The Economist thinks Vista launch will be a non-event | The Coffeehouse

corona_coder
Only Proprietary software vendors deal in absolutes.

Will the launch of Windows Vista flop? Several parties thinks so, including the Economist who thinks its time for PC makers to dump Windows and start bundling Linux. Like I said, Windows Vista is too big brother for me, but how many will spend a months paycheck on it? A whimper instead of a bang?

CyberGeek
Kittens in fishbowls are cute

A month's paycheck? Heavens no. $399, maybe, but not a full month's paycheck.

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

The article is interesting. I wish it was also accurate, tho... Sad

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

CyberGeek wrote:
A month's paycheck? Heavens no. $399, maybe, but not a full month's paycheck.

Hey, not everybody makes as much money as you Smiley

Ramanjit

I think microsoft is doing wrong by not having a strong answer to google's GWT like Visual WebGui. I feel that microsoft is more on WPF/VISTA than on the AJAX part. This is not good to for them to ignore the market and just for selling vista.

ZippyV
Fired Up

It's called asp.net, Ramanjit.

Xaero_Vincent
Sexy me

<rant>
I don't know about you guys but I'm getting tired of the perpetual debating between Windows and Linux. The debating is useless and noones opinion is influenced in the end anyway.

Why don't people just shut up use what they want already?
</rant>

Ramanjit

ASP.NET for my opinion does not give aswer to developing applications but fancy sites. If I want develop applications like Outlook web access ASP.NET does not make job easier. GWT and Visual WebGui is the only framework I found for develop web applications provide very good solution. I can develop in 5 minutes with Visual WebGUI/GWT what thats much time with ASP.NET and it will be bad to work on...

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

Ramanjit wrote:
ASP.NET for my opinion does not give aswer to developing applications but fancy sites. If I want develop applications like Outlook web access ASP.NET does not make job easier. GWT and Visual WebGui is the only framework I found for develop web applications provide very good solution. I can develop in 5 minutes with Visual WebGUI/GWT what thats much time with ASP.NET and it will be bad to work on...

You're confusing the two things; you can't compare an underlying framework with a bunch of controls.

nightski

Also ASP.NET has an AJAX framework called "Atlas" that you can download now. It makes the AJAX stuff much easier. On top of that there are some very rich 3rd party controls that can be combined with Atlas.

Ramanjit

I am not confusing. Visual webgui is framework that extends ASP.NET to support WinForms programming just as Atlas extends ASP.NET to support AJAX. This is not a component collection. I find this as a very good concept of developing web applications and I can do impressive applications in no time. This is not because richer controls it is because you have much more intuitive tool for developing applications. I programmed on Atlas and on webgui and it is uncomparable. I work with atlas when I do sites when I to do web applications I use the webgui.

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

Ramanjit wrote:
I am not confusing. Visual webgui is framework that extends ASP.NET to support WinForms programming just as Atlas extends ASP.NET to support AJAX. This is not a component collection. I find this as a very good concept of developing web applications and I can do impressive applications in no time. This is not because richer controls it is because you have much more intuitive tool for developing applications. I programmed on Atlas and on webgui and it is uncomparable. I work with atlas when I do sites when I to do web applications I use the webgui.

But Visual WebGUI is just a bunch of richer controls and a framework on top of a framework; it sits on top of the MS Ajax framework and puts a pretty face on top so it looks almost like a winforms app from the developer point of view.

However there are those of us who would prefer to think of our web apps as web apps and can quite happily draw up impressive applications using just the ajax extensions and the ajax controls. It's just another (and simpler to my mind) way of doing things.

Wanting to force everyone down the road of WebGUI removes flexibility for all of us.

Ramanjit

I not say that all should work in this concept. I think it not concept for developing sites but it is a better for developing web applications but you can arguee and have your opinion and it is OK.

That does not change my feeling that Microsoft is pushing AJAX aside for the nice UI of vista simply cause it sells and continues the monopol.

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

Ramanjit wrote:

That does not change my feeling that Microsoft is pushing AJAX aside for the nice UI of vista simply cause it sells and continues the monopol.

Without the Ajax extensions VisualWebUI wouldn't be there. I'm not convinced that WPF/E will work well for applications mind you, but giving you a framework to support web apps hardly seems to be ignoring it. MS have always provided frameworks and let everyone else write controls and UIs on top of it. Even MFC provided a bare minimum of functionality.

Ramanjit

You talk as a developer that is doing sites not as one that had to do applications.

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

Ramanjit wrote:
You talk as a developer that is doing sites not as one that had to do applications.

And why can't they both be one and the same? Your idea of an ideal framework for a web application is very different to mine.

Ramanjit

The reason that they can not be one is that the common between the two leaves developing web applications with very poor tools. you can see the visual webgui site it has a great introduction for developers that explains the difference between an application dedicated framework to a general purpose framework.

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

Ramanjit wrote:
The reason that they can not be one is that the common between the two leaves developing web applications with very poor tools. you can see the visual webgui site it has a great introduction for developers that explains the difference between an application dedicated framework to a general purpose framework.

But again you're assuming that every web application is going fit into that framework; it most certainly doesn't. You're rather guilty of snobbery over what is and is not an application. Wordpress is an application, Passport is an application, the code that drives the BBC news site is an application and none of those will fit into the visual webgui paradigm.

Ramanjit

There is nothing to do with snobbery here. Just the right tool for the right task and many developers need to write applications which are actually better of done with WinForms but are developed on web because this is what customers demand in lots of cases. These web applications can be back-ends, crms, ecms, and lots of other line of business applications that have to compromise so that Microsoft can build a tool that fits all.

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

Ramanjit wrote:
There is nothing to do with snobbery here. Just the right tool for the right task and many developers need to write applications which are actually better of done with WinForms but are developed on web because this is what customers demand in lots of cases. These web applications can be back-ends, crms, ecms, and lots of other line of business applications that have to compromise so that Microsoft can build a tool that fits all.

So instead you want Microsoft to deliver a framework that fits with what you want, but compromises others.

And back-ends certainly don't need to be written like a winforms app. MS isn't excluding "applications" as you view them, Visual WebUI builds on the tools MS delivers. Visual studio has never been about hand holding, it's been about delivering what you need to get the job done, and enabling others to deliver frameworks and controls for a narrower vertical market.

Ramanjit

I give up. Me and the one or two developers that are doing web applications will find our solution at http://www.visualwebgui.com or http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/.

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

Ramanjit wrote:
I give up. Me and the one or two developers that are doing web applications will find our solution at http://www.visualwebgui.com or http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/.

And the rest of us are just dismissed because it's not an "application" in your view. Oh well, have fun over there, don't let the door hit your (I need to watch my language) on the way out.

nightski

What is the definition of flop in this case? I am sure Vista will do very well. Will it sell many copies on January 30th? Does it even matter? Probably not.

In fact it wouldn't surprise me if Vista had a greater desktop marketshare than its competition already, pre consumer launch Wink

Darbacour

corona_coder wrote:
Will the launch of Windows Vista flop? Several parties thinks so, including the Economist who thinks its time for PC makers to dump Windows and start bundling Linux. Like I said, Windows Vista is too big brother for me, but how many will spend a months paycheck on it? A whimper instead of a bang?

Yeah right.

The 'Economist' is a non-event.

Pls don't give this turd more credit than my cats declaring this is 'The year of the Feline Desktop'

Which BTW it IS

Ray6

corona_coder wrote:
Will the launch of Windows Vista flop? Several parties thinks so, including the Economist who thinks its time for PC makers to dump Windows and start bundling Linux. Like I said, Windows Vista is too big brother for me, but how many will spend a months paycheck on it? A whimper instead of a bang?

Yup, several parties said the same thing about Windows XP. I think its high time that the Linux folk began to actually do something active about getting Linux onto the desktop, instead of wasting everyone's time, praying for MS to fail.

Jobs managed it; why can't you?