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
  • Visual Studio 2008 RTM before november 5th

    Klaus Enevoldsen wrote:
    Microsoft will be giving away copies of Visual Studio 2008 RTM on DevConnections in Las Vegas which starts on november 5th.

    I read somewhere that many of the teams are already at zero bugs bounce and that they are arming the war room and the ship room soon. Cool. I wonder if there will be any releases before RC?

    A September 2007 CTP would be great!


    I'd love another release as well.  B2 has been pretty great, but there's a few remaining bugs that are annoying me to no end.  Specifically, I often end up with a designer that doesn't paint correctly.  Makes it pretty difficult to use.

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    Custa1200 wrote:
    
    wkempf wrote:
    A large part of the HTML/XHTML standards came from Microsoft.
    And failed miserably to implement a lot of it before letting it sit on the floor like a fish out of water floundering about, oh and this is just after they crushed all the competition by what will go down in history as one of the biggest monopolistic disasters. Kudos to them for trying to get back in line with reality though, but there is still some ways to go. BTW shouldn't there have been a new IE out by now according to Bill's new browser refresh each year statement?


    No, that's just ignorance.  The parts that IE fails to implement were never submitted by MS.  Further, at the time IE was more compliant to the standard then any other.  The issue was that newer versions of IE were few and only changed the UI features and not the document processing, which lead to the terribly uncompliant state of the modern IE.

    I'm not about to cut MS any slack on the poor standards conformance of IE.  However, I'm also going to recognize the contributions they made to the standard and to the fact that in the beginning they worked hard to be compliant.

    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.

  • Microsoft website on Open Source

    Why doen't the Office format count?  And what about C# and the CLR?  They've also contributed to most ISO standards.  A large part of the HTML/XHTML standards came from Microsoft.

  • Oh no, not again...

    1.  This is old news.  Didn't check to see if it was posted here or not, but both /. and digg talked this one to death.

    2.  Technically, this isn't a root kit.

    3.  It still wasn't a smart move.

  • upgrade to office 2007?

    Lloyd_Humph wrote:
    Nosey: What the hell is a hedge fund?


    I never understand people who ask questions that literally take 5 seconds to lookup via Google in an online forum where it is likely to take 5 hours to get a reply. Smiley

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedge_fund

  • upgrade to office 2007?

    harumscarum wrote:
    

    I got an email last week saying I could upgrade to Office 2007 if I so desired. So for those of you who work for a living and use 2007 is the upgrade worth it? I know it has a new UI but was just wondering if there were enough new features to prompt an upgrade. Is there also a performance hit when running Office 2007, particularly Outlook?



    It's mostly subjective, but personally I really like the new Office.  In particular, I'm grooving on Outlook 2007.  Performance seems to be a little better for a few things in outlook, though some of the new features are what have me sold.

    There's a To-Do Bar that accomplishes everything "Outlook Today" was intended to, but in a much more convenient side bar.  I live and die by "Search Folders" (hardly ever delete e-mail, and always leave it sitting in the Inbox, but despite that I have e-mail handily filed away under folders, often in multiple folders at once), and they seem to function quicker in the new version.  "Instant Search" is very helpful.  The RSS feeds turned out to be extremely handy for a lot of internal blogs.  Categories have been updated to be more in your face and easier to use, including nice color coding.  Combine that with search folders and it becomes easy to file e-mail away with out having to "break" the whole Search Folder paradigm.  Because of the Ribbon interface in e-mail, I've had to relearn some keystrokes, which was a minor pain point, but over all, I'm loving it.

    For Word, the new Ribbon interface can take some getting used to, but honestly, it's a lot easier to use than the old cascading menus.  Otherwise, I don't use it often enough for anything beyond the standard business documentation creation to have noticed any new features worth mentioning.  And I don't use Excel often enough to have even had a reason to open it yet.

  • Cool Codec pack for vista

    I need more than DVD.

  • Cool Codec pack for vista

    blowdart wrote:
    
    wkempf wrote:
    Looks fishy to me as well (a false positive on malware detection?).

    Related question, though, what do others use for codecs?  Don't mind paying a little, if the price is reasonable.


    On XP? ffdshow


    On Vista.

  • Cool Codec pack for vista

    Looks fishy to me as well (a false positive on malware detection?).

    Related question, though, what do others use for codecs?  Don't mind paying a little, if the price is reasonable.

  • Are Virtual Function Calls Still Expensive?

    1.  Virtual calls will always have the overhead of at least one indirection (the optimizer can, in some circumstances, eliminate this, but in those cases you're not doing anything polymorphic).

    2.  The overhead of the v-call has always been just a single indirection, which has never been that expensive.

    3.  When you need a virtual call (polymorphic behavior), there's no other concept you could hand craft that would perform any better.

    4.  Premature optimization is the root of all evil (or something like that).

    If you don't need polymorphic behavior, don't use it.  If you need it, worrying about the overhead of a v-call is pointless.