development futures...
-
following on from the post about mfc below... it is becoming increasingly obvious to me that the trend ms is taking with its dev tools is more influenced by its need to keep posting record profits to please its shareholders than to make our lives easier or better lets face it ... there is no good reason why managed code and the clr was necessary to provide any new class library features etc bar garbage collection afaics (and anyone who acually _needs_ garbage collection shouldnt be writing software) ... the primary motive was to make it easier (almost idiot proof in fact) for people to write software and at the same time reap a nice reward for doing so with increased sales of tools etc is all this aimed at providing better software products to _our_ end users?? no ... not even close ... in fact the current mess has the opposite effect imho now take the internet ... a major force in corporate life that no one company has a hold over because there are standards for doing everything ... makes life nice and easy for us developers and our clients ... what does ms do? make their own set of standards and tools that follow it ... is the primary reason for doing this so that we developers can produce better end products for our users? i dont think so if u realise what drives ms then u can see the true reasons behind things that happen ... anybody who believes that ms makes new software just cos they want to make everybodys life better is somewhat missing the point
Just the same old dribble.. Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
Just the same old dribble.. Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
Yeah ok, but... I am confused as to what the point of this thread is? Isn't it a lot like saying the sky is blue?
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
-
Yeah ok, but... I am confused as to what the point of this thread is? Isn't it a lot like saying the sky is blue?
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
-
The person's comments about the evil MS trying to dominate the world. Every company out there is doing the same thing, even open source ones! Same old dribble.. From the disdain the person has about managed code, he/she might be a C++ programmer that wants the world to remain flat and cannot tolerate change. Same old dribble.. Do they make tools that make our life easier, yes.. MFC made our life easier. For many ATL, made our life easier. Then .NET has trashed our lives.. Ummm. Have made things easier and now most kids can write software that can compete with most professionals. Yes, they make money on it and that is their goal. They, like almost all companies exist to make money and that is what the shareholders demand. But to get developers to upgrade and buy more tools they have to give the developers a reason. Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
The person's comments about the evil MS trying to dominate the world. Every company out there is doing the same thing, even open source ones! Same old dribble.. From the disdain the person has about managed code, he/she might be a C++ programmer that wants the world to remain flat and cannot tolerate change. Same old dribble.. Do they make tools that make our life easier, yes.. MFC made our life easier. For many ATL, made our life easier. Then .NET has trashed our lives.. Ummm. Have made things easier and now most kids can write software that can compete with most professionals. Yes, they make money on it and that is their goal. They, like almost all companies exist to make money and that is what the shareholders demand. But to get developers to upgrade and buy more tools they have to give the developers a reason. Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
I am not narrow minded, Micosoft is just as bad as the rest of them. Of course, I can see beyond Linux! Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
I am not narrow minded, Micosoft is just as bad as the rest of them. Of course, I can see beyond Linux! Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
l a u r e n wrote: anybody who believes that ms makes new software just cos they want to make everybodys life better is somewhat missing the point Erm, yeah. Microsoft like any company exists to keep posting those record profits. Influence doesn't come into it. Companies don't exist to make our lives better, they exist to take our cash. So what is new? l a u r e n wrote: [ms] make their own set of standards and tools that follow it ... is the primary reason for doing this so that we developers can produce better end products for our users? If we didn't produce better end products for our end users then they wouldn't use them, and if they don't use them then Microsoft has no income because neither the end users or us developers would have a need for their software. Microsoft are the landowners of olden times, they make us pay to use their land but in return we get the benefit of their influence and get to use their property to feed our families. It is foolish to believe they exist to support you IMO. BTW, I notice your new laptop still doesn't have a caps lock key... ;)
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
Crap. Most of their profit in at least the past 15 years has come from the home user. They know very little about if it is good, only that their are nice shiney adverts telling us all how good Microsoft's stuff is. Then they keep buying the upgrades hoping it will have less bugs. Rarely does. Microsoft was lucky that so many people pirated their stuff early and got used to it. Many of these pirates now make the purchasing decisions that make Microsoft even more money. If we're lucky Microsoft might find a company with a good/modern operating system and buy then out. Thats pretty much all they have done in the last 20 odd years to get new stuff. Everything else is little more than old stuff with minimal evolution and shitloads of backwards compatibility. Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So i had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
-
following on from the post about mfc below... it is becoming increasingly obvious to me that the trend ms is taking with its dev tools is more influenced by its need to keep posting record profits to please its shareholders than to make our lives easier or better lets face it ... there is no good reason why managed code and the clr was necessary to provide any new class library features etc bar garbage collection afaics (and anyone who acually _needs_ garbage collection shouldnt be writing software) ... the primary motive was to make it easier (almost idiot proof in fact) for people to write software and at the same time reap a nice reward for doing so with increased sales of tools etc is all this aimed at providing better software products to _our_ end users?? no ... not even close ... in fact the current mess has the opposite effect imho now take the internet ... a major force in corporate life that no one company has a hold over because there are standards for doing everything ... makes life nice and easy for us developers and our clients ... what does ms do? make their own set of standards and tools that follow it ... is the primary reason for doing this so that we developers can produce better end products for our users? i dont think so if u realise what drives ms then u can see the true reasons behind things that happen ... anybody who believes that ms makes new software just cos they want to make everybodys life better is somewhat missing the point
Anyone who needs garbage collection shouldn't be writing software? I'm sorry but I completely disagree with this one. It's a rather harsh overgeneralisation. If you want to go all the way with your low-level anctics, then I suggest you write your next big project using punch cards. Programming languages evolve for a reason. I have developed large projects in both managed and unmanaged languages, and personally I did not feel that using managed code made me "lazier" with my memory allocation. What it *did* do was take away the time that is normally required for me to deal with choosing where to call free(), and when to call it. The obvious conterargument, but by no means overshadowing the advantages, is that developers may become more complacent with their memory usage. But you can counter that again with the advantage of not being able to do naughty things with memory. Aside from security, teaching people programming with a managed language is so much easier. Writing to element n rather than n-1 in an array doesn't cause a segmentation fault 5 minutes into your code. It causes an exception that the student can read, and ask for assistance with. Once they are informed of why the exception was thrown, they understand arrays. The .NET class library is fantastic. I am not forcing my opinion upon anyone, but I personally think it is wonderfully written, organised, and very complete. Software developers like consistency - and that's why the .NET class library works so well. The library documentation is consistent, and the class usage is consistent. Start plugging in classes from elsewhere and the project soon becomes unmanagable and hard to maintain. And although "MS M4K3 SOFTW4RE IPH BUGZ LOL", I personally trust that the classes do their job perfectly, every time. As for the CLR, I have a friend who's team has successfully completed a large project utilising the CLR. One team member with expertise in a particular area that they required considered himself to be a more proficient C++ coder, while the rest of the team were used to, and had began the project in VB. No problem whatsoever to move him over to MC++ and continue working on the project. We don't all think MS just wants to make software to make everyone's life better - that would be rather naive. As an entity, they want to make money. But I would put good money on saying that the .NET/VS team are just as enthusiastic about software development as most people are here. Thanks, Simey
-
You are a bit narrow focused, too, sometimes Lauren ;) Hehehe... - Anders Bill's Bar
My PhotosWDevs - The worlds first DSP, free blog space, email and more. Now also with forums :)
-
Anyone who needs garbage collection shouldn't be writing software? I'm sorry but I completely disagree with this one. It's a rather harsh overgeneralisation. If you want to go all the way with your low-level anctics, then I suggest you write your next big project using punch cards. Programming languages evolve for a reason. I have developed large projects in both managed and unmanaged languages, and personally I did not feel that using managed code made me "lazier" with my memory allocation. What it *did* do was take away the time that is normally required for me to deal with choosing where to call free(), and when to call it. The obvious conterargument, but by no means overshadowing the advantages, is that developers may become more complacent with their memory usage. But you can counter that again with the advantage of not being able to do naughty things with memory. Aside from security, teaching people programming with a managed language is so much easier. Writing to element n rather than n-1 in an array doesn't cause a segmentation fault 5 minutes into your code. It causes an exception that the student can read, and ask for assistance with. Once they are informed of why the exception was thrown, they understand arrays. The .NET class library is fantastic. I am not forcing my opinion upon anyone, but I personally think it is wonderfully written, organised, and very complete. Software developers like consistency - and that's why the .NET class library works so well. The library documentation is consistent, and the class usage is consistent. Start plugging in classes from elsewhere and the project soon becomes unmanagable and hard to maintain. And although "MS M4K3 SOFTW4RE IPH BUGZ LOL", I personally trust that the classes do their job perfectly, every time. As for the CLR, I have a friend who's team has successfully completed a large project utilising the CLR. One team member with expertise in a particular area that they required considered himself to be a more proficient C++ coder, while the rest of the team were used to, and had began the project in VB. No problem whatsoever to move him over to MC++ and continue working on the project. We don't all think MS just wants to make software to make everyone's life better - that would be rather naive. As an entity, they want to make money. But I would put good money on saying that the .NET/VS team are just as enthusiastic about software development as most people are here. Thanks, Simey
Simon Walton wrote: Writing to element n rather than n-1 in an array doesn't cause a segmentation fault 5 minutes into your code. It causes an exception One thing I really love about VM. Simon Walton wrote: The .NET class library is fantastic. I am not forcing my opinion upon anyone, but I personally think it is wonderfully written, organised, and very complete. I have somewhat different opinion on this one :) In my eyes, BCL is a poorly designed, bloated jungle. That's why they are introducing "My Classes" into VB 2005 - as if that would help ;P
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
-
l a u r e n wrote: no see ur missing my point but thats ok im kinda bored discussing things with people who are too narrowly focused to see beyond microsoft Boooo. That was not worthy of you, Lauren. Maybe you shouldn't have brought it up if you didn't want to talk about it?
"Making money is art and working is art and good business is the best art of all."--Andy Warhol Toasty0.com
-
following on from the post about mfc below... it is becoming increasingly obvious to me that the trend ms is taking with its dev tools is more influenced by its need to keep posting record profits to please its shareholders than to make our lives easier or better lets face it ... there is no good reason why managed code and the clr was necessary to provide any new class library features etc bar garbage collection afaics (and anyone who acually _needs_ garbage collection shouldnt be writing software) ... the primary motive was to make it easier (almost idiot proof in fact) for people to write software and at the same time reap a nice reward for doing so with increased sales of tools etc is all this aimed at providing better software products to _our_ end users?? no ... not even close ... in fact the current mess has the opposite effect imho now take the internet ... a major force in corporate life that no one company has a hold over because there are standards for doing everything ... makes life nice and easy for us developers and our clients ... what does ms do? make their own set of standards and tools that follow it ... is the primary reason for doing this so that we developers can produce better end products for our users? i dont think so if u realise what drives ms then u can see the true reasons behind things that happen ... anybody who believes that ms makes new software just cos they want to make everybodys life better is somewhat missing the point
Except that, IMO, C# is better than C++, .NET is better than MFC, managed code is better than unmanaged code, etc. Obviously, there are exceptions, and enough of them that C++, MFC, and unmanaged code will happily continue to have a life. Regardless of their motives, I'm quite delighted with C# and .NET. Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing
-
Crap. Most of their profit in at least the past 15 years has come from the home user. They know very little about if it is good, only that their are nice shiney adverts telling us all how good Microsoft's stuff is. Then they keep buying the upgrades hoping it will have less bugs. Rarely does. Microsoft was lucky that so many people pirated their stuff early and got used to it. Many of these pirates now make the purchasing decisions that make Microsoft even more money. If we're lucky Microsoft might find a company with a good/modern operating system and buy then out. Thats pretty much all they have done in the last 20 odd years to get new stuff. Everything else is little more than old stuff with minimal evolution and shitloads of backwards compatibility. Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So i had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
"... Everything else is little more than old stuff with minimal evolution and shitloads of backwards compatibility...." Oh, come off it! You can't have it both ways, if they didn't have backwards compatibility everyone would be up in arms. The facts are that their most recent operating systems since windows 2000 are marvels of stability and considering the size and scope of the user base as close to bug free as any software out there.
-
Crap. Most of their profit in at least the past 15 years has come from the home user. They know very little about if it is good, only that their are nice shiney adverts telling us all how good Microsoft's stuff is. Then they keep buying the upgrades hoping it will have less bugs. Rarely does. Microsoft was lucky that so many people pirated their stuff early and got used to it. Many of these pirates now make the purchasing decisions that make Microsoft even more money. If we're lucky Microsoft might find a company with a good/modern operating system and buy then out. Thats pretty much all they have done in the last 20 odd years to get new stuff. Everything else is little more than old stuff with minimal evolution and shitloads of backwards compatibility. Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So i had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
Michael Martin wrote: Crap. Most of their profit in at least the past 15 years has come from the home user. They know very little about if it is good, only that their are nice shiney adverts telling us all how good Microsoft's stuff is. Precisely. :confused:
David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Everybody is entitled to my opinion
-
following on from the post about mfc below... it is becoming increasingly obvious to me that the trend ms is taking with its dev tools is more influenced by its need to keep posting record profits to please its shareholders than to make our lives easier or better lets face it ... there is no good reason why managed code and the clr was necessary to provide any new class library features etc bar garbage collection afaics (and anyone who acually _needs_ garbage collection shouldnt be writing software) ... the primary motive was to make it easier (almost idiot proof in fact) for people to write software and at the same time reap a nice reward for doing so with increased sales of tools etc is all this aimed at providing better software products to _our_ end users?? no ... not even close ... in fact the current mess has the opposite effect imho now take the internet ... a major force in corporate life that no one company has a hold over because there are standards for doing everything ... makes life nice and easy for us developers and our clients ... what does ms do? make their own set of standards and tools that follow it ... is the primary reason for doing this so that we developers can produce better end products for our users? i dont think so if u realise what drives ms then u can see the true reasons behind things that happen ... anybody who believes that ms makes new software just cos they want to make everybodys life better is somewhat missing the point
I mostly agree. *But* no other company that I can think of (other than *maybe* Apple) is even attempting to provide a comprehensive, next generation API, toolkit, and development tools. And I *hate* saying that. Linux, despite all it's advantages, doesn't even come close in terms of a complete end user API. Instead you have a whole slew of competing projects that sort of fill in the API(s) (KDE does this best IMHO), but are all changing and still lack features. So a developer's life is no better on linux than it is on MS. In fact, after developing with so called "state of the art" tools on Linux, Apple, and Win32, I begrudgingly have to say that Win32 is infinitely easier to deal with than Apple or Linux. And Apple, despite it's reliance on crummmy GNU tools, is still vastly easier to deal with than linux. Here's another thought: On both Apple and Win32 you have a healthy developer ecosystem that consists of: - A primary company behind the core system API's that provides a unified (compared to unix) architecture and design behind the API's and ensures that the system has a core set of libs/features that cover a range of potential development, from back end servers, to end user GUI apps. - A common distribution architecture for distributing software - Commercial software vendors (i.e. Adobe, Corel, Oracle, etc, etc) - Smaller shops like Omni, Dundas - Individual shareware/freeware authors - OSS groups and individuals working/distributing projects Each of these fills a niche. Contrast this with Linux and you have: - A vast amount of OSS software, most of which also runs on Win32/OS X. - A handful (if that) of smaller commercial companies selling software - A number of big commercial companies (IBM, HP, RedHat, Novell) selling either "services" or backing parts of the system, i.e. IBM's contributions to parts of the linux *kernel*. All of these companies have appropriated various OSS projects and roll them into "distros" that are quasi complete OS distros meant to compete with Apple or MS. - No one is *pushing* or *leading* core API development, enhancement, or R&D. It just seems to happen, or at worst it turns into a vast devlopment by committee. Consequently, as a "whole", linux lacks (IMHO) when compared to Windows or Apple. - a pretty agressive attitude of "if aint GPL we don't want it". This goes from the kernel maintains insistence on keeping out binary only drivers, to the communities apparent avoidance of anything that is not "free". Case in point: try
-
following on from the post about mfc below... it is becoming increasingly obvious to me that the trend ms is taking with its dev tools is more influenced by its need to keep posting record profits to please its shareholders than to make our lives easier or better lets face it ... there is no good reason why managed code and the clr was necessary to provide any new class library features etc bar garbage collection afaics (and anyone who acually _needs_ garbage collection shouldnt be writing software) ... the primary motive was to make it easier (almost idiot proof in fact) for people to write software and at the same time reap a nice reward for doing so with increased sales of tools etc is all this aimed at providing better software products to _our_ end users?? no ... not even close ... in fact the current mess has the opposite effect imho now take the internet ... a major force in corporate life that no one company has a hold over because there are standards for doing everything ... makes life nice and easy for us developers and our clients ... what does ms do? make their own set of standards and tools that follow it ... is the primary reason for doing this so that we developers can produce better end products for our users? i dont think so if u realise what drives ms then u can see the true reasons behind things that happen ... anybody who believes that ms makes new software just cos they want to make everybodys life better is somewhat missing the point
l a u r e n wrote: there is no good reason why managed code and the clr was necessary to provide any new class library features etc bar garbage collection afaics (and anyone who acually _needs_ garbage collection shouldnt be writing software) There's a vital difference between needing and using. Using a platform with garbage collection can alleviate some obscure bugs (of course, so can writing rigorously correct c++, but I haven't found many that are able to do that yet), it can reduce development time and alleviate maintenance efforts. Of course, garbage collection can be a pillow for people who don't know what they are doing, but they are always there; they are abundant in the C++ world as well. As I see it, the importance is not whether or not you have garbage collection, it is whether you know why your tools work and how they work, not just how to use them. The big gain of .Net is, as I see it, the language agnosticism that it provides. You can try however much you want and argue that COM provides an ample amount of interoperability between languages, but I think the elegance in which .Net interoperates speaks for itself. -- Henrik Stuart (http://muer.njoerdba.com[^])
-
Anyone who needs garbage collection shouldn't be writing software? I'm sorry but I completely disagree with this one. It's a rather harsh overgeneralisation. If you want to go all the way with your low-level anctics, then I suggest you write your next big project using punch cards. Programming languages evolve for a reason. I have developed large projects in both managed and unmanaged languages, and personally I did not feel that using managed code made me "lazier" with my memory allocation. What it *did* do was take away the time that is normally required for me to deal with choosing where to call free(), and when to call it. The obvious conterargument, but by no means overshadowing the advantages, is that developers may become more complacent with their memory usage. But you can counter that again with the advantage of not being able to do naughty things with memory. Aside from security, teaching people programming with a managed language is so much easier. Writing to element n rather than n-1 in an array doesn't cause a segmentation fault 5 minutes into your code. It causes an exception that the student can read, and ask for assistance with. Once they are informed of why the exception was thrown, they understand arrays. The .NET class library is fantastic. I am not forcing my opinion upon anyone, but I personally think it is wonderfully written, organised, and very complete. Software developers like consistency - and that's why the .NET class library works so well. The library documentation is consistent, and the class usage is consistent. Start plugging in classes from elsewhere and the project soon becomes unmanagable and hard to maintain. And although "MS M4K3 SOFTW4RE IPH BUGZ LOL", I personally trust that the classes do their job perfectly, every time. As for the CLR, I have a friend who's team has successfully completed a large project utilising the CLR. One team member with expertise in a particular area that they required considered himself to be a more proficient C++ coder, while the rest of the team were used to, and had began the project in VB. No problem whatsoever to move him over to MC++ and continue working on the project. We don't all think MS just wants to make software to make everyone's life better - that would be rather naive. As an entity, they want to make money. But I would put good money on saying that the .NET/VS team are just as enthusiastic about software development as most people are here. Thanks, Simey
Simon Walton wrote: Anyone who needs garbage collection shouldn't be writing software? I'm sorry but I completely disagree with this one. I don't. I agree completely with lauren. I agree that garbage collection can be useful and make things easier, but I also think that if people don't know how to manage memory properly without one, they shouldn't be programming. It's people who don't know how to manage memory properly that contribute to all the memory-hogging, badly written programs.
Ryan
"Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"