| reply to itguy05
Re: Why do you hate Microsoft said by itguy05:It also wasn't until I branched out into Linux and OS X that I realized just how poor Microsoft's offerings are from a technical (and aesthetic) point of view. Agree. I'm a Linux user myself. While things aren't perfect, they are a helluva lot better than what MS offers.
Registry? Why put all your config stuff into a horrible database that is hard to use and understand? May have made some sense back in the day but config files are much easier to do.
DLLs? really? Why not self contained apps (like OS X) that has everything you need for them right in it.
There's a lot of other stuff not to like about Microsoft. I've hated them since before it was cool to hate them.
Also Linux offers XFS, Btrfs, JFS, ReiserFS and others. With Windows you are stuck with NTFS (or FAT which is even worse).
To be fair, Apple's HFS isn't much better. Linus Torvalds called it "utter crap."
I could go on and on about M$, specifically as it relates to Windows. Tons of design flaws.
--
Getting people to stop using windows is more or less the same as trying to get people to stop smoking tobacco products. They dont want to change; they are happy with slowly dying inside. -- munky99999 |
|
| reply to mastsethi
said by mastsethi:We may criticize all we like but it makes little sense hating MS cause at the end of the day, we use a windows powered pc. And hopefully a win 8 powered tablet in the coming months.
*You* may use a Windows powered PC, but speak for yourself. Not all of us do. I haven't used Windows in many years and never plan on going back. Linux is far superior to both Windows and OSX.
--
Getting people to stop using windows is more or less the same as trying to get people to stop smoking tobacco products. They dont want to change; they are happy with slowly dying inside. -- munky99999 |
|
| reply to justine
said by justine:Software shouldn't be copyrightable. Then it would be a profession instead of a product. Everyone would build on a common pool of software and it would improve like other arts and sciences.
Well said. This is what open-source is all about. Collaboration and free and open code. The problem is these big software companies want to patent code, which is preposterous. Code is nothing but logic and math. Has anyone ever patented math? No, so why do we allow people to patent a freaking line of source code?
Most code is written in C, especially at the lower levels of OS's and the like. C is a free and open language, so I find it crazy that people want to patent C code (yet this is precisely what M$ and others get away with).
I like the open-source model, specifically the GPL: do what you want with our code, but abide by the license (mainly give the authors credit and don't redistribute without keeping the code open).
I have no problem with patents if they are truly innovative. Writing code is not innovative whatsoever. This is why I think patents should only be available for hardware.
And Apple's patents are crap. They patented a freaking rectangle and a color (that's what the lawsuit was about, Apple claimed Samsung stole a rectangular shape). Patents are supposed to be "non-obvious." A rectangular shape of a phone is very obvious and should never have gotten through the patent office.
--
Getting people to stop using windows is more or less the same as trying to get people to stop smoking tobacco products. They dont want to change; they are happy with slowly dying inside. -- munky99999 |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
2 edits | reply to KodiacZiller
said by KodiacZiller:Yeah it was a stupid idea and I am amazed that M$ has kept it around this long. Oh, you people have short memories.
The NT-style registry was introduced as a replacement for the text-file configuration of DOS and DOS-based Windows. The problem was that application installers kept screwing it up. To add a line loading your device driver requires such advanced programming as finding the right place in the file, adding a line, getting the format right, not re-doing the same thing on reinstall, etc. Certainly not rocket salad, but apparently beyond the capabilities of many application programmers.
A popluar complaint was "my system won't boot because this idiot app installer scrozzled config.sys/win.ini/autoexec.bat".
So a key/value database where changes can be made, without rewriting the whole thing, was a definite improvement. It made the OS more resilient against idiot programmers.
Windows is to some extent a victim of its own success. The original design was that the registry would live in the system virtual address space. But it worked so well that every app and its brother wants to keep stuff there, and the address limits (on a 32-bit system) are strained.
Mind you, I don't subscribe to this registry-rot theory. That is propaganda from people who hawk voodoo 'cleaning' software. |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8 | reply to KodiacZiller
The GPL depends entirely on copyright law. If there were no copyright law, the GPL would be unenforceable.
Your argument about C is nonsense. Most novels are written in natural language, so is it therefore crazy that people want to copyright things written in natural language? Most inventions are described in natural language, so is it crazy that people want to patent things described in natural language?
There is a coherent argument to be made against copyright and against patents, but "because they are written in C" is not one of those arguments. |
|
|
|
| said by dave:The GPL depends entirely on copyright law. If there were no copyright law, the GPL would be unenforceable.
Your argument about C is nonsense. Most novels are written in natural language, so is it therefore crazy that people want to copyright things written in natural language? Most inventions are described in natural language, so is it crazy that people want to patent things described in natural language?
There is a coherent argument to be made against copyright and against patents, but "because they are written in C" is not one of those arguments.
While I understand your analogy, I think it is flawed. Programming languages are nothing but structured logic and (usually) leave only one way to do things (or at least they try to do so). There really isn't much room for "art" in programming as there is in literature. Programming is used to accomplish a task -- to communicate with a CPU that understands 1's and 0's. This is why I think programming is much more similar to doing math than it is to writing a novel. Sure, English is a "language" as is C/C++ or Perl. Then again mathematics is a language too, but it's not patentable.
If you put two experienced programmers in separate rooms and ask them to write a simple application, they will likely have code that is very similar. So if one of them "patents" his code before the other guy, I guess the other guy is SOL?
Copyrighting code is a different issue and I have no problem with that. If someone writes a program and wants to license it, fine with me. But if some other guy writes a similar app that consists of original code, he shouldn't be liable to patent suits. After all, the code will be very similar in certain areas, which means it is "obvious" and fails the definition of something that is patentable. Copyright usually deals with an entire application, which is fine with me. If I want to use the software I can either follow the license or find an alternative.
I am not against patents in general, but I am against software patents.
--
Getting people to stop using windows is more or less the same as trying to get people to stop smoking tobacco products. They dont want to change; they are happy with slowly dying inside. -- munky99999 |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8 | said by KodiacZiller:If you put two experienced programmers in separate rooms and ask them to write a simple application, they will likely have code that is very similar. Well, sure, if all you're writing is a "simple" application, then there's likely a simple way to do it. But that is mere tautology; more complicated problems admit of widely-varying solutions that require the creative process.
I think your conception of 'what programming is' is wrong, too, but this is no place to expound on my theories of programming, and the differences between good programmers and time-servers. |
|
 Dude111An Awesome DudePremium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:11 | reply to dave
Well Dave there is nothing wrong with keeping your registry clean buddy.... I have cleaned tons out of my registry and you can see the difference..... (Better performance,etc) -- Think of it like just buying your computer.... The reg is clean then right?? |
|
davePremium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8 | Yeah, let me know when you start running the same operating system as I do (DOS-based Windows 98 has nothing in common wth today's Windows family derived from NT). And then I'll ask you for your performance metrics. |
|
 r81984Fair and BalancedPremium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
 ·row44
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to mastsethi
Re: Why do you hate Microsoft Its all been downhill since windows 3.11.
Everything new has just been gimmicks.
Seriously though, XP SP3 and Win7 are awesome.
Win8 sucks badly. The metro scrolling is just sad. The metro ie browser does not even work right.
I think Win7 will be around a long time as win8 will end up being like a windows 98/me or vista.
Microsoft is what made computers and internet so successful. Why would anyone hate microsoft?
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr. |
|
 UberNuubThe Source is dead.Premium
join:2005-03-20
Lawrenceville, GA | reply to mastsethi
I do not hate MS. I like WIN XP, WIN 7, Office etc. very much. |
|
 J E F FWhatta Ya Think About Dat?Premium
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
·Rogers Portable ..
·WIND Mobile
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to jabarnut
said by jabarnut:I love Microsoft!
Back in the old days, I used to invite Bill over for dinner all the time,
Steve Ballmer is a little scary though, so I've never invited him...not so sure I'd want that guy in my house. 
Ditto. Bill is a bit of a nerd, as expected. But Steve seriously has a few loose bolts.
Bill likes the stronger beer, which surprised me.
I think the issue with Microsoft is not their products, but the companies that they deal with. There have some laptops that have no business being sold with Windows 7 and other apps that run like complete crap. Not really the fault of MS. While Apple sells their OS/Hardware together, they're making sure it runs decent.
If MS came out with their own branded computers, they'd run fine. But you'd not expect to pay much less than $700 or $800 for it.
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. - Albert Einstein |
|
Dude111An Awesome DudePremium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:11 | reply to mastsethi
Everyone can vent thier anger here: »microsoftsucks.org |
|
 jabarnutLight Years AwayPremium,MVM
join:2005-01-22
Galaxy M31
kudos:2 | How about we just vent it here instead?
Dudes posts: 
--
I had a life once.....now I have a Computer and a Modem. |
|
Dude111An Awesome DudePremium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:11 | Ya we could do that too buddy  |
|
jabarnutLight Years AwayPremium,MVM
join:2005-01-22
Galaxy M31
kudos:2 | I rest my case. |
|
 CheesePremium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1 | I wonder who told him he was an "awesome dude"....  |
|
 RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | reply to Dude111
What a spam filled forum. No thanks. |
|
| Yousuckdude111.com |
|
| reply to dvd536
Re: Why do you hate Microsoft said by dvd536:because microsoft is the lesser of two evils and DOESN'T force quicktime and itunes on you!!1 I can uninstall iTunes and Quicktime on OS X just fine. Try removing Internet Explorer or Media Player..... |
|
