Entries:
Comments:
Posts:

Loading User Information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading User Information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements

Discussions

Bass Bass I need better writers.
  • Perhaps SQL isn't interesting? But it sure is !

    blowdart said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    why should I write properitary database code such as T-SQL which will ensure my code will never work with more then one database and operating system?

    You don't have to, frankly 99.9% of the time you don't need the T-SQL extensions, and that's what they are, extensions. Ditto with Oracle. If you think that you can't run SQL-99 on Sql Server then your research hasn't been that deep, especially as MySQL only supports a SUBSET of Sql99 and indeed has it's own proprietary extensions and states "We are not afraid to add extensions to SQL or support for non-SQL features if this greatly increases the usability of MySQL Server for a large segment of our user base."

    I really don't ever want to have to say "No, you can't" to a high paying customer just because his infrastructure and my code don't work together. That's why portability is important to me, in my industry there exists no monoculture where everyone uses Windows and SQL Server.

    Saying you only support a single database is not portability. Simply because your chosen database runs across X OS's is not going to endear you to large customers who already have an investment in a database system other than your chosen one. Rather than support a single database abstract it, provider models, ORMs that support multiple backends. Far more flexible and gives you a larger market to sell into.

    Perhaps I was misunderstood, I (so far) want to support multiple databases, and do so, by writing simple SQL-99 that should work on all major databases. I will look into ORMs as well. I'm asking what the advantage of writing T-SQL is, is it worth losing portability over? It baffles me because there are companies who sell products that only work with one database.

  • What UAC Controversy?

    wastingtimewithforums said:
    Minh said:
    *snip*

    "There will be people who say, UAC isn't a security feature because it can be bypassed so easily"

    ------------------

    Read the following postings, from the linked post to the bottom of the page:

    http://channel9.msdn.com/forums/Coffeehouse/473037-UAC-controversy-the-last-episode/?CommentID=473716

    It's not that easy to circumvent UAC (on Vista at least).

    If I have a museum and put laser detectors, cameras, 10 security guards, etc, to protect the towel rack in the bathroom, while all my priceless artwork is completely unguarded, that's not good security. UAC (and yes, UNIX root/user permissions also) is protecting the towel rack (eg: \Program Files), while all the user's personal files and network integrity, stuff that could ruin that individual for life thanks to identity theft and the like, is completely frecken unguarded.

  • Perhaps SQL isn't interesting? But it sure is !

    AndyC said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*
    Put them under a large enough strain and the weaknesses in them compared to the big players become all to obvious. That's not to say they aren't getting better however and, personally speaking, I'd use either of them over DB2 any day.

    Really, what do you mean by that? The performence of MySQL is worse? That it's less stable? If so, why do large organizations with like Google, Facebook and Yahoo depend on it?

  • Perhaps SQL isn't interesting? But it sure is !

    Sabot said:

    The thing is if SQL Server is somewhere in your development stack you've gotta get to know it well because it's could so eaily add lead boots to your projects.

    Yes it is a Yin/Yang thing, you do have to put code into the right place and working out that balancing act does take knowledge either built up by experience or from the many good educational materials, books and webcasts (most of them free from Microsoft!)

    I would have to stab myself in the head if I did UI stuff all day ... now that is boring! Programming all that validation, working out the next scenario where a user can be stupid, not interesting at all Devil

    On a serious note, I did enjoy UI coding but I don't have the temperment for it.

    So you get the big no-no's in SQL Server right? Like Select * is bad?

    You get why getting the right 'Collations' is very important? ... and which ones have been deprecated?

    Why DBA's don't like LINQ? ... it's all about the Query Plan Baby!

    Why the new MERGE command is very cool? ... well get's you into the pub early.

    ... and not to mention the game changers coming in SQL Server 2008 R2 !

    Geeeez I could talk all day, I will pull out some of my favourite Microsoft webcasts for you to watch.

    You said "up until recently", but if I were to choose MySQL today, it administration would be on par? If not, what exactly is missing?

    This really is a serious question by the way. In the future I will probably have the need for a database. I want to make a good, balanced, decision.

    You seem to be really exicited about SQL Server. I've done my own research on it. But I am interested to understand why I should spend thousands of dollars (or worse, force my customers to spend thousands of dollars in additional to my own fees - money I'd rather have) on a database when there are SQL-99 compliant databases which are free. What am I missing out on exactly if I support  Postgres or MySQL?

    Even more difficult to justify, why should I write properitary database code such as T-SQL which will ensure my code will never work with more then one database and operating system? What should I tell customers who want to use my product on other databases? I hope it's not "I'd really love to invoice you for $500k mister, but tough sh*t, I've decided early on to write completely unportable code. How about you hand that check over to my rich competitor who supports your DB because his code is SQL-99?"

    I really don't ever want to have to say "No, you can't" to a high paying customer just because his infrastructure and my code don't work together. That's why portability is important to me, in my industry there exists no monoculture where everyone uses Windows and SQL Server.

    Will my productivity with T-SQL really increase that much to justify possibly losing customers? Does T-SQL like practically write itself or something?

  • NY Post: FEAR GRIPS GOOGLE

    I found a neat Bing trick (easter egg?) that somehow improves search results. Search for "google" (weird word, don't ask me what it means) and then click the first result. Now search for what you are looking for. It's a strange easter egg for sure.



    PS: It was a joke, please don't hurt me. Sad

  • Perhaps SQL isn't interesting? But it sure is !

    This is a serious question. If I am writing an application, why exactly would I spend thousands of dollars on a database when there are databases that are free of charge (MySQL, PostgresSQL), and also SQL-99 compliant?

  • Who wants to change the world?

    If you implement it using Mono.SIMD it will be very very fast (at least on Mono). Smiley

  • Mono getting attacked

    wkempf said:

    "Microsoft fanboys hate it because it's "anti-capitalist freetard software"."

    Really?  I've never once seen a MS fanboy make such claims about Mono. I'd be interested in seeing even a single such comment. More importantly, I highly doubt that such comments, if they do exist, are anything but extremely rare, while the "Free software fanboys" tirades are all too common.  You can't mention Mono anywhere on the Internet without having multiple such tirades posted in response. That says a lot to me. About the communities, not the technologies.

    Well the anti-Linux fanboy or the MSFT fanboy is a pretty new thing. I don't know if they are being sarcastic, but there are plenty of places on the 'net you can find gatherings of such people. Just be careful, NSFW and all.

  • Mono getting attacked

    CannotResolveSymbol said:

    It's worth noting that there are popular Mono applications shipped with most distributions by default (Banshee, Beagle, F-Spot, and Tomboy are all C# apps running on Mono using GTK# for their UI).  That would seem to indicate that Mono isn't univerally hated by the F/OSS community, either.

    Yeah, it's kind of funny. I think Linux uses more .NET on the desktop then Windows does.

  • Anyone use the Mono Addins?

    Kenneth.Cochran said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    I've updated my blog  with my initial experiences using Mono.Addins. I'm planning on doing a whole series on using it in a .NET 2.0 project.

    How is your Mono.Addins expirence going?