Entries:
Comments:
Discussions:

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

Discussions

William Kempf wkempf
  • ISO votes to reject Microsoft's OOXML as standard.

    Chinmay007 wrote:
    It's not a complete loss, but it can cause some issues:

    1) Microsoft can revise the standard

    which means

    1) Microsoft Office 2007 must be revised along with it, creating a possible mess with two different OOXML formats running around

    -or-

    2) Microsoft Office 2007 won't support standard ISO OOXML


    I'm willing to bet most of the "comments" on the standard were looking for clarifications and more details, not actual changes that would impact the current Office.  (For example, with heard the rumblings on here about "binary blobs" that are undocumented features for backwards compatibility with older Office formats.  Fixing such an issue (if it exists) would only entail modifications to the document, and not any actual change to the existing format.)  Even if there were changes required, you'd just be looking at a new version of Office and/or some service packs.  As an XML format, if it's designed correctly, having multiple versions is a non-issue.

  • Kentsfield quad-core heat

    I have an E6600 that running the stock fan was idling at 50C.  If left running, it would eventually creep up high enough to actually cause the PC to turn off.  Under load it would kick off the alarms in PC Probe (it's on a P5B Deluxe Mobo) fairly reliably.  I bought a better cooling system for it and it now idles around 40-42C and under load remains below 60C.  I've never had to worry about temps before, so I have no idea how good/bad any of this is (though kicking off alarms and powering down indicates the stock cooling system was obviously not "good enough").  But based on my temps, that 70C sounds high?

    Now the only issue I have with heat is that though the PC is running within ranges PC Probe considers tolerable, I've now raised the temperature in the room by nearly 5F.  Room is just plain stuffy! Sad

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    Chinmay007 wrote:
    
    Are you talking about performance as in "stability"? I've nothing but problems with Internet Explorer's stability since IE4. Can't count how many times I have gotten "Internet Explorer illegal operations" over the years. Likely more then any other application. I was a very early adopter of Firefox because of this and the massive security/spyware problems. I don't use Internet Explorer 7 enough to judge it specifically, but why should I? Firefox works perfectly for me and has more (relevent) features.

    I'm not going to make any assumptions about it's codebase however. To me the final product is what matters, and Internet Explorer loses in this respect.


    We'll have to agree to disagree.  I've never had stability issues with IE.  I can't say the same for FF.  If nothing else, the memory leaks were enough to get me to switch back as soon as IE 7 came out.  I had several other stability issues with FF beyond the leaks as well.

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    double post

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    W3bbo wrote:
    
    wkempf wrote:
    Mozilla is actually what killed them.  The Mozilla products were pure trash.  Firefox was the first usable browser.  But I don't think it's likely to remain popular either.  The underlying code base is just not of high enough quality, IMHO.


    I've seen the Firefox source, on the whole it looks fine to me; if a little hard to understand initally (just like any other software project really). The only failing is that it needs more documentation.


    I've done more than see it.  I've worked with it.  For nearly 3 years.  It's the only Open Source code I've worked with that I truly don't have a good opinion of.

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    Chinmay007 wrote:
    
    wkempf wrote:
    The issues people have with Firefox, such as the memory leaks that plague them, are directly attributable to the poor quality of the code base.  IE, on the other hand, behaves rock solid, even if it's not compliant with the standards.  So, while I have never seen the IE code base, I can certainly make some assumptions.
    You can have spaghetti code that complies and runs cleanly. I don't think it's that safe to make assumptions about Internet Explorer's codebase without actually looking at it.


    Certainly you can.  However:

    1.  I didn't say the code base for FF was "spaghetti code".  There's a bit of that, but that's not what's wrong with the code base.

    2.  IE doesn't comply.

    3.  It's never "safe" to make assumptions.

    Yeah, some of those points make me sound schitso Wink.

    I'm not really making assumptions about IE's code base.  I'm making assumptions about the viability of the two browsers going forward.  IE has a track record of solid performance (ignoring it's definate issues with standard compliance) and improvements.  Firefox, IMO, doesn't have this track record.  So the only thing I can judge the future on FF on is the code base, which is definately not something in its favor.

    I'm glad for the competition that's gotten IE to start to move again.  I wish there were even better competition.  In many ways, Opera is probably better competition, but it's never gained the popularity of FF and therefore has never really been the competition needed.  Besides, I really don't like Opera's UI and suspect that's at least part of what's hindered its acceptance. Sad

    Right now, my hopes rest in IE 8, though I've not gotten the vibes I'd like from MS that IE 8 will address standards properly.

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    The issues people have with Firefox, such as the memory leaks that plague them, are directly attributable to the poor quality of the code base.  IE, on the other hand, behaves rock solid, even if it's not compliant with the standards.  So, while I have never seen the IE code base, I can certainly make some assumptions.

  • Visual Studio 2008 RTM before november 5th

    I'm not sure they are related bugs.  For me, it's the contents of the designer (i.e. the windows and controls I'm designing, as well as the new "zoom widget"), not the designer itself that fails to refresh.  It also is not tied to debugging my application.  It happens most often when I build my project and the designer has to reload because referenced assemblies have changed.  Though it happens randomly at other times as well.

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    W3bbo wrote:
    
    wkempf wrote:
    Oh, and it could be argued that the competition was "crushed" by their own failings.  They spent a huge amount of time, effort and money in trying to take Microsoft down in the courts, and left their product to stagnate in the mean time.  At the start of the legal wars, Netscape still held a large part of the market, and I believe could have stayed there if they'd concentrated on their product.  But the quality of Netscape's offerings was going down with every release, and the public saw this and reacted accordingly.


    Actually, Netscape spent a lot of time developing their pet-project: JSSS (JavaScript Stylesheets), since the W3C didn't like it and gave the alternative: CSS, the go-ahead, the Netscape guys had to implement CSS at the last minute, making Netscape 4 poor in comparison to it's rival: IE4.

    Thanks to that little indescision, Netscape open-sourced their new (at the time) layout engine as Gecko / NGLayout which lead to the Mozilla project and eventually Firefox.


    Mozilla is actually what killed them.  The Mozilla products were pure trash.  Firefox was the first usable browser.  But I don't think it's likely to remain popular either.  The underlying code base is just not of high enough quality, IMHO.

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    Chinmay007 wrote:
    
    W3bbo wrote:
    
    wkempf wrote:
    Oh, and it could be argued that the competition was "crushed" by their own failings.  They spent a huge amount of time, effort and money in trying to take Microsoft down in the courts, and left their product to stagnate in the mean time.  At the start of the legal wars, Netscape still held a large part of the market, and I believe could have stayed there if they'd concentrated on their product.  But the quality of Netscape's offerings was going down with every release, and the public saw this and reacted accordingly.


    Actually, Netscape spent a lot of time developing their pet-project: JSSS (JavaScript Stylesheets), since the W3C didn't like it and gave the alternative: CSS, the go-ahead, the Netscape guys had to implement CSS at the last minute, making Netscape 4 poor in comparison to it's rival: IE4.

    Thanks to that little indescision, Netscape open-sourced their new (at the time) layout engine as Gecko / NGLayout which lead to the Mozilla project and eventually Firefox.


    Come on, the fact that IE was bundled with Windows had something to do with it too. I remember in Windows 95 if you upgraded to IE4 it would also literarly improve the UI of the whole OS. It wasn't just a web browser, it was a operating system upgrade. (The way I saw it at the time.)


    That's an argument as to why the browser should be bundled, actually.  But in general, I don't believe this gave anyone an unfair competitive advantage.  At least half of the people I knew still ran Netscape at this point in time, despite the bundling.