<FONT color=#888899>Wooden Table</FONT> <FONT color=#444455 size=3>wtf</FONT> <FONT color=#666677>xml</FONT>
Does anybody have any pictures to post on this theme?
<FONT color=#888899>Wooden Table</FONT> <FONT color=#444455 size=3>wtf</FONT> <FONT color=#666677>xml</FONT>
Does anybody have any pictures to post on this theme?
@Saladin said:
Anyhow, only being able to burn a RECOVERY disk once? WTF?
Oh yes. I have a Compaq desktop with Windows XP and it also has a "Recovery CD/DVD Creator" which explicitly says on the first dialog that you can only make one set of recovery discs per PC.
I've always wondered what would happen if the software fails during the recovery disc creation. Now I know.
@AssimilatedByBorg said:
As a personal pet peeve, I hate Java being described as "interpreted". In my mind, JIT aside, it's compiled to the Java Virtual Machine "assembly", which is then translated to the native machine at run-time. In the "compiled vs. interpreted" continuum, Java's much closer to compiled, for all practical purposes from the programmer's perspective. IMHO only.... and your definitions of "interpret" and "translate" may differ from mine.... I've long grown sick of people saying, "why would you use Java... it's interpreted!" rather than apply any intelligent analysis.
In both Java and .NET platforms, the source code is compiled to intermediate code (bytecode), which is handed over to a virtual machine (whether it be the JVM or the CLR) for execution. For all intents and purposes, I don't see a large difference in how the two platforms handle execution of code. I suppose the extent of compiling the bytecode into native code at runtime by JITing may be different by the two virtual machines, but whatever isn't being compiled by JIT is more or less being interpreted by the VM. I'm not sure how compiling to bytecode on Java would be "closer to compiled" as opposed to compiling to MSIL on .NET.
If people say "Java is interpreted," I think there's some truth to it, as unless the bytecode is being converted into native machine code, it is interpreted. However, I also feel that those comments come from people who either live in the past when the JVM didn't have JIT (pre-1.2 days before HotSpot), or are just unaware of how VM and JIT work in general.
That said, my little concern about the paper is that the comparison of Java and VB .NET sounded like a mixture of a comparison of platforms and languages. Whenever Java was being mentioned, it appeared that the Java platform was being mentioned without discussion of the language. Conversely, when discussing VB .NET, there seemed to be an emphasis on "it's easier to program, so it attracts bad talent" and less on the .NET platform that it stands on.
@Anonymouse said:
"...with..." (as in a seperate medium like a floppy disk or CD-ROM) or "...on..."?
That's a "with" -- The Ontrack Disk Manager software came on a floppy disk included with the new hard drive. I remember getting one with a Western Digital 1.6 GB hard drive to install on my 486 running Windows 3.1.