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


Dave Williamson davewill here birdie birdie, get in my belly!
  • The should I give up my windows phone question

    @BitFlipper: Comes up for me although it did peg the CPU for quite some time before settling down on the mouthful of almost 400 K of memory.


    Wow. The reviews are quite glowing.

  • Is ​communicati​on to devs broken or just too fragmented

    2 years too late I ran across this when working with an Installer project.

    My.Computer.Info.OSVersion lies



  • Is ​communicati​on to devs broken or just too fragmented

    @figuerres: Yep.  The hope with the thread was to either enlighten me or come up with something because right now either I'm broken or the communication channel is broken or too fragmented to be effective.

  • Is ​communicati​on to devs broken or just too fragmented

    @blowdart:Ok. That is an area where I need to improve.  Honestly, before this I thought the rule for security updates was only the playdough inside was being changed and there were no functional changes to the perimeter.  Your example is a good reason why that can't always be the case.  Good to know.

    So far it seems the following are notification avenues:

    1. Random blog on MSDN.  Some team member who was kind enough to write it up.

    2. Email notification.  Azure billing has been good about this.  Other stuff is hit or miss or it is unknown where to sign up for this type of notification.

    3. There does seem to be a few dedicated twitter accounts that are used for notification.


    I'm sure there are other avenues and I'm just blanking on them currently.  Not that it matters.  There isn't a simplified model or consistent avenue for all it seems.  If you have other avenues please post them here as I bet it will benefit someone.

  • Is ​communicati​on to devs broken or just too fragmented

    Man. Exactly. First I've heard of this one.

    "you had 1 years notice of that one" .... curious what the notice mechanisms were on this one?

    This is what I'm trying to figure out ... the communication failure.

  • Is ​communicati​on to devs broken or just too fragmented

    @magicalclick: If "this" is in regards to the .NET versions, it isn't Azure specific.

  • Is ​communicati​on to devs broken or just too fragmented

    Yep. In Azure there was a notification recently about deprecating certain versions of the storage API.  Again a similar we mentioned this 14 hundred years ago but we decided to mention it here again as we have extended the deprecation based on usage and feedback.

    I get the sense that unless I have a dev whose sole responsibility aligns with one of the specific technologies (which is ludicrous) then things get lost.

    Wouldn't it be nice if when the RTM occurs the EOL can be stated as well?  Apparently the usual 5 year active plus 5 year life support no longer applies.

  • Is ​communicati​on to devs broken or just too fragmented

    It seems like a 1/2 dozen times this year I've received a last minute notification about technology version X being dropped and the dropped date is just weeks away.  Yet the notification mentions that it was mentioned long ago.

    Yesterday it was .NET 4 through 4.5.1 being dropped as of January 16, 2016.  Goodness we just started establishing a beach head with .NET 4.5.

    "On August 7, 2014, Microsoft announced that support will end for .NET Framework 4, 4.5, and 4.5.1 on January 12, 2016. It is recommended that customers and developers complete the in-place update to .NET Framework 4.5.2 by January 12, 2016 to continue receiving technical support and security updates. "

    The above notice came by way of an Azure guest operating system notification.  NOT even a direct something about .NET (that supposedly occurred on August 7, 2014).

    It seems like the communication channel to devs is either broken or so fragmented that it isn't having its needed impact.

    Over the past couple of years, is anyone else struggling with similar communication to dev issues?

  • No more end to end encryption

    Wow! Some folks better collectively get their hackles up.

  • October 6th ​Announcemen​ts

    , Sven Groot wrote


    I believe so. If you're on Verizon you're probably out of luck though.

    I've heard this Verizon out-of-luck thing from multiple points now.  So I went and pulled the specs for the HTC one for Verizon and for AT&T to get their listed cellular specs:

    Verizon spec
    4G LTE Band 13/4 (700/1700 MHz), CDMA/1xEVDO Rev. A (800/1900 MHz); Global - EDGE/GSM (850/900/1800/1900), HSPA/UMTS (850/900/1900/2100); E911, sGPS (simultaneous), Standalone GPS, GLONASS

    AT&T spec
    4G LTE Bands 2, 4, 5 and 17, 4G HSPA+ with enhanced backhaul, UMTS/HSPA+ 850/1900/2100MHz, GSM/GPRS/EDGE 850/900/1800/1900MHz


    Then went to the Lumia 950 XL specs:

    GSM network: 850 MHz, 900 MHz, 1800 MHz, 1900 MHz
    GSM max data speed DL: EGPRS 296.0 kbps
    GSM max data speed UL: EGPRS 236.8 kbps
    WCDMA network: Band 1 (2100 MHz), Band 2 (1900 MHz), Band 4 (1700/2100 MHz), Band 5 (850 MHz), Band 8 (900 MHz)
    WCDMA max data speed DL: 42.2 Mbps (Cat 24)
    WCDMA max data speed UL: 5.76 Mbps (Cat 6)
    LTE FDD network: Band 1 (2100 MHz), Band 2 (1900 MHz), Band 3 (1800 MHz), Band 4 (1700/2100 MHz), Band 5 (850MHz), Band 7 (2600 MHz), Band 8 (900MHz), Band 12 (700 MHz), Band 20 (800MHz), Band 28 (700 MHz)
    TD-LTE network: Band 38 (2570-2620 MHz), Band 40 (2300-2400 MHz)
    LTE max data speed DL: 300 Mbps (Cat 6)
    LTE max data speed UL: 50 Mbps (Cat 6)


    Wouldn't the LTE FDD network Band 4 (1700/2100 MHz) meet the Verizon 4G LTE Band 13/4 (700/1700 MHz) at the 1700 MHz?  Or does that 13/4 mean something else like Band 13 subchannel 4 for example?