playstation or OSX games available for Linux.
Sony, Apple, or MicroSoft could also revolutionize the Market by buying TiVo, installing their own OS onto TiVo boxes in place of Linux, and then offereing their big games and applications to the TiVo/DVR community...effectively capturing large swaths of the current home-TV-Computer market that is emerging. Frankly, it's only a brief matter of time before the major DVR players introduce games and office applications on a broad scale into the market. Apple alone could *double* its current U.S. marketshare by paying a few hundred million for TiVo. Sony could knock off Dell by doing the same thing.
The computer, TV, telephone, and Internet are converging more and more with each passing day. This brings up market opportunities that didn't exist a few years ago. Someone will eventually take advantage of this changing landscape.
A simple license agreement would stop Wine from having Win9x, if MicroSoft wanted to bar Linux rather than coopt it like the Borg.
What would releasing Win95 into open source accomplish for MicroSoft? It would give MicroSoft more desktops to sell MS Office and Age of Empires.
Right now, sole source proprietary hardward vendors like TiVo are limited to Linux or some flavors of Unix (ha, redundant statement) to ship a "free" OS with their DVR's.
Give them Win95 and then they can ship something that MicroSoft can charge for downloading games to.
So the plus side of releasing Win95, for MicroSoft, is that it will enlarge MicroSoft's market penetration.
The downside for MS not releasing Win95 is that MS constantly runs the risk that someone big such as Sony or Apple will figure out how to coopt the existing Linux marketspace, e.g. by either buying TiVo or by porting their games and applications to Linux...either of which would give Apple or Sony millions of new desktops to sell new software.
Does MicroSoft want to be the dominant home-tv-computer/business server vendor, or will MS delay long enough for another player to grab those markets?
hey...! didnt Bill Gates PERSONALLY write "Turtle Graphics" ?
What's this?! A stealth argument for making development environments *more* difficult?!
Honestly, throwing together an app in VB.Net is not more difficult than VB 6...packaging the "executable" to be shipped is actually easier in VB.Net.
What MicroSoft did was roll out an original Object-Oriented system in VB.Net that pretended to be an incremental upgrade from VB 6; when the reality was that VB 6 was the last of the line and VB.Net was an entirely different language that shared little more than the old name (a crappy way to trade on past marketshare).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.