.NET expert: Microsoft is losing confidence in .NET

Discussions

News: .NET expert: Microsoft is losing confidence in .NET

  1. Richard Grimes, .NET expert & book author, has been playing with .NET since it's technical preview in 2000. Richard has also been writing about .NET for Dr. Dobbs Journal for over 3 years. Richard is stepping down from his post of commenting on all things .NET. In his farewell address, he looks back at some missteps in the development of .NET and offers words of warning about the future of the platform.

    In summary, Richard writes that the library was released too early, and I think it was too large, and gives a number of reasons for why VB.NET was done for marketing reasons instead of technological - there was no real reason or benefit of the new language.

    Richard points to Microsoft's own lack of conviction in .NET because Microsoft did not re-write many of it's core products on .NEt, instead if used .NET as a library to extend its products on - even Office and Visual Studio were not written in .NET, and "to date, [Microsoft] has not shown any more conviction to the framework".

    Talking about WinFS and it's removal from the next version of Windows (Longhorn), Richard writes that:
    rather than making this technology work, Microsoft chose to remove it. Reading between the lines, I doubt if this technology will ever return.
    Writing about the other two major new technologies for Longhorn, Richard says:
    Microsoft announced that the two other .NET technologies in Longhorn, Indigo and Avalon, would be available for other versions of Windows. Indigo is a messaging technology, so it makes sense that other versions of Windows can use it. However, I take the decision to make Avalon available to other versions of Windows as a lack of confidence in the sales of Longhorn...Microsoft has indicated that Longhorn will not be the great .NET innovation that we were lead to believe it was from PDC 2003. This indicates to me that Microsoft is losing confidence in .NET.
    Richard concludes that "Microsoft has allowed marketing to take precedence over technology".

    Full article: Mr. Grimes’ Farewell.

    Threaded Messages (246)

  2. non sense argument[ Go to top ]

    Seriously, rewriting Office in .NET is stupid. MS have a solid code base making lots of money. There's no good reason to rewrite it. I could do without VB.NET, but C# in my book is a big improvement over VB. Then I'm am totally bias against VB. Regardless of marketing or percieved commitment to .NET from MS, .NET is a welcomed advancement to me. Others will differ obviously.
  3. I have had a popular open source Java FTP library, edtFTPj, available for some years.

    http://www.enterprisedt.com/products/edtftpj/overview.html

    It normally gets around 400-500 downloads/week.

    About 18 months ago I ported it to C#, a library called edtFTPnet.

    http://www.enterprisedt.com/products/edtftpnet/overview.html

    Usage has been gradually increasing, and nowadays edtFTPnet is getting downloaded more often than edtFTPj.

    I think that is an indication that .NET is alive, well and growing - not to mention the large number of downloads of edtFTPD, our port of proFTPD to Windows/.NET.
  4. It just simply means that >NET people lacking any of FTP libs out there :p
  5. It just simply means that >NET people lacking any of FTP libs out there :p

    Yes, but why would you need FTP for .NET when you can just share a Windows drive across the Internet? I am honestly surprised that Windows-only developers are looking for solutions outside of msn.com / microsoft.com / MSDN. Who knows what this could lead to? They might start switching from MSN to AOL, or worse!

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  6. It just simply means that >NET people lacking any of FTP libs out there :p

    Exactly. Here is a review of the various FTP libs, etd stacks up ok, but with 11 other libs, there's some fair competition.

    I actually used Bea Petrovica's jFTP which has quite a few features, see the comparison.

    When C# tools are ported to Java, then I'll be impressed.
  7. Why is C# a better language?[ Go to top ]

    It would be nice to hear a reason or reasons for why C# is a better language than VB.Net? And I don't mean just because one can write memory management routines. I mean really, how many different memory algorithms are there? Why worry about writing any when so many patterns are already available via the .Net library (dictionaries, queues, stacks, etc). In the upcoming release of VB.Net many features will be available that are available in C# (generics, operator overloading for instance). But even now, I don't see very much custom code written in C# or C++ that actually take advantage of operator overloading.

    While I would prefer to have terminated as opposed to continued commands, I really could do without case sensitive coding. This is the one single issue in my mind that makes it hard as a long time VB coder to switch to C, C++ or C#. It drives me nuts to have to keep in mind that the "C type" languages are case sensitive. Frankly, I do not see a big advantage in a case sensitive language any more. Especially with all of the code editing capabilities (that can help reduce the number of keystrokes necessary to write code) of the IDE's that are available. Yes, yes I know one of the arguments for "C type" languages is portability and the typical response is "Why worry about portability when 90% of computers run Windows?". Theoretically, assembling something to MISL should allow it to run in any environment where a .Net JIT environment is installed. Of course there is that nasty issue of where MS' own MISL code calls out to Windows DLLs and COM components. Of course this isn't just limited to VB.Net. However, if someone were to write an abstract layer that could fulfill the requests being asked of the Windows components. But then there is the bothersome issue of copyrights.

    For the types of programs I write very little of it requires me to actually have to write "bare metal" type of code. When it does I abstract it out. Otherwise all of the productivity that the VB.Net environment affords me, far outweighs any perceived technological superiority that writing code in C, C++ or C# may have.

    When you think about it, its probably best that VB programmers are caged within the Windows environment. Because if they weren't, the amount of VB.Net code written would quickly dwarf the amount of "C-Type" code in non-Windows environments.
  8. Why is C# a better language?[ Go to top ]

    I really could do without case sensitive coding. This is the one single issue in my mind that makes it hard as a long time VB coder to switch to C, C++ or C#. It drives me nuts to have to keep in mind that the "C type" languages are case sensitive.

    Why? Because case-insenstive code is sloppy. Having worked with both I much prefer case-sensitive code. In C style languages, the case of a token is often used to convey meaning.

    There's nothing worse than maintaining code where the developer kept the caps-lock on. I imagine these people think that all caps text is more 'computery'.
  9. RE[ Go to top ]

    Hello,

    The WinFS file system indeed seems rather interesting one. If you are in, you can find more info about it at this source:
    http://www.ntfs.com/
  10. Richard points to Microsoft's own lack of conviction in .NET because Microsoft did not re-write many of it's core products on .NEt, instead if used .NET as a library to extend its products on - even Office and Visual Studio were not written in .NET, and "to date, [Microsoft] has not shown any more conviction to the framework".

    Why would Microsoft rewrite anything? One reason for .NET's existence is to lock everything to Windows OS as tightly as possible, and make it ever easier to do so. By binding everything to the legacy code that is profoundly Windows, Microsoft makes sure that .NET can not be copied, run on some other OS, and so on. This is exactly the reason why Mono is not .NET - Mono is Mono. Secondly, it is a great marketing tool - answer to Java and the like.
  11. Rolf,

    Don't worry, cest la vie, we'll welcome you back to the Java community. But you must behave yourself, though. :-)
  12. +1 Excellent post :-)
  13. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    Francis,

    Sorry to disturb your optimist Christmas dream.

    1) More than 120M copies of the .NET Framework were downloaded and installed (using either Microsoft downloads or Windows Update)

    2) More than 85% of new consumer PCs sold in 2004 had the framework installed. More than 58% of business PC had the .NET Framework preinstalled or preloaded

    3) Between Q303 and Q204 there was more than 30% increase in the number of .NET Framework installations in the business segment.

    4) Most of the installations of the .NET Framework are in Windows XP and Windows 2000 machines.

    http://blogs.msdn.com/brada/archive/2005/01/14/352967.aspx

    Maybe MS will write new major revenue generating products maybe they wont, that have nothing to do with .NET being a Java-competitor.

    Here is some statistic from www.it.jobserve.com,
    Available jobs for search terms Java, C#, .NET and J2EE
    (old Java maintainance jobs included)

    2003-04-03
    Java=1478 C#=282 .Net=635 J2EE=561

    2004-01-10
    Java=2276 C#=586 .Net=1006 J2EE=1105

    2005-01-19
    Java=3614 C#=1515 .Net= 2073 J2EE=1635

    So the market decides, people are "voting with their feets".

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  14. you can do better[ Go to top ]

    Oh come on Rolf. The RG's article has so many holes in it that you can easily argue the points are mis-guided or incorrect. There's no need to bring up bogus stats, when the article provides ample opportunity to show the facts do not support his assertions.

    you could atleast try :)

    peter
  15. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    Francis,Sorry to disturb your optimist Christmas dream.1) More than 120M copies of the .NET Framework were downloaded and installed (using either Microsoft downloads or Windows Update)

    So what?
    2) More than 85% of new consumer PCs sold in 2004 had the framework installed. More than 58% of business PC had the .NET Framework preinstalled or preloaded

    And my Honda has Honda parts installed.
    3) Between Q303 and Q204 there was more than 30% increase in the number of .NET Framework installations in the business segment.

    3 is 30% of 10. When you have almost no installations, it's easy to have a rapid percent increase.
    4) Most of the installations of the .NET Framework are in Windows XP and Windows 2000 machines.

    OK. Great.
    Here is some statistic from www.it.jobserve.com

    Here are a couple statistics from dice.com:

    Java: 9112
    C#: 2602

    Most .NET jobs seem to be VB maintenance.
  16. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    Most .NET jobs seem to be VB maintenance.

    This was predictable since .NET was first released. A huge amount of .NET is being used as 'Visual Basic 7', on the client side, and hardly competing at all with Java on the server side.
  17. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    Most .NET jobs seem to be VB maintenance.
    This was predictable since .NET was first released. A huge amount of .NET is being used as 'Visual Basic 7', on the client side, and hardly competing at all with Java on the server side.

    Actually most .NET positions are ASP.NET using either VB.NET or C#. I'm not sure where the original author got his information on most projects being VB maintenance but I can say from my own personal experience over the past 4 years of working with .NET, I have yet to work on a project that wasn't a from-scratch rewrite of an application written in some other technology. But that isn't maintenance.
  18. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    I'm not sure where the original author got his information on most projects being VB maintenance but I can say from my own personal experience over the past 4 years of working with .NET, I have yet to work on a project that wasn't a from-scratch rewrite of an application written in some other technology. But that isn't maintenance.

    I have no figures to say whether or not 'most' new .NET projects are Visual Basic 'maintenance', but job site searches show that there is a lot going on. After all, what do VB6 developers do? VB.NET is the intended upgrade.
  19. WinFX. managed code...[ Go to top ]

    He did not mention WinFX, which will take place of Win32 and to my knowledge largely managed code. If MSFT does not believe in .Net why would they do something like this. To promote .net you have to write everything in .Net ???

    Well, did Sun rewrite everything in Java?

    Web technologies have been static for years (HTML and Javascript.. all the web frameworks utlimately render these even if it PHP, ASP or JSP), Avalon/XAML is the next frontier. I dont see anything wrong with MSFT promoting it. (be honest, are we really happy with current web technologies? )
  20. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    Francis,

    Sorry to disturb your optimist Christmas dream.

    1) More than 120M copies of the .NET Framework were downloaded and installed (using either Microsoft downloads or Windows Update)

    ..

    Rolf, at that rate it will never catch up to JBoss.

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  21. java vs. .net...again[ Go to top ]

    Why is it that Java vs. .Net causes such zealous debates. Each serves a particular purpose and serves that purpose well. I have always thought that if you want to be a good mechanic you cant just work on european cars and not say japanese. Any good architect/developer/whatever should be able to solve the business problem with what ever tool solves it the best.

    As for the numbers of job postings such as say dice.com:

    Java: 9112
    C#: 2602

    In my view that means 11714 jobs for someone like myself who can do both :)

    Q
  22. java vs. .net...again[ Go to top ]

    Any good architect/developer/whatever should be able to solve the business problem with what ever tool solves it the best.

    Ah, but really good software developers and architects add to their toolset with both libraries of re-usable code and experience. It makes sense for most developer groups to standardise on one language for most situations. Otherwise:

    developer1: "This new project could re-use that tax calculation library we wrote last month - where is it?"

    developer2: "Here.. it's fast and versatile. We wrote it well."

    developer1: "OK - let me load it up in Eclipse on my Linux machine"

    developer2: "Er..."

    developer1: "What the *^%&! Its in Visual Basic!"

    developer2: "Well, the boss said VB.NET was the best tool for THAT job"

    I believe that having years of detailed experience of one language and its libraries, along with the ability to re-use code in different projects and platforms, is far more important than being able to do Java AND .NET AND PHP AND etc., etc.

    So, the choice of development language can be very
    important, as it can be a decision that will have consequences for a company for years.
  23. java vs. .net...again[ Go to top ]

    Any good architect/developer/whatever should be able to solve the business problem with what ever tool solves it the best.
    Sure. But I would like to have some hair/mind/money left when I am done.
    As for the numbers of job postings such as say dice.com:Java: 9112C#: 2602In my view that means 11714 jobs for someone like myself who can do both :)Q
    Me too. But I'll take the Java ones first any day.
  24. the trend = "writings on the wall"[ Go to top ]

    The results are meaningless unless you have the results for one or two years back. These searches never can be accurate but if you hold all parameters constant and measure over a period of time you get a consistent picture, statistically significant.

    BTW. I. published my first results here in TSS 3 years ago

    Elementary dr. Watson.

    Why don't you try to search on c# or vb or .net? :)

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  25. the trend = "writings on the wall"[ Go to top ]

    The results are meaningless unless you have the results for one or two years back. These searches never can be accurate but if you hold all parameters constant and measure over a period of time you get a consistent picture, statistically significant.BTW. I. published my first results here in TSS 3 years agoElementary dr. Watson. Why don't you try to search on c# or vb or .net? :)RegardsRolf Tollerud

    OK - let's look at one of measures of language use that YOU have considered useful: the Tiobe index.

    Java: 18.9%, second only to C at 19.5%.

    Where are the .Net languages?

    Well, Visual Basic (with VB.Net not distinguished) is at 6.9%. C# is at a dramatic... 2.5%!

    Also, I do find it rather ripe for you to use the phrase 'statistically significant' as you are one of the worst abusers of statistics I have even seen.
  26. the trend = "writings on the wall"[ Go to top ]

    !Also, I do find it rather ripe for you to use the phrase 'statistically significant' as you are one of the worst abusers of statistics I have even seen.
    +1
  27. writings on the wall[ Go to top ]

    The Tiobe index?

    Java is down from 23.11 to 18.87% - that is a ca 20% decrease in one year only.

    "one of the worst abusers of statistics I have even seen"

    So you don't believe my numbers? Hmm, perhaps the Java guy and Spring coder Yann Caroff has more credibility?

    Figures from UK's JobServe (it.jobserve.com/)
    For the past 5 days according to Yann Caroff

    January 29, 2003
    http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=17627&article_count=44

    .NET: 455
    WebLogic: 182
    WebSphere: 140
    Java: 1396
    C#: 186

    Mars 9 2005 For the past 5 days

    .NET: 1411
    WebLogic: 332
    WebSphere: 325
    Java: 2282
    C#: 1031

    (My numbers posted above was "for the past 7 days").

    Please tell me whats abusing with it.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  28. writings on the wall[ Go to top ]

    Please tell me whats abusing with it.RegardsRolf Tollerud
    Well their statistically meaningless for a start. What do you think they prove?
  29. writings on the wall[ Go to top ]

    The Tiobe index?Java is down from 23.11 to 18.87% - that is a ca 20% decrease in one year only.

    Yes, but a decrease in what? The Tiobe index is meaningless. It does not indicate jobs, projects, number of developers... it is very hard to come to any conclusion about what this index DOES measure... I certainly don't believe that C# is anything like as unpopular as Tiobe suggests.

    My point is that all such analyses are of very little value... but you keep quoting them and picking whichever suits your argument.
    "one of the worst abusers of statistics I have even seen"So you don't believe my numbers? Hmm, perhaps the Java guy and Spring coder Yann Caroff has more credibility?Figures from UK's JobServe (it.jobserve.com/) For the past 5 days according to Yann Caroff January 29, 2003 http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=17627&article_count=44.NET: 455 WebLogic: 182 WebSphere: 140 Java: 1396 C#: 186 Mars 9 2005 For the past 5 days.NET: 1411 WebLogic: 332 WebSphere: 325Java: 2282 C#: 1031 (My numbers posted above was "for the past 7 days").Please tell me whats abusing with it.RegardsRolf Tollerud

    I don't believe any of these, or at least I don't believe that any real conclusions can be drawn from them.

    What does an increase in .Net mean? Does it mean there are lots of new exciting .Net projects, or does it mean that legacy VB6 code is being converted to VB.Net (or even C#) which means that .Net is, in those cases, being treated as little more than an upgrade, not competing with anything...

    There may be some objective measure of how successful a development language or technology is (perhaps lines of code written per year?), but whatever it is, it would involve a huge amount of research - and probably by that time the market would have changed anyway.
  30. writings on the wall[ Go to top ]

    .NET: 455
    WebLogic: 182
    WebSphere: 140
    Java: 1396
    C#: 186

    Mars 9 2005 For the past 5 days

    .NET: 1411
    WebLogic: 332
    WebSphere: 325
    Java: 2282
    C#: 1031


    The most obvious mistake here, is that you've listed .NET and C# separately. A quick search shows that the two searches often yield the same jobs, as .NET, C# and VB.NET are often come up under the same job.

    Secondly and closely related to the first point; it's rather odd that you included figures for .NET and C#, but declined to include searches for both Java and J2EE.

    Now why's that Rolf?

    The first couple of searches for J2EE, came up with results that didn't mention Java at all. In fact, while I was playing about with this, I found jobs that mentioned JMS, JDBC, Vignette and a few other technologies that use Java, but didn't actually mention Java in the job spec.

    Thirdly, it is often the case that job specs just lump in every technology that th company has ever looked at, whether or not the department is using it or not.

    In short, you're wrong. Again. You can't just count job ads (missing out results that will kill your argument stone dead); it's often not as simple as that.
  31. Ray,

    "In short, you're wrong. Again. You can't just count job ads"

    Ok fair enough, but let us see.

    Regular as a clock comes a test, study or benchmark where C#/.NET beats the hell out of Java. And every time, regular as a clock comes the squirmy excuses, the different explanations why this is a fake, bought by Microsoft, completely invalid, irrelevant, incorrect etc etc.

    Any numbers of .NET vs Java use is lies, lies, and damn statistic in the same vain.

    Can't you see how ridiculous this is?
    Can’t you see that there never are any positive figures about Java?
    Can't you calculate the odds winning against Microsoft?

    In short, can’t you use your head?

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  32. Java is dead, long live Java[ Go to top ]

    C# = Java. The next generation.

    It has been successfully forked.
  33. Can't you see that there never are any positive figures about Java?

    Amazing. You have actually presented positive figures about java in this very thread:

    "January 29, 2003: Java: 1396
    Mars 9 2005 For the past 5 days: Java: 2282"

    According to you the Java job market has grown 160% over that period.

    You have actually managed to contradict yourself in the same thread - an awesome achievement!
  34. the committee is iin a state of denial[ Go to top ]

    Regular as a clock comes a test, study or benchmark where C#/.NET beats the hell out of Java. And every time, regular as a clock comes the squirmy excuses, the different explanations why this is a fake, bought by Microsoft, completely invalid, irrelevant, incorrect etc etc.
    Well I wonder why that is...
    Microsoft originally claimed .NET 28 times as fast as Java. After subsequent benchmarks this was proven to be utter nonsense as their performance was very similar. I can't believe that actually tried to claim TWENTY EIGHT TIMES.

    Then we had Rolf deciding to stick his nose into a benchmarking exercise at JavaLobby last year. He was utterly convinced that C# was faster. After a couple of comparisons with one of the JL guys it turned out he was completely wrong.

    Now remind us why we should treat benchmarks from MS and Rolf with respect.
  35. the Java camp is learning[ Go to top ]

    Hello there, you want to rewrite history in good old Soviet tradition?

    Microsoft claimed that .NET was 28 times as fast as the original first implementation of Petstore which was true under heavy load.

    After several panic attempts of rewrite the results is still 2-3 times behind with any EJB Application Server.

    Using only Spring/Tomcat/iBatis though, that would give you similar performance, more or less. It is in this direction it goes, isn't it?

    EJB combined with over-architecturing was the cause (as in countless other projects wasting billion upon billions probably causing the recession 2000-2003).

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  36. the Java camp is learning[ Go to top ]

    Microsoft claimed that .NET was 28 times as fast as the original first implementation of Petstore which was true under heavy load.After several panic attempts of rewrite the results is still 2-3 times behind with any EJB Application Server.
    You are wrong. According to:
    http://gotdotnet.com/team/compare/Middleware30.pdf
    The performance of the Java and C# versions were very similar.
    I must admit it is funny that you are proven wrong by information posted on a Microsoft run website.
    Using only Spring/Tomcat/iBatis though, that would give you similar performance, more or less. It is in this direction it goes, isn't it?EJB combined with over-architecturing was the cause
    As pointed out above you have already been proven wrong. In fact use of Entity EJB resulted in IMPROVED performance in the study I referenced above.

    No futher mention of your little blunder at JavaLobby?
  37. ?[ Go to top ]

    This is not the original Sun Petstore application. This is not even the first TMC Performance Case Study that was released October 2002. (Round II)

    "In fact use of Entity EJB resulted in IMPROVED performance.."

    Sometimes it is best to let your opponents words stand for itself.. ;)

    I am finished discussing EJB entity beans once and for all and so are most people. Why don't you ask Vic?

    The Javalobby results (http://www.javalobby.org/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=14768&tstart=-1) was that C# beat Java all the time as long as they were using the same technology. But in the end they used a new and different library (Java.NIO) that does not exist in C# yet. When it does, we will run the benchmark again. As Java.NIO still is not that much used I assume there are some drawbacks with it that was not coming forth in the debate.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  38. Re: ?[ Go to top ]

    This is not the original Sun Petstore application. This is not even the first TMC Performance Case Study that was released October 2002. (Round II)
    The bottom line is that the performance of the two was very similar even according to a Microsoft run website. A little difficult for YOU to argue against.

    Hence proving that the 28 times faster claims by MS were utter nonsense. That brings me back to your orignal question of why Java folks don't respect MS benchmarks. I think the history explains everything.

    "In fact use of Entity EJB resulted in IMPROVED performance.."Sometimes it is best to let your opponents words stand for itself.. ;)
    Sound technical argument Rolf ;)
    The Javalobby results (http://www.javalobby.org/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=14768&tstart=-1) was that C# beat Java all the time as long as they were using the same technology. But in the end they used a new and different library (Java.NIO) that does not exist in C# yet. When it does, we will run the benchmark again. As Java.NIO still is not that much used I assume there are some drawbacks with it that was not coming forth in the debate.RegardsRolf Tollerud
    So you DID lose and even admit it.
  39. stop the nonsense[ Go to top ]

    Jack,
    The bottom line is that the performance of the two was very similar even according to a Microsoft run website. A little difficult for YOU to argue against..
    Hence proving that the 28 times faster claims by MS were utter nonsense.

    Again: it was the first orginal PetStore that was 28 times slower!
    The bottom line is that the performance of the two was very similar even according to a Microsoft run website. A little difficult for YOU to argue against.

    No. That study (July 21, 2003 Round III) are using caching to obfusicate the results.

    In September TMC released a new study (Round IV) comparing WebSphere J2EE vs .NET by productivity, manageability, reliability, and performance. This time caching was not allowed and accordingly Websphere was 2-3 times slower.

    Links:

    TMC Releases Productivity Case Study Results (Round III)
    July 21, 2003
    http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=20476

    TMC Releases Performance Case Study Results (Round III)
    July 30, 2003
    http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=20655

    Mackie Jackson comments on Round III:
    Political correctness is now invading the software industry. Anyone who has seriously worked with .Net and j2ee will quickly realize that .net out performs j2ee by a wide margin. This is political correctness gone amuck.


    Caching not allowed (Round IV)
    TMC Completes Massive IBM J2EE / .NET Study with 394 comments!
    http://theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=28847

    Quoting from EWeek article (Round IV)
    The comparison not only involved productivity and performance, but also cost. According to the study, the Microsoft results are based on a system running Visual Studio .Net running on Windows Server 2003 and costing $19,294. The IBM results are based on a system running WebSphere Network Deployment edition running on Red Hat Linux and costing $253,996.

    Horia Muntean:
    Damn thing! This is overwhelming! We better surrender and move on to meet the future: .NET
    From where can I download a free .NET stack so I can start learning?

    Don't forget to notice how the J2EE productivity is far behind.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  40. P.S.[ Go to top ]

    Any consultant with just a few years practical experience under his belt understands that a solution with 2 million LOC less will always win over another solution that does the same thing but with 2 million LOC more.

    No study necessary.
  41. P.S.[ Go to top ]

    Any consultant with just a few years practical experience under his belt understands that a solution with 2 million LOC less will always win over another solution that does the same thing but with 2 million LOC more.No study necessary.
    No fair hiding lines though. Hint: If you stick your hand in the air and put one finger up, how many fingers are you holding up?


    Always? I wouldn't say always. Way too many varibles. Sometimes more LOC is better.
  42. Statistics[ Go to top ]

    Either way...

    I only believe in Statistics that were faked by myself
  43. this smoke and mirrors game is so second grade. It's so easy to pick part the authors article point by point. Paul already did most of the work for you. But given that you use .NET, I would think a seasoned .NET developer would be able to point out additional flaws in the author's rant. You don't even have to be original, you can just rehash what others have already suggested. Here, I'll help you out.

    The authors assertion that MS is not committed to .NET is not supported by the latest C# triggers in Yukon. Given the important of Sql Server within the .NET stack, the inclusion of C# triggers and message queuing in Yukon shows the opposite.

    enjoy

    peter
  44. Peter,

    There are 2 sides of C#/.NET.

    1) As a Java competitor for contract consulting.
    2) As "Operating System" (see below)

    If MS rewrites SQL Server, Sharepoint, Exchange Server, Office Suite, etc, TODO in C#/.NET, then what they would have in reality is a Virtual Operating System that doesn't care about the underlying hardware.

    I have always perceived this no 2) option as an emergency exit, to have in reserve if ever windows should become obsolete. "The Fox always have two exits".

    At the moment though everything is going well for Microsoft and Windows (2003 advanced Server, Longhorn) and it would be premature to exercise the second option, there is no need.

    Anyway to have a second option is good policy.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  45. #2 is the moon[ Go to top ]

    Ok, I normally don't defend MS or .NET, but the idea of rewriting Sql Server or Exchange in C# is far fetched. I'm guessing the code base is large enough that it would take 3-5 years at best. chances are, windows will be around for another 20 years atleast. On the topic of "releasing too early", I take the OSS perspective. Release often, release early. no single person can know how users will use a piece of software. giving users access to the software is ONE way of getting feedback. Of course most user's won't provide feedback. Usually, only a dedicated few will try out new releases and report back. So a company can easily create a special list of testers who they can trust to alpha/beta test. MS already has a program for that, so the release "too early" argument is a house of cards.

    peter
  46. "I'm guessing the code base is large enough that it would take 3-5 years at best. chances are, windows will be around for another 20 years atleast".

    Yes it is not going to happen tomorrow. But you have to admit that MS think ahead, they do have the "long range view"-. Anyway I did a visit to your Dingo site and become interested. I agree that XSD has its shortcomings but was hoping somehow that the XSD Inference tool would kind of sort out things a little? I have always been surprised that no such good tool exists. Do they expect me to write a XSD Schema by hand? (shudder)

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  47. Who knows[ Go to top ]

    I haven't kept track of schema support in the next VS.NET release, but most of the developers I worked with recently just use the XSD to import tables from Sql Server and then run it by XSD. I use XmlSpy to write schema or I write it by hand. It's really not that hard if you stick to just complexType and simpleType. but I digress. I think MS would be better off focusing on staying ahead. A virtual OS on top of .NET doesn't feel like a credible approach to me for several reasons.

    1. how will hardware abstraction layer work? in NT it was HAL.

    2. .NET has a ton of windows specific hooks. Not in the main VM or C#, but all the gui warper, msmq wrappers and ado wrappers.

    3. what's the performance cost? given that users will not accept something that is 2x slower just because it's a virtual OS. if it was, there would be a bigger market for OS emulation software. the market doesn't support the notion of a mainstream virtual OS. I could be wrong.

    all of these reasons tell me, MS is committed to windows and .NET because they compliment each other. For many business apps, it is easier to use C#.
  48. #2 is the moon[ Go to top ]

    Ok, I normally don't defend MS or .NET, but the idea of rewriting Sql Server or Exchange in C# is far fetched.
    I don't care if it is written in C# (or any other .Net language). But I do care if I can use it seemlessly from .Net. If it doesn't work, I don't want a COM interop error or the typical MS error. Especially Exchange. Try performing Exchange (not outlook) tasks from .Net. I've given up till Exchange's SDK is .Net.
  49. ... On the topic of "releasing too early", I take the OSS perspective. Release often, release early. no single person can know how users will use a piece of software. giving users access to the software is ONE way of getting feedback. Of course most user's won't provide feedback. Usually, only a dedicated few will try out new releases and report back. So a company can easily create a special list of testers who they can trust to alpha/beta test. MS already has a program for that, so the release "too early" argument is a house of cards.

    I agree with the general concept here but I can't agree with you hen it comes to software that requires a licence purchase. The problem with Microsoft specifically is that their code is frequently little better than beta standard by the time it goes production - and us developers are expected to shell out significant cash to take part in their 'extended beta'.

    As a user of free open source I expect to get involved in finding and resolving bugs in newer OSS products/libraries, but there is no way I would tolerate being asked to pay for a product that turns out not to be production quality.

    I give you Visual SourceSafe as an excellent example - I still hear regular complaints from my .Net colleagues that it delivers the wrong version of a file. How long has this product been on the market? MS have such confidence in it that they have written a new CM tool for Visual Studio Team Server...

    If a company expects you to pay for a licence, then the software must already be of production quality. Any company that expects people to pay to finish a beta test.... (I am reminded of the Sinclair Spectrum Microdrive, which was released before it was fully tested. The early users ended up, quite literally, performing tests on behalf of Sinclair Research to get the thing working reliably - showing my age now...)
  50. thanks for the reminder[ Go to top ]

    ... On the topic of "releasing too early", I take the OSS perspective. Release often, release early. no single person can know how users will use a piece of software. giving users access to the software is ONE way of getting feedback. Of course most user's won't provide feedback. Usually, only a dedicated few will try out new releases and report back. So a company can easily create a special list of testers who they can trust to alpha/beta test. MS already has a program for that, so the release "too early" argument is a house of cards.
    I agree with the general concept here but I can't agree with you hen it comes to software that requires a licence purchase. The problem with Microsoft specifically is that their code is frequently little better than beta standard by the time it goes production - and us developers are expected to shell out significant cash to take part in their 'extended beta'. As a user of free open source I expect to get involved in finding and resolving bugs in newer OSS products/libraries, but there is no way I would tolerate being asked to pay for a product that turns out not to be production quality. I give you Visual SourceSafe as an excellent example - I still hear regular complaints from my .Net colleagues that it delivers the wrong version of a file. How long has this product been on the market? MS have such confidence in it that they have written a new CM tool for Visual Studio Team Server...If a company expects you to pay for a licence, then the software must already be of production quality. Any company that expects people to pay to finish a beta test.... (I am reminded of the Sinclair Spectrum Microdrive, which was released before it was fully tested. The early users ended up, quite literally, performing tests on behalf of Sinclair Research to get the thing working reliably - showing my age now...)

    I humbly thank you reminding me about the $$ factor. I forgot about that a second there.

    That is why I use and prefer OSS. If commercial products aren't better than the Open alternative, I definitely wouldn't shell out money for it. There are applications worth paying for like Photoshop, final cut pro, and ultraEdit to name a few I like.
  51. I agree with the general concept here but I can't agree with you hen it comes to software that requires a licence purchase. The problem with Microsoft specifically is that their code is frequently little better than beta standard by the time it goes production - and us developers are expected to shell out significant cash to take part in their 'extended beta'.

    Microsoft has a few crappy products, but most of their software exhibits pretty good (and often very good) quality.

    I know it's popular to constantly bash the quality of Microsoft software compared to FOSS, but I've seen the source code to a lot of both, and sometimes it's amazing to me that a lot of that GNU software even compiles. It's built like crap in general, with relatively few exceptions to that rule. (And it continues to amaze me how well it seems to work, despite its general crappiness.)

    Microsoft's problem isn't the software quality, it's the close-mindedness and arrogance that comes naturally with being so powerful as to have no peers (or even comparables) whatsoever in one's own market. They are their own worst enemy.

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  52. They (Microsoft) are their own worst enemy.
    Not while I'm alive they're not!
  53. The results are meaningless unless you have the results for one or two years back.

    They aren't meaningless if you are looking for a job now. And that's really all those numbers show.
    These searches never can be accurate but if you hold all parameters constant and measure over a period of time you get a consistent picture, statistically significant.BTW.

    Really? One site in a single country and you think that's stastically signficant?
    I. published my first results here in TSS 3 years ago

    Color me impressed.
    Elementary dr. Watson.

    Good one. I have heard that since grammar school.
    Why don't you try to search on c# or vb or .net? :)RegardsRolf Tollerud

    Because .net is a just a marketing tool that works as a bin for anything MS wants to call .NET

    For example, I had to install ".NET" dll in order to run a Java application. Does that make this Java app part of .NET?

    Another exampel is the fact the VB is part of .NET. Eventually almost all VB apps will have to upgrade to .NET and viola! they are using .NET. It's just a name game. It doesn't really mean anything. I don't know any VB programmers who think moving to .NET actually changed anything significantly.
  54. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    Francis,Sorry to disturb your optimist Christmas dream.1) More than 120M copies of the .NET Framework were downloaded and installed (using either Microsoft downloads or Windows Update)2) More than 85% of new consumer PCs sold in 2004 had the framework yadda yadda blah blah blah... etc.
    The number of people running Windows update and installing the framework is totally meaningless. Most of them don't even know what it is.
  55. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    Francis,Sorry to disturb your optimist Christmas dream.1) More than 120M copies of the .NET Framework were downloaded and installed (using either Microsoft downloads or Windows Update)2) More than 85% of new consumer PCs sold in 2004 had the framework yadda yadda blah blah blah... etc.
    The number of people running Windows update and installing the framework is totally meaningless. Most of them don't even know what it is.

    Well, that's the point. Most of them shouldn't need to know what it is, it's a development environment not a user product. Of course to run a simple Java applet in my IE browser, I've get nice (and useless) icons on my desktop that I get to delete.
  56. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    Of course to run a simple Java applet in my IE browser, I've get nice (and useless) icons on my desktop that I get to delete.

    You don't have to. And even so, such little pain for such great joy.
  57. It is not Christmas yet..[ Go to top ]

    4) Most of the installations of the .NET Framework are in Windows XP and Windows 2000 machines.
    Just when I though they were all going to be on Linux and Solaris ;)
    Remember all the cross-platform claims that were being made when it was released??

    Installing .NET on Windows - fancy that.
  58. only Rolf can silence himself[ Go to top ]

    Dear Friend,

    Truth of the matter is that nothing can silence a person if that person is not willing to be quiet.
  59. Rolf,Don't worry, cest la vie, we'll welcome you back to the Java community. But you must behave yourself, though. :-)

    ROTFL !

    Cheers

    Remi
  60. Why here ?[ Go to top ]

    Why post this at tss.com and not tss.net ?

    Discussions about the relevance of VB.NET are as
    relevant here as entity bean versus POJO's are
    for .NET developers.
  61. Why here ?[ Go to top ]

    There were two reasons this wasn't posted as a news item on TSS.NET. The first is out of respect for Richard Grimes who in spite of his current bizarre opinions has been a strong supporter of the .NET community. The second, and primary reason is that Joe .NET Developer doesn't really care if Richard Grimes leaves in a huff. His accusations are nothing that we haven't heard a dozen or so times (on this site alone! :-)) So why make a bigger deal out of it than it is?
  62. Why here ?[ Go to top ]

    The second, and primary reason is that Joe .NET Developer doesn't really care if Richard Grimes leaves in a huff.

    This _should_ be on TSS.NET regardless. It's about .NET, it's from an expert, it says things that a many of us .NET architects believe, not all of it is true, but a splash of truth hurts and really .NET'ers should be having there say on it. Richard can handle the criticism if he wrote the article.
  63. Why here ?[ Go to top ]

    This _should_ be on TSS.NET regardless. It's about .NET, it's from an expert, it says things that a many of us .NET architects believe

    Wow. I am stunned. There really are .Net architects? Don't you just read what Microsoft says to do and implement it? :)
  64. Why here ?[ Go to top ]

    This _should_ be on TSS.NET regardless. It's about .NET, it's from an expert, it says things that a many of us .NET architects believe
    Wow. I am stunned. There really are .Net architects? Don't you just read what Microsoft says to do and implement it? :)

    Gold :)

    Hey, it takes time to read all those patterns & practices articles. And those dang "Application Blocks" are over-engineered.
  65. I resemble that remark[ Go to top ]

    Yes, there are real architects who work with .NET, I am one. Now granted we don't tend to preach and prattle hoping to make ourselves look important by latching on to every new open source framework that comes down the road, you know the way architects in other technologies do. But we're still here, quietly getting the job done.
  66. I resemble that remark[ Go to top ]

    Yes, there are real architects who work with .NET, I am one. Now granted we don't tend to preach and prattle hoping to make ourselves look important by latching on to every new open source framework that comes down the road, you know the way architects in other technologies do. But we're still here, quietly getting the job done.
    So are you using Nant and NHibernate and Spring.Net and NUnit and ... ? I would expect that someone who is an .Net "architect" has no choice (and should) look outside the Microsoft provided (or will provide some life) tools. If you only use what they provide or wait until they do, and only do it how they say - well, their is little left to architect. I just came off of a .Net project and we ended up using the above tools and not because we "latched on to every new open source framework." Now if there were a good .Net AOP solution.
  67. I resemble that remark[ Go to top ]

    So are you using Nant and NHibernate and Spring.Net and NUnit and ... ?

    Actually yes, at least sometimes. It depends on the client. But I can tell you that I do have NUnit and log4net installed on all of my PCs and use them in most projects.

    The dependency on Microsoft happens less at the Architect level than it does at the developer level where the person doesn't have the experience to know if Microsoft is leading them astray, ala SqlDataSource control. But most of the architects in the .NET world that I know, including myself, have a long history of working with other tools. Heck, I've even written a couple of Java apps for Unix. But that was a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.
  68. +1[ Go to top ]

    Since I've used NUnit and log4Net, I want to say the are good tools. I haven't tried NAnt yet, but I have played with NHibernate. C# open source seems to be coming along nicely, but I'm bias :)
  69. +1[ Go to top ]

    Since I've used NUnit and log4Net, I want to say the are good tools. I haven't tried NAnt yet, but I have played with NHibernate. C# open source seems to be coming along nicely, but I'm bias :)
    Try it. You'll like. The last project I worked on became unwieldy so I spent sometime getting all the assemblies to be pulled from VSS (part of the pain), built and then put into a deployment directory.

    Of course if one only has one assembly and no unit tests, no point in doing NAnt.

    There is a tool to help you generate a NAnt script from your project. Last time I used it, I couldn't get it to work on any ASP.Net projects.

    The problem with C# (or any .Net) OSS is the same problem with any Microsoft based tools. You never know when MS is going to come along and take your "business" away or make your tool obselete.

    http://68.236.189.240/article/story-20050215-13.html
  70. MSBuild makes NAnt obsolete.[ Go to top ]

    The problem with C# (or any .Net) OSS is the same problem with any Microsoft based tools. You never know when MS is going to come along and take your "business" away or make your tool obselete.

    That is what MSBuild is going to do to NAnt. Instead of building MSBuild, MSFT should have opened its arms for NAnt, but somethings take a while for change(and some take forever).
  71. Is that new?[ Go to top ]

    I used the old build tool for .NET and it *cough* sucked hard. the project I was on had over a dozen different components and the build script constantly broke. the worse part was the lack of interfaces between the components, so the dependencies got ugly really quick. had someone defined interfaces as the contract between the components, it would have been easier. oh well, I rather go download NAnt and learn it instead of using one provided by MS. it's my own bias, since I use Ant and like it.
  72. Is that new?[ Go to top ]

    I used the old build tool for .NET and it *cough* sucked hard. the project I was on had over a dozen different components and the build script constantly broke. the worse part was the lack of interfaces between the components, so the dependencies got ugly really quick. had someone defined interfaces as the contract between the components, it would have been easier. oh well, I rather go download NAnt and learn it instead of using one provided by MS. it's my own bias, since I use Ant and like it.

    If you know Ant, you pretty much know NAnt. Sort of like if you know Java, you pretty much know C#. :)
  73. MSBuild makes NAnt obsolete.[ Go to top ]

    While I both empathize with the makers of NAnt and agree that MSBuild will probably make it unnecessary in a .NET environment, the reason that products like NAnt come about is that there are always holes to fill. The more Microsoft comes out with the more holes there are to fill.

    Take refactoring for instance. .NET 1.x comes out and we need refactoring. So ReSharper comes out and bang we have refactoring. Microsoft says "Hey, developers need that let's put it into the product" and now we have refactoring in C# (don't get me started about why it's not in VB). Who knows what holes Whidbey is going to have in it which will provide ample opportunity for open source projects.
  74. MSBuild makes NAnt obsolete.[ Go to top ]

    now we have refactoring in C#
    Well, not yet (Has Whidbey been released?). And it will only be some so resharper still can provide value. I could use it right now. :( Even this small stuff that Whidbey has.
  75. I resemble that remark[ Go to top ]

    The dependency on Microsoft happens less at the Architect level than it does at the developer level where the person doesn't have the experience to know if Microsoft is leading them astray, ala SqlDataSource control.

    Don't I know. It not only is MS but magazines and other publications. I dropped at least one magazine for that reason. I've been doing MS technologies for over 10 years. When I took my VB exam - over half the questions where about technologies I would never use as an architect.

    But that was a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.
    I'm sorry that you've not been able to use anything good lately. :)
  76. Why here ?[ Go to top ]

    Well then Peter, you write up the news post and I'll approve it.
  77. sorry, but I'm too busy[ Go to top ]

    thanks for the vote of confidence, but I'm way too busy with all the other stuff like helping Drools, working on Dingo, jakarta JMeter, personal projects, day job, assisting RuleML and reading up on new/interesting stuff. And I still need to find a good way to write about rule technology, which still alludes me.

    peter
  78. Why here ?[ Go to top ]

    There were two reasons this wasn't posted as a news item on TSS.NET. The first is out of respect for Richard Grimes who in spite of his current bizarre opinions has been a strong supporter of the .NET community. The second, and primary reason is that Joe .NET Developer doesn't really care if Richard Grimes leaves in a huff. His accusations are nothing that we haven't heard a dozen or so times (on this site alone! :-)) So why make a bigger deal out of it than it is?
    If it isn't newsworthy, why are so many .NET folks blogging about it?
  79. Why here ?[ Go to top ]

    Discussions about the relevance of VB.NET are as relevant here as entity bean versus POJO's are for .NET developers.

    Awhile back there was the absurd suggestion that the CLR is more multi-language than the JVM. I say "absurd" since most VMs are Turing Complete, and the JVM has long had an unbeatable list of hosted languages.

    Finally Richard dispels this CLR puffery with his indictment that VB had to be radically corrupted when ported to the CLR. Specifically, he notes that .NET is ill-suited languages that lack classes and exceptions.
  80. liked to see that schedule[ Go to top ]

    Developers would have said something like it will take 3 years to rewrite all the apps in .net and they won't be backward compatible to earlier versions of our OS off which we make most of our money. That would have gone over well.
  81. liked to see that schedule[ Go to top ]

    ... they won't be backward compatible to earlier versions of our OS off which we make most of our money. That would have gone over well.

    This part is actually one of the core strategies of Microsoft leveraging its position to 'force' customers to upgrade: never provide good backwards compatibility, instead rehash storage formats every time and provide tools to upgrage to new format, never backwards. Eventually the documents (like word) become polluted with various versions and the only one that works with all of them is the latest version of Word. Brilliant.
  82. How many times have you been asked what .NET means and what relationship it has to .COM and .ORG? Of course, Cool faired no better.
    When there are no more arguments, go personal. Who care what was it called? iDrive is a nice name, but the technology is a nightmare. And was Oak any better then Cool?
    Some bright spark decided to call it C# ... and the users did not know how to pronounce it (C-pound?)
    Now he regrets he have not taken those music classes? It is not late yet.
    I suspect that finding bugs was not the intention—it was more likely that the beta was open to get as wide acceptance as possible.
    How Eclipse is different? Oh right, it is free. The plugins are not, though.
    In general, I think the library was released too early, and I think it was too large. The framework redistributable is 25 MB, which is many times larger than the Java redistributable.
    JRE 1.4: 35M with rt.jar only 22M.
    While I am on the subject of Visual Basic, I may as well give my opinion about that language.
    No one in their right mind should have even bothered about VB having Delphi around.
    The first casualty was WinFS. It's true that this technology made Longhorn slow, and in particular, WinFS made Outlook Express totally unusable. But rather than making this technology work, Microsoft chose to remove it. Reading between the lines, I doubt if this technology will ever return.
    WinFS To Be Available on Windows XP "Microsoft is back-porting its WinFS file-system technology to Windows XP, the same way that it is doing with its Windows presentation and communications subsystems, according to company officials."
    My opinion is that Avalon, or more specifically, XAML, will mark the death of ASP.
    I really hope on that.
    ASP.NET actually makes it easy to write the application so that it can be used by browsers other than IE.
    Umm... not always.
    If Longhorn does not implement the shell, or will not allow you to extend the shell with .NET, then Microsoft has clearly lost their confidence.
    Considering how easily COM objects can be used from .NET apps, and considering that current shell is based on COM this should hardly be an issue.
    The framework has become Visual Basic—it's intended for users to develop applications, but not for Microsoft to create operating systems or the revenue generating products that they base their profits on.
    Considering that MS primary task is to lock the users/developers on Windows platform, I would not bother with .NET and would use good old Win32 and nice frameworks like Delphi. But Win32 being old is not that good, it has to support the compatibility with Win16, DOS and whatever else. There are a lot of patches and hacks. MS apparently decided that it is easier to switch developers to entirely new platform and them pull of the older API, then to gradually improve Win32 while deprecating older functions. With Win32 they have to much baggage. This is sad, because .NET seems too bloated for me. I remember how happy I was, compiling my apps into 4K exe file. Nice and clean, nice and clean...
  83. ASP.NET actually makes it easy to write the application so that it can be used by browsers other than IE.
    Umm... not always.
    A really trivial example I saw implemented using the designer last week failed to work in Firefox. I wouldn't touch it.
  84. ASP.NET actually makes it easy to write the application so that it can be used by browsers other than IE.
    Umm... not always.
    A really trivial example I saw implemented using the designer last week failed to work in Firefox. I wouldn't touch it.

    Cross Browser compatability is a nightmare for any web developer, it is naive to complain about an editor or a framework with regards to this problem.
  85. A few thoughts... Eclipse is very very different. And BTW, a lot of the plugins are free.

    Also, for the person who wrote...

    "ASP.NET actually makes it easy to write the application so that it can be used by browsers other than IE."

    Take a look at this microsoft link in a firefox browser (yes, written by Microsoft in ASP.NET)
    http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/teamsystem/workshop/msfagile/default.aspx

    Asp is not the best language to use to write applications so it can be used by browsers other then IE because microsoft eats their own dog food and doesnt want others to use other browsers.


    -Nick
    http://nickchristy.blogspot.com/
  86. Normal for Java zealots[ Go to top ]

    Nick,

    "Take a look at this microsoft link in a firefox browser (yes, written by Microsoft in ASP.NET)"

    1) For the first, how can MS provide support for a browser that didn't even exist when .NET was released?

    2) For the second, have you done your research? Are you sure it is not a bug in Firefox?

    3) For the third, I see in your blog that you already have condemned Michael Jackson. In my school when I was a boy we were teached that in our western democracy, all is innocent until guilt is proven and that we let 10 guilty free rather than condemn one innocent.

    But I see that you are as unjust in the one case as in the other. All in a days work of course.

    With all due respect
    Rolf Tollerud
  87. Normal for Java zealots[ Go to top ]

    3) For the third, I see in your blog that you already have condemned Michael Jackson. In my school when I was a boy we were teached that in our western democracy, all is innocent until guilt is proven and that we let 10 guilty free rather than condemn one innocent.

    First - that is how the legal system works. Or is supposed to. As individuals we have the right to make up our own minds. Just cause the legal system says someone is innocent doesn't mean for a minute that they truly are. (OJ any one?)

    Second - Not all instances is "innocent till proven guilty" true in the American Legal system. Sometimes you must prove your innocence.
  88. off topic[ Go to top ]

    I find it rather inappropriate to take what someone says off TSS in their own blog against them. if you want to address inaccuracies of their post, do so directly. otherwise it's just trolling. Rather than make vague comments, you could just post the actual HTML or javascript and point out how it is or isn't valid. If the html/javascript is valid, then everyone can see it's firefox being bad. If it is invalid and IE specific, than people can see it's .NET being IE centric.

    have fun :)

    peter
  89. off topic... you decide...[ Go to top ]

    I find it rather inappropriate to take what someone says off TSS in their own blog against them.
    Most of topics that make news on tss(both sides) are blogs. I understand there is a fine line betwen when to use it or not(in the current case name-calling).
  90. bug in Firefox as usual[ Go to top ]

    You are welcome to download the file,

    http://www11.brinkster.com/monoasp/test/msdn_file.zip

    Then you can see that Firefox is demonstrating strange behaviour - the offending lines are,

    BODY {
       FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica
    }

    Remove it and everything works fine.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  91. cool, I'll report the bug[ Go to top ]

    You are welcome to download the file,http://www11.brinkster.com/monoasp/test/msdn_file.zipThen you can see that Firefox is demonstrating strange behaviour - the offending lines are,BODY {   FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica}Remove it and everything works fine.RegardsRolf Tollerud

    great! i'll have to report the bug if it isn't already in their bug database.

    peter
  92. Hmm, not just firefox[ Go to top ]

    You are welcome to download the file,http://www11.brinkster.com/monoasp/test/msdn_file.zipThen you can see that Firefox is demonstrating strange behaviour - the offending lines are,BODY {   FONT-FAMILY: verdana,arial,helvetica}Remove it and everything works fine.RegardsRolf Tollerud

    for kicks I loaded that aspx page and it also doesn't display in Mozilla. makes sense since both share common code. a quick search on the official W3C spec and it looks like it's IE specific. so frankly, it's not strictly a bug. It is a bug in the sense that it doesn't handle IE specific CSS. I'm not going to bother submitting a bug to firefox, since that might be considered an insult.

    I could be wrong, but a quick 20 minute scan of the official spec tells me it's not strictly compliant.

    peter
  93. "it's not strictly compliant"

    I'll find it hard to believe.

    All people tell me is that how Firefox is great for browsing. Very well. But if you want to develop advanced dhtml applications with Axis/XMLhttpRequest "a la Google" you get nowhere because all the bugs and strange behavior.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  94. It's not up to me to decide[ Go to top ]

    "it's not strictly compliant"I'll find it hard to believe.All people tell me is that how Firefox is great for browsing. Very well. But if you want to develop advanced dhtml applications with Axis/XMLhttpRequest "a la Google" you get nowhere because all the bugs and strange behavior.RegardsRolf Tollerud

    Since I'm not a firefox developer, I'm not about to tell them what to do. If they feel it is better to stick to the "official spec" than that's their decision. But honestly, it is working as designed.

    I agree with you it should work on firefox and mozilla, but I can just as easily argue IE should follow the official spec, or not claim it is CSS compliant.

    For example, I purposely designed dingo so that it meets my needs and I explicitly claim it is not compliant to .NET. I try find a balance between following the official W3C spec and compatability with .NET and Mono, but I make no claims of strict compliance or adherence to how MS does things.

    It's one thing if you believe firefox is being childish for choosing W3C compliance over IE compatability, but it's another thing to claim firefox has a bug because IE supports it. I don't really care for W3C, so being compliant to their "official" specs isn't something I really care about. I have both mozilla and IE on my system, so if something doesn't render right in mozilla, I use IE.

    would you claim Sybase TSql is buggy because it is slightly different from MS TSql? The thing is, with firefox, I can go download the source and implement the support I want. If IE doesn't support the features I want, I have to ask them nicely and then wait 3 years.

    peter
  95. they fight valiantly but..[ Go to top ]

    "It's one thing if you believe firefox is being childish for choosing W3C compliance over IE compatability"

    But the case is they are trying to do both! And with poor results, too much bugs. Around 30000 something at last count..

    But in fact I often do not know if a problem belongs to lack of W3C compliance or is a bug. It can be really hard to find out like yourself that spent 20 min and ending up not being sure just for a simple CSS thing. But what I do know is, if I could concentrate on only IE6 I could make some great dhtml applications. But if it should also be cross-browser I give up - too complicated.

    There is an over-belief in standards. You can not set up a large standard on hundreds of pages and expect the different vendors to follow exactly. It is the same problem as with CORBA. Different vendor’s implementations were not compliant. Because the "standard" is never detailed enough, can never be detailed enough.

    "I purposely designed dingo so that it meets my needs and I explicitly claim it is not compliant to .NET"

    But with Dingo you don't have this problem. The results are only though to be approximatly anyway, to be finished by human hand.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  96. they fight valiantly but..[ Go to top ]

    Around 30000 something at last count..But in fact I often do not know if a problem belongs to lack of W3C compliance or is a bug.

    It's their time right, so they do what ever they want. I won't speak for firefox, but so far I've been happy with it. There are cases where mozilla renders slower than IE, but I can wait a few extra seconds. There are some sites that work better with IE. For example, try loading a TSS.com thread that has over 150 posts. In IE it loads considerably faster than mozilla.
    There is an over-belief in standards. You can not set up a large standard on hundreds of pages and expect the different vendors to follow exactly. It is the same problem as with CORBA. Different vendor’s implementations were not compliant. Because the "standard" is never detailed enough, can never be detailed enough.

    I'm not sure I agree that "it can't be detailed enough". There are good standards out there. Though I'm totally bias against W3C and the way they write specs. When a standard if very focused, one can describe in sufficient detail to implement it. W3C isn't alone in writing bad specs or docs. There are cases where I wish some microsoft technologies had more detailed specs. I could complain about passport specification, but I won't go there.
    "I purposely designed dingo so that it meets my needs and I explicitly claim it is not compliant to .NET"But with Dingo you don't have this problem. The results are only though to be approximatly anyway, to be finished by human hand. RegardsRolf Tollerud

    Even though I attempt to find a balance, I'm sure there are plenty of people who will not use Dingo and dismiss it because it doesn't follow the MS way. At the end of the day though, all I care about is getting the job done and making sure I deliver value to my customer.

    peter
  97. There is an over-belief in standards.

    Really ???
    There's an over-belief in hype IMHO.
    Standards are often left aside by people who think they are smarter and/or found a way to make money on users' misunderstandings.
    You can not set up a large standard on hundreds of pages and expect the different vendors to follow exactly. It is the same problem as with CORBA.

    Your world is definitly full of illusions... I won't spend time to explain this to you, I prefer reading your posts instead... They're lots of fun actually :-))))
    Different vendor's implementations were not compliant.

    Once again, you miss it completely.
    Look at this thread please we already have the usual CORBA war there.
    If you prefer gathering statistics instead, look at this :
    http://www.corba.org/success.htm.
    And *that* ain't bullshit.
    Because the "standard" is never detailed enough, can never be detailed enough.

    pfffff... We have standards everywhere in this world, your life depends on it everyday...
    You should seriously consider stop believing everything you read... or change your readings :-)

    Have fun,

    Remi
  98. Normal for Java zealots[ Go to top ]

    1) For the first, how can MS provide support for a browser that didn't even exist when .NET was released?

    By conforming to long-established W3C standards for CSS and HTML!
  99. Firefox is not 100% W3C[ Go to top ]

    Mozilla/Firefox does not contain only W3C standard code. Knowing that if they want to compete they had to copy all functionality in IE6 they also have things like XMLHttpRequest which is not a W3C thing. They also have added their own things like ZUL, which is not approved by W3C.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  100. Firefox is not 100% W3C[ Go to top ]

    IE's not either !
    They also have added their own things [...]

    So does IE.
    Where have you seen e.g. VBScript is a standard ?? Embedded ActiveXs ? ...

    Don't you remember a few time ago, M$ even wanted to change things in... XML !!!!

    Have fun,

    Remi
  101. 3) For the third, I see in your blog that you already have condemned Michael Jackson. In my school when I was a boy we were TAUGHT that in our western democracy, all ARE innocent until guilt is proven and that we let 10 guilty free rather than condemn one innocent.

    Sorry, I couldn't resist. :-)
  102. 1) For the first, how can MS provide support for a browser that didn't even exist when .NET was released?

    HTML is a standard. Simply respect it instead of appropriating it and changing it so it's not a standard any more and you're the only one able to manage it...
    Typical from M$.
    3) In my school when I was a boy we were teached that in our western democracy, all is innocent until guilt is proven and that we let 10 guilty free rather than condemn one innocent.

    M$ has already been proven guilty many times... They even led small companies with good ideas to death, just using the big pressurization means they have.
    They're gangsters, this has been proven against the court many times !
    You seem to be very addicted to "hazardous statistics" : well try google "microsoft court".

    Talking about "innocence" and "microsoft" is not possible.

    Have fun,

    Remi
  103. Microsoft gangsters?[ Go to top ]

    Puh - Compared to Sun MS is white as snow. Besides, the only sin is to be boring!
    Microsoft - working there is like being an endowed researcher at the coolest, most well-funded university on earth, where they only let in the uber-smart. It was easily the highest concentration of smart people I've ever had the pleasure of being around.

    Microsoft as the next most repected company after General Electric.

    Bill Gates is the world's most respected business leader
    Microsoft was "Most Desired IT Employer of 2002.
    http://www11.brinkster.com/monoasp/java-net/ms_intern.html

    Have fun
    Rolf Tollerud
  104. Microsoft gangsters?[ Go to top ]

    Puh - Compared to Sun MS is white as snow. Besides, the only sin is to be boring!
    Microsoft - working there is like being an endowed researcher at the coolest, most well-funded university on earth, where they only let in the uber-smart. It was easily the highest concentration of smart people I've ever had the pleasure of being around.Microsoft as the next most repected company after General Electric.Bill Gates is the world's most respected business leaderMicrosoft was "Most Desired IT Employer of 2002.
    http://www11.brinkster.com/monoasp/java-net/ms_intern.htmlHave funRolf Tollerud

    Look at number 96 on this list - http://www.pbs.org/wsw/resources/bestcompaniestoworkfor.html
  105. Microsoft gangsters?[ Go to top ]

    Microsoft - working there is like being an endowed researcher at the coolest, most well-funded university on earth, where they only let in the uber-smart.

    Rolf, you forgot about the part where everyone at Microsoft is a ninja!

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  106. Microsoft gangsters?[ Go to top ]

    Microsoft - working there is like being an endowed researcher at the coolest, most well-funded university on earth, where they only let in the uber-smart.
    Rolf, you forgot about the part where everyone at Microsoft is a ninja!Peace,Cameron PurdyTangosol, Inc.Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters

    oh man, thanks for the laugh cameron.
  107. even you can be cool, Cameron![ Go to top ]

    Although innocently attacked I turn my other cheek and am instead willing to help. Like Egeria - you do know the nymph Egeria? King Numa? Rings a bell? No? Anyway I understand you have not started with my advice yet because you don't know where to start!

    Therefore I have picked the very first book for you, Paul Johnson's work about the western (leftwing) intellectuals. Both educational and entertaining! I believe it can be bought at Amazon. Or else it is in the library. L-i-b-r-a-r-y.

    Anyway I have heard that you were spotted on a consert last night - Stravinsky's Le Sacre du Printemps. Excellent. Keep up the good work!

    With the very best greetings from your mentor,
    Rolf Tollerud
  108. as bruce lee would say[ Go to top ]

    "be like water. you pour water into a cup, it becomes the cup. you pour water into a bowl, it becomes a bowl. water is without form, but it can carve valleys."

    enjoy
  109. bruce lee is in[ Go to top ]

    Ancient Chinese wisdom still holds!

    You must help me with Cameron. He wants to change from an uncultivated beer drinking American into an Oxford Intellectual. With our help he can make it! He must embark upon a long-range program. Maybe we can divide the work among us?

    What do you say?
    Rolf Tollerud
  110. you're too funny[ Go to top ]

    not sure if you're referring to me or not, but I have no desire to be cultivated what ever that means. I don't drink beer either. It's all about the coffee. Not that beer is bad or anything. Beer is like Microsoft, no wait, that makes no sense. As Sun Tzu said, oh wait that's more chinese junk. maybe Sartre can find an exit. Oh wait, that's french junk. I'm sure Rolf will find a perfectly obscure philosopher to quote.

    As popeye would say, "I am what I am."

    peter
  111. you're too funny[ Go to top ]

    not sure if you're referring to me or not, but I have no desire to be cultivated what ever that means.
    It means pompus arse/twit. For an example, check out Monty Python's Rich Twit Race.
  112. yeah, but that would require humor[ Go to top ]

    I doubt Rolf watches Monty Python. he's probably think you're talking about Python programming language :)

    that or he might claim Sun is like the ministry of silly walks.

    ok, I apologize for the bad joke, but I couldn't resist.

    peter
  113. you're too funny[ Go to top ]

    maybe Sartre can find an exit

    Well, he was an exitstentialist..... (Sorry)
    As popeye would say, "I am what I am."peter

    Pah! Nonsense! That was Gloria Gaynor....

    As everyone knows, Popeye said 'I yam what I yam'.
  114. Microsoft gangsters?[ Go to top ]

    Puh - Compared to Sun MS is white as snow.

    OK, a typical great statement... here comes the statistics or yet-very-useful pointer I guess ?
    Microsoft - working there is like [...]

    Touchdown :-)

    Have fun,

    Remi
  115. Microsoft gangsters?[ Go to top ]

    Microsoft - working there is like being an endowed researcher at the coolest, most well-funded university on earth, where they only let in the uber-smart. It was easily the highest concentration of smart people I've ever had the pleasure of being around.

    Yeah, some people are realy insecure. They need be in the 'best' university or the 'best' company in order to feel good about themselves.
    Microsoft as the next most repected company after General Electric.

    By who? Microsoft is one of the least respected software company by a lot of people, including me.
    Bill Gates is the world's most respected business leader

    Even if it is true, doesn't negate that the company sucks.
    Microsoft was "Most Desired IT Employer of 2002.

    That's a little kinky.
  116. I don't know how you can expect anybody to take your opinions seriously when you stoop to using that idiotic M$ for Microsoft. Consider yourself ignored.
  117. another uneducated[ Go to top ]

    He doesn't even know the current hip lingo; the right phrase should be,
    Theyr's ganstas!
  118. Consider yourself ignored.

    Your post proves the inverse.

    Have fun,

    Remi
  119. re: Rolf[ Go to top ]

    I will address your comments in order:
    1) 1) For the first, how can MS provide support for a browser that didn't even exist when .NET was released?
    How do you define support? What about the ongoing process of fixing bugs, handling issues that arrise, and in general making sure your software is working? If this is the case, MS should have fixed the issues that arose when a new browser enters the market.
    2) 2) For the second, have you done your research? Are you sure it is not a bug in Firefox? You are right, I pointed blame at Microsoft without checking to see if it was a bug in firefox. The reason I did so was because of history. Microsoft is a Microsoft Shop. They aim their software towards Microsoft users. This causes issues.
    3)3) For the third, I see in your blog that you already have condemned Michael Jackson. In my school when I was a boy we were teached that in our western democracy, all is innocent until guilt is proven and that we let 10 guilty free rather than condemn one innocent. But I see that you are as unjust in the one case as in the other. All in a days work of course What does my opinion on the MJ case have anything to do with the discussion? Last time I checked, I was entitled to my opinion, as are you. If you feel that MJ is innocent, so be it. If you feel there is not enough information right now, so be it. I am not going to attack your feelings on this case, because you are entitled to them. Truthfully, I think there is guilt on both sides. Its horrible to say, but I think the family does have ulterior motives in this case, based on their actions. However, this does not excuse any criminal activity that took place, and if he is guilty (as i feel he is) then he should be charged fully and not given any benefits because of his money.

    Nick
    http://www.nickchristy.blogspot.com
  120. MS's Response[ Go to top ]

    Dan Fernandez, Microsoft's Visual C# Project Manager, posted a response to that article. If you care to read it here is the link:
    http://weblogs.asp.net/danielfe/archive/2005/02/22/378343.aspx
  121. I don't get it[ Go to top ]

    .net and csharp aren't doing anything innovative. Check this site out: www.CSharp-Source.Net...it's a joke, a blatant rip off of things in the Java and php community.

    Not only is it NOT innovative but it locks you into ONE company, ONE operating system. And for those that mention Mono-who the heck is using Mono in enterprise applications? and if so Why?

    Why would any developer in their right mind use that stuff.
  122. I don't get it[ Go to top ]

    .net and csharp aren't doing anything innovative. Check this site out: www.CSharp-Source.Net...it's a joke, a blatant rip off of things in the Java and php community.Not only is it NOT innovative but it locks you into ONE company, ONE operating system. And for those that mention Mono-who the heck is using Mono in enterprise applications? and if so Why?Why would any developer in their right mind use that stuff.

    Since I use both C# and Java, the reasons I use it are simple. The person I work for has decided to use .NET. Normally they are not technical and can't make that decision. So basically, they've been sold on something based on marketing material.

    That's not to say .NET doesn't have it's merits, but from the consulting work I do, it's mainly because someone standardizes on Visual Studio and then has to use the full .NET stack. Even if there are better solutions out there that are more appropriate, many business use it because it's the MS solution.

    Reasonable business with technical managers will often choose a mix of technologies and decide based on merit. In those cases, I'm glad there are open source alternatives for C#. I should say that I'm totally bias, since I am the author of an open source schema compiler for C#. Since the stock schema compiler for .NET blows chunks, I wrote my own. But really, I was just copying established techniques in the java world and making it available for C#.

    peter
  123. I don't get it[ Go to top ]

    Why would any developer in their right mind use that stuff.

    People are used to seeing MS win. They dominate the desktop, their browser dominates also. A lot of people think that Windows dominates the server market.

    What it comes down to is a combination of the kind of thinking that makes people buy lottery tickets where the last winning ticket was sold and the kind of thinking where people paid upwards of $50 for a teeshirt that says Calvin Klein T-shirt.

    A lot of people want to be on the side of the winner and they assume that MS will win. They figure that in a few years, Linux and Unix will be a niche market or a laughable memory, everyone will be using .NET and they'll be experts in the only set of languages that matter.
  124. I don't get it[ Go to top ]

    <James>
    A lot of people want to be on the side of the winner and they assume that MS will win. They figure that in a few years, Linux and Unix will be a niche market or a laughable memory, everyone will be using .NET and they'll be experts in the only set of languages that matter.
    </James>

    You know - I've been writing enterprise software for 20 years and I've done so for lots of very large companies. What I can say about each experience is that in no case was MS even slightly considered for mission-critical enterprise work - yeah there were probably more NT servers around than Unix/Linux servers but they were file servers and the like.

    Also, I've used lots of languages - C, C++, Java have predominated - C# has a long way to go. Windows has a long way to go in the server market. Microsoft has a long way to go in the image department as well. The likeliehood that Linux/Unix will be a laughable memory is, well, laughable!

    Cheers
    Ray
  125. I don't get it[ Go to top ]

    Interestingly enough .NET, besides all the silly accusations like backing MS technology because they are a winner or old and stale t-shirt comparison along with mindless ripoff accusations, works and does benefit the developer community with a more elegant lexical structure of the language (take properties, foreach and null-based casting for example), as well as interoperabilty with unmanaged code which Java with its JNI could not even compare to. It provides a better Annotations or Attributes handling vs. the handicapped JavaDoc/XDoclet way that Java 1.4/1.5 provides. Runtime code generation engines are awsome for those who would want topuse the technology and applicability of design ptterns is more clear with the features described above.
    So for those dorky little teenager boys who wear "MS = EVIL" t-shirts and sores on their right(left) hand, .NET surely is not a technology of choice, but for other self-respecting professionals it might as well be an intgeral part in their solution development process.

    Cheers.
  126. I don't get it[ Go to top ]

    .NET surely is not a technology of choice, but for other self-respecting professionals it might as well be an intgeral part in their solution development process. Cheers.

    There is a huge advantage of developing for Windows in .NET which has not been widely stated: because .NET apps run on a VM they are largely isolated from processor changes, so the transition to 64-bit Windows is going to be virtually painless for pure .NET developers. I remember the huge problems involved in moving Windows code from 16 to 32 bits. (Of course, Java has the same advantages).
  127. I don't get it[ Go to top ]

    .NET surely is not a technology of choice, but for other self-respecting professionals it might as well be an intgeral part in their solution development process. Cheers.
    There is a huge advantage of developing for Windows in .NET which has not been widely stated: because .NET apps run on a VM they are largely isolated from processor changes, so the transition to 64-bit Windows is going to be virtually painless for pure .NET developers. I remember the huge problems involved in moving Windows code from 16 to 32 bits. (Of course, Java has the same advantages).

    But most of that was to take advantage of several items at once. The most obvious was the addressing and how your various segmented memory tricks were non longer necessary and having to cooperative multitask

    However, the biggest pain, I would say was from the new APIs introduced in Win32- threading, long file names,new controls(Win31 vs. Win95), etc.

    I submit that the hardest issues experienced in moving from 16 to 32 bits were not caused by API changes.

    The 64-bit changes are not coming in conjunction with a slew of new libraries. I would say most standard user applications won't be affected by Win(or Linux) 64 and will require recompiles and trivial porting.

    I think your games and enterprise apps that want things like more addressing will require more effort. Wouldn't all the various VMs need to be modified to really take advantage of this?

    The next version of Windows will see significant application changes as people try to rewrite their apps to take advantage of the new APIs.
  128. I don't get it[ Go to top ]

    I remember the huge problems involved in moving Windows code from 16 to 32 bits. (Of course, Java has the same advantages).
    I submit that the hardest issues experienced in moving from 16 to 32 bits were not caused by API changes.

    I agree, but the word size changes were still a definite problem.
    The 64-bit changes are not coming in conjunction with a slew of new libraries. I would say most standard user applications won't be affected by Win(or Linux) 64 and will require recompiles and trivial porting.

    Well, this is always said, but I have seen many problems
    over the years. Unless all code is very cleanly written, (for example, uses no 'sizeof' operators or functions, and does not rely on the precise memory alignment of data structures, and never uses any binary files), there will always be difficulties. I have seen these problems arise again and again on different architectures.

    With .NET and Java, you don't even have to recompile.
    Wouldn't all the various VMs need to be modified to really take advantage of this?

    Well yes, but that is the task of the VM writer, not the general developer.
  129. Don't get me wrong, I like Java, it is responsible for inspiring most of what is good in .NET.

    One of the main advantages of .NET is that it integrates existing legacy applications well with a modern, well-designed managed runtime and class libraries.

    Microsoft isn't going to waste time rewriting Office and Visual Studio in .NET. One of the downsides of Java is that everything has to be reinvented to "run everywhere".

    Microsoft will develop the applications of the future in .NET, and P/Invoke the rest. The Java community can grumble about non-portability while it continues to reinvent more wheels :P

    And meanwhile, projects like DotGNU and Mono continue to dispel the "Windows-only" myth of .NET.
  130. Rewriting for .NET would miss the point[ Go to top ]

    And meanwhile, projects like DotGNU and Mono continue to dispel the "Windows-only" myth of .NET.

    I disagree: Mono and DotGNU are always going to be playing 'catch-up' with .NET, which is itself a changing platform. This is fundamentally different from Java/J2EE where different implementations have to be certified as full and compatible!

    I think a better way to view Mono is a good way to write and deploy cross-platform C# and ignore whether or not it is compatible with .NET (although it largely is).
  131. I think a better title would be ".NET Expert jumps to conclusions and in doing so eeks out another 2 minutes of relative notoriety".

    Mr. Grimes criticisms of .NET are superficial at best. Yes, the runtime is larger than a breadbox. Who cares? More than 60% of households in America access the Internet over broadband making 25Megs less than a one minute download. But more importantly, the size will be even less of an issue when the .NET Framework takes its rightful place as part of the operating system in future versions of Windows.

    Yes, .NET is a wrapper over Win32 API calls. That is because Win32 API calls are all we have to interact with the operating system in it's current state. Yes, some of the wrappers are written badly because the Win32 API itself isn't very good in some places. Yes, there are some things missing. But show me another fully integrated library that attempts to cover as much territory, from Windows to Web development, from system programming to business applications. Even over here in Javaland, it takes a set of products with names having spiffy coffee references or that looks like somebody spilled a bowl of alphabet soup just to write an app from UI to server. :-)

    As for VB.NET not being VB, I disagree. VB.NET is VB matured. OO concepts SHOULD be used in writing applications even in VB not that simulated OO crap that was in VB6. The language has grown up and is ready to take it's place as a serious development language just like C# or (gasp) Java. If VB developers want to have the respect of other language fans, they have to step up and learn how things work.

    When he questions Microsoft's commitment to .NET because they didn't rewrite Office, I think he must have been working with strong chemicals in an unventilated room. Of course they didn't rewrite one of their flagship products to use .NET without a strong business reason to do so (Corporate America should take note of that mentality).

    Now what you will see is a gradual de-emphasizing of the name/logo/trademark ".NET" as it becomes part of ALL Microsoft products. Microsoft started out by slapping .NET on everything in site and in doing so managed to thoroughly confuse it's customers. They've since realize the error of their ways and are now in the process of putting it back under the covers where only we developer nerds will see it. But that doesn't mean that its not still just as important as ever.

    His opinions on Avalon are also (hopefully) chemically induced. Making Avalon available in Windows XP had nothing to do with them not believing in Longhorn. It had everything to do with them believing in Avalon, so much that having it only available on Longhorn didn't make sense. There are important competitive reasons to get Avalon on Windows XP and Longhorn and if Mr. Grimes doesn't see that then it is his own short sightedness. I would however be the first guy to like to know what is going to be in Longhorn that won't be available in Windows XP. But that's another topic.

    So in conclusion, and to quote my buddy Bill, Mr. Grimes' comments are "Much ado about nothing, full of sound and fury but signifying nothing". Okay, I might have combined quotes from a couple of different plays but you get the idea.

    Paul Ballard
    Editor, TheServerSide.NET and Microsoft VB MVP
  132. I think a better title would be ".NET Expert jumps to conclusions and in doing so eeks out another 2 minutes of relative notoriety".

    I think he's just trying to get hired by the Burton Group.

    ;-)

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  133. Mr. Grimes, I want to share something with you. The factory pattern using C#/Generics

         public interface ILog
          {
                void Write();
          }
          public class AppLog : ILog
          {
                public void Write()
                {
                      Console.WriteLine("App Log");

                }
          }
          public class DBLog : ILog
          {
                public void Write()
                {
                      Console.WriteLine("DB Log");
                }
          }

          public class LogFactory
          {
                public static ILog Create<T>() where T : ILog, new()
                {
                      return new T();
                }
          }
     
    public class Program
    {
          static void Main()

          {
                ILog appLog = LogFactory.Create<AppLog>();
                appLog.Write();

                ILog dbLog = LogFactory.Create<DBLog>();
                dbLog.Write();
          }
    }

    Factory pattern using java/generics

    http://www.developerdotstar.com/mag/articles/troche_factorychain.html

    I think Mr. Purdy is correct. You are trying to get hired by the Burton Group.
  134. As for VB.NET not being VB, I disagree. VB.NET is VB matured. OO concepts SHOULD be used in writing applications even in VB not that simulated OO crap that was in VB6. The language has grown up and is ready to take it's place as a serious development language just like C# or (gasp) Java.

    I am not going to dismiss VB.NET as a language since it is fully capable of doing what Java can. That said, I think Microsoft missed a beat with VB.NET if you think about the user base. I try not to paint stereotypical image of 'script kiddies' here but the anecdotal evidence that I have suggests that VB.NET is a big step, often too big. The regular VB guy will still write their code like in the old VB days, clueless of objects and what they stand for.
  135. One other thing...[ Go to top ]

    For those of you interested in hearing more of the technical inaccuracies of his article, check out these links:

    Dan Fernandez's Blog
    Scott Swigart's Blog
    Paul Vick's Blog
  136. One other thing...[ Go to top ]

    For those of you interested in hearing more of the technical inaccuracies of his article, check out these links:Dan Fernandez's BlogScott Swigart's BlogPaul Vick's Blog

    The replies are feeble at best.
  137. Windows is a primarily client OS, .NET is more suited for server applications then client. This is the conflict.
  138. Windows is a primarily client OS, .NET is more suited for server applications then client. This is the conflict.

    The numbers here tend to agree with your statement.

    http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=48507&de=on&dotnet=on
  139. Read this article on DDB through a link sent by a friend. Frankly I was not expecting a on this article discussion here. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and it is good to see that there are people in the technical community who still values core technology over marketing blitz. We need them for the mankind for growth and advancement of technology which is not intended to help a particular section or a company.

    But I was amazed by the number of replies posted criticizing the article here and all so many justification of each points posted by Mr. Grimes. Well please, this is a Java community and we were just talking about a article. You don't have to shout so hard, we all know what is inside VB and VB.Net and all those perceived value adds in C#.

    We always knew that MS employs more sells people than developers, but never knew they have so many of there people keeping an eye on Java Communities. After all, the right minded professionals need to something worthwhile.

    Hope to see this kind of articles more often in the coming days. Thanks to Floyd for posting the link and congratulations to Richard for a frank and truthful article.
  140. I think these .Net bloody ass holes are trying to boost up the technology. In my perception, no meaning to support .Net now onwards....
  141. I think these .Net bloody ass holes are trying to boost up the technology. In my perception, no meaning to support .Net now onwards....

    what is so bad about boosting the technology and who should stop supporting .Net now on? The thing about .Net is, it is designed to lurk in window development circles even it fails on server side. So you can do away with .Net on the server but not on the client.
  142. The HumbleBlogger responds to Mr. Grimes' dour assessment of current .NET state of affairs:

    current state of Microsoft .NET
    http://humbleblogger.blogspot.com/2005/03/current-state-of-microsoft-net.html
  143. Yeah, sure, Microsoft is losing confidence in .NET. That's why Avalon and Indigo are programmed in managed code, that's why Microsoft doesn't support the unmanaged web services toolkits anymore, or why they provide .NET specific extensions to Office, which is one of their two flagship products... I guess Sun has lost faith in Java since they didn't program the latest version of Solaris in Java and turned Sparc into java-only chips :)
  144. Mostly, of course, this article is a rant. But there is an interesting point at the heart of it. .NET was released before it was ready for prime time. The same thing could be said about Java of course, but unlike Java, in the 3 or so years that have followed Microsoft seem to have done remarkably little to address this. And maybe this is why Longhorn, when it ships, will include neither Avalon or Indigo, and Longhorn itself will not be the .NET Windows the Bill promised it would be.
  145. Actually, I agree that it was release prematurely. But I look at it like getting married or having a baby. People ask themselves all the time if they're ready for such a big move. Fact is, you're never ready. You do it and grow into the role of husband/wife and father/mother. .NET was released and it's growing. .NET 2.0 will be even better than 1.x.
  146. So, what's he going to do now?
  147. By the way, did anyone notice the similarities:

    http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=29494

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  148. Hehe..
    This article and bunch of replies are just increasing .NET popularity. Now Google has many new index term associated for this page.

    :)
  149. Well the thread seems to go to its end. The next time I publish "the Yann Caroff" statistic C# numbers will have surpassed Java because of the seventh times higher growth rate.

    To think of that the old mainframe programmers though they could come back with their white laboratory rocks, their million dollar projects, attitude and all! Today I can fly anywhere in Europe for a fraction of the cost as before when the national airlines dominated. Microsoft has done for the IT business what Ryan air and the other low-cost airlines have done for the Travel business.

    The only thing you can ask yourself is, "How come the old situation was allowed to exist so long?". That could be subject to a thorough investigation, both in Travel and IT business.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  150. Microsoft has done for the IT business what Ryan air and the other low-cost airlines have done for the Travel business.The only thing you can ask yourself is, "How come the old situation was allowed to exist so long?". That could be subject to a thorough investigation, both in Travel and IT business.RegardsRolf Tollerud

    Actually, you are wrong. Cheap IT was introduced by cloners of the IBM PC in the early 80s, by companies such as Amstrad. The GUI operating system that would dominate was very much up for debate, with many PCs being shipped with GEM (remember that?).

    As for pricing, Microsoft is the exact opposite of the low-cost airlines. Instead of offering no-frills products at a low price, they have been offering bloated products with bundled add-ons at an excessive price. Unlike Microsoft, Ryan Air and EasyJet have not been subject to legal action relating to alleged overpricing.

    Microsoft is far more like the older airlines - dominating the market and trying every trick in the book to ensure that prices stay high and other airlines are restricted.
  151. Why do you think that people has short memories? In the beginning Word, Excel, etc also sold separately, and the price today with more units in the suite is less than what a single Word or Excel costed then. The price has all the time been going down. And how do you dare question the tiny price of the Office suit that is totally insignificant when the issue here is those unbelievably prices of Websphere, Weblogic and the like, not to speak of the consulting costs that is 11 times the cost of products according to IBM.

    And Amstrad? GEM?? Please save me the squirmy excuse, it was Microsoft that did it, and still do.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  152. odd comparison[ Go to top ]

    Ok, let me get this clear. You're comparing the price of a single license of MS Office to a single license of Websphere or Weblogic. Now, the license of both servers aren't cheap, but wouldn't it more accurate to compare the price of win2K3 server? If you're gonna compare office suite, then compare OpenOffice with MS Office. Or what ever alternative office suite you want to compare to.

    I find your definition of history funny. I would hardley consider something 10-20 years old as history. The last time I checked, earth was millions of years old. Humans have recorded history for over 5K years. 10-20 years is a bit short sighted. In 200 years, all of this corporate bickering will seem rather silly.

    in the words of ren and stimpy "happy happy joy joy"
  153. odd comparison?[ Go to top ]

    No Peter, it was not I that dragged the price of Office (or win2K) into the matter. I am not that stupid. And for Open Office the less said of it is better.

    What is history and what is not? I don't know but it seems that people’s memory are so short that they need to be reminded.

    It was not the prices of the old mainframe people that disturbed me most but their incompetence/attitude, unbearable arrogance and crappy software. Then as now.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  154. odd comparison?[ Go to top ]

    No Peter, it was not I that dragged the price of Office (or win2K) into the matter.

    Yes you did:
    And how do you dare question the tiny price of the Office
    And for Open Office the less said of it is better.

    Who mentioned it? There are other alternatives - Corel Office is a good example.

    Personally, I find Open Office to be a superb package - I know of companies that have saved huge amounts of money by using it, and have also avoided the security and virus issues involved in using Microsoft products.
    It was not the prices of the old mainframe people that disturbed me most but their incompetence/attitude, unbearable arrogance and crappy software.

    I think you are getting confused. I mentioned Amstrad PCs in the 80s. I don't remember even mentioning mainframes, Websphere, space aliens, French philosophers etc.

    That Microsoft has been subject to legal action regarding pricing is a fact - and, yes, I dare mention it!
  155. odd comparison?[ Go to top ]

    I think he has voices in his head.
  156. odd comparison?[ Go to top ]

    And for Open Office the less said of it is better.

    Why?
  157. odd comparison?[ Go to top ]

    And for Open Office the less said of it is better.
    Why?
    Cause the more we talk about it, the more people will know about it and realize there is no need for them to spend a single buck, peso, denero, pound, etc on MS Office.
  158. I could be totally wrong here. I thought that was one of the reasons why MS is aggressively trying to tie MS Office into every server/back office piece they can.

    it makes sense really. if a business has all their docs in word, and excel, it makes sense to tie that into the server components. Without that push, the appeal for MS Office degrades more and more. hardcore business users will use all the advanced features, but the typical home user only uses a small portion of what word and excel can do. take pivot tables for example. it's a neat feature, but how many home users use it regularly? So there's another reason why MS is committed to .NET. C# and .NET plays an important role in bridging MS Office and the server components.

    peter
  159. I could be totally wrong here. I thought that was one of the reasons why MS is aggressively trying to tie MS Office into every server/back office piece they can.it makes sense really. if a business has all their docs in word, and excel, it makes sense to tie that into the server components. Without that push, the appeal for MS Office degrades more and more. hardcore business users will use all the advanced features, but the typical home user only uses a small portion of what word and excel can do. take pivot tables for example. it's a neat feature, but how many home users use it regularly? So there's another reason why MS is committed to .NET. C# and .NET plays an important role in bridging MS Office and the server components.peter

    "Pivot tables" are available in OpenOffice. Just downloaded 2.0 beta.

    I agree that Microsoft is tying Office to everything. For that matter everything to everything. I'm not faulting them for it. But they have no choice but to do it. They are doing the same with the web. Those who think the browser is still the way to display apps (not distribute) needs to realize this too. For those of you who think AJAX is the future, please check out the MS tea leafs. That or get all of your users/clients on FireFox/Opera if they use Windows.
  160. odd comparison[ Go to top ]

    The last time I checked, earth was millions of years old.
    I was with you till that point. Millions of years huh? I was wondering what the stench was (you know how old things get smelly :) ).
  161. And how do you dare question the tiny price of the Office suit that is totally insignificant when the issue here is those unbelievably prices of Websphere

    Er.. It was not me that was questioning it: it was various US states.

    What an interesting comparison - I have never used Websphere for word processing... how does that work?
  162. Why do you think that people has short memories? In the beginning Word, Excel, etc also sold separately, and the price today with more units in the suite is less than what a single Word or Excel costed then. The price has all the time been going down.

    Unfortunately, it's not true.

    However, don't let fact stand in your way ;-)

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  163. Why do you think that people has short memories? In the beginning Word, Excel, etc also sold separately, and the price today with more units in the suite is less than what a single Word or Excel costed then. The price has all the time been going down.
    Unfortunately, it's not true.However, don't let fact stand in your way ;-)Peace,Cameron PurdyTangosol, Inc.Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
    Just looked and MS Office has gone down $0.001 in value. There it went again! Oops. Rolf said price, not value. :P
  164. Why do you think that people has short memories? In the beginning Word, Excel, etc also sold separately, and the price today with more units in the suite is less than what a single Word or Excel costed then. The price has all the time been going down.

    Unfortunately, it's not true.

    However, don't let fact stand in your way ;-)

    The price at today is (Amazon) $379.00

    In Word Myths and Feedback:
    Three apps purchased separately from the market leaders were around $1500 before Office. Office is now about $379 - nearly half of what it was when it came out, and that is in current dollars.

    At the time, word processors such as WordPerfect, Word and others sold for ~$500, so to sell Word, Excel and PPT for only $699 seemed illogical. But in fact what it did was make the price of getting all our apps much more affordable, and we often got $699 (discounted of course) from people who would only have bought one app before for $499.

    MS Word sold separately in 1997 was $500 = $1000 in current value, in other words the price of whole Office Professional! package today is 38% of the original price for a single Program!

    I leave it as an exercise to you to compute the value of the smaller Office package as a fraction of words original price.

    With utmost respect
    Rolf Tollerud
  165. inflation mathematics[ Go to top ]

    MS Word sold separately in 1997 was $500 = $1000 in current value, in other words the price of whole Office Professional! package today is 38% of the original price for a single Program!I leave it as an exercise to you to compute the value of the smaller Office package as a fraction of words original price.With utmost respectRolf Tollerud


    I'm curious how you arrive at that figure. what kind of mathematics you using to calculate the inflation of $500 us dollars in 1997 to $1K 2005 dollars.

    peter
  166. inflation mathematics?[ Go to top ]

    Calculate the 2005 value anyway you want, my original assertion that the whole Professional Package today cost less than the original MS Word still holds.
  167. inflation mathematics?[ Go to top ]

    Java comes to the rescue, once again!!!

    http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html

    Have fun!
    Henrique Steckelberg
  168. Using someone's blog to prove facts? :(

    BTW, what is the MSRP on Office? Not the discount price.
  169. MSRP[ Go to top ]

    I thought everyone either buys a new computer or pirates office. That or they pretend to be a college student and buy the student version at discount.

    sorry for the terrible joke

    peter
  170. MSRP[ Go to top ]

    I thought everyone either buys a new computer or pirates office. That or they pretend to be a college student and buy the student version at discount.sorry for the terrible jokepeter
    "Humor plays close to the big, hot fire which is Truth ... "
  171. Some info about Chris Pratley[ Go to top ]

    Mark,
    "Using someone's blog to prove facts? :("

    Chris Pratley is Group Program Manager for Microsoft Word and has been employed at Microsoft since 20 years. (1994)

    Turned out it was really just Chris who cared. :)
    The History of Word

    Chris Pratley has posted a fascinating narration of the evolution of Microsoft Word, starting way back in the days of MS-DOS up until Word 2003. If you haven't discovered Chris' blog, yet, this is an excellent post to introduce you to it. He is consistently interesting and I promise you will be adding him to your blogroll after perusing just one or two of his posts!
    Go check out his post, "Word Myths and Feedback:"
    http://blogs.msdn.com/Chris_Pratley/archive/2004/04/28/122004.aspx

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  172. MS Word sold separately in 1997 was $500 = $1000 in current value

    I don't know about retail costs, but years ago we used to pay less than $200 for Office, and now it's over $300. The list price might have come down, but the OEM price has definitely shot up. As for Word, it was garbage until Word for Windows v2.0, when it suddenly became a pretty nice product; back then (IIRC) you could often pick up Word for less than $100, and it was often included for free with new computers because Microsoft was still trying to kill Word Perfect off. (Oh wait, that sounds anti-competitive. Oops.)

    Windows likewise. It used to be $16 (OEM) and now it's closer to $150. (Disclaimer: Back when Windows was $16, you had to pay an additional $14 for DOS. You also had to buy both in pretty big volumes to get those prices ;-)

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  173. but I thought Microsoft employs several teams of highly skilled ninjas for that purpose. tell me that ninjas are real, otherwise I might have to commit ritual suicide :)

    peter
  174. How come you paid $200 when Chris Pratley,Group Program Manager for Microsoft MS Word says the cost back then was $699? Do you expect us to just take your word for it? :)

    Please. We are talking about the ordinary list price, not any discount or special OEM offer.

    Provide some links or proof or shut up.
  175. in college[ Go to top ]

    If I remember correctly, in the early 90's one could purchase the full office for 200.00 with a student id at the local university bookstore.
  176. How come you paid $200 when Chris Pratley,Group Program Manager for Microsoft MS Word says the cost back then was $699? Do you expect us to just take your word for it? :)Please. We are talking about the ordinary list price, not any discount or special OEM offer.Provide some links or proof or shut up.
    Can he quote me if I blog about it??? :)
  177. I know very well that the price of the Office packet in the beginning was 5500 SEK here in Sweden, a price I have paid many times not only for my own use. So $699 would mean a dollar rate of 8 SEK/dollar which sounds perfectly normal.

    This thread can exemplify the lack of honesty and civil courage from the members of TSS. Of course many of the 456946 members must remember the price of the Office but no one comes to help.

    It is patetique. But this urban myth about the "overprice" of Office is only one of the hundreds of lies about Microsoft that goes around Internet – as part of the general lynch-mob atmosphere based on envy.
  178. The usual pattern. Proved wrong? Attack the crazy, mean, Java scientists.

    Can you have Chris provide links, invoices, etc from when Word first came out?

    BTW, I don't see anyone on this thread saying that MS Office is over priced. Steve talked about them overpricing in general. Is it overvalued? Sure. The majority of Office users don't need the majority of what it provides.
  179. Proved wrong?[ Go to top ]

    You forget a little thing: It is you that are proven wrong and caught of dishonesty too.
  180. Proved wrong?[ Go to top ]

    You forget a little thing: It is you that are proven wrong and caught of dishonesty too.
    Me?

    For those who have made statements, nothing has been proven yet. Just blogs and hearsay.
  181. wish I had a reciept[ Go to top ]

    I personally bought a couple copies of office from a university store for 200.00. I don't have the receipts anymore since that was a long time ago. What you paid for MS Office is not what I paid for it. go ask microsoft yourself how much they used to charge for office in the early 90's at universities. they will prove you wrong.

    peter
  182. wish I had a reciept[ Go to top ]

    We are talking about the list-price not student-discounts.
  183. if you're angrey don't blame me[ Go to top ]

    It's not my fault you paid a lot more than I did for the same exact software. Go ask microsoft for a refund if you are so furious. I'm not the one who made up the rules, but i sure did look for a way to pay the lowest price. my point isn't and wasn't to address the retail price. My point is this. Microsoft charges different prices for different people, so you can't take one price as the "only price". In fact, Microsoft charges a different price based on market, country, region and user. A simple price comparison doesn't begin to capture the whole picture.

    enjoy.

    peter
  184. disgusted - it's not cricket[ Go to top ]

    Am I talking to Peter Lin the financial aggregations real-time expert or some moroon? When shall you guys learn to loose gracefully? When Java.NIO won the day I accepted that.

    I hereby refuse to believe that Americans are decendants from England!
  185. disgusted - it's not cricket[ Go to top ]

    I hereby refuse to believe that Americans are decendants from England!
    Good. Because a good many are not. I am only 1/4 English. We have a good many Dutch and Danish and German and Japanese and Nigerian and Iranian and .....
  186. But this urban myth about the "overprice" of Office is only one of the hundreds of lies about Microsoft that goes around Internet – as part of the general lynch-mob atmosphere based on envy.
    Oh, poor Microsoft! What haveth thy done to deserve such awful labels, one wonders! :)

    MS pictured as a pitiful pure innocent saintly company. Talk about being honest.

    Could someone please rescue this troll? He needs help defending MS. A lot.
  187. But this urban myth about the "overprice" of Office is only one of the hundreds of lies about Microsoft that goes around Internet – as part of the general lynch-mob atmosphere based on envy.
    He needs help defending MS..
    No. I do not need help. Microsoft is winning or do I need to cite the "the Yann Caroff" numbers for you again? Amazingly, in real life the good guys often win in the end.

    Sorry.
  188. But this urban myth about the "overprice" of Office is only one of the hundreds of lies about Microsoft that goes around Internet – as part of the general lynch-mob atmosphere based on envy.
    He needs help defending MS..
    No. I do not need help. Microsoft is winning or do I need to cite the "the Yann Caroff" numbers for you again? Amazingly, in real life the good guys often win in the end.Sorry.

    so do half-truths, distortion and selective memory count as lies? Anyone can compare what ever price they want and claim the price has dropped, but that is a half truth. Just like the news has to filter out stuff they consider "extraneous" so they can get out a 1 minute blurb. Cameron stated what he used to pay, I gave an example of what I paid and I sure there are others who didn't pay the price you paid for Office.

    If you want to talk about truth, than present the facts. Microsoft has and continues to charge different prices depending on the customer. You want to show Office has dropped in price overall, than you have to consider OEM and educational pricing. A large percentage of the people get MSOffice through those channels. In fact I would argue that is one of the two strongest sales channels for Microsoft. Feel free to prove me wrong with cold hard facts.

    enjoy.

    peter
  189. Peter, your suggestion that we should not look at the official list price but at students-discounts, OEM rebate, whatever, is quite funny. Also your "Feel free to prove me wrong with cold hard facts".

    But what the heck you should always try to see the positive in everything. So therefore I would like to take the opportunity, on behalf of everybody, to thank you for not mentioning financial aggregations today!

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  190. why is it funny[ Go to top ]

    I don't know what percentage of MS office sales go through the OEM and university channel, but from my unscientific personal experience it is more than half. for the sake of argument, lets say OEM, corporate and university account for 70% of the total sales. Does it make sense to use the "official list price" as the basis for measurement?

    Most people I know do not pay the "official list price" for microsoft products. Most try to get it at a cheaper price. I haven't seen any official breakdown of MSOffice sales, since they keep that secret. Microsoft isn't alone in this practice. Most businesses artificially set a high "list price". This is done on purpose. I would think this is something basic that most adults understand. To me "list price" means "bs price". when i go to the supermaket to buy groceries, 95% of the things I buy are not a the "list price". Even if the price is exactly what two other stores charge for the same product.

    I don't believe you really think "list price" is the "real cost".

    be cheap and shop around

    peter
  191. info from SEC filing by MS[ Go to top ]

    Here is what MS has to say about their sales in their official filing to the sec
    Information Worker includes revenue from Microsoft Office, Microsoft Project, Visio, other standalone information worker applications, SharePoint Portal Server and CALs, and professional product support services. Revenue from Information Worker was $2.27 billion in the September quarter of fiscal 2003, increasing 26% from the prior year’s September quarter. Office revenue growth was due to the pro-rata recognition of revenue from a large increase in multi-year licenses signed prior to the transition to the Company’s Licensing 6.0 programs, strong growth in OEM system builder’s attach rates, and successful Office student license sales. Additionally, Microsoft Project revenue growth was in excess of 40% led by the recent launch of the product’s newest version.

    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/789019/000103221002001614/d10q.htm#tx220_1

    Microsoft states clearly strong sales from multi-year license, OEM and student license. So are you going to admit you're wrong? This isn't me saying it. It's what MS says to the government.

    peter
  192. Pardon me but you can't seem to get any order in your head so let me spell it out for you:
     
    1) Either you compare the list price in 1997 with the list price in 2005 or,

    2) Compare the student-discount price in 1997 with the student-discount price in 2005 or,

    3) Compare the OEM discount in 1997 with OEM discount in 2005 (with the same number of licenses) or, etc etc

    You can not compare the student-discount in 1997 against Official list-price in 2005. I am sure you get the gist of now that I have explained so even a 7 year old can understand do you? ;)

    So using Henriques excellent Java applet I get the list price of Office 2003 Professional edition in 2005 to be ca 50% of the price of MS Word in 1997.

    You are welcome to try your luck with any of the other editions, but please use hard facts, nothing like "I seem to remember" or "as far as I remember" etc.

    Madre Mia!
    Rolf Tollerud
  193. good thing you're not an analyst[ Go to top ]

    Pardon me but you can't seem to get any order in your head so let me spell it out for you:&nbsp;
    1) Either you compare the list price in 1997 with the list price in 2005 or,
    2) Compare the student-discount price in 1997 with the student-discount price in 2005 or,
    3) Compare the OEM discount in 1997 with OEM discount in 2005 (with the same number of licenses) or, etc etc

    You can not compare the student-discount in 1997 against Official list-price in 2005. I am sure you get the gist of now that I have explained so even a 7 year old can understand do you? ;) So using Henriques excellent Java applet I get the list price of Office 2003 Professional edition in 2005 to be ca 50% of the price of MS Word in 1997.You are welcome to try your luck with any of the other editions, but please use hard facts, nothing like "I seem to remember" or "as far as I remember" etc.Madre Mia!Rolf Tollerud

    dear god. do you really think that is an accurate measurement of what office costs? I wasn't suggesting someone compare student to retail. I suggesting you see the whole picture of what office costs. simplistic comparison are half truths. but you'll see what you want to see. If I originally buy office as a student, but then buy office with a new system. It is valid to compare the two prices. It is what I paid for it. Microsoft has every right to charge what they want for each market. I also have every right to get a college student to buy a student version for me if I don't want to pay the OEM price. Or I can find another OEM that has it at a lower price.

    have fun

    peter
  194. Peter,[ Go to top ]

    You spend too much time before the computer.
    Take two weeks vacation and then read again what you just wrote!

    "good thing you're not an analyst"

    But I can give you the address to a good one!

    With hope of good recovery
    Rolf Tollerud
  195. Microsoft must love you[ Go to top ]

    From microsoft's perspective, customers who don't shop around and pay the full retail price are excellent. People like me who shop around for the best price cause company lots of displeasure. Call me all the names you want, I'll keep saving my money.

    I must say, proding you is a guilty pleasure. You're responses are never dull, factual, and are always colorful. Six year olds are pretty smart by the way. Give a six year old the option to buy 4 candies for 1 dollar or 1 candy for 2 dollars, guess which they'll choose.

    enjoy your 2 dollar candy

    peter
  196. Cameron stated what he used to pay ..

    Actually, I never had to personally pay back then. I had friends on the Office team that would just pick up a copy for me at the Microsoft store on campus, and as a Microsoft MVP, Microsoft would send me Office for free. (Free from Microsoft is a lot less than student licenses, which BTW are intended for STUDENTS! ;-)

    However, I was referring to the licenses that we bought as a company, or the licenses that I would approve to be bought with a new machine (that's an OEM license).

    Microsoft prices have definitely gone up repeatedly and steadily, and the licensing terms have become more and more strict (or in my personal opinion, onerous).

    However, in their "defense", it isn't just Microsoft that is making licenses more an more onerous. Until the western world figures out how IP relates to software, I'm afraid those "EULAs" that you click through will continue to grow and convolute themselves.

    Also in Microsoft's defense, I said that the price of Office was going up, but I didn't claim that it sucked, and I didn't spell Microsoft with a dollar sign. I use Office all the time, and I really like it, with very few exceptions. I do think it is pricey considering the volume that they do, but nonetheless, we've now bought the Pro version of Office for all our employees and we get it bundled with all the new workstations and notebooks that we buy.

    In other words, as a purchaser, user, etc. I feel pretty confident talking about both the price and the value. The price has definitely gone _up_ from my point of view (since I'm not a blogger for Microsoft), but the software has gotten pretty usable too.

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  197. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    "Also in Microsoft's defense, I said that the price of Office was going up"

    It was a time mr Purdy when your opinions here in TSS was so highly valued that your word was enough.

    Unfortunately, even if you may have not noticed that time is over. Or, to put it blunt, You squandered it.

    So now you, as everybody else, have to give links and proofs. Don’t be nostalgic! It can happen to anybody. A reputation takes years to build up but can be destroyed in seconds. Ref. Joseph Conrad: Heart of Darkness.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  198. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    It was a time mr Purdy when your opinions here in TSS was so highly valued that your word was enough.

    Gag me with a spoon. Other than my extraordinary patience for dealing with trolls, I am but a simple man with a keyboard and an opinion.
    So now you, as everybody else, have to give links and proofs.

    A gave you a link already.

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Shared Memories for J2EE Clusters
  199. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    It was a time mr Purdy when your opinions here in TSS was so highly valued that your word was enough.
    Gag me with a spoon. Other than my extraordinary patience for dealing with trolls, I am but a simple man with a keyboard and an opinion


    Well I still highly value Cameron's opinions on TSS. His comments are always interesting and useful.
    If he uses the phrase "gag me with a spoon" again though, I will have to rethink that....
  200. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    It was a time mr Purdy when your opinions here in TSS was so highly valued that your word was enough.
    Gag me with a spoon. Other than my extraordinary patience for dealing with trolls, I am but a simple man with a keyboard and an opinionWell I still highly value Cameron's opinions on TSS. His comments are always interesting and useful.If he uses the phrase "gag me with a spoon" again though, I will have to rethink that....
    Yes. A more 2000ish expression still involves the spoon - To paraphrase Lewis Black - "If I have to hear Rolf one more time I am gonna shove a spoon in my ear - because if I am going to be in that much pain I am going to inflict it on myself."
  201. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    "There is no spoon..."
  202. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    "There is no spoon..."
    Fork?
  203. or[ Go to top ]

    "There is no spoon..."
    Fork?

    how about a spork?
  204. or[ Go to top ]

    "There is no spoon..."
    Fork?
    how about a spork?
    Just not a cheap platic one. Won't do the job. I usually get two at [fill in your fav fast food rest.] cause I am bound to break the first one.
  205. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    Mark,

    It seems somehow that you have gotten out of steam. Why do we not go over to the new thread?

    "Recent SPECjAppServer benchmark results put BEA in the lead" http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=32577

    IMO:

    To create a benchmark that refuses competition with alternative technologies shows truly narrow-mindness and cowardness. That the J2EE world refuses competition (it's the naked truth: with SPECjAppServer EJB world refuses to compete) is a disgrace to Java community, commercially flawed because it is a safe-heaven for EJB technology to avoid competition!

    Java voice:
    "So we have a technology (EJB) that is immature and we can't make it compete. Instead of taking the challenge and making it work, we cowardly devise a competition only for our technology, like who is the best of fools"

    What Java should do as a community is to get the word out to Sun to take the thing out and fire all the documents that would show it ever existed.

    Best regards from
    Rolf Tollerud
  206. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    IMO:To create a benchmark that refuses competition with alternative technologies shows truly narrow-mindness and cowardness.

    It is not avoiding competition at all. Microsoft is welcome to create a compatible implementation of J2EE and enter the benchmark. They can enter the huge multi-vendor Java market at any time if they are prepared to play fair and pass all the compatibility tests like everyone else. After all, if BEA and Oracle can do it, surely Microsoft can?
  207. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    IMO:To create a benchmark that refuses competition with alternative technologies shows truly narrow-mindness and cowardness.
    It is not avoiding competition at all. Microsoft is welcome to create a compatible implementation of J2EE and enter the benchmark. They can enter the huge multi-vendor Java market at any time if they are prepared to play fair and pass all the compatibility tests like everyone else. After all, if BEA and Oracle can do it, surely Microsoft can?
    Yeah, it is difficult to compare apples (java) with a rotten orange. :P
  208. that time has passed[ Go to top ]

    No, Rolf, it is just a benchmark that only considers platforms worth mention.

    How goes that "Rolf-is-a-bot" theory? Any further developments?
  209. I think it's totally feasible[ Go to top ]

    it wouldn't take more than 2 dozen well written rules to simulate Rolf :) but I don't consider it an useful exercise, since the posts are obivously from a Rolfbot.

    </joke>

    peter
  210. I think it's totally feasible[ Go to top ]

    Of course it is feasible! I just put together some comments from different TSS members..

    hi hi

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  211. I think it's totally feasible[ Go to top ]

    it wouldn't take more than 2 dozen well written rules to simulate Rolf :) but I don't consider it an useful exercise, since the posts are obivously from a Rolfbot.</joke>peter

    You would need some kind of automated search engine, to come up with typical Rolf links: "A survey from 5 years ago in Greenland proves that current worldwide Microsoft server sales are 1000x that of Linux".
  212. it wouldn't take more than 2 dozen well written rules to simulate Rolf :) but I don't consider it an useful exercise, since the posts are obivously from a Rolfbot.</joke>peter
    You would need some kind of automated search engine, to come up with typical Rolf links: "A survey from 5 years ago in Greenland proves that current worldwide Microsoft server sales are 1000x that of Linux".
    Don't forget the unusable blog quotes search engine too. Oh, and the spurious statistics search engine! And finally some famous pseudo-intellectual book quotes too, in some random language and/or country of origin, to add to the flavour. :) Later on, we can add a MS a** kissing engine too, to round it up. :D
  213. But will it help making the Java EJB Application Servers faster?
  214. no need for that. a simple LISP program set to run every 5 minutes will be sufficient.
  215. again[ Go to top ]

    bot - today Bill Gates was choosen No. 1 business leader by CNN - bot

    (CNN) Tuesday, March 15, 2005 Posted: 10:42 AM EST (1542 GMT)

    According to a panel of experts CNN gathered to rank the top 25 business leaders of the past quarter-century.

    Bill Gates, Microsoft chairman and world's richest man is the No. 1 business leader of the past quarter-century for his mix of entrepreneurial energy, dogged leadership and philanthropic interest.

    This is a automated message, please do not reply to this post.
  216. P.S.[ Go to top ]

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/28/cnn25.top.business/
  217. again and again and again[ Go to top ]

    bot - today Bill Gates was choosen No. 1 business leader by CNN - bot(CNN) Tuesday, March 15, 2005 Posted: 10:42 AM EST (1542 GMT) According to a panel of experts CNN gathered to rank the top 25 business leaders of the past quarter-century.Bill Gates, Microsoft chairman and world's richest man is the No. 1 business leader of the past quarter-century for his mix of entrepreneurial energy, dogged leadership and philanthropic interest.This is a automated message, please do not reply to this post.

    Hot news:
    http://news.com.com/Developers+slam+Microsofts+Visual+Basic+plan/2100-1007_3-5615331.html?tag=nefd.top

    "More than 100 influential developers using Microsoft products have signed a petition demanding the software company reconsider plans to end support for Visual Basic in its "classic" form."

    "One of the main issues keeping VB6 and earlier developers from making the migration to VB.Net is the steepness of the learning curve,"

    "The difficulty in moving existing VB6 apps to VB.Net is, in some cases, insurmountable."

    "Many of those leaving the language behind are migrating not to VB.Net but to non-Microsoft languages such as Java, according to some surveys. For example, a November 2004 survey of developers in Europe, the Middle East and Africa by Evans Data found that Visual Basic had lost 25 percent of its developer base in those areas since 2003."

    This is an automated response. Please do not read.
  218. VB6 is a tool, not a language[ Go to top ]

    "The problem, say the dissenting developers, is that when Microsoft made Visual Basic.Net (or Visual Basic 7) the successor to VB6, it actually killed one language and replaced it with a fundamentally different one."

    It is wrong to say it is a language, VB6 is a tool. The language inside the tool is unimportant. A tool for desktop applications and as that a incredible successful one (for contract programming). Faster than any Java swing application with less than 10% memory use.

    It is just that desktop-application is not that useful today so it should be deprecated.

    Avalon/XAML will change all that again, but that is another story.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  219. Rolf says Microsoft is wrong[ Go to top ]

    It is wrong to say it is a language, VB6 is a tool.

    Erm. Microsoft says it is a language
    http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vbcn7/html/vaconprogrammingwithvb.asp

    I never thought I would hear you say that Microsoft was wrong.
    It is just that desktop-application is not that useful today so it should be deprecated.

    Ah! I guess that is why all those VB6 developers are migrating to Java!
    Avalon/XAML will change all that again, but that is another story. RegardsRolf Tollerud

    Absolutely. It's that wonderful agile, barracuda-like mercilessness again. Nothing like deprecating all those existing technologies and APIs and leaving developers stranded. Another reason I feel warm and comfortable using non-Microsoft development tools.
  220. So you think the pace is to fast? In all other areas of the market-economy the development is swift. I bought my new 3G phone in November; already there is a newer model. The same with flat screens, DVD/HDV with hard disk, multimedia PC's, new cars, motorbikes, etc etc.

    The VB6 supporting DLLs is not going to be removed from Win XP, paying support is going to continue for 3 more years. Nobody has better backwards compatibility than Microsoft.

    And at the other side: what is the opposition offering? Java already has assumed the position of Cobol. EJB3 is a dead end. Java/Swing will never be able to compete on the desktop, innovations like SWT is frowned upon. The whole community is incredible conservative and clings to Elephant EJB Application Servers like drowning people to a stick of wood.

    What will you offer against Avalon/XAML? Gerald Bauer has preached for a long time but is only laughed at! So in short it boils down to:

    Get your ass up and start to doing things.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  221. So you think the pace is to fast? In all other areas of the market-economy the development is swift. I bought my new 3G phone in November; already there is a newer model. The same with flat screens, DVD/HDV with hard disk, multimedia PC's, new cars, motorbikes, etc etc.

    And what is the technology universally supported on all those devices?... Java! Every day many times more people use Java VMs than use Windows.

    I did not say the pace was too fast! I said Microsoft is happy to keep leaving developers behind by introducing non-backwards compatible technologies, as I know from personal experience.
    The VB6 supporting DLLs is not going to be removed from Win XP, paying support is going to continue for 3 more years.

    Shows how much you know: There aren't any VB6 supporting DLLs in Windows XP - that is why you have to package the VB6 runtime (and supporting DLLs) into your installer for VB6 applications.
    Nobody has better backwards compatibility than Microsoft.

    That is utter nonsense!

    I have had serious backward compatibility problems with Microsoft over the decades, from development tools to file formats. I have never known a company that is so willing to break compatibility and deliberately corrupt standards. For example, just mention Access 95 and Access 97 to those of us with long memories and see the angry reaction.
    And at the other side: what is the opposition offering? Java already has assumed the position of Cobol.

    A stupid thing to say. Show me COBOL for mobile devices. Show me video games in COBOL. Show me COBOL used for mathematical modelling. Show me COBOL used for real-time network management. Show me high-performance relational databases actually written in COBOL. Show me COBOL multi-threading libraries. Show me a web server written in COBOL.

    Perhaps you might be confused because there are COBOL compilers written in Java. In fact - show me a COBOL compiler written in COBOL!
    EJB3 is a dead end.


    Nonsense. EJB3 introduces high-performance relational POJO persistence. If that is a dead end, why is Microsoft so interested in .Net object persistence?
     
    Java/Swing will never be able to compete on the desktop,


    Yes, because it is the GUI of the recently award-winning NetBeans. It is so awful, it wins developer awards.
    innovations like SWT is frowned upon.

    Yeah, like its only the GUI for the most popular IDE - Eclipse.
    The whole community is incredible conservative and clings to Elephant EJB Application Servers like drowning people to a stick of wood.What will you offer against Avalon/XAML?

    Why do I have to offer anything against it? Don't you understand anything about Java? The GUIs for Java can make use of whatever native technology is available. I will be able to simply plug in my JSF Renderkit for XAML in the same way as I can plug in my WML or SVG Renderkits.

    And how many desktops is XAML going to be on in 5 or 10 years? People are still using Windows 98 in significant numbers. No-one with any sense will write web or client applications that can only be used by a small number of their customers.
    So in short it boils down to:Get your ass up and start to doing things.RegardsRolf Tollerud

    I already have. I have made sure I am where the real innovation is: open source + Java. You stay with the dinosaur that is Microsoft. Good luck.
  222. please try to come up with something new[ Go to top ]

    Java/Swing will never be able to compete on the desktop,
    It can. If it doesn't "succeed" it will only be because of shortsight and/or blindered people like you. It is no less capable then Atari and Amiga's were at something other than games and graphics.
  223. Shows how much you know: There aren't any VB6 supporting DLLs in Windows XP - that is why you have to package the VB6 runtime (and supporting DLLs) into your installer for VB6 applications.

    Why don't you take a small vb6 one file application and try it on a new Windows XP installation before you make a fool of yourself?
    And what is the technology universally supported on all those devices?... Java! Every day many times more people use Java VMs than use Windows.

    Java to dominate consumer electronics? Hardly
    http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=25447#119262

    "Just at this moment M$ is overtaking another important market - PDA wit Pocket PC. How long will it take the mobile market to be completely dominated by M$..?"

    Oliver dot Lauer at epost dot de
    Old Europe

    Well - not long!
    "Nobody has better backwards compatibility than Microsoft."
    That is utter nonsense!

    Take any application even back to old DOS and it still runs.

    "Show me COBOL for mobile devices."
    Like Java in PDAs?

    "Show me video games in COBOL."
    Show me video game in Java that is not a joke

    "Show me high-performance relational databases actually written in COBOL."

    Please don't mention "high-performance" in connection with Java.

    I do think there is a market for Java making ring-tones though! ;)
    Do immediatly enroll in the composition class at the university!

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  224. Shows how much you know: There aren't any VB6 supporting DLLs in Windows XP - that is why you have to package the VB6 runtime (and supporting DLLs) into your installer for VB6 applications.
    Why don't you take a small vb6 one file application and try it on a new Windows XP installation before you make a fool of yourself?

    Blast! I hate being wrong! You win that one. I am actually going to apologise for questioning your knowledge about this.
    And what is the technology universally supported on all those devices?... Java! Every day many times more people use Java VMs than use Windows.
    Java to dominate consumer electronics? Hardly http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=25447#119262
    "Just at this moment M$ is overtaking another important market - PDA wit Pocket PC. How long will it take the mobile market to be completely dominated by M$..?"

    You do realise the PDA market is dying?

    Anyway, this is irrelevant. The matter of whether or not these device have MS systems on (most don't) has no bearing on whether or not they have Java on - most PCs are now shipped with Java VMs. Java is now the de-facto standard for app deployment on mobile devices, as you well know.

    Java is now shipped on more than half of all mobile phones. If you have recently purchased a phone, you may have Java in your pocket!
    Take any application even back to old DOS and it still runs.

    I have many that don't run! I have Win32 video games I bought years ago that fail under XP, various language IDEs, and I have major DOS databases and other applications that fail under the DOS shell on XP.
    "Show me COBOL for mobile devices." Like Java in PDAs?

    Yes, like Java in PDAs. Java runs in PDAs no matter what the OS. Show me COBOL in PDAs.
    "Show me video games in COBOL.
    Show me video game in Java that is not a joke

    Trouble is, no matter what I show you, you can say 'it is a joke', can't you?

    But, that still did not answer my question. Show me, or admit Java isn't COBOL.
    Please don't mention "high-performance" in connection with Java.

    As it now matches C++ speed in many benchmarks, I certainly will. And, as a pure Java database recently beat a C database in performance tests... I definitely will.

    You know full well that the Java low-performance argument was lost years ago.
  225. I give up[ Go to top ]

    "I have many (DOS applications) that don't run!

    Have you tried to right-click on the .exe file to choose different archaic ways to run the file?

    Anyway I do not have the power to argue anymore. Especially as neither you, Mark, Peter or even Henrique are real Java zealots.

    I go to bed
    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  226. I give up[ Go to top ]

    "I have many (DOS applications) that don't run!Have you tried to right-click on the .exe file to choose different archaic ways to run the file?

    No, because even with decades of experience in the IT industry I would not have thought of that.

    Of course I have!
    Anyway I do not have the power to argue anymore.

    I have achieved something then.
    Especially as neither you, Mark, Peter or even Henrique are real Java zealots.

    I treat that as a compliment! I don't believe in zealotry and unquestioningly supporting one technology. I use the best tool for the job, which happens, for now, to be Java.

    If .Net was truly cross-platform and truly vendor-independent, with support from large corporations, and free of Microsoft's influence, I would consider that!
  227. I give up[ Go to top ]

    I treat that as a compliment! I don't believe in zealotry and unquestioningly supporting one technology.
    Me too. I've done (and do) plenty of different technologies to know which ones are "better" and for what. And if I had to pick one, I know which one that would be too.

      So does Rolf only want to "discuss" Java with zealots?

     Odd how it is that we think anyone to the "right" of us is a Zealot/Fanatic/... and to the left are "liberals". Rolf doesn't see himself as a zealot but ... .
  228. You're too funny[ Go to top ]

    "I have many (DOS applications) that don't run!Have you tried to right-click on the .exe file to choose different archaic ways to run the file?Anyway I do not have the power to argue anymore. Especially as neither you, Mark, Peter or even Henrique are real Java zealots.I go to bed
    RegardsRolf Tollerud

    So now I'm a Java zeolot? If that were true, I wouldn't have any experience in .NET or have release Dingo as on open source library. I did defend Microsoft in a couple responses in this thread.

    Who is reasonable and who is a zeolot :)

    for the record I do like OSS java. corporate java I have mixed feelings, but that has to do with usual corporate BS. I like OSS C#. I dislike .NET the platform for the same reason I dislike corporate Java. I like some of the tools in both C# and Java, but the whole platform concept is too much group thinking for me.

    enjoy.

    peter
  229. Show me video game in Java that is not a joke
    So you don't have a cell phone? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7130108/site/newsweek/

    How about web started games?
    http://grexengine.com/sections/externalgames/
  230. one is never too old to learn! do-re-mi[ Go to top ]

    blockquote>Show me video game in Java that is not a joke
    I believe this is a Java game:

    http://www.lawandordergame.com/

    I know that older versions were for sure.
  231. blockquote>Show me video game in Java that is not a joke
    I believe this is a Java game:http://www.lawandordergame.com/I know that older versions were for sure.
    Yes! uses Java 1.4 and Java 3D. Nice one.
  232. Don't dis COBOL[ Go to top ]

    A stupid thing to say. Show me COBOL for mobile devices. Show me video games in COBOL. Show me COBOL used for mathematical modelling. Show me COBOL used for real-time network management. Show me high-performance relational databases actually written in COBOL. Show me COBOL multi-threading libraries. Show me a web server written in COBOL.Perhaps you might be confused because there are COBOL compilers written in Java. In fact - show me a COBOL compiler written in COBOL!

    Hey, you obviously don't know what you are talking about. Java took a lot of it's architecture from COBOL, including the Virtual Machine. Micro Focus COBOL/2 (since early 80's) ran under a VM and ran the same Byte Code on both PCs and Un*x boxes. Java borrowed heavily from this architecture.
    Also, of interest, the MF COBOL/2 compiler was written in ... COBOL!! The demos included Space Invaders written in ... COBOL!! In fact, every knock you make of COBOL is wrong. How do I know? I worked at MF way back in the late 80s.
    Java is nice, but, it's not as innovative as you think. The COBOL World was frequently there before Sun.
  233. Don't dis COBOL[ Go to top ]

    A stupid thing to say. Show me COBOL for mobile devices. Show me video games in COBOL. Show me COBOL used for mathematical modelling. Show me COBOL used for real-time network management. Show me high-performance relational databases actually written in COBOL. Show me COBOL multi-threading libraries. Show me a web server written in COBOL.Perhaps you might be confused because there are COBOL compilers written in Java. In fact - show me a COBOL compiler written in COBOL!
    Hey, you obviously don't know what you are talking about.

    Thanks.
    Java took a lot of it's architecture from COBOL, including the Virtual Machine. Micro Focus COBOL/2 (since early 80's) ran under a VM and ran the same Byte Code on both PCs and Un*x boxes. Java borrowed heavily from this architecture.

    Just because MF COBOL ran on a VM in the 80s and Java ran on a VM does not mean that Java borrowed from COBOL. VM technology was around way before that, with Smalltalk being a good example. There was also the pascal p-system. I believe the Smalltalk VM was part of the inspiration for Java. The Java Hotspot technology was based on technology from the Self language, not COBOL.

    Also, of interest, the MF COBOL/2 compiler was written in ... COBOL!! The demos included Space Invaders written in ... COBOL!! In fact, every knock you make of COBOL is wrong. How do I know? I worked at MF way back in the late 80s.Java is nice, but, it's not as innovative as you think. The COBOL World was frequently there before Sun.
    Every knock?

    "Show me COBOL for mobile devices. Show me COBOL used for mathematical modelling. Show me COBOL used for real-time network management. Show me high-performance relational databases actually written in COBOL. Show me COBOL multi-threading libraries. Show me a web server written in COBOL."

    I'm not saying Java is innovative, and I don't intend to knock COBOL - it is great for what it is intended to do.

    What I was knocking was the suggestion that Java is equivalent to COBOL - a language intended for server-side business logic. It is much more than that.
  234. <Rolf>
    "Java already has assumed the position of Cobol."
    </Rolf>

    When you say that Java has taken the palce of Cobol, do you mean that thousands of mission critical apps have been built in it and will still be running in thirty years time ?

    Oliver Salmon (Never done Cobol but many interfaces with GDS)
  235. <Rolf>
    "Java already has assumed the position of Cobol."
    </Rolf>

    When you say that Java has taken the place of Cobol, do you mean that thousands of mission critical apps have been built in it and will still be running in thirty years time ?

    Oliver Salmon (Never done Cobol but many interfaces with GDS)
  236. VB6 is a tool, not a language[ Go to top ]

    It is wrong to say it is a language, VB6 is a tool.
    It is both.
     The language inside the tool is unimportant.
    So unimportant that thousands of VB6ers force Microsoft to put VB6 syntax back in VB.Net.
    A tool for desktop applications and as that a incredible successful one (for contract programming).
    Odd - you could create COM objects and web projects and ActiveX controls with it too. Just cause the majority only used it for only desktop apps doesn't mean that is only what it is/was for.
    Faster than any Java swing application with less than 10% memory use.
    Maybe faster but 10% memory usage? So you've created the same app in both Swing and VB6? How well does your VB6 app run on Linux (yeah, that is why Swing isn't like VB6) ?
    It is just that desktop-application is not that useful today so it should be deprecated.
    No. They are still useful today. Just not as much used. It should be done away with because doing apps with Winforms and Swing are much better in the area of deployment and maintenance and ... .
    Avalon/XAML will change all that again, but that is another story.
    I hope so too. That way I can go back to doing mostly Java desktop apps too.
  237. But this urban myth about the "overprice" of Office is only one of the hundreds of lies about Microsoft that goes around Internet – as part of the general lynch-mob atmosphere based on envy.

    This all goes back to you trying to compare Microsoft to a cheap no-frills airline!

    I did not say that it was my personal view that Microsoft overpriced. I just stated that the comparison of Microsoft to a cost-cutting airline was silly because Microsoft had been subject to legal action for overpricing. That is objective fact, not a matter of opinion. One such legal action was part of the US Department of Justice's case against MS. So much for urban myth!

    I think in some ways Microsoft have helped the personal computing industry - I was very happy in the 1980s when everyone standardised on one GUI for the PC - it made my life as a developer and PC user support person much simpler. However, there were plenty of other alternatives to Microsoft that could have been standardised on: Gem, Desqview, OS/2, even Xenix! The IT industry wanted a common GUI and OS. Windows 2.0/3.0 only really took off because OS/2 didn't, which was a shame because OS/2 Warp was a delight to use, and very stable. However, to say that Microsoft drove the PC revolution is nonsense, and a backwards version of history. Sure, there are good things about Windows, but to idolise Microsoft this way is strange - they are just another company, who made use of the IBM PC and its clones.
  238. of course I admire Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    A company of that size that still is agile, smart and merciless as a Barracuda!

    Back in the times that England was the world's greatest sea power with ships in everycorner of earth it was administrated by 500 persons. Today when the British fleet is - I almost said - nonexistent :) it is administered by 35000 persons. How can it be so? Still that is almost always the story when companies or organizations grows. And not only that. The important "culture" - the personality so to speak usually turn into the "bureaucratic" ineffective type.

    No so Microsoft. Anyone that visit Microsoft can ensure themselves that the culture it similar to a small startup. That is, if your smart enough, if you are competent enough, you are allowed to get away with anything! (Including seducing your boss daughter! )

    There is only one way you can accomplish that as a leader, as a owner, and that is to be smarter than the smartest. And I suspect B. Gates is just that.

    Regards
    Rolf Tollerud
  239. of course I admire Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    A company of that size that still is agile, smart and merciless as a Barracuda!

    Absolutely! I completely agree with you. Those aspects of Microsoft are impressive...

    And why I don't use .NET, and why I make sure that I use cross-platform and multi-vendor technologies, even if they are occasionally of lesser quality than the Microsoft equivalents, whenever I can - because you are right!

    Because you should not trust ANY company, even if they are slow, dumb and nice. Certainly you should never put the future of your organisation or product in the hands of a company that is so agile and smart that it can change direction very quickly - so you have to work to keep up - and so merciless that it is happy to leave users and developers behind if necessary. I have been using and Microsoft products for nearly 30 years (I used their MASM in the 70s), and I know in detail about their agility and mercilessness.
  240. Rolf, Rolf... :-)
    Wrong tactics again...
    You can't win respect by intimidating people. Especially not by posting random sentences from "How to look educated in 24h"! ;-)
    Philosophy is not just text. Go read classics again. You will convince me that you actually got it when you stop showing off.
  241. Misleading arguments[ Go to top ]

    With all my respect to Mr. Richard Grimes, I guess he is really misleading in his arguments. There are millions of line codes of C++ at IBM, SUN, Microsoft and others ...
    Why would any company spend money to rewrite something that exists and running! For each 1$ spent on redevelopment, there are many $ to be spent on testing and maintenance !!! IBM for ex integrated Java into Lotus Notes, but did not rewrite it in Java. This is what is done by Microsoft too, it has integrated .Net into MS-Office... Well this is much clever move than reinventing the wheel. I am sure the future, will bring much more amazing pure .Net softwares that will be useful and more innovative than redoing the same thing.
    Every technology has its weak points, especially at the start. I remember the first days of Java were awful! Most of the applets crashed on either Netscape or IE ...

    ziad
  242. What an amazing thread. And what a waste of time (OK, it's got me too). Here's some more perspectives, not that they're needed:
    Microsoft: How utterly dull that so many MS-oriented architects simply believe the documentation. At least back in the Windows 3.0 days the doco was so shot you'd make up your own mind. Yes, there are too many uncritical adherents of the story.

    But: Well, the MS patterns stuff over .NET C# appears to work quite well in practice, and if you can look beyond it and squirt a few collagens into the right places, results are quite impressive.

    OK, so compared to what: Compared to a large J2EE/EJB implementation, similar space, same client. Oops, their architects simply believed the doco that they should instantiate an EJB for almost every event or entity in the architecture. Most of us in this forum could retire on the money wasted getting that to a point where it was viable and ready for business.

    And, the model for comparison: I recruited a whole bunch of Java/J2EE developers and cross-trained them in dotNet. They seem to be finding it quite productive, but you can dismiss that as bias toward the boss if you'd prefer.

    There's dumb stuff in .NET - I can't believe that Indigo wasn't figured and built into the first release of .NET tools, but tell me that the Java and J2EE standards world is perfect and blissful. Really?
  243. Where to start? When to stop...[ Go to top ]

    but tell me that the Java and J2EE standards world is perfect and blissful. Really?

    The Java and J2EE standards world is not perfect or blissful.

    But...

    It's not-perfect and not-blissful in a cross-platform multi-vendor way.

    And that, for me, is what Java is all about.
  244. Where to start? When to stop...[ Go to top ]

    but tell me that the Java and J2EE standards world is perfect and blissful. Really?
    The Java and J2EE standards world is not perfect or blissful.But...It's not-perfect and not-blissful in a cross-platform multi-vendor way.And that, for me, is what Java is all about.
    I told that to someone before Christmas and he told that they studied it in his MBA and that it was not an advantage. (I should have told him to get his money back)
  245. Where to start? When to stop...[ Go to top ]

    And, the model for comparison: I recruited a whole bunch of Java/J2EE developers and cross-trained them in dotNet. They seem to be finding it quite productive, but you can dismiss that as bias toward the boss if you'd prefer.
    From experience - There really wasnt't much to do to cross train them. Most telling them what they wouldn't be able to do and not be able to use. When I use VS.Net I feel like I have one arm tied behind me and my legs hobbled. And it is not for lack of experience on Microsoft tools (I got my VB6 MCP without studying a lick).

    From experience -
    Yes, one can be "productive" in .Net if they use NHibernate and Spring.Net and Log4net and NAnt and NUnit and the refactoring plugin.
  246. The thing about this .NET vs. Java war is that we, as the programmers who consume the technology, really have very little to fear or lose.

    Back in the 1980s, I was a Turbo Pascal programmer. I knew everything about the language, spent many years writing in it, and did some great work. My friends warned me that Pascal was a dying language. Eventually, I realized that they were right, and that I'd have to learn C. All those years of knowledge down the drain, right?

    Not really. When I finally broke down and started my first C project, it was tough going at first, but in a few weeks I was just as productive with C as I had been with Pascal. What I was really doing all those years was learing how to program well, not learning Turbo Pascal.

    A few years later I started doing C++. Then Java. Same story both times.

    If you're a good Java programmer -- if you really know what you're doing, and you're not just blindly following a pattern or memorizing an API -- then you're not far away from being a good .NET programmer if you ever want or need to be. So don't sweat it worrying about who's winning.

    The people who have to worry are the people with vested interests in the technology -- like Sun, BEA, and Microsoft. They want US to feel like we've invested in a lot of non-transferrable knowledge of their platforms because it is in THEIR best interest! Think about it. If Java went to hell tomorrow, you could get another job, learn a new technology and be back where you were in two months. Sun on the other hand would be screwed.

    Frank
  247. Think about it. If Java went to hell tomorrow, you could get another job, learn a new technology and be back where you were in two months.

    Some of us have a long-term investment in a technology, which includes libraries and code repositories built up over years.
    Sun on the other hand would be screwed.Frank
    So would IBM, BEA, HP and others for whom Java is an important part of their IT strategy. Of course, multi-vendor languages just don't vanish, they just get slowly less used over the years.