Some sponsor might need money



  • @death said:

    I use windows at work because I must. Here I am locked in. And that in itself is unpleasant but not the problem here. The problem is the effort that M$ puts into hindering me using my Linux running equipment and interfacing with my Linux running things through proprietary extensions in standards(so called IE only HTML) and through non-public protocols(SAMBA/AD domain, extensions to KERBEROS making a standard kerberos non-AD compatible, etc) thus abusing their dominant position on the market.

    IE has very few proprietary extenstions anymore that really matter.  Typically, it's just their own implementation that other people call "proprietary" that the spec explicitly allows.  Plus IE isn't the only one on the market that has their own HTML.  Isn't IE only HTML like ... 3 tags?  Or has it grown?



  • @ShadowWolf said:

    @death said:
    I use windows at work because I must. Here I am locked in. And that in itself is unpleasant but not the problem here. The problem is the effort that M$ puts into hindering me using my Linux running equipment and interfacing with my Linux running things through proprietary extensions in standards(so called IE only HTML) and through non-public protocols(SAMBA/AD domain, extensions to KERBEROS making a standard kerberos non-AD compatible, etc) thus abusing their dominant position on the market.

    IE has very few proprietary extenstions anymore that really matter.  Typically, it's just their own implementation that other people call "proprietary" that the spec explicitly allows.  Plus IE isn't the only one on the market that has their own HTML.  Isn't IE only HTML like ... 3 tags?  Or has it grown?

    I can't even think of an IE-only HTML element off the top of my head. On the other hand, Firefox, Safari, and Opera employ things like the non-standard canvas element shamelessly (and good for them) while IE is slow on the uptake. I guess the tables have turned?



  • Well, the company I'm currently working for maintains a web application framework that only works on IE. But it's implemented in a way that..., well let's just say it has little relation to HTML. Lots and more lots of javascript and DOM instead.



  • @ammoQ said:

    Well, the company I'm currently working for maintains a web application framework that only works on IE. But it's implemented in a way that..., well let's just say it has little relation to HTML. Lots and more lots of javascript and DOM instead.

    That stuff pisses me off. I have to really stretch myself to code JavaScript in a non-cross-browser way. Well, I guess I have worked with a few people that made it clear that "document.getElementById" is just too hard to grasp for some folks.



  • In the browser market indeed tides have turned. However, the trick M$ tried to pull with JAVA virtual machine its of the same sort. IIRC "Implement, Extend, Extinguish." was the quote.

     

    As an irrelevant side note: It really makes me doubt the sanity of some developers/architects when they take a cross platform thing like Java (or to lesser degree JavaScript) and then nail it permanently to Windows... I mean if you want to throw cross platform out of the window,  why do it through a slow virtual machine like Java? Whats wrong with just writing a native windows App?



  • @death said:

    As an irrelevant side note: It really makes me doubt the sanity of some developers/architects when they take a cross platform thing like Java (or to lesser degree JavaScript) and then nail it permanently to Windows... I mean if you want to throw cross platform out of the window,  why do it through a slow virtual machine like Java? Whats wrong with just writing a native windows App?

    Well, people might choose Java because they like that language more than, say, VB or C++. Just as they use C# now to write Windows-only programs.



  • @death said:

    As an irrelevant side note: It really makes me doubt the sanity of some developers/architects when they take a cross platform thing like Java (or to lesser degree JavaScript) and then nail it permanently to Windows... I mean if you want to throw cross platform out of the window,  why do it through a slow virtual machine like Java? Whats wrong with just writing a native windows App?

    1) Java isn't slow

    2) Who is writing Windows-only Java? (I'm sure it exists, just have never seen it)



  • @djork said:

    2) Who is writing Windows-only Java? (I'm sure it exists, just have never seen it)

    Back in 1998 or so, MS offered Windows-specific "extension" to Java in their development tool (VisualJ) and VM. Sun successfully went to court about that; MS stopped distributing their VM then. Since then, browsers do not include a JavaVM by default. Back in 1998, most did. 



  • @ammoQ said:

    @djork said:

    2) Who is writing Windows-only Java? (I'm sure it exists, just have never seen it)

    Back in 1998 or so, MS offered Windows-specific "extension" to Java in their development tool (VisualJ) and VM. Sun successfully went to court about that; MS stopped distributing their VM then. Since then, browsers do not include a JavaVM by default. Back in 1998, most did. 

    OK... thanks. I am aware of the history. The question is: who in their right mind, today, manages to sidestep all of the platform-independent architecture that is in place and write Windows-specific Java apps?



  • @djork said:

    OK... thanks. I am aware of the history. The question is: who in their right mind, today, manages to sidestep all of the platform-independent architecture that is in place and write Windows-specific Java apps?
    Search TDWTF archives for at least 1 example (though IIRC, that one was Linux or Unix, not Windows-bound).



  • @djork said:

    @ammoQ said:
    @djork said:

    2) Who is writing Windows-only Java? (I'm sure it exists, just have never seen it)

    Back in 1998 or so, MS offered Windows-specific "extension" to Java in their development tool (VisualJ) and VM. Sun successfully went to court about that; MS stopped distributing their VM then. Since then, browsers do not include a JavaVM by default. Back in 1998, most did. 

    OK... thanks. I am aware of the history. The question is: who in their right mind, today, manages to sidestep all of the platform-independent architecture that is in place and write Windows-specific Java apps?

    It only takes one C:\windows in the source to bugger it all up. 



  • @djork said:

    OK... thanks. I am aware of the history. The question is: who in their right mind, today, manages to sidestep all of the platform-independent architecture that is in place and write Windows-specific Java apps?

    Today: probably nobody. (Except for the c:\ stuff mentioned before)

    Back then: Let's say the customer wants the program written in Java, buzzword-compliance and stuff, but also wants a lot of Windows-specifiic features that MS' extended version of Java offers an easy way to?



  • @asuffield said:

    @djork said:

    The question is: who in their right mind, today, manages to sidestep all of the platform-independent architecture that is in place and write Windows-specific Java apps?

    It only takes one C:\windows in the source to bugger it all up. 

    This is not just platform-specific, but it-only-works-on-my-machine-specific. Anyone capable of doing that is has worse problems than worrying about platforms.


Log in to reply