When you say 2010 BCL, you mean .NET 4 right?
Aug 04, 2009 at 1:08 PM
++ on the integration with Codeplex
But it has to be thought out more. The power of Codeplex but still somehow not make it a link to some external site.
Actually, if not Codeplex integration, integrate source control into Sandbox? I don't know. We need some mechanism to make it easier for Niners to work on shared projects. Codeplex doesn't feel so optimal. It has no support for distributed source control. .NET + distributed source control is a powerful thing. They are almost meant for each other.
Another really good idea IMO:
Have some projects that you the editors of Channel 9 come up with, and then give prizes to participants or something. Something open source that would benefit .NET developers. Think of something sorely missing from .NET but something that would not be too difficult to implement (not so specialized). Then put up a project and let all niners on it, preferably a DSCM like BZR or GIT because that's safer then giving everyone SVN commit or whatever. I understand though if that's too NIH.
So, no contest for once just cooperation. Prizes don't have to big, like T-shirt if make 20 useful commits. Maybe a coupon $50 off on a Zune for 50 useful commits. You don't need a big carrot is what I am saying, but you should have some kind of carrot to encourge participation.
Thank you for addressing my concern. I'm sorry if I sounded a bit rude, it's just something I am very interested in for my own (non-academic) projects.
Hopefully it won't be long before I can use this EXTREMELY USEFUL (!!!!) technology in my own projects. The confines of a single computer is becoming really limiting, I really do not want to switch to Java, or have to re-implement my own Dyrad/Hadoop instead of focus on the real problem. So it's quite frustrating.
Yeah if you keep this up by next year, Microsoft will hiring Richard Stallman as a technical fellow and Emacs and Common Lisp will replace Visual Studio and C#.
Damn right and license it for non-academia while you are at it. I really think it's incredibly lame to discriminate like that. Fabulous job there on completely alienating commercial developers who need clustering and would love access to something like this. You know, the kind of people that actually make you money in the form of increased Windows sales.
Yes it does piss me off. What reaction do you expect to do when you show me something interesting and make it illegal for me to use it. Gratification? Hell no. This is really so lame.
I knew I should I sticked with Java. I'd actually have a real clustering solution today (Hadoop). Really .NET can be so much better if you all stopped with your overzealous software hoarding mindsets. But Java is looking better every day.
Jul 16, 2009 at 12:37 PM
It was a somewhat interesting video.
MapReduce is an in fact a fairly high level programming abstraction. If you are programmer you only have to write two functions: map and reduce. From what I understand Dyrad is even higher level in that it can describe a graph of operations that might take multiple maps and reduces otherwise. Basically it helps you write something more concise that might require a larger program with MapReduce. I think that's just the nature of Linq in action. Linq can represent a graph of operations in a single statement, to so easy to do with standard code. I don't think this signifies some mathematical difference between the two at the low level (I didn't get any hint that Dyrad could do parallelize things that MapReduce can't).
But DyradLINQ might be the most awesome thing since slice bread, but right now the only significant difference to me about something like Hadoop or this DyradLINQ is I can not legally use DyradLINQ. I don't care if you told me DyradLINQ was worse the Hadoop, the fact that it is designed for .NET means I would use it.
So you can sell it to me but quite frankly it's useless unless you license it better. Hadoop is fully open source and you can use it in commercial products. Why is DyradLINQ so restricted?
Jul 16, 2009 at 11:55 AM
But seriously the license you guys put it under is lame as hell. Try Ms-PL next time, you'll like it.
I rather have an Internet were people aren't forced to use specific operating systems in order to participate. I think that completely defeats the purpose of the Internet as an open medium accessible to all: once of the reasons the Internet was successful and widely adopted in the first place (built on open standards like TCP/IP all the way to HTTP and HTML). I do feel that Silverlight takes away something from that.
I would be really happy if Microsoft decided to release an offical spec for Silverlight as well as a promise not to sue people who use or implement Silverlight, kind what they did with some parts of .NET.