I tend to agree with Brian, but I would go so far as to say I hate web technologies in general. I'm not fussy, they all suck. Scripted Languages particularly. Anyone who says they are more productive with a scripting language has never debugged an application
in their life. Actually it's sad to say but in some ways VB6 was the most productive language I ever worked on, mainly because edit and continue was so snappy, you could iterate again and again with fixes and test and re-test without ever stopping your application.
I'm a hard-core C# programmer now and I do love it, but there are times when I realise just how much time I'm wasting, waiting for my computer to stop an application and/or re-compile. You'd think then that a Scripting language would be my bread and butter, but I can't live without debugging, strong type checking, intellisense, etc.
I tend to agree with Brian, but I would go so far as to say I hate web technologies in general. I'm not fussy, they all suck. Scripted Languages particularly. Anyone who says they are more productive with a scripting language has never debugged an application in their life. Actually it's sad to say but in some ways VB6 was the most productive language I ever worked on, mainly because edit and continue was so snappy, you could iterate again and again with fixes and test and re-test without ever stopping your application.
I couldn't agree more that Microsoft Update should enable automatic updates of third parties. I don't agree that the reason they don't do it is due to legal issues. After all just give a blanket disclaimer to the end user, and force the User to choose when they install an application whether it should be allowed to update itself (note that it should say how to do this manually from within the app, should the user choose not to). I write Windows apps for a living, and while Click-once addresses many of the issues, there are still non-managed apps out there that bug the hell out of me wiht update requests (Quicktime/iTunes being the biggest offender with a massive popup while I'm working on something).
Jason Cox wrote:
When XP was released everyone 'hated' it and gave it bad reviews until they actually stopped beleiving the FUD, you expected anything different during the Vista release?
I'm not so sure about that one Jason. When XP came out everyone I know embrased it with open arms. Finally, we had an OS that was built off of a solid kernel we all knew and loved (NT/2000) and not based on DOS like 95, 98 and ME.
Have you forgotten the "Woe is me, XP won't play my old DOS games" cry that came from everyone when they shifted from the Win 95 kernel to the NT kernel??
Just a little bit of history repeating... Biggest problem with Vista has is the lack of killer apps, things that really leverage all the new stuff they've put in (there's quite a lot of new stuff if you bothered to look). So yes it's a matter of time before Vista is popular, but Microsoft's finally done their part, it's up to us developers now to develop new software, new drivers etc. to make Vista show it's true colours.
littleguru wrote: Got this after a 3 seconds of black screen:
Display driver nvlddmkm stopped responding and has successfully recovered.It's like the 20th time I get this... I don't understand why Microsoft gives nVidia the "Vista certified" logo. They sure aren't!
You were forced to reboot? Mine use to just beep and do it for me, now that's convenience
I love Vista's new driver model, and I'm quite disappointed in nVidia, their drivers have always been rock solid (until now).
Unfortunately, alternate data streams are lost when you move the file to a non-NTFS system, with no warning or anything. The user experience in that case is very jarring and unexpected...
I am looking at possible options to solve exactly this problem
That was why I think WinFS was such a big part of Longhorn's original vision, allowing the OS to crack open files and put meta data inside them when they left the sanctity of the "Store".
I'd like to know what lessons Microsoft learnt from building Vista. MS took a very different attitude with building Vista, being more open, talking with developers very early on about what they were planning and giving extremely early betas.
With the delays and dropping of features that came afterwards, having feature ideas stolen by competitors, is Microsoft going to shy away from this approach?
P.S. It tears my heart out to think what Vista was set to become in the early days. Truly ground breaking stuff, I wonder how many people really understood what was going to happen to the software industry. But I guess everyone's afraid of too much change.
Get this, I was trying out a beta of Windows Dreamscene and thought I'd just chuck a 200mb wmv at it to see what it would do.
Vista froze... Not a good experience, but just as I was about to hit the good old reset button, the screen goes black, then up pops a nice little balloon telling me that my video card driver had failed, and Vista had recovered from it for me!!!!
It then proceeded to notify MS about the issue.
I was flabbergasted... Kudos to Microsoft for their efforts on this OS, it truly is the greatest. So long BSOD.
Admittedly I think I'm still running a beta video card driver, but Vista just takes it in it's stride... Fantastic.
Seems to me that for windows mobile to be a contender for the zune phone, they'd need wpf/e style graphics capabilities to compete with the iPhones UI. I would love it if it was windows mobile as this means i could write software for it in C#.