Microsoft Update 784 Megs...
-
Thats ridiculous, you should create your own update compression and installation system for MS.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Have you ever used the Linux Package Management System. There's a great one (the King) that comes with SuSE but I think RHPM is just fine. I love how they do it. They put every single little aspect of the update separately in the RPM manager. You whistle while you work and click the ones you need. Then at the end it scans your selections and adds in the supporting packages you *must* have to make your selections work. It's so stream lined and easy... Not this monolithic 400Mb download to actually get 30Mb worth of updates... It used to have a really cute name but I forget that now... Two names that went together like milk & honey. What were they... ah yes! APT and Synaptic. I kind of wish Micrsoft would swing more in that direction. So easy to do... Have you seen those package managers though? Totally SWEET!:cool:
-
I'm so with you on that!!! You write the front and I'll write the back. We'd be freagin RICH DUDE!!!:cool::rose:
ALRIGHT!! Let me fire up MS-DOS debug, I need to create a 16bit .COM QBASIC compiler that will allow me to create a 32bit C compiler that will enable me to create a 64bit C++ compiler that will enable me to build a .NET clone and finally a C# compiler and IDE.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
Thats ridiculous, you should create your own update compression and installation system for MS.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Dude, I better get SVN and Tortoise up and running for all this code we're carving out. This could get ugly fast... Alas and never fear. Paul has a Mac and ruby, he can save us all.:rolleyes:
-
So I switched from Windows Update to Microsoft Update (does the whole suite of Microsoft products). So I run the ActiveX control and comes back with 784 megs of updates.:omg: If I was on dial-up I'd be so screwed. Thankfully I had all of it pulled down in about 20 minutes but the install is still going and there's the pink bunny going back and forth on the screen pounding a drum. What's that all about?:laugh:
code-frog wrote:
784 megs of updates
That means the updates - not the products, but the updates - are about 10, no, 100, no, 1000 times bigger than our entire development system! Wowzer! Gives new meaning to words and phrases like "bloat" and "feature creep", doesn't it?
-
ALRIGHT!! Let me fire up MS-DOS debug, I need to create a 16bit .COM QBASIC compiler that will allow me to create a 32bit C compiler that will enable me to create a 64bit C++ compiler that will enable me to build a .NET clone and finally a C# compiler and IDE.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
We are not going to get anywhere without the right chips. I need some good salted corn tortilla chips with some fresh salsa. I love to belly up some chips and hot salsa prior to coding. At which point I like to belly up to an ice cold coke that I use to sip away my flaming mouth as I start constructing the players that bring together the game. But it's gotta start with food man or I'm dead before we even have the kick-off. Tostitos is good enough. Classic Coca Cola is a must (I've had thread locking, pessimistic errors any time Pepsi is around). Alright! We're off. Should be good like back in the day pulling all nighters (several in a row) getting stuff done for the prof so he could say, "Yeah, looks fine. It compiles." and you'd want to say "Dude but it compiles with style and flair..." except you really needed to belch out some chips and salsa and it wouldn't aid your case for sure...:cool:
-
code-frog wrote:
784 megs of updates
That means the updates - not the products, but the updates - are about 10, no, 100, no, 1000 times bigger than our entire development system! Wowzer! Gives new meaning to words and phrases like "bloat" and "feature creep", doesn't it?
:cough: They are fixes for security flaws. :cough: So I guess that means they shipped these things without doors or locks and windows.:cool:
-
Have you ever used the Linux Package Management System. There's a great one (the King) that comes with SuSE but I think RHPM is just fine. I love how they do it. They put every single little aspect of the update separately in the RPM manager. You whistle while you work and click the ones you need. Then at the end it scans your selections and adds in the supporting packages you *must* have to make your selections work. It's so stream lined and easy... Not this monolithic 400Mb download to actually get 30Mb worth of updates... It used to have a really cute name but I forget that now... Two names that went together like milk & honey. What were they... ah yes! APT and Synaptic. I kind of wish Micrsoft would swing more in that direction. So easy to do... Have you seen those package managers though? Totally SWEET!:cool:
code-frog wrote:
Have you ever used the Linux Package Management System.
Yeah, but I haven't thoroughly looked at it and figured out how it worked. It has been a very long time since I installed Linux on my computer. When I discovered RPMs I thought it was a great idea and I thought Windows was a piece of crap because it used .exe files at the time to install programs. I was pretty young and Windows 2000 was pretty new so I didn't know of .msi files at the time. For updating existing files I think a differential system would be compact and fast. It would just tweak the files instead of totally replacing them and you wouldn't have to download the whole file. Also the differential information in the download could be compressed with a standard compression algorithm decreasing the size even more.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
code-frog wrote:
784 megs of updates
That means the updates - not the products, but the updates - are about 10, no, 100, no, 1000 times bigger than our entire development system! Wowzer! Gives new meaning to words and phrases like "bloat" and "feature creep", doesn't it?
Why must it take over my system and severely limit my capabilities and give me vague information? Its clearly not a mature product or is some kind of pre-alpha experiment being developed in the Osmonian laboratories.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
We are not going to get anywhere without the right chips. I need some good salted corn tortilla chips with some fresh salsa. I love to belly up some chips and hot salsa prior to coding. At which point I like to belly up to an ice cold coke that I use to sip away my flaming mouth as I start constructing the players that bring together the game. But it's gotta start with food man or I'm dead before we even have the kick-off. Tostitos is good enough. Classic Coca Cola is a must (I've had thread locking, pessimistic errors any time Pepsi is around). Alright! We're off. Should be good like back in the day pulling all nighters (several in a row) getting stuff done for the prof so he could say, "Yeah, looks fine. It compiles." and you'd want to say "Dude but it compiles with style and flair..." except you really needed to belch out some chips and salsa and it wouldn't aid your case for sure...:cool:
Coke and snacks is a must but you forgot tea and coffee. Oh and some strong facial hairs to rub and tug on when you are thinking hard. Its a bad habit of mine that ends up in my keyboard. :laugh:
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
code-frog wrote:
Have you ever used the Linux Package Management System.
Yeah, but I haven't thoroughly looked at it and figured out how it worked. It has been a very long time since I installed Linux on my computer. When I discovered RPMs I thought it was a great idea and I thought Windows was a piece of crap because it used .exe files at the time to install programs. I was pretty young and Windows 2000 was pretty new so I didn't know of .msi files at the time. For updating existing files I think a differential system would be compact and fast. It would just tweak the files instead of totally replacing them and you wouldn't have to download the whole file. Also the differential information in the download could be compressed with a standard compression algorithm decreasing the size even more.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Where I worked at Micron we had this cool system. Every single in-house dependent file or library got downloaded to ever singl persons coputer. If you downloaded one of your programs that needed it another system was watching and paused your request while it installed the files you needed then let your request ride right on by. It was beautiful. Everyhing was there and it ran. There was another that just updated. The updates were so tight that we never had more 30 seconds of being out of synch across the site at any given time. It was cool. Your application called for it. The curator found it and loaded it. The curator took deliveries all the time and the updater was running real time. It was slick. We'd use MSI's sometimes DLL's sometimes batch files. Any registered file could be put in and pushed out in under 30 minutes.
-
Coke and snacks is a must but you forgot tea and coffee. Oh and some strong facial hairs to rub and tug on when you are thinking hard. Its a bad habit of mine that ends up in my keyboard. :laugh:
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
I have to stay clean shaven. Otherwise I do that and my face starts to hurt and it drives me nuts.
-
Where I worked at Micron we had this cool system. Every single in-house dependent file or library got downloaded to ever singl persons coputer. If you downloaded one of your programs that needed it another system was watching and paused your request while it installed the files you needed then let your request ride right on by. It was beautiful. Everyhing was there and it ran. There was another that just updated. The updates were so tight that we never had more 30 seconds of being out of synch across the site at any given time. It was cool. Your application called for it. The curator found it and loaded it. The curator took deliveries all the time and the updater was running real time. It was slick. We'd use MSI's sometimes DLL's sometimes batch files. Any registered file could be put in and pushed out in under 30 minutes.
What happens if some files that you pre-downloaded were missing or corrupt? What happens if they are out of date? Why not put all those files on a centralized network connected location and have the curator download the files off the network that way you can keep everything up to date easily and manage everything easily. It wouldn't be any slower on todays high speed 100 and 1000 mbit networks.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
So I switched from Windows Update to Microsoft Update (does the whole suite of Microsoft products). So I run the ActiveX control and comes back with 784 megs of updates.:omg: If I was on dial-up I'd be so screwed. Thankfully I had all of it pulled down in about 20 minutes but the install is still going and there's the pink bunny going back and forth on the screen pounding a drum. What's that all about?:laugh:
code-frog wrote:
there's the pink bunny going back and forth on the screen pounding a drum. What's that all about?
Microsoft did a poll and found that people thought the BSOD was too impersonal and threatening. The bunny is the replacement, and when the bunny stops...
"...a photo album is like Life, but flat and stuck to pages." - Shog9
-
Why must it take over my system and severely limit my capabilities and give me vague information? Its clearly not a mature product or is some kind of pre-alpha experiment being developed in the Osmonian laboratories.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Why must it take over my system?
Our product doesn't "take over your system" - it merely takes over your screen (1) to focus your attention on the task at hand, and (2) as an example of an alternate and more elegant interface for general purpose use. We don't like to look at Microsoft's tasteless and over-complicated collection of interface widgets when we're trying to work. Furthermore, we want to give each and every developer the ability to actually create something - to design and implement the interface that is exactly right for his particular user community. That's why our applications start out - not as a Window on top of someone else's window on top of someone else's desktop - but as a completely blank screen.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Why must it... severely limit my capabilities?
It doesn't. You can minimize our desktop at any time (the command is under "M"). And you can ALT-TAB to other running applications, at any time. You can also use the "Windows" key to bring up the Start bar, at any time. There's a way to bring the entire Window's desktop to the front, too, but I forget what it is because I never do that.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Its clearly not a mature product or is some kind of pre-alpha experiment being developed in the Osmonian laboratories.
In the Manifesto available on our website we specifically say: We offer our Plain English compiler as both "proof of concept" and a first step in the right direction. Our integrated development environment includes an elegant desktop interface, a simplified file manager, an efficient text editor, the compiler, and the page-layout routines used to produce all of our documentation, the illustrations for our web site, and this manifesto. It should be noted that all this functionality is embodied in a single, stand-alone, native-code executable less than one megabyte in size. The program runs on the Wintel Kluge, was written entirely in Plain English, and re-compiles itself in less than three seconds. Note the words "proof of concept" and "first step in the right direction". Clear enough?
-
Why must it take over my system and severely limit my capabilities and give me vague information? Its clearly not a mature product or is some kind of pre-alpha experiment being developed in the Osmonian laboratories.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Why must it... give me vague information?
When I sent you the link for the product, I included, among other things, this warning: I recommend that you start with the PDF in the "documentation" directory and follow the instructions you find there TO THE LETTER. Print off the first 54 pages - I mean that, print them off - and do EXACTLY what they say. No more, no less. Ask questions as you go. We can talk about your other projects when you've finished that exercise. Otherwise, I can pretty much guarantee that you'll be disappointed. You failed to follow those simple instructions and were, as predicted, disappointed.
-
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Why must it take over my system?
Our product doesn't "take over your system" - it merely takes over your screen (1) to focus your attention on the task at hand, and (2) as an example of an alternate and more elegant interface for general purpose use. We don't like to look at Microsoft's tasteless and over-complicated collection of interface widgets when we're trying to work. Furthermore, we want to give each and every developer the ability to actually create something - to design and implement the interface that is exactly right for his particular user community. That's why our applications start out - not as a Window on top of someone else's window on top of someone else's desktop - but as a completely blank screen.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Why must it... severely limit my capabilities?
It doesn't. You can minimize our desktop at any time (the command is under "M"). And you can ALT-TAB to other running applications, at any time. You can also use the "Windows" key to bring up the Start bar, at any time. There's a way to bring the entire Window's desktop to the front, too, but I forget what it is because I never do that.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Its clearly not a mature product or is some kind of pre-alpha experiment being developed in the Osmonian laboratories.
In the Manifesto available on our website we specifically say: We offer our Plain English compiler as both "proof of concept" and a first step in the right direction. Our integrated development environment includes an elegant desktop interface, a simplified file manager, an efficient text editor, the compiler, and the page-layout routines used to produce all of our documentation, the illustrations for our web site, and this manifesto. It should be noted that all this functionality is embodied in a single, stand-alone, native-code executable less than one megabyte in size. The program runs on the Wintel Kluge, was written entirely in Plain English, and re-compiles itself in less than three seconds. Note the words "proof of concept" and "first step in the right direction". Clear enough?
I cant go up one directory, I cant drag and drop, I cant run it in a windows and use the rest of my system, the menus are not standard. I don't know what functions the program has but I can easily figure out what functions are likely going to be in the file menu, however when I want to do something in cal I have to search in all the letter buttons to find something. If I want to compile the program for instance where do I look, is it in B for Build? C for Compile? M for make EXE? Its a flawed concept and something very very few could ever get used to, its like 80s Mac to the extreme times 1000. If you want people to take your product seriously then stop treating developers like 8 year olds who never used a computer before.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Why must it... give me vague information?
When I sent you the link for the product, I included, among other things, this warning: I recommend that you start with the PDF in the "documentation" directory and follow the instructions you find there TO THE LETTER. Print off the first 54 pages - I mean that, print them off - and do EXACTLY what they say. No more, no less. Ask questions as you go. We can talk about your other projects when you've finished that exercise. Otherwise, I can pretty much guarantee that you'll be disappointed. You failed to follow those simple instructions and were, as predicted, disappointed.
I'm talking about the error messages. When I compile a program that has syntax errors or other code errors that prevent the program from compiling I expect intricately detailed information including a line number. If it is not a syntax error then I would like to know why the code would not work and maybe even some suggestions on how to correct it like Visual Studio 2005. Also whats with buttons saying m'kay. LOL its like its for a 5 year old or something. Perhaps your lexical analysis algorithms are advanced and very capable but the overall product seem like a toy.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
I cant go up one directory, I cant drag and drop, I cant run it in a windows and use the rest of my system, the menus are not standard. I don't know what functions the program has but I can easily figure out what functions are likely going to be in the file menu, however when I want to do something in cal I have to search in all the letter buttons to find something. If I want to compile the program for instance where do I look, is it in B for Build? C for Compile? M for make EXE? Its a flawed concept and something very very few could ever get used to, its like 80s Mac to the extreme times 1000. If you want people to take your product seriously then stop treating developers like 8 year olds who never used a computer before.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
stop treating developers like 8 year olds who never used a computer before.
but he is the only adult in the world, to him the rest of everyone are children all going the wrong way and refusing to obey/listen to him. By the way, as I understand it, he disapproves of the current lexical analysis work out of the AI sector, so doesn't use lexical analysis in the true sense of the word -- his compiler doesn't understand what you type anymore than a C compiler understands what you wrote. It is basically a syntactical compiler like every other windows compiler, only does less, but uses an English syntax. Even he admits the world is better simplified so you don't need power, you don't need capability, you don't need your OS, you don't even need any other software, what you saw should be all you ever need, proof of concept or not, he claims less is more. Anyone who isn't happy with his way, should shut up and change because they are wrong and only he is right. Calling his compiler "lexical analysis" would be like calling the very first C-shell the same as the latest generation of Visual studio. But then the whole industry of AI is all going the wrong direction... you know, brain simulations and multi-path complex neuron interactions. True AI, true lexical analysis, is so blasé compared to doing the almost nothing as you saw.... You get more contempt for the universe than quality of product from Osmo.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
I cant go up one directory, I cant drag and drop, I cant run it in a windows and use the rest of my system, the menus are not standard. I don't know what functions the program has but I can easily figure out what functions are likely going to be in the file menu, however when I want to do something in cal I have to search in all the letter buttons to find something. If I want to compile the program for instance where do I look, is it in B for Build? C for Compile? M for make EXE? Its a flawed concept and something very very few could ever get used to, its like 80s Mac to the extreme times 1000. If you want people to take your product seriously then stop treating developers like 8 year olds who never used a computer before.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
I cant go up one directory
Yes you can, with mouse or keyboard. You just didn't do what you were told to do and so you don't know how. Remember, it's an alternative interface that comes with instructions.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
I cant drag and drop
Not in our application; there's no need to do so. The interface is intentionally minimalist and there are other ways (mouse and keyboard) to accomplish the same ends.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
I cant run it in a windows and use the rest of my system
As discussed above, you can use the rest of your system; you just can't see it when we're on top. Again, this is intentional - we're illustrating a possible replacement for the Window's desktop and therefore must obscure the competition to make our point.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
the menus are not standard
Of course; that's part of what "alternative" in "alternative interface" means. If everything was standard, well, it would be standard.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
I don't know what functions the program has but I can easily figure out what functions are likely going to be in the file menu, however when I want to do something in cal I have to search in all the letter buttons to find something.
Not really. The menus are simply alphabetical. "Save", for example, is under "S".
Captain See Sharp wrote:
If I want to compile the program for instance where do I look, is it in B for Build? C for Compile? M for make EXE?
Well, "Compile" is under "C" and "Run" is under "R". Both create a fresh executable of your entire application - in less than three seconds. The normal technique is to use CTRL-R or ALT-R (either one) to test code under development; since a complete recreation is effected every time, you can be sure that the program you're testing and the one you'll eventually release are one and the same thing.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Its a flawed concept and something very very few could ever get used to,
You haven't seen the smiling faces of our users. We have.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
If you want people to ta
-
I'm talking about the error messages. When I compile a program that has syntax errors or other code errors that prevent the program from compiling I expect intricately detailed information including a line number. If it is not a syntax error then I would like to know why the code would not work and maybe even some suggestions on how to correct it like Visual Studio 2005. Also whats with buttons saying m'kay. LOL its like its for a 5 year old or something. Perhaps your lexical analysis algorithms are advanced and very capable but the overall product seem like a toy.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
When I compile a program that has syntax errors or other code errors that prevent the program from compiling I expect intricately detailed information including a line number.
You don't need a line number; the editor is integrated with the compiler and the offending line is highlighted and scrolled onto the screen.
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Also whats with buttons saying m'kay. LOL its like its for a 5 year old or something.
It's a joke, m'kay? Aren't we allowed to have a little fun, m'kay? You don't complain about CodeProject's childish mascot, m'kay, so lay off our buttons, m'kay?
Captain See Sharp wrote:
Perhaps your lexical analysis algorithms are advanced and very capable but the overall product seem like a toy.
Things don't have to be difficult to the sophisticated; and they don't have to be complicated to be "grown up". The thing is what we say it is, and it does what we say it does. It's small, efficient, and unique. Worthy of study - if one has an open mind about these things...