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 Knows the way the wind is flowing.
  • In reply to LSE adandons failed Windows project

    stevo_ said:

    Whilst we're at it.. bass:

    Thanks for the lesson.. here's me spending the last 6 years in .NET and never realized that Tongue Out.. they are the same thing in terms of a program.. or rather.. theres JUST .NET.. my point was (if you read), he says there was a BLEND OF:

    c# programs
    .net programs

    Thats not a blend.. thats just one thing.. .net programs; per chance written in c#.

    Well you said .NET and C# are "THE SAME THING". I was merely correcting you on this.

    This is a very common misunderstanding/confusion, something that I personally witness A LOT. And I don't know enough about your qualifications to realize you know this or not, I just know that a lot of people have this idea that .NET and C# are on and the same. But they are not interchangeable. It's kind of like people confusing pointers and arrays in C. Sad More people seem to have that confused then people who do not.

  • LSE abandons failed Windows project

    stevo_ said:

    "really wa. Sources at the LSE tell me to this day that the problem was with TradElect."

    You mean the coffee boys who just assume.. oh new system went up today- and associate that.. regardless if was the new systems fault this guys a cóckend..

    More proof this guy knows jack * about anything microsoft: "The TradElect software itself is a custom blend of C# and .NET programs"... mmm yea, I love me them c# and .net programs.. such a rich blend of THE SAME THING.

    I use C# and .NET to write programs, C# is my language, .NET is the framework it runs under. I fail to see how they are the same thing.

  • HTML5 questions

    LeoDavidson said:

    Don't think this has been posted here yet. An email from Monday, by someone involved with the HTML5 spec, summarising the state of the video codec issue:

    http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.html

     

    Looks like the key problem is software patents.

  • HTML5 questions

    blowdart said:
    May28th2018 said:
    *snip*

    Yes but google and chrome are simply picking and choosing what parts of the "standard" they implement (it's not a standard right now anyway, it's a draft). And when that happens it's very risky, look what happened to Netscape's guesswork with the Layer tag - developers had to code around a broken, non-compliant implementation for years because a browser company decided to jump the gun in order to get a competitive advantage. MS also learnt this the hard way with their XML bits. Mozilla's threading bits aren't part of any standard at all, they're the new <blink> tag.

    It's interesting to note who is driving the standard - Google and Apple, people who complained loudly when MS tried to implement new non-standard bits but are happy to do it themselves. Heck Google already said they would try to push for additions to HTML5 to support Wave - and that's very worrying, a company influencing a standard just to suit one of their applications.

    One must ask, is Microsoft ignoring the standards process or the standards process ignoring Microsoft? Smiley

  • Studying or Working ?

    CKurt said:
    JohnAskew said:
    *snip*

    Yes, my parents are really nice and i enjoy the being "taken care of". Altought it's not all sunshine Wink

    I say go for it if you can. IMO there is a lot of very profitable companies taking advantage of the "bad economic" situation and paying crap starting salaries these days. While it's likely you'll find a job, it will be easy for a company to take advantage of this "bad economy" crap and pay a subpar salary especially considering you are a new grad.  And hey if the economy still sucks you can always stay until Ph.D. Smiley

  • Stallman warns against C# and Mono

    staceyw said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    It can't do WinForms and never will, but I don't need it to do Winforms.  I am going to buy into the xaml thing and do the vectors and invest the grey matter to move to the next step.  I would love a native 3.5 .net experience everywhere, but that is not going to happen anytime soon from perspective of current clr.  However, when you really look a SL, you see it is not really a web based.  It is client based.  It loads xaml from a path, and renders it all on the client side.  With OOB support, you also see you could deploy on cd as a normal app with no web needed and you start to see a different animal and the current lines get blurry.  There is no technical reason most other libraries could not be added (save the hw issues, sockets, sound, etc) over time.  

    The problem is largely security here. We had the ability to execute pretty much abitrary code from the web browser with IE6, but that led to the spyware disaster then we still feel today. Silverlight spyware could become a problem if it gets too much features, and it's a problem if it has not enough features. Basically, you can't win either way.

  • Stallman warns against C# and Mono

    staceyw said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    I have no bones with Mono.  I am just looking into the future a bit.  When you look where SL has come from v1 to v3 in a fairly short time, one can see how more platforms and more features would be natural and expected.  V3 has a lot of goodness already.  Currently, it is hard to see where you hit the wall.  I think there is enouph going on that the argument will change from push to pull.  Instead of MS spending resources on pushing to different platforms (which does not scale well for any company namely because you can't be expert at everything), platforms vender will write hooks and extentions to support a SL layer.  Maybe there is or could be a thin HAL layer that venders could write.  Because of its dot net roots, adding feature libraries (i.e. wcf, 3D, GPU etc) becomes a much lower bar for MS and deployment.  Maybe Mono, for example, could become the experts in this HAL layer for all these other platforms to allow both Mono and SL and .Net to run.

    To  me I think the web's power and persistance lies in it's sheer simplicity. HTML is simple text based markup you can use Notepad and no compiler to work with. The HTML code is everywhere, it's very hard to "hide" your HTML code from your website vistors. Looking at web site source is how I first learned HTML. Didn't need a book. I think that's just the genius of it.

  • Stallman warns against C# and Mono

    staceyw said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    I have no bones with Mono.  I am just looking into the future a bit.  When you look where SL has come from v1 to v3 in a fairly short time, one can see how more platforms and more features would be natural and expected.  V3 has a lot of goodness already.  Currently, it is hard to see where you hit the wall.  I think there is enouph going on that the argument will change from push to pull.  Instead of MS spending resources on pushing to different platforms (which does not scale well for any company namely because you can't be expert at everything), platforms vender will write hooks and extentions to support a SL layer.  Maybe there is or could be a thin HAL layer that venders could write.  Because of its dot net roots, adding feature libraries (i.e. wcf, 3D, GPU etc) becomes a much lower bar for MS and deployment.  Maybe Mono, for example, could become the experts in this HAL layer for all these other platforms to allow both Mono and SL and .Net to run.

    I can tell you one thing SL3 won't do: WinForms. There are thousands upon thousands of WinForms apps in production.

    Personally I am not a big fan of web applications. I don't think too much "rich functionality" or programming logic really belongs on the web. It gets too rich you get security issues like ActiveX. So we have security measures now. But because of this in the end of the day it kind of feels like you are artificially limiting yourself in a web application; even SL or Flash. I know SL3 will support a Adobe AIR style offline mode. But hey, so does .NET it of course supports an offline mode Smiley. And Silverlight is just a subset of .NET. I rather code for .NET directly and not be limited. Just my opinion.

    But yeah the web is changing everything and TBH we are going to see LOTS AND LOTS more web apps in the future hell I think most people like live in their web browser already. But I want no part in this! Smiley Get off my lawn!

  • Stallman warns against C# and Mono

    staceyw said:
    contextfree said:
    *snip*

    SL3 with out-of-browser support and beyond will essencially make all this moot.  A dev will be able to deliver apps on all supported platforms and not worry this stuff because it is supported by ms.  c#, f#, VB.net, or any language that can produce IL.  Does bring to question how mono will then provide value.  One can write to SL once and have it run everywhere and not have to worry about porting to mono (or other) for example.

    Mono pitchmen mode activated!

    Mono is much bigger then Silverlight, it's (trying) to create the entire .NET framework and then some. And Silverlight "multiplatform" means only two platforms: Windows and Mac OS X. There is no other technology that brings C#/.NET to more platforms and devices then Mono. Mono runs on so much more..

    Mono runs on Windows, Linux, BSD, Solaris, Mac OS X, iPhones, Android Phones, Wii game consoles, processor arches: ARM, MIPS, SPARC, POWER,x86 and x64. And that's just the beggining.

    Also Mono is especially suitable for writing video game engines (nevermind XNA) and highly scientific applications: it supports SIMD instructions, something that .NET currently does not. And it has some features like C# interactive evaluation that .NET will only get in .NET 4.0

    Mono is also open source. In fact it's 100% open source: you can look at, and even modify the source code for the entire Mono project, and not get the men in black on your a$$ for daring to. Free distribution. Free modification. No compromises.

    Mono is also very modular. You can customize Mono down to the method level (without actually modifying the BCL) making it especially suitable for embedded development. You don't need to make comprises based on what some arbitrary defined "edition" tells you can do. It can scale all the way down and all the way up, one codebase, any functionality you need. No worrying about the differences between Compact, Micro, Macro, Enterprise editions or whatever.

    If you want a .NET framework with full C# 3.0, Linq, Generics, WinForms 1.0 and 2.0, ASP.NET 1.0 and 2.0, interactive shell, Silverlight + more, an intergrated and extremely powerful plugin framework (Mono.Addins), and you want this framework to support Mac OS X, Linux, Windows, and dozens of other devices and platforms. And you want it to be free both in the sense of charge and of freedom: you have only one option. The Mono option. Smiley

     

    Now for some cheesy marketing slogans:


    Mono. It's .NET. Everywhere.

    Mono. The one option for multiplatform .NET. (One = Mono; ha ha ha)

    Mono. The code monkey wet dream.

    Mono. RAD development wherever development takes you.

    Mono. It doesn't need a marketing slogan.

     

    End Mono pitchmen mode!

     

    Disclaimer: I do not work for Novell or in way affliated with the Mono project. I'm just a bit of a fan. Smiley

  • Stallman warns against C# and Mono

    contextfree said:
    Bass said:
    *snip*

    I think SkyDrive is going to be moved to the Live Framework in the future, so you could probably program against that?

    I think Live Mesh is suppose to be programmable or something. Honestally it's hard to keep track of all of Microsoft's overlapping web services on any given day. Smiley I like SkyDrive because it's not some crazy buzzword filled file storage system of strangeness. It's just a drive. In the sky. SkyDrive. Too bad it doesn't have an API. Sad