As stated, it's been like this for decades. However, the tools that exist and people want are far more greater in number that it was even 10 or 20 years ago. As a dev approaching 15+ years of work and 20+ years programming experience, you basically have two semi-smart choices to make as you grow up in this field. Position your self to grow from dev to middle management and beyond. Not everyone is managerial material, or wants to be so this isn't always the best option. The other smart path is for the first 5-10 years of your career, look for the BIG tech tools that every big company uses for 5-10 years and become an expert amongst experts. After that tech is dead for 10+ years, dig up all of your old resources, load up some old VMs and re-familiarize yourself with "legacy" tech. There are a lot of major corporations that are not in IT that still have old COBOL/RPG mainframes. There are also a ton of VB6/very-old Microsoft Access databases that are in use in even BIG companies. These companies often get to the point where this stuff breaks or they realize they have to throw a TON of money to upgrade their systems. Software specs tend to not exist within these companies (or were long lost) so they need legacy gurus to come in, dissect the existing system(s) and then fix it or spec-out a new system from old code. This is "consultation" work and can pay very well, if you are familiar with the right tech. This isn's "sexy", but by golly if you get bored with the "rat" race of being perpetually obsolete, let your most obsolete expertise start to work for you. I'm not their yet, but I'm probably going to start pushing "WinForms" development around 2021. I plan to work hard at staying on top of what is relevant today but in 2021 I'll be 40 and that's a good age to start pulling out the old familiar tech that none of the "new kids", fresh out of school, have even heard of or will laugh at when they still see it in use. Suckers... it's the desperate corps that pay the best, who are scrambling to find the grey-beard experts.

Or search this:

How do I turn on my PC site:codeproject.com

Just throw the "site:" option at the end of your search, and Google will strictly search the specified web site.

Microsoft releases a new version of it's OS and it puts users in a UI-shellshock, it breaks many of their current applications, it near-forces users to need a touch display (are there many touch displays for desktops out there?) and they expect everyone to be happy? Apple releases a new OS and gives it a catchy name, adds tabbed-browsing to their version of Windows Explorer, integrates a map feature into the OS and makes only a few other minor changes, while strengthening the core of the kernel. I use to be a hardcore Windows Developer and lover. I even blogged about it as a young developer and waxed philosophically of how the behemoth of Microsoft loved it's developers and equipped them to make wonderful software for the masses. However, that era has past. I need consistency and nominal updates to the operating system that fix what's broken and, as a result, continues to empower me to make exceptional software for the masses. Sure, you can make the GUI prettier but don't break your OS, at it's core, to do it! Goodbye Microsoft. Our relationship was a good one while it lasted. However, your obsession of breaking new ground at the expense of breaking important OS fundamentals has forced me to search for an alternative.

GOTO was never the problem-- prevalent abuse of the keyword and poor code structure was the epidemic. Still, one tech writer writes an article calling a simple op-code "evil" and 30 years (or thereabouts) later we still think anyone using a GOTO command is a programming idiot. To this day, all tech writers must earn my respect before I trust what they write.

I have a series of applications that I've written that are used internally for a manufacturing company I work for. Most of these applications are very simple programs, and they just help automate a few processes that can otherwise takes hours to do manually. On occasion a database moves or some other network change occurs, and I have to crack open VS2008, make a slight modification, recompile and deploy my application. For many of these applications, on a recompile of the app, the program would break in odd places, when all I've done is updated a title bar or something! Very annoying. Turns out, it was a breaking change in C# and this isn't, technically, a bug. The problem has to do with hardcoded 0's when calling methods with multiple signatures. My old app would work, because it was compiled under an old variation of C# and the .Net compiler. When it was recompiled, however, the application would break, even though the code hasn't changed. I'm not trying to write thesis, but if you want to read the thorough details of this oddity, check out my specific question I ask on StackOverflow[^].

I'd just like to add that C is quite popular too. There is still a great need for low-level code, especially in the embedded hardware world. I graduated in 2003, got a job working most of that time as a C# developer. About a year and a half ago I transitioned to embedded systems and, as best I can tell, the ONLY language option you have is C if you are going to be working with the low-level hardware. If you are interested in apps that run on smaller form-factor devices (i.e. smartphones and tables,) stick with Java for Android and for iOS devices, you should learn Objective-C.

The funny thing is to consider the converse of such a notion. Upgrading to Win8 is comparable to death-- no one knows what comes next, but all you have previously worked for is lost in the transition.

You guys have obviously never written any objective C. The following method signature (without defined parameter names) is a legit initializer method from the Apple code base for the NSBitmapImageRep[^][] object. God only knows what some users have made.

initWithBitmapDataPlanes:pixelsWide:pixelsHigh:bitsPerSample:samplesPerPixel:hasAlpha:isPlanar:colorSpaceName:bitmapFormat:bytesPerRow:bitsPerPixel:

"Give me an example where someone has actually leaned back at a meeting and calmly said: 'THANK GOD that we broke all the foobar code out in a separate foobar layer!'" Challenge accepted! Seriously, I wrote a "smart client" application about five years ago for my company that had to have a Server database that synchronized data through a web service, to a user's computer that cached certain pieces of data on a user's computer so that they could make and print various reports from remote locations. One layer, (the reporting layer), worked rock-solid... until Windows Vista came out. Ever since then, the app has seemed to work less and less successfully with each new Windows Vista (to now Win 7) install. Almost 100% of the problems have been with the third-party reporting engine that I've had to consume (take a guess at which one that is). I work for a company that is excessively slow to change. Since bugs have crept up in the Reporting Layer due to the third-party library, I've been hassling management to let me re-write it using a better reporting tool. A lot has changed in 5 years and I am positive that there are better solutions. I've haven't yet received the approval to re-write the reporting layer but once I do (it really is just a matter of time) I will me quite glad that I can simply re-write the class that is drives the reporting process. Without that class, I'd have to spend a significant amount of time, dissecting the app looking for function dependencies and making sure that I understand each step of the pre-reporting process before changing any code. Subtle bugs creep in that way. With an OO model, I now know that I specifically developed the reporting layer as a class. All I need to do is export the classes signature and make a new class that contains the same variables and methods. Next, delete the old class code file and insert the new. Make sure that I have all my dependencies are copied into the outputted build and viola! On to testing! The difference between an OO solution and a procedural one would me that the replacement process will have taken possibly weeks (maybe even a month or more!) of additional time. I actually agree with your sentiment. I think it is an unfortunate truth that many developers learn about buzz "methodologies" and implement them because that's what everyone else is doing. An N-Tier system has to be better if there are more tiers, right? Isn't that the whole point of calling it "N" Tier? Flat out, absolutely wrong. IMHO, The idea behind a ti

Although I willingly gave up my VCR a long time ago I, too, have preferred to stick with analog TV. Primarily because I still enjoy vintage video games and I just don't like the way NES/SNES/Genesis/etc... games look on a high def machine and I don't mind the poorer quality, standard def analog signal for TV watching. I'm already wondering what I'm going to do when my 32" CRT kicks the bucket. Anyway, I suggest a change of perspective. Instead of looking for new, reasonably priced options, look for vintage hardware in excellent condition. Most old VCRs (from the late 70's to mid 80's) appear to go for varying price ranges from $5.00-250.00. I guess it depends on the seller. After a quick five minute look, here are a few pieces that caught my interest on eBay. Maybe with a little research you can find an old system (possibly one you remember owning from the 80's) that is known for being a super-reliable, unbreakable piece of hardware. After finding the preferable hardware, take the time to look for one in good to excellent condition on eBay or Craigslist and be willing to search for a few months until you find what you are looking for. 1978 Magnavox [^] Galaxy 2100 (Has an LCD on the front?!)[^] Magnavox from the Mid 80's (OMG, that's what I had as a kid!!1!)[^]

Ok, I am extremely new to WMI. In fact, what I know about it is what I've learned in the past couple hours while trying to solve a hardware related problem. What I would like to do is get a particular instance of a WMI class (Win32_NetworkAdapterConfiguration), cache the current settings on a users computer, change certain settings, run my operation, and then restore the original WMI class instance. After reading up on the Win32_NetworkAdapterConfiguration from here[^], I have found that there are functions that can change the settings I am interested in modifying. My fear is, however, that since this application will be used on various systems with different hardware devices and original network settings that I will call a function that may have an unexpected consequences which I may not be able to restore (or know how to restore.) So, my thought is that I'd much rather take a snapshot of the users network configurations, make my changes and do what I need to do and then do a complete restore of the user's original network adapter configuration. Is this possible through WMI and, if so, is it advisable? -- Sorry, I forgot to mention. I am implementing this within a C# application. I can interpret code in just about any language, but this needs to be a .Net solution.

modified on Thursday, May 20, 2010 9:25 AM

[Message Deleted]

[Message Deleted]

[Message Deleted]

[Message Deleted]

[Message Deleted]

[Message Deleted]

[Message Deleted]

[Message Deleted]

[Message Deleted]