Linux-Advocacy Digest #409, Volume #30 Sat, 25 Nov 00 10:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Curtis)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Curtis)
Re: Bug-time.... where is NT? (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Curtis)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Slightly Offtopic: MacOS X give Windows a bit of competition ("MH")
KDE2 (Xavi Solsona)
Joe Linux Advocate of the week! ("MH")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Corel To Dump Linux? ("MH")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Tore Lund)
Re: LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR ARMED FORCES SIMULATION: ("MH")
Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats ! ("James")
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (roger@x)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (mark)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 07:54:59 -0500
Tom Wilson wrote...
>
> "Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > T. Max Devlin wrote...
> > > Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 12:34:10
>
> < snip >
>
> > ....Most will benefit from the stability that Linux offers. But that's all
> it
> > has to offer that's worth mentioning to the typical user. They can get
> > the same level of stability using Win2k. ........
>
> Without resorting to flames and other foolishness, I disagree. Most of the
> vitriol statements like that draw come from years of hearing "Just wait
> 'till the next version" and "Oh, we've fixed that SR<insert number here>".
> I've been hearing it ever since Windows V1.0 (I never used it, but, had to
> sell it). The botched up MS-DOS v4.01 STILL sits sourly with me. In short, I
> can't believe this statement and most others, with a bit of experience under
> their belts, won't either. Microsoft OS's are, IMHO, released WAY too soon.
> The balance between profit and quality, historically, has been out of
> kilter. Their dominance in the marketplace is such that this needn't change.
Urhm. They're far from dominant in the server market. This is because
they can't easily bamboozle that user base. Win2k is testimony to this.
They're definitely upping the quality.
> Their past attitude, in regards to complaints or honest bug reports, was
> dismal and some of us don't forget that. To their credit, they've come a
> long way in the support department. However, some of us are a bit hesitant
> to pick up soap in the shower a second time.
>
>
> Rant Mode Off.
>
> PS: I'm having a bad NT day, so sue me!
--
| ,__o
!ACM _-\_<, A thing is not necessarily true because
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ a man dies for it.
mailto:martian*at*cwjamaica*dot*com
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 07:58:43 -0500
Tom Wilson wrote...
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8vnubl$4ujgg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:LhJT5.2681$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:pUET5.10217$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:%OqT5.2513$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Press shift when you click the OK button on the shut down screen,
> > this
> > > > > would
> > > > > > give you quick shutdown.
> > > > > > BTW, ctrl+alt+backspace doesn't restart X, it terminate it, and
> then
> > > > start
> > > > > > it, there is quite a difference here.
> > > > >
> > > > > The point is, the entire OS doesn't go down in flames as a
> consequence
> > > of
> > > > > the GUI crashing... Sure, you lose whatever it might have been you
> > were
> > > > > working on, but core processes other systems on your net might be
> > using
> > > > > don't have to be interrupted by the recovery. Plus, you don't have
> to
> > > deal
> > > > > with the corrupted file system and registry nonsense.
> > > >
> > > > To the average user, the GUI *IS* a core process, and usually the only
> > > thing
> > > > they care about on a desktop machine. Who cares if the telnet server
> is
> > > > still running if you just lost all your work in the 5 open X
> > applications
> > > > you had going?
> > >
> > > If said desktop machine was also host to a CVS repository that was
> > currently
> > > being updated or hosted a printer that was in the middle of a large
> print
> > > job, someone would, indeed, care if the machine were hopelessly locked
> up
> > or
> > > rebooted.
> >
> > It's not an average desktop machine.
>
> The point remains that GUI sub-system failures need not bring down an OS -
> As they frequently do under the Microsoft model.
The point is, that this advantage is largely moot to an average desktop
user.
> > > > And corrupted file systems don't usually happen with NTFS since it's
> > > > journaled. And I have never experienced a corrupted registry except
> > when
> > > > the hard disk developed bad spots.
> > >
> > > Key word being USUALLY.
> > > You've been very fortunate in regards to the registry. I've experienced
> > > registry corruption on two occasions. Both occasions involved drives in
> > > pristine condition. Both were lockups that occured during service pack
> > > updates. They were on separate machines that normally displayed quite
> sane
> > > behavior.
> >
> > Two occasions, out of how long time using windows? On how many machines?
>
> I cede that such corruption is rare. My point is that it indeed can happen.
I respect you for that. Some here make it out to be the intolerable order
of the day.
> Incidents referred to:
> ==============
> Machine #1: 1996
> Compaq Proliant (Model number forgotten - One of the older ones)
> Dual Pentium 166
> NT 4.0 Server
> Upgrade to SR3
> Locked, Rebooted, Rescue Disked, Foobar. Re-install everything. A-OK.
>
> Machine #2: March of this year
> Dell OptiPlex GX1 Pentium III
> NT 4.0 (FAT-16 incidentally - Not my idea - I just work here)
> Upgrade to SR5
> Locked, Rebooted, Rescue Disked, Acted like it was OK, It lied - Foobar two
> days later. Re-install everything, A-OK
--
| ,__o
!ACM _-\_<, A thing is not necessarily true because
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ a man dies for it.
mailto:martian*at*cwjamaica*dot*com
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Bug-time.... where is NT?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 13:13:38 GMT
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >>
> >> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Really, it is pretty tricky to get software to not leak,
> >> > and Microsoft has as much trouble as anyone else.
> >> ^^^^^^^
> >>
> >> you misspelled "more"
> >>
> >> Can you say "spaghetti code" ????
> >
> >You really must make your signature more concise, it's
> >longer than St. Paul's letter to the Corinthians (who
> >probably thought that St. Paul was the new gold vendor
> >down the street).
> >
> >Anyway, I've never had a good feeling about Microsoft
> >code in general. It's often ugly, and the APIs
> >take wayyyyyyyyyyyy too many parameters, including
> >parameters that are pointers to structures or are
> >"handles". Definite spaghetti no matter how careful
> >the MS programmer is.
> >
> >It arises from the Microsoft development philosophy,
> >as explicated by the former Visual C++ team leader,
> >Jim McCarthy. <paraphrase> When you commit to
> >develop using Microsoft tools, you commit to a way
> >of life. The one thing we will do is change, and
> >change rapidly. This forces everyone to work hard
> >to keep up, and gives us an advantage. </paraphrase>
> >
> >Of course, this attitude is merely a formalized
> >version of how things work in the real world.
> >The price we pay is buggy code.... spaghetti code.
> >
> >Hell, I've written spaghetti code many a time, because
> >I knew I would not be given the time to "do it right".
> >I've found that growing an API works quite well for
> >awhile. Ultimately, it grows beyond my easy grasp,
> >and new projects take longer. At some point it is
> >time to throw it out and regrow from a stronger position.
> >
> >Microsoft does this very well. Again, though, the
> >transition is always marked by an efflorescence of
> >bugs.
> >
> >Chris
>
> Precisely!
>
> Microsoft throws just about everything they did
> away and writes it from scratch. And each time
> it takes them longer to produce the next generation
> OS. And in this process they introduce more bugs
> and security problems than was produced in the last
> release.
>
> Microsoft is not like Linux in the respect that
> Linux can build on past sucesses.
>
> Microsoft has no past sucesses to build upon.
> All they seem to know how to do is to re-invent
> the wheel constantly.
>
I must partly disagree with you. If they stumble in some
very idiotic idea, then they stick with it. Maybe they
rewrite the code. But it's just a different implementation
of the same idiotic idea.
> They are more marketing hype than substance.
On that I fully agree.
>
> Charlie
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 08:41:44 -0500
T. Max Devlin wrote...
[...]
> >Win2k offers a stable environment in which I may run my
> >preferred apps, all of which are not from MS.
>
> Yes, it is a monopoly; we are aware of that. I think many may argue
> about the term 'stable environment', but that's beside the point.
>
> >I'd be beside you saying the same thing if Win9x was all there was to use
> >to run the apps I wish to run.
>
> Somehow, I doubt that.
Mr. Presumptuous strikes again. I migrated from Win9x to OS/2 in 1996
because I disliked Win9x. It was too damn unstable and OS/2 provided a
better environment to work in. A better shell.
I put aside all the Windows apps I was using and bought OS/2 equivalents.
I learnt how to use them. I also learnt OS/2 itself.
Linux provides a better solution today than OS/2 did in 1996.
If Win9x were all that MS offered, I'd either be still running OS/2 or
now running Linux. There's no doubt whatsoever in my mind about that.
Win2k irons out a lot of the hangups I had with NT. I installed it in
January and am yet to experienced a system lockup or BSOD. Do I need
better stability that this for my purposes?
> >> IOW, your whole language rant was a
> >> ruse, and had it not been language, you would have found some other
> >> miscellaneous issue to try to discredit the more functional system in
> >> order to defend your bogus choice to use monopoly crapware.
> >
> >More functional system to do what?
>
> That's the point. Presuming the answer to that question is advance
> makes for rinky-dink toys, not computers.
<chuckle> As I said, knock yourself out guy.
> >It doesn't make sense using a more
> >functional system if you're not interested in the greater functionality
> >functionality it offers over the others. It doesn't make sense running
> >this more functional OS, if it will not run the apps you wish to run in
> >it.
>
> You apparently aren't aware of the crucial nature of the application
> barrier in maintaining the illegal OS monopoly. Or perhaps you just
> want to pretend it isn't valid; I'm not sure.
Oh yes it is valid.
> >Most will benefit from the stability that Linux offers. But that's all it
> >has to offer that's worth mentioning to the typical user. They can get
> >the same level of stability using Win2k. If they hear that another OS
> >which will run their apps more stably exists
>
> Well, I guess lower prices never were a very attractive marketing point.
Their is cost and there is cost. Speaking only in terms of dollars and
cents is limited.
> Not to mention that I see no reason to hand-wave stability (and no, W2K
> merely approaches closer to such a level of stability than Win/DOS; it
> is not even close to commensurate.)
<chuckle> Again, knock yourself out. :=)
> As for whether they hear that another OS which will run their apps more
> stably exist, you seem to propose that the applications predated the
> operating system in the users experience.
No, what would make you think that?
> YOU might already be locked
> into a Windows monopoly, unable or unwilling to use any other
> applications, but most people don't have such a limited perspective.
After trying some of these alternatives, yes, I am unwilling.
> >What good is an OS without apps to run on it? What good is BeOS when
> >there are no apps for it. It's a fine OS, but useless without
> >applications. Why the hell do you think 'Wine' exists, or Odin for OS/2
> >or Soft Windows for the Mac?
> >
> >I find your line of argument largely pointless, isolated and impractical.
> >You just wish to whine don't you?
>
> Quite the opposite. You don't even have a line or argument; all you
> have is recognition that the application barrier can maintain an
> operating system monopoly almost indefinitely. Too bad Bill Gates beat
> you to it; had you had the idea three decades ago, you might be today
> the richest man in the world, but then your company would also be facing
> the federal judiciary.
<Yawn> Knock yourself out. :=)
--
| ,__o
!ACM _-\_<, A thing is not necessarily true because
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ a man dies for it.
mailto:martian*at*cwjamaica*dot*com
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 13:47:28 GMT
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> I cede that such corruption is rare. My point is that it indeed can happen.
>
> Incidents referred to:
> ==============
> Machine #1: 1996
> Compaq Proliant (Model number forgotten - One of the older ones)
> Dual Pentium 166
> NT 4.0 Server
> Upgrade to SR3
> Locked, Rebooted, Rescue Disked, Foobar. Re-install everything. A-OK.
>
> Machine #2: March of this year
> Dell OptiPlex GX1 Pentium III
> NT 4.0 (FAT-16 incidentally - Not my idea - I just work here)
> Upgrade to SR5
> Locked, Rebooted, Rescue Disked, Acted like it was OK, It lied - Foobar two
> days later. Re-install everything, A-OK
About 5 years ago our group used to avoid upgrading the NT 3.51 machines.
Our motto was "Slick the disk, then reinstall everything from scratch".
You'd think that Windozzzzzzzzzz 2000 would be much better, and maybe
it is. But, if you're planning to upgrade from NT 4 to Win 2000,
you'd better.....
"Slick the disk, then reinstall everything from scratch".
Chris
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Slightly Offtopic: MacOS X give Windows a bit of competition
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 08:54:05 -0500
Why is the MS Office suite important? I thought everything MS sucked?
wats up wit dat?
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Just went into Wellington yesturday to Magnummac to try out Mac OS X
> Public Beta. Fast, stable and easy to use, now, if Microsoft gets it's
> ass into gear and churns out Office 2001 Carbonized, it will become a
> real hit. A great combination of proven technology (UNIX) and ease of
> use (MacOS GUI) has resulted in very good OS that will propell Apple
> into the true main stream consumer areana.
>
> kiwiunixman
>
------------------------------
From: Xavi Solsona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: KDE2
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 13:53:33 GMT
I think this piece of software (KDE2) will help a lot
to bring several desktop Windows users to GNU/Linux.
Welcome to new distributions with 2.4 and KDE2 by
default (I consider GNOME inferior nowadays) will
be given. Just a little more multimedia/gaming libraries
and GNU/Linux wouldn't have rival at any fields. At
server one I think it is the very best.
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Joe Linux Advocate of the week!
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 09:00:24 -0500
"kiwiunixman" has the honors this week as being fit for linux
ambassadorship by virture of this fetid little gem of warm & fuzzy linux
advocacy.
> Glitch, what you need to understand is that he (Skully1900) is a Windows
> simpleton, however, there are the few (like dudeman) who keep themselves
> open to new ideas. The typical tall story is the complaining that the
> GUI isn't nice and dandy like Windows, I actually use my computer for
> programming and other work, whether the icons are pretty, or I can have
> hundreds of animating icons don't effect my work in the slightest.
> Skully1900, If you dislike it so much why don't you provide a better
> solution....oh I'm sorry....your one of those stupid...."I couldn't
> program if my like depended on it" type. Fuck off Skully1900 and never
> come back...oh....a quick reminder....at the rate of linux growth, you
> Skully1900 will be eventually assimilated. If you are (Skully1900)
> going to make a "contribution" actually elaborate on you experience
> rather than simply saying it sucks.
>
> kiwiunixman
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:08:20 GMT
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> BTW, Outlook Express has crashed twice this evening and I'm trying as hard
> as I can to keep off-color vernacular out of my MS related posts. <g>
As a professional MCSE (morbidly cynical software engineer),
I recommend you slick the disk and reinstall everything from
scratch. Bring along a good book.
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel To Dump Linux?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 09:12:10 -0500
"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:%_HT5.2668$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> < snip >
>
> > I have yet to see one product, ever, made by Corel that was any good.
> > The fact that Corel is dropping Linux after an investment by Microsoft,
> > is, however, interesting.
Really? Here we go again. I suppose the millions of Word Perfect users are
ALL idiots, aren't they? Of course. You say it's crap, it must be crap.
Ever used Corel Draw? I suppose you helped them write that and it's crap
too, right?
Give us all the line numbers with the GOTO's, please.
Give it a break. You want crap? Fire up any version of Netscape > 3x
including the Gecko powered slop released this week. THAT'S CRAP!
Corel Linux did get very good reviews in some PC mags, mainly for ease of
use.
Not only that, they let a stripped down version of WP be DL'd for free.
I know, F 'em anyway, right? You guys are all heart.
Second, like most Linux VAR's, they were not making money. You folks don't
tend to purchase software applications, so maybe you can draw us all out
another one of your 'business' charts and see if you help us figure out the
"whole profitability thang" would ya?
Geez!@!
And quit with the MS conspiracy crap, we've kept the movie rolling, but the
story is REAL old now.
> Considering the "quality" of their Linux port, we owe MS a bit of
gratitude
> for this.
MS gobbles up many a failing company. MS's NET initiative has more to do
with why they picked up corel than anything else. Which you would know if
you read instead of playing 'experts'
------------------------------
From: Tore Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:10:19 +0100
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 Nov 2000 17:49:46 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> >1) Considering that vi only uses main-keyboard keys (regardless
> > of QWERTY vs. Dvorak issues.....why, exactly?
>
> The movement keys are placed sensibly in vi (hjkl)
Are they? Alternatives like jkl; or ji,l seem much more symmetric to
me. It's hard to see why hjkl should be preferable in any way.
If the layout of movement keys in vi is so sensible, why has it not been
adopted everywhere - not even in world of Unix?
> But like I said, <map> is your friend. One could always remap the
> command mode bindings so that the key positions were the same as
> those on the 'qwerty'.
By all means. Both movement and editing keys should adhere to some
scheme that does not depend on either keyboard layout or language. Then
and only then might we agree upon a standard layout that made the cursor
pad superfluous.
--
Tore
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR ARMED FORCES SIMULATION:
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 09:22:23 -0500
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Political lesson on U.S. foriegn policy as it relates to the world from Non
US citizen snipped {yawn} due to the usual over simplification that strips
away anything salient and or relevant, and only once again shows the glaring
similarity that Linux + Linux users == knock the big guy has to US haters +
non US citizens == knock the big guy.
> > If you disapprove so much, why not simply go back to NZ? Seems real
simple to me.
> I am in New Zealand already, and I am quite happy. Surpisingly, we have
> access to Internet, or is there the old urban-myth that New Zealand is
> 20 years beind everyone? and there are sheep walking around everwhere?
> still there in certain countries overseas.
Oh, good. I never assumed anything. I figure the NZ's are getting along just
fine.
I wish you and your entire country well. Now, don't go away mad, just go
away.
Ah, the sheep. No, I don't imagine them walking around..unless it's in
bedrooms with French maid costumes on. Nervous little buggers over there,
huh?
> > Oh, what's wrong with the linux version of Gecko, kiwiunix-guy? Or do
you
> > just prefer win98 web browsing?
> I have two machines, this one is gradually being shifted over to
> becoming a wintel machine
Ah yes. Typical (always) response to the linux user using MS internet
software.
------------------------------
From: "James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats !
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 16:47:26 +0200
"James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3a1ad8cd$0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Guys,
>
> Have just spent a few days playing with ML 7.2 using KDE2. Must admit
that
> I am very impressed with the improvements. Even between ML 7.1 and 7.2.
> Now USB printing, USB scanning is working (albeit not by default). And my
> modem and ppp worked first time in KDE2.
> In fact all my hardware that I have tested is working OK, including
UDMA-66
> on /dev/hda. Still have to try out the specific capabilities of my
> CD-Writer (an HP9310) and DVD reader, however.
CD burning was easy enough - worked without any tweaking.
Could read the DVD filesystem, but could not find a [non-alpha] DVD player
(such as powerDVD which came with my DVD drive) to play a DVD movie. OMS
looks promising however.
>
> Well done Linux community! You now have a desktop which may stand a
chance
> against W2k. The apps are not quite there yet. E.g., downloaded Netscape
> 6 which is even worse than Netscape 4.7 (why is the file>page_setup menu
> grayed out? Cannot even select landscape mode when printing).
>
> The system seems pretty fast - once I set up UDMA-66. Is there any way
> that I can determine whether my graphics system, a NVidia GeForce256 made
> by GigaByte, is optimally configured? Dragging screens seem a bit
sluggish.
>
> James :-)
>
------------------------------
From: roger@x <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: 25 Nov 2000 06:05:13 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, mlw says...
>
>I can't understand the reason why anyone would use Java.
And I can't understand the reason anyone would use C++.
>I like C/C++
>because it can have a close relationship between what is written and
>what is executed.
so, use assembler then.
> When writing algorithms that can be important,
really? the best language to write algorithm in is pascal. It is
not C or C++ or Java actually.
>
>Java, on the other hand, is an interpreted language.
who cares how it runs. You need to take the blinders off your eyes.
The whole points of programming is abstraction, and Java provides
a better abstration than C++. In this way, Java is a higher level
to some extent than C++, and so it is better for application
development.
>
>From an engineering point of view, interpreted languages have a job, and
>compiled languages have a job.
Again, you are confused. What difference does it make for you? what difference
is it if it is compiled or interpreted or whatever? btw, You can compile
Java to a .exe if you want. So what?
> Who cares about the language?
You do. You are the one who are complaining that Linux programmers
do not like C++. Why do you care then?
>C++ is
>tedious because it has a close relationship between syntax and machine
>code.
that is why languages that provide higher level abstraction are
more productive. Becuase programmers spend the time thinking about
the problem domain, not about the subtle interactions between the
language and the specific platform.
Ada for example, is a much higher level language. People who develop
in Ada are more productive also. The same with Java, the same with
Delphi.
>Computer machine code is tedious. Java's tedium is pointless
>because while it feels like you are coding for a processor, you are
>actually coding for an interpreter.
Again, you are hung up of some irrelevent aspect. Why I code, I do not
'code for a processor'. I develop software that best represent the
solution for a physical problem. I do not, and should not care, about
the 'processor'.
>>
>> Even C is a better choice than C++.
>
>And, alas, we are back to this point. If you would go back and read the
>210+ posts in this thread, you would not post such a ridiculous
>sentence.
I agree with that statment. Ansi C, is better than C++, becuase it is
simpler.
The simple fact is that C++ use is declining every day. I get calls
from agents all the time about software projects, and I have not
seen anyone asking for C++ for a long time. They ask for Java, Perl,
C (for low level stuff), shell programming. But no C++.
C++ is dying, the same as MFC and windows programming is dying. Why?
Becuase there are better things out there now to use.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:41:20 +0000
In article <8vmht0$50m41$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <8vk07g$4qtqs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> >
>> >"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In article <8vhjjf$gh7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christopher Smith wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >
>> >
>> >> >You mean it has nothing in common for those who haven't been using
>OSes
>> >like
>> >> >MacOS and Windows their whole life.
>> >> >
>> >> >That would be, erm, about 2% of the population, if that.
>> >>
>> >> Considering the Windows and DOS have only been around over the
>> >> last couple of decades, that would require everyone to be under
>> >> 20. They're not.
>> >
>> >Your logic is flawed, computers only became wide spread in the 80s.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> No - the problem is with the term 'their whole life'. If we argue
>> that people have been using computers their whole life since the
>> 1980s then they _must_ be in their 20s. They're not.
>
>You are hanging to semantics, and you know it.
>Stop getting literal and get what he was really trying to say.
>
I understand what he was trying to say and it was, in my view,
wrong, for the reasons I state above.
Mark
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
