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


cdwatkins cdwatkins
  • deCast - Building an Azure App Part I: Setup and Hello World

    Having already done this once, I found the hardest part was trying to take Windows Azure Storage linked into the ASP.NET project linked into .NET ria services so the silverlight app could access it.  Doing any one part of that wasnt too tough, but trying to mix the technologies together (especialy given that there is no cloud based domain service so you have to kind of write your own).

    I fear alot of people are going to skip a few steps and access the windows azure storage directly from the silverlight client, and thats just totaly insecure.
  • Erik Meijer and Matthew Podwysocki - Perspectives on Functional Programming

    You talk alot about the Maybe monad, but you never mention the Nullable type in c# that I think is the same thing.  Both say there might be a value or there might not be.  The one thing I think c# does need is just to have a "pure" modifier  (like the static modifier), which doesnt allow any side-effects by not allowing access to the global and local store (just like the static modifier doesnt allow access to the local store of the object).  And then add a new type (like Action or Function) which would be a PureFunction, so that can you pass a pure function as an argument.
  • Manuvir Das: Introducing Windows Azure

    I really like how microsoft is setting up this Azure enviroment, where every application is compleatly scallable, and protected from any kind of hardware errors.  What I would like to see though is an extention of the "developer" version of azure (the one used by visual studio), so that we can take azure applications, and run them on our machines using our bandwith.  It would be a more "advanced" version as it requires a bit more provisioning, but it would all compleatly scallability from one single computer (like the developer version of azure that already exists), to an intranet behind a company firewall, and then out on the web hosted by someone like microsoft. 

    There are several reasons for this "corporate" version of azure.  I know that you guys pay tons of money for your hardware and bandwith, and that cost will have to be passed on to us companies creating these services, while I can get much cheaper hardware and bandwith if i dont care as much about 24/7 service (not to mention all the support staff that you guys must have for this).  The second reason is that not all data can be stored out on the cloud.  Especialy very sensative data (credit card #'s, social security #'s, medical records, etc), where it just cant (for reasons of regulations or buiesness reasons) be hosted by someone else.

    I dont care if azure takes over all the machines (ie no other OS running), and I would expect to pay a per machine (or cpu/core) cost (as well as a per machine cost for each of the machines that can use the extra services like sql services).  But having a uniform way of provisioning a group of 10-100 servers, along with automatic duplication and failover on my own servers would be really nice.