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


evildictaitor evildictait​or Devil's advocate
  • SpamSpamSpam

    , Dr Herbie wrote

    26 Pages of spam -- I can only delete them one at a time, so I'm not even going to try (plus I am at work and they don't pay me to moderate a forum).  If only I had a ban-hammer, or a batch delete  ....


    Agree. Came here to find 20 or so pages of spam. There's been several times now where I've gone through several pages marking them, but this is now so frequent that I can't be bothered anymore.

    Without some kind of "bulk-delete" for spam threads, it doesn't scale.

  • UWP slow startup times

    , cheong wrote

    @wkempf: Actually, Android device before API level 22 (i.e.: v5.0 Lolipop) uses precompiled binaries. JIT only exist on Android on v5.0+. Therefore, those Apps on older Android phones starts without JIT cost, but cannot maximize the performance with JIT (when the code is compiled at runtime to suit the system)

    IIRC, even on recent builds of Android, the whole binary is pre-JITted at boot/install time; so the only really "just-in-time" JITting that happens is for dynamically generated code.

  • Beginner's Luck

    , cheong wrote


    Btw, "owning software" does happen when you "buy" software from freelancers / SI vendors, together with the source code and the ownership transfer agreement. :P

    Government agencies do this a lot.

    Right, but the price tag for software purchases isn't $10-$100. It's more like $10k+ for a tiny project that does one bespoke thing, coded by a single person.

  • Beginner's Luck

    , Dennis​RLevesque wrote

    ... and why I prefer to own my own programs instead of licensing them.

    You've never been able to buy Windows; at least, assuming you don't have several billion dollars in the bank. It's always been available under licence. And the same is true of all software; even GPL software, which is licenced (albeit for free and with permissive terms) under the GPL.

    "Owning" software might be a convenient short-hand for licensing software, but it's not a thing that end-users do, or ever have done in the history of computers.

    In terms of your success in this endeavor? Precisely Zero. Not gonna happen. Microsoft getting people to move off Windows XP is a central part of its business plan for Windows. So while you can, of course, continue to use Windows XP yourself subject to the terms of your original licence - and you can run third-party tools to patch system components (via, say, Detours) for your and your friends if you want to, don't expect Microsoft to help you, or give you their permission to bring it to a wider group of people.

  • Jury: Google allowed to use Java APIs in Android

    , TexasToast wrote

    Oracle should spend their money on developing something new and stop paying attorneys to go to court on Lawsuits that amount to jealousy.


    That ruling is not about Oracle getting compensation on something they developed.  Sun developed Java.

    So? If Oracle didn't get legal rights for Java, they would have paid less to buy Sun, which would mean that Sun developers would have gotten less compensation for their work.

    The idea that you shouldn't be able to get money for a thing you bought as opposed to a thing you made is anti-capitalist. If you can make money from it yourself, you should be able to sell it.

    That's not to say I don't fully side with Google on this one. Interfaces (and APIs) are clearly something that shouldn't be copyrightable, because it would give platform owners (such as Windows, iOS, Android and, indeed, Java) an enormous - and in my view, unfair - advantage over other platforms innovating and competing by blocking them from being platform-compatible with software written for the huge and pre-existing platforms.

    So this is clearly a good thing for the market, and for software development generally. But let's not confuse outcome with principle. Because this judgement also means if you provide a closed-source API-equivalent version of a GPL product, the GPL owners won't have a claim on the closed-source API (since you can't copyright, and therefore can't GPL-ify) an API - just as long as none of the GPL code makes it into the product as well.

    I think that's a good thing too; but lots of people who are braying over the victory aren't doing it because of the principle that APIs shouldn't be copyrightable, but over the fact that their guy won

    It's a good decision, but I'm just saying: if you're deciding whether the outcome is good based on your opinion of Google, Oracle, Android or Java, you're Doing It Wrong (TM).

  • Chrome OS to get Android apps via the magic of containers

    , kettch wrote

    @TheTraveler: From what I understand, it's a lot easier to emulate ARM on x86, but not so much to go the other way.

    It's easy to emulate either way round; it's just about an order of magnitude slower and drains battery life like a vampire.

    That's why this is for Chrome desktops; i.e. powerful machines that you plug in. And it's worth remembering, of course, that most Android apps aren't ARM. They're Dalvik Java that's pre-JITted to ARM on phones, but can be trivially pre-JITted to x86 on desktops.

  • MS selling feature phone business

    , magicalclick wrote

    is feature phone a smart phone? 

    No, "feature phones" are old Nokia phones (i.e. the ones that aren't smart phones and don't run Windows).

    Microsoft has literally always intended to sell this part of the Nokia business. It's high-value in India, China and in Africa, but the phones don't run Windows, so it's always made more sense for them to sell it on once they could find a good buyer for it.

  • The ​transformat​ion is complete

    , BitFlipper wrote

    So they have actually since updated the MSDN homepage. So let's take a looksee... Hmm, I still don't see the "I write real applications" link.

    Click "Library".

  • Nokia dead because it didn't innovate.

    , cbae wrote

    Is that innovation or simply good packaging/marketing?

    Why can't good packaging/marketing be innovative?

  • Jeff Sandquist goes to twitter

    Yeah. Sad times at Microsoft. I know a crap-ton of good peeps from Microsoft who've left over the past 18 months Sad