Users don't buy .NET concept
-
According to VNUNet http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2698542,00.html "Even the switch to the NT kernel in Windows XP will not be reason enough for the average home user to upgrade." You don't need knowledge of OS'es to understand that the NT-kernel is much more stable then the Win9x/ME-kernel? I think this would be one of the major reasons for home-users to upgrade to XP. Although we didn't see that happen when Win2K released, but I think that's because MS said it was not for home-use. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
-
According to VNUNet http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2698542,00.html "Even the switch to the NT kernel in Windows XP will not be reason enough for the average home user to upgrade." You don't need knowledge of OS'es to understand that the NT-kernel is much more stable then the Win9x/ME-kernel? I think this would be one of the major reasons for home-users to upgrade to XP. Although we didn't see that happen when Win2K released, but I think that's because MS said it was not for home-use. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
My personal opinion is that a fair amount of "Home" users will upgrade. There's obviously plenty of reason to. Companies that invested in Win2000 probably won't. There's not much reason to. Home users on the other hand have every reason in the world to upgrade. I can't say how long I've been waiting for Microsoft to finally merge the 2 OS's and now it's going to happen. I've usually always run NT but did a dual-boot for games. Now I don't have to anymore. Win2000 is the most rock-solid OS I've ever seen. In 1 year I've seen Windows come down only once (and it was while I crashed in a debug environment). XP users (home users) ought to be "impressed" by the stability Microsoft has achieved since most of them have never used NT (muchless W2K).
-
My personal opinion is that a fair amount of "Home" users will upgrade. There's obviously plenty of reason to. Companies that invested in Win2000 probably won't. There's not much reason to. Home users on the other hand have every reason in the world to upgrade. I can't say how long I've been waiting for Microsoft to finally merge the 2 OS's and now it's going to happen. I've usually always run NT but did a dual-boot for games. Now I don't have to anymore. Win2000 is the most rock-solid OS I've ever seen. In 1 year I've seen Windows come down only once (and it was while I crashed in a debug environment). XP users (home users) ought to be "impressed" by the stability Microsoft has achieved since most of them have never used NT (muchless W2K).
Funny, I just had my first real Win2k crash today. I can't remember what I did (it happened so soon :)) I was debugging too, I think I touched memory that I really wasn't allowed to touch at all. On the machine I develop, I dual-boot as well (Win98 and 2k) but I'm sure when XP releases, a third OS will enter my harddisk (and #1 in the bootmenu) -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
-
Funny, I just had my first real Win2k crash today. I can't remember what I did (it happened so soon :)) I was debugging too, I think I touched memory that I really wasn't allowed to touch at all. On the machine I develop, I dual-boot as well (Win98 and 2k) but I'm sure when XP releases, a third OS will enter my harddisk (and #1 in the bootmenu) -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
I've >NEVER< understood this myth that Win2k is stable. For the first 4 months of my use of my WIn2K system I was experiencing daily crashes, especially spontaneous reboots. It was so bad that files opened in VC++ would be trashed by the reboot - full of garbage data after rebooting. Turns out I had a bad video driver, and once that was replaced, all my problems went away.. but still, it shows that the system can be brought down, hard. And then there are the just-plain-freaky things that happen all the time - the 10 second pause every time I delete a file.. the Explorer lockup that happens when I try to open a VC5 .DSW file through a double-click... the occasional message that a file can't be saved because it is in use... etc. Crashes are not the only thanigs that force me to reboot.
-
I've >NEVER< understood this myth that Win2k is stable. For the first 4 months of my use of my WIn2K system I was experiencing daily crashes, especially spontaneous reboots. It was so bad that files opened in VC++ would be trashed by the reboot - full of garbage data after rebooting. Turns out I had a bad video driver, and once that was replaced, all my problems went away.. but still, it shows that the system can be brought down, hard. And then there are the just-plain-freaky things that happen all the time - the 10 second pause every time I delete a file.. the Explorer lockup that happens when I try to open a VC5 .DSW file through a double-click... the occasional message that a file can't be saved because it is in use... etc. Crashes are not the only thanigs that force me to reboot.
That's not Win2k crashing, that's the product of a guy (or company) that doesn't know what they're doing. I never have a pause when I delete a file, my explorer never locks up and the message that a file is in use, and can't be deleted I only experience when killing my .CLW file. And that's the fault of the MS DevEnvironment, for not closing down a project properly when asked to close. I think 99.5% of all crashes and strange behavior in Win2k can be assigned to bad developers (and their product such as bad drivers, creepy software etc) In my opinion, Win2k is the most stable product that has ever leaved Redmond. Actually, all MS app's and OS'es are more stable since Bill Gates has taken over the development-department again. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
-
That's not Win2k crashing, that's the product of a guy (or company) that doesn't know what they're doing. I never have a pause when I delete a file, my explorer never locks up and the message that a file is in use, and can't be deleted I only experience when killing my .CLW file. And that's the fault of the MS DevEnvironment, for not closing down a project properly when asked to close. I think 99.5% of all crashes and strange behavior in Win2k can be assigned to bad developers (and their product such as bad drivers, creepy software etc) In my opinion, Win2k is the most stable product that has ever leaved Redmond. Actually, all MS app's and OS'es are more stable since Bill Gates has taken over the development-department again. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
-
>"I think 99.5% of all crashes and strange behavior in Win2k can be assigned to bad >developers (and their product such as bad drivers, creepy software etc)" ^ | | Yeah, Microsoft developers. lol;P
Actually, I was thinking about persons that never learned to proper reply on a message LOL2 ;P -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
-
My personal opinion is that a fair amount of "Home" users will upgrade. There's obviously plenty of reason to. Companies that invested in Win2000 probably won't. There's not much reason to. Home users on the other hand have every reason in the world to upgrade. I can't say how long I've been waiting for Microsoft to finally merge the 2 OS's and now it's going to happen. I've usually always run NT but did a dual-boot for games. Now I don't have to anymore. Win2000 is the most rock-solid OS I've ever seen. In 1 year I've seen Windows come down only once (and it was while I crashed in a debug environment). XP users (home users) ought to be "impressed" by the stability Microsoft has achieved since most of them have never used NT (muchless W2K).
Win2000 was SUPPOSED to be the merging of the two, then all of a sudden it wasn't. I believe this is why it was called W2000, which from a marketing POV makes it the follow on from 95/98. I think it rocks too, I hate having to use W98 instead, but as it is more unstable, it is better for testing code to make sure IT is stable. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
According to VNUNet http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2698542,00.html "Even the switch to the NT kernel in Windows XP will not be reason enough for the average home user to upgrade." You don't need knowledge of OS'es to understand that the NT-kernel is much more stable then the Win9x/ME-kernel? I think this would be one of the major reasons for home-users to upgrade to XP. Although we didn't see that happen when Win2K released, but I think that's because MS said it was not for home-use. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
Regardz Colin Davies
-
Regardz Colin Davies
I'm not sure. I think that the average user will have at least a good clue what .NET is all about. (Maybe it's wishful thinking) -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
-
I'm not sure. I think that the average user will have at least a good clue what .NET is all about. (Maybe it's wishful thinking) -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
.Net hasn't really been sold to "Users" yet, But I know a lot of developers who don't understand the .Net concept still, Only tme will truly tell ! :) Regardz Colin Davies
-
Actually, I was thinking about persons that never learned to proper reply on a message LOL2 ;P -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
> Actually, I was thinking about persons that never learned to proper reply on a message I assume you mean me, but since that makes no sense I'll let it pass :') The phenomena I see are real. This business of the pause when I delete a file drives me nuts - I have to remember to not delete things unthinkingly as I have in the past (by that, I mean the junk files that we all occasionally find lying around. It puts a serious crimp in my productivity. The VC++ phenomenon is even wierder. What happens is that when I double-click a .DSW file, the program wil load it, will put up 2 simultaneous message boxes saying it needs to be converted to the new format.. and then MSDEV will crash, and strangely enough, the shell will no longer let me access the .DSW file - I have to reboot to get things started again. (Sometimes the folder containing the file will get stuck in a loop and stay blank.) I have a feeling that, my experiences aside, W2K is probably more stable than previous versions of Windows. But these wierdities are things I've never seen before on any version of Windows, and they are enough to throw me into a tizzy when they happen. And even though the driver problems are not necessarily Microsoft's fault - I pin some of the blame on them, because they make Windows so damn hard to program.
-
According to VNUNet http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2698542,00.html "Even the switch to the NT kernel in Windows XP will not be reason enough for the average home user to upgrade." You don't need knowledge of OS'es to understand that the NT-kernel is much more stable then the Win9x/ME-kernel? I think this would be one of the major reasons for home-users to upgrade to XP. Although we didn't see that happen when Win2K released, but I think that's because MS said it was not for home-use. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
Tom Gladstone's article seems totally knee jerk to me, and clearly focused on the world today and not the world on the horizon. On the XP front, well, people buy the new OS when they get a new computer. Anyone I know who's upgraded their company from Win9x to NT or 2000 has simultaneously upgraded their hardware. XP will simply filter into our lives one upgrade at a time. I'd just like to add some of my own comments to Tom's points: 1. People want to own software This will require a bit if a cultural change, but it will happen. Years ago I wanted to own my own Telephone answering machine as well, now I pay the $3/mo without a second thought. And my life is better for it. As long as the user experience isn't horrible, I think the software on demand concept will work well. 2. Users do not want to pay monthly fees just to get their computers to run. Same point as above IMO. I pay a monthly fee to run my television, if the cable stops so does my TV. Same holds for my telephone(s), my internet connection, my water, heat and electricity. 3. The infrastructure just isn't there yet. I agree with this, but .Net is really a forward looking proposition, at least in this regard. Much of the new platform is about making software easier to manage and control, but cool things like the dynamic downloading of assemblies will make software as a service a natural migration for everyone who develops for .Net. It's virtually there by default. I don't know the stats on CableModem and ADSL connected homes, but I think it's pushing 20% in the US/Canada. For corporate users, this will be much, much easier to roll out. 4. Technical support will be a nightmare To me this clearly shows that Tom really doesn't understand .Net. Why technical support would be any better or worse, or why documentation is an issue, I'm not sure. I guess he figures you'll just go to a website and use the app. Does anyone really get a manual with software they buy anymore? I think Intuit still ships manuals, does anyone else? 5. People want privacy. Now this point I agree with. This will be the big big issue. I'd easily argue that 3/4 or more of the software in the world is still pirated, so the black market types won't embrace this. Hmmm, maybe this will be the real opening for OpenSource software to get a foothold. For those willing to pay privacy will be a big issue and on this front there is much trust to be earned. In the end though, the phone company *could* listen
-
According to VNUNet http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2698542,00.html "Even the switch to the NT kernel in Windows XP will not be reason enough for the average home user to upgrade." You don't need knowledge of OS'es to understand that the NT-kernel is much more stable then the Win9x/ME-kernel? I think this would be one of the major reasons for home-users to upgrade to XP. Although we didn't see that happen when Win2K released, but I think that's because MS said it was not for home-use. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
I think that there is some confusion between .Net and Windows XP .... they are not the same. One is an operating system the other is a development framework.
-
According to VNUNet http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2698542,00.html "Even the switch to the NT kernel in Windows XP will not be reason enough for the average home user to upgrade." You don't need knowledge of OS'es to understand that the NT-kernel is much more stable then the Win9x/ME-kernel? I think this would be one of the major reasons for home-users to upgrade to XP. Although we didn't see that happen when Win2K released, but I think that's because MS said it was not for home-use. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
That author doesn't know the difference between Win XP and .NET, but putting that aside, he has a couple of good points, but has bad presentation of his arguments. He makes it seem like MS will go broke without more money coming in through subscription fees. He also says "With sales of new computers heading somewhere below sea level..." Neither of those make any sense. Re "People want to own software" - I see this being the case for many people. When I buy product X, I insist on having the physical install media. If my drive crashes or I rebuild my system, I want the ability to simply reinstall the product. Re "Users do not want to pay monthly fees just to get their computers to run." - I feel this way, but I can understand that newbie computer users (say, those that buy newbie-targeted systems like eMachines or iPaqs) would accept a monthly charge. And most important: "People want privacy." Ah yes. I guarantee (and you can quote me on this and post it on billboards if you want) I will never use any software that phones home on my personal system. Not Win XP, not Office, not PS2 games, nothing. Plain and simple, when I pay for Product X, and legally obtain it, it's none of the company's darn business how often I use it, what work I do with it, or if I even use it at all. While I understand the need to cut down on piracy, this method is simply unacceptable. If any company makes its software phone home, I will not buy it, use it, or support the company. </privacyrant> --Mike-- http://home.inreach.com/mdunn/ The preferred snack of 4 out of 5 Lounge readers.
-
> Actually, I was thinking about persons that never learned to proper reply on a message I assume you mean me, but since that makes no sense I'll let it pass :') The phenomena I see are real. This business of the pause when I delete a file drives me nuts - I have to remember to not delete things unthinkingly as I have in the past (by that, I mean the junk files that we all occasionally find lying around. It puts a serious crimp in my productivity. The VC++ phenomenon is even wierder. What happens is that when I double-click a .DSW file, the program wil load it, will put up 2 simultaneous message boxes saying it needs to be converted to the new format.. and then MSDEV will crash, and strangely enough, the shell will no longer let me access the .DSW file - I have to reboot to get things started again. (Sometimes the folder containing the file will get stuck in a loop and stay blank.) I have a feeling that, my experiences aside, W2K is probably more stable than previous versions of Windows. But these wierdities are things I've never seen before on any version of Windows, and they are enough to throw me into a tizzy when they happen. And even though the driver problems are not necessarily Microsoft's fault - I pin some of the blame on them, because they make Windows so damn hard to program.
Hey Jim - that all sounds painful. Seems like a lot of these problems are either DLL incompatibilities (how many times have you had a shonky installation overwrite a new DLL with their older one?) or bad drivers (dark looks at anyone who ever failed to test their drivers on W2K for my Dell laptop :mad: ) From Windows Me there is the system rollback feature that allows you to undo bad changes, and .NET helps (and claims to remove) the problem of DLL Hell, so the situation is getting better. Is this the best way to do it though? Is it possible to have an OS that can withstand the nastiest device driver and most arrogant install package? (and still remain reasonably fast and simple to use?) I've no experience with another PC based OS, so I can't comment on how good Linux or MacOS or whatever is at handling third party drivers and a million different brands of hardware. Has anyone any good/bad stories about these guys? cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Hey Jim - that all sounds painful. Seems like a lot of these problems are either DLL incompatibilities (how many times have you had a shonky installation overwrite a new DLL with their older one?) or bad drivers (dark looks at anyone who ever failed to test their drivers on W2K for my Dell laptop :mad: ) From Windows Me there is the system rollback feature that allows you to undo bad changes, and .NET helps (and claims to remove) the problem of DLL Hell, so the situation is getting better. Is this the best way to do it though? Is it possible to have an OS that can withstand the nastiest device driver and most arrogant install package? (and still remain reasonably fast and simple to use?) I've no experience with another PC based OS, so I can't comment on how good Linux or MacOS or whatever is at handling third party drivers and a million different brands of hardware. Has anyone any good/bad stories about these guys? cheers, Chris Maunder
Chris, the word is awful. We love to bash MS cause they're known and an easy target, but without exception when I've ventured into another realm, I've witnessed worse software. I'll be the first to admit that I've usually be somewhere between disappointed and upset with Microsoft's offerings (has anyone really spent any time with Microsoft Exchange?), but when I embrace an alternative, I'm even more disappointed. So what am I saying here, that MS is the lesser of known evils? Maybe. First and foremost I think MS should do a much better job of the software that they give us. FWIW I think Windows 2000 is excellent, and I hope that all future software releases meet the same standard. I truly believe that Microsoft understands this, and is trying to instill the philosophy of better reliability into its systems, and it's dev teams. David
-
Chris, the word is awful. We love to bash MS cause they're known and an easy target, but without exception when I've ventured into another realm, I've witnessed worse software. I'll be the first to admit that I've usually be somewhere between disappointed and upset with Microsoft's offerings (has anyone really spent any time with Microsoft Exchange?), but when I embrace an alternative, I'm even more disappointed. So what am I saying here, that MS is the lesser of known evils? Maybe. First and foremost I think MS should do a much better job of the software that they give us. FWIW I think Windows 2000 is excellent, and I hope that all future software releases meet the same standard. I truly believe that Microsoft understands this, and is trying to instill the philosophy of better reliability into its systems, and it's dev teams. David
I'm using Win2K Pro, and I have many of the same problems that Jim reports. Very often in VC6 I'll hit the build button and get an error message that the file can't be saved because its in use by another application. Once, I lost the file entirelly and had to recreate it. Since then, I've learned to hit the save button before compiling or attempting to exit the IDE. I have one game I also like to play on Win2K. Until recently it was very slow and I could see a lot of activity on the hard drive (17 gigs). After upgrading from 125meg to 256 meg RAM those problems went away. Guess the operating system was doing an awfully lot of swaping. One of the things that might also cause file problems is antivirus programs. I have the latest version of Norton Antivirus and have learned to turn it off when I'm using VC6. This also seems to have helped things.
-
According to VNUNet http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2698542,00.html "Even the switch to the NT kernel in Windows XP will not be reason enough for the average home user to upgrade." You don't need knowledge of OS'es to understand that the NT-kernel is much more stable then the Win9x/ME-kernel? I think this would be one of the major reasons for home-users to upgrade to XP. Although we didn't see that happen when Win2K released, but I think that's because MS said it was not for home-use. -- Alex Marbus www.marbus.net
Generally home users upgrade by buying a new computer. And they only do this when their old computer has become inadequate. When they upgrade, they'll get XP, no choice in the matter. Windows 95 only sold something like 7 million copies retail, which are mostly upgrades. They sold somthing like 200 million OEM copies.
-
I'm using Win2K Pro, and I have many of the same problems that Jim reports. Very often in VC6 I'll hit the build button and get an error message that the file can't be saved because its in use by another application. Once, I lost the file entirelly and had to recreate it. Since then, I've learned to hit the save button before compiling or attempting to exit the IDE. I have one game I also like to play on Win2K. Until recently it was very slow and I could see a lot of activity on the hard drive (17 gigs). After upgrading from 125meg to 256 meg RAM those problems went away. Guess the operating system was doing an awfully lot of swaping. One of the things that might also cause file problems is antivirus programs. I have the latest version of Norton Antivirus and have learned to turn it off when I'm using VC6. This also seems to have helped things.
Antivirus programs are notorious for causing problems, primarily because they wedge themselves into the OS in ways that are basically uncool. Further, antivirus and software development are almost mutually exclusive. Think about it. What does a virus checker do, but watch for suspicious activity, and what could be more suspicious than an application which writes out new applications on disk? I've never seen any of the problems you mention with errors, except when the IDE itself gets confused. The application may not have actually ended and when you try to rebuild it, it's in use (by the OS).
