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


TexasToast TexasToast
  • Rekeying certificates - what does that ​do/mean/aff​ect?

    Is this related to the heartbleed hole exposed in openssl?  Will cause a lot of certificates to rekey.

    If you were using a version of openssl which is used on a lot of apache sites,  your private keys could have been stolen and you need to get a new certificate with new keys for your site to protect it.  (of course you need a new version of openssl that patches this problem too)


    Open sores for open source.



  • You must pay $100 to deploy your own software in Windows

    , SadCoder wrote

    Thanks for listening.

    I think you are right and I agree with you 100%.  I do a lot of apps also that cannot be publicly shared whether for myself or for some customers (confidential government etc).  Android is getting a lot of apps the other phones don't get since you can get at the hardware.   Store apps in windows just cannot do things a full blown powerful app can do.

    This being said,  I like getting my apps from a known source so they are secure.  I still don't like apps from windows store unless I know the author.   Actually I don't have any use for store apps on my laptop but I do use apps on my windows phone.   I do like android better since they have apps with no restrictions and can do things windows phone cannot do like finding cell towers and signal strength etc.  

    Bottom line is I am not against the store and apps but I want the power that Microsoft is investing in store apps such as native compile to come to the desktop.   I don't need store app technology if Microsoft keeps the desktop in line with the new features in store apps.   Whether they keep doing this is what worries me.  

  • You must pay $100 to deploy your own software in Windows

    Bas is making the point of don't use the modern app scenario.   It does not fit you.   Microsoft is doing a hard sell and putting lipstick on the pig but if nobody can use it to make money or solve their problem it will either die or change.   Windows 8 was changed to make people like it better and so will the modern app story.   Microsoft is powerful, but they cannot force change unless it benefits the users.   They try but the markets determine in the end what will happen.  I say for now, just wait it out,  it will get better.   They have already changed a few things for the better and I am sure side loading will be looked at for new applications.

  • You must pay $100 to deploy your own software in Windows

    There are other reasons to have a private application.   I might be doing a project for the Navy and they are going to have an HMI showing the status of their ship with multiple screens etc.   This is not public but also it needs a way to be distributed.   There are all kinds of markets and software scenarios that side loading would hamper.  The world is not just that simple.   Also a lot of LOB apps are tailored to a customer and delivered with some of these custom setups.

  • You must pay $100 to deploy your own software in Windows

    @Bas:It is the hip thing to do.  You get all these cool WinRT apis, native compilation and maybe your app runs on windows phone for free.   Just a guess because desktop apps run fine on windows 8.

  • You must pay $100 to deploy your own software in Windows

    @Bas: He is referring to Metro apps.  He seems a little emotional about it but he does have a point.   I know Microsoft said that desktop apps will get full support but they also somewhat always hold back stuff.  Take the native compiler,  they should have it doing desktop .net apps also to test it out.  Also,  Microsoft kind of promotes modern apps to replace desktop apps.  Right now since modern apps are not as powerful they promote little apps that compliment the companies desktop app. (like autocad with a viewer for modern apps).    I like to use a lot of small helper apps on my phone, but I personally don't need much of the garbage modern apps in the store for my laptop.   I really don't know how this all shakes out but I hope Microsoft just realizes that developers want to move their desktop apps to windows 8 for the desktop,  then they will address complimentary apps for the store.   But they need a common WinRT base to do this efficiently.

  • You must pay $100 to deploy your own software in Windows

    This will keep the Desktop going forever.   No new API is worth paying fees to run an application on a already paid OS.  Why do you think Android is popular over Apple and MS on the phone side.  I like the idea of public apps  to be certified and will pay for it so I know it is clean and some checks have been made.   There is another world where you don't need to have Microsoft involved to have an application certified by them.   Side loading is a problem but just stay on the desktop and avoid these problems.  My users are Windows 7 users so modern apps are already useless.  I cannot invest too heavily in modern apps until there are users in large numbers.   With side loading,  it just adds to the lack of acceptance for windows 8.   You have not had this application replacement problem since the move to windows from DOS.   New windows programs did not run on DOS and new modern apps do not run on Windows 7 or older.

  • .NET Native Preview announced!

    I ran one of my modern apps and the startup time is much faster.   I really need this for desktop apps where I have some heavy duty applications that will notice improvement.   There are other advantages to this that are not performance.   One of them is reverse engineering code is a lot harder.   Also,  you can optimize on the target platform better.  If your a web programmer the advantages are less,  but on the server side I see a lot of benefits.   If they extend this to use Mono's version of .net and native compile this IL  to native Linux then you really have something because you don't have to install anything into your Linux box (in theory).  Just drop the exe and run it. (I am hoping anyway)

  • .NET Native Preview announced!

    @bondsbw: Are you sure about this basic essentials?  I think you compile it for the target and the OS (whichever OS you targeted) supports the binary you generated.   Just like a C app.

  • .NET Native Preview announced!

    Here is an FAQ on it.  


    Sounds very promising.   This is going to be a great improvement in keeping .Net and C# moving forward.  I hope it can even replace microframework in the future.   This leaves C/C++ for device drivers and really gives you no reason to use C/C++ for application development.  Hopefully they even make it to target a Linux distribution.   Charge a fee to compile it in the cloud and make your money per compile and link.   That way you don't care if it goes on Linux,  Microsoft still makes their money.