I'll have what they're drinking
-
They have drivers, but I never installed one for XP (and I didn't let Windows Update do it either) so why do I need one on W7? This is also the only proper screen I could get, it's very hard these days. And no indeed, but this is just one of the problems. I had to make substantial modifications to W7 to make it workable. It's as if W7 grudgingly allows me to use my computer, instead of the other way around. I'll try that thingy you linked to after dinner.
It sounds like your issue is something different, but I've ran into issues with W7 detecting monitors correctly over VGA cables that weren't attached when I booted. Off hand I don't recall if I managed to find a workaround for that or not (haven't tried hooking my work laptop to my home LCD since). Edit: IIRC I did manage to fix it after installing newer drivers for the quadro gpu in the laptop, although what GPU drivers should have to do with what resolutions the monitor offers...
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
modified on Friday, September 17, 2010 3:50 PM
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
I still care a great deal about the code I write.
You are one of the last few remaining lights. Most of what I see is darkness.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Who cares about the work? Be passionate about your creations. Everything you create is a part of you, and everything you create reflects on you.
Damn right! When you look at my code, it is not just code you're looking at, you're looking at me. When you edit my code, it is not just code you're editing, you're editing me.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
if you're just one person on a large team, mindlessly filling in the blanks in a detailed spec document ("You write a function that parses X and Y and returns Z, then he'll make the one that turns Z into..."), I can see how it'd be pretty hard to care about it.
That is what they (the ones in control) are doing. Making the Software industry just like the Food industry. Making things so simple and repetitive that they can hire just about anyone to do the job.
NULL
Mechanical wrote:
Damn right! When you look at my code, it is not just code you're looking at, you're looking at me. When you edit my code, it is not just code you're editing, you're editing me.
Geez man, you need to find some hobby! Preferably a hobby with big boobs!
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
It sounds like your issue is something different, but I've ran into issues with W7 detecting monitors correctly over VGA cables that weren't attached when I booted. Off hand I don't recall if I managed to find a workaround for that or not (haven't tried hooking my work laptop to my home LCD since). Edit: IIRC I did manage to fix it after installing newer drivers for the quadro gpu in the laptop, although what GPU drivers should have to do with what resolutions the monitor offers...
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
modified on Friday, September 17, 2010 3:50 PM
-
I tried hard to understand what your rant is about. The people at Microsoft made a good choice by not supporting XP. Why waste time on developing using a LCD when you can develop something "performant" using latest technologies. The competition from other browsers got tough especially in terms of performance and I think IE9 will beat all of them. Finally, it will be possible to have faster HTML apps on IE. Also, by the time IE9 is released lot of corporate world will move to Windows 7.
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
The competition from other browsers got tough especially in terms of performance and I think IE9 will beat all of them.
Ummmm.... the competition all made blazing fast, standards based browsers that DO support XP. The fact that Microsoft didn't speaks volumes (to those that care to listen).
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
Also, by the time IE9 is released lot of corporate world will move to Windows 7.
Doubtful. Unless the economy picks up dramatically business will be using XP for a few more years.
-
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
The competition from other browsers got tough especially in terms of performance and I think IE9 will beat all of them.
Ummmm.... the competition all made blazing fast, standards based browsers that DO support XP. The fact that Microsoft didn't speaks volumes (to those that care to listen).
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
Also, by the time IE9 is released lot of corporate world will move to Windows 7.
Doubtful. Unless the economy picks up dramatically business will be using XP for a few more years.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Ummmm.... the competition all made blazing fast, standards based browsers that DO support XP. The fact that Microsoft didn't speaks volumes (to those that care to listen).
IF you want to go back in time and convince MS to port DX10 to XP be my guest, this is the technical showstopper for backporting IE9. The GPU accelerated 2D DX component wasn't created until DX10. Anyone wanting to do GPU acceleration in windows has to choose between: 0) Working the GPU drivers directly (*gag*). 1) Doing 2D graphics using using DX9 3d methods (kludgy). 2) Use OpenGL (I suspect this is what FF4.0 is doing, but hell will freeze over before it's used in Redmond). 3) Developing a non-GPU accelerated rendering engine in parallel to the DX10 one. (Goes against having an app behave the same on all platforms.) 4) Dropping XP support.
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Ummmm.... the competition all made blazing fast, standards based browsers that DO support XP. The fact that Microsoft didn't speaks volumes (to those that care to listen).
IF you want to go back in time and convince MS to port DX10 to XP be my guest, this is the technical showstopper for backporting IE9. The GPU accelerated 2D DX component wasn't created until DX10. Anyone wanting to do GPU acceleration in windows has to choose between: 0) Working the GPU drivers directly (*gag*). 1) Doing 2D graphics using using DX9 3d methods (kludgy). 2) Use OpenGL (I suspect this is what FF4.0 is doing, but hell will freeze over before it's used in Redmond). 3) Developing a non-GPU accelerated rendering engine in parallel to the DX10 one. (Goes against having an app behave the same on all platforms.) 4) Dropping XP support.
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
- Doing what Firefox, Google, Opera and Apple did and create a fast, standards based cross platform browser that isn't dependent on MS specific technologies. Seriously... MS decided to do the DX10 one knowing full well they wouldn't make an XP version. They can't fall back on it after the fact as an excuse. Disclaimer: I personally don't care if IE9 works on XP or not. At work (where I use XP) I don't do any surfing that requires much of a browser and the competition is more than adequate. At home... MS has chosen not to port their browsers to my preferred OS.
-
Well the move has just started. Corporate clients usually do not want to go out of date with support. I assume by end of 2011 XP machines will be as rare as Windows 2000 machines are now. So it does not make any sense for a new project such IE9 to sacrifice performance by trying to support XP especially because those on XP can still use IE 8.
modified on Friday, September 17, 2010 12:40 PM
-
That all sounds great. I can't fathom, though, what is in the operating system that will allow all this new performance. Cheers, Drew.
Drew Stainton wrote:
what is in the operating system that will allow all this new performance.
This: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd370990(VS.85).aspx[^]
-
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
The competition from other browsers got tough especially in terms of performance and I think IE9 will beat all of them.
Ummmm.... the competition all made blazing fast, standards based browsers that DO support XP. The fact that Microsoft didn't speaks volumes (to those that care to listen).
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
Also, by the time IE9 is released lot of corporate world will move to Windows 7.
Doubtful. Unless the economy picks up dramatically business will be using XP for a few more years.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Doubtful. Unless the economy picks up dramatically business will be using XP for a few more years.
Most of the corporate customers are already in support/maintenance contract with Microsoft and they do not have to pay extra in software at least. Almost all the companies I work with started the windows 7 and Office 2010 upgrade process about 2 months back. The reason I know this is because I get flooded with emails asking wither muy software will work with Windows 7 and Office 2010.
-
- Doing what Firefox, Google, Opera and Apple did and create a fast, standards based cross platform browser that isn't dependent on MS specific technologies. Seriously... MS decided to do the DX10 one knowing full well they wouldn't make an XP version. They can't fall back on it after the fact as an excuse. Disclaimer: I personally don't care if IE9 works on XP or not. At work (where I use XP) I don't do any surfing that requires much of a browser and the competition is more than adequate. At home... MS has chosen not to port their browsers to my preferred OS.
It all makes perfect business sense, why care about building a software for a soon to be out dated OS using LCD technologies when yo can clean up and rewrite using better technology and produce better software.
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Doubtful. Unless the economy picks up dramatically business will be using XP for a few more years.
Most of the corporate customers are already in support/maintenance contract with Microsoft and they do not have to pay extra in software at least. Almost all the companies I work with started the windows 7 and Office 2010 upgrade process about 2 months back. The reason I know this is because I get flooded with emails asking wither muy software will work with Windows 7 and Office 2010.
-
It's the hardware costs and end user issues that they're avoiding for as long as possible.
As I said, in my experience, lot of companies have started moving to Windows 7. Almost everyone I work with (about 80 of them and some of them in F 500) have started the process. I see no evidence of anyone holding back as I saw when Vista was released. Even the most technological backward companies (textile and paper) have started it. So I assume that by Q3-Q4 2011, every one of my customers will be on W7 and Office 2010.
-
I tried hard to understand what your rant is about. The people at Microsoft made a good choice by not supporting XP. Why waste time on developing using a LCD when you can develop something "performant" using latest technologies. The competition from other browsers got tough especially in terms of performance and I think IE9 will beat all of them. Finally, it will be possible to have faster HTML apps on IE. Also, by the time IE9 is released lot of corporate world will move to Windows 7.
5! :thumbsup:
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com (recently moved from web-host to wordpress)
-
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
by the time IE9 is released lot of corporate world will move to Windows 7.
Not every corporation will have moved to Windows 7, where I work we are missing out Vista but its looking like mid 2011 before we can move to Windows 7 all because we need to test some severe legacy systems and how it works in Windows 7
As barmey as a sack of badgers Dude, if I knew what I was doing in life, I'd be rich, retired, dating a supermodel and laughing at the rest of you from the sidelines.
Simon_Whale wrote:
Not every corporation will have moved to Windows 7
Yeah but a large number will move (the ones that need faster browsers certainly will).
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com (recently moved from web-host to wordpress)
-
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
by the time IE9 is released lot of corporate world will move to Windows 7.
How about the 'lil fella who loves his XP and want to stick to it?
Yusuf May I help you?
Yusuf wrote:
How about the 'lil fella who loves his XP and want to stick to it?
He can use older versions of IE, or use non-Microsoft web browsers :-)
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com (recently moved from web-host to wordpress)
-
Christopher Duncan wrote:
As I'm sure you all know, IE9 doesn't support XP. Firefox does. Chrome does. Hell, even that funky tree hugging Apple browser does.
Yes, but IE8 does support XP, just stuck with this one. IE9 probably not supports Win 3.11 as well, but nobody complains about that.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
Deyan Georgiev wrote:
IE9 probably not supports Win 3.11 as well, but nobody complains about that.
Don't be so sure. :rolleyes:
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com (recently moved from web-host to wordpress)
-
As I said, in my experience, lot of companies have started moving to Windows 7. Almost everyone I work with (about 80 of them and some of them in F 500) have started the process. I see no evidence of anyone holding back as I saw when Vista was released. Even the most technological backward companies (textile and paper) have started it. So I assume that by Q3-Q4 2011, every one of my customers will be on W7 and Office 2010.
-
I think you're letting your personal, anecdotal evidence cloud your judgement. Most IT stats and polls don't reflect your experiences.
Yes may be, but usually I have found that my personal evidence matches the reAl world. Wow! Someone voted your posts 1. I will compensate the voting.
-
It all makes perfect business sense, why care about building a software for a soon to be out dated OS using LCD technologies when yo can clean up and rewrite using better technology and produce better software.
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
It all makes perfect business sense, why care about building a software for a soon to be out dated OS using LCD technologies when yo can clean up and rewrite using better technology and produce better software.
And not support 68% of the market? Where is the "business sense" in that? In my not so humble opinion, Microsoft is just doing one more little thing to help nudge XP users towards 7. Which is fine, I just wish they would admit it.
-
There's a big fuss being made over IE9. And perhaps they deserve it. They've come up with an astonishing and novel way to make their software run faster. They simply tell users to buy a faster box. For the record, I just can't get excited about browsers but like Viagra ads, they're a part of everyday life. At least the latter promises something enjoyable. As I'm sure you all know, IE9 doesn't support XP. Firefox does. Chrome does. Hell, even that funky tree hugging Apple browser does. I made a good living off of MS technologies and don't feel like learning a whole new religion to maintain my power over the small electronic boxes that seem to be taking over the household (the refrigerator has taken to whimpering and scooting away from the ethernet port). Even so, you have to wonder when someone will decide that it's time to just shoot MS in the head and put that lumbering, incompetent, dysfunctional collection of middle managers out of its misery. I swear, the first MS guy I hear whining about IE losing market share, I'm just going to whack him in the head with an empty pizza box. In the meantime, whatever the MS management is drinking, I'll have two, please.
Christopher Duncan
www.PracticalUSA.com
Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes
Copywriting ServicesYeah, but...XP must die. Personally, as the guy who has to support thatgoodfernuthin' browser (IEx), IE9 brings a gentle waft of hope. Hope that it may support standards. Hope that the CSS3 stuff I want to use will be appreciated by more. Hope that IE will STOP CRASHING AND KILLING MY ZEN CALM. OK, deep breaths. I'm good. Really.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP