Re: Microsoft and trust

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

Ok - seems I have to post "on top".
My following reply was not "going through" in the original thread.


"Bill McCarthy" <Bill@xxxxxxxxxx> schrieb

[Working on the Windows-platform]
Why?
I have to (for now) - but I'm making my way, to be able
to jump off in a few years - is that too difficult to understand?

And that has taken you seven years so far ?
No, my decision to not only change the language, but instead
change even the operating-system as the base of my apps,
was made in 2004/2005.
From that point on I've explored this new platform and tried
to get all my VB6-Apps to work on it.
From 2007 on that was working more and more smoothly
and now in 2008 I don't have to work around some not
yet implemented Win(e)APIs any more - no changes needed
for my Apps - and I use a whole lot of WinAPIs in them.

And yet still no clear direction form you which way you
are moving or to where ?
Why should I move to another language that fast - I mean
I just managed/explored, to have all my important Code-assets run
on Linux/Wine - I'm not under pressure now anymore (regarding
any new upcoming OS's by Microsoft, because fortunately
my customers are easy to convince to use my Apps on Linux -
and yes, that is not that easy for *everyone* here in the group
regarding the type of Apps and customers *they* have.
Nonetheless this little "success-story" (if you want to call it so)
worth at least noting IMO, because some people in the group
don't even know, that this alternative exists and works.

And there is no switch for that - that's a (migration-)process.

right. But the first step of such a migration is to determine
*where* you are migrating to.
Yes - the first step is to move over to Linux.
The next step (from now on) is, to write (more)VB6-Wrappers
around open and community-driven libraries, instead
of exploring the .NET-ones, so that I end up with very
few "VB6-glue-code" over time. That will allow me, to
switch to some other language (whatever that may be)
some time in the future with low(er) effort - using the
same open libraries over there, which I already know very
good, because I already wrote wrappers for them.

All you've said is where you are migrating from ;)
Yes, I'm migrating from all that overhyped MS-Operating-
Systems first, which are "crippled" more and more regarding
what you are "allowed" to do and what not.
And believe me, that feels real good - no pressure here.
No licenses, no "online-registrations", no UAC, no DRM,
and last but not least - no Tec-Hype!

If by better, you mean *almost* intact via wine
on a linux OS, that might be true.
No, I mean better and *completely intact* regarding
the output of the VB6-compiler compared with the
output of e.g. VS 2008.

Mono is free, CLI is ISO spec.
(as long as the patent-problematic
remains a theoretical one, which I only can hope).
Again, jsut rhetoric FUD from you... The "scare" factor.
No, I think it is evident, to be scared by MS-tactics.
I mean, we don't need to discuss the trust-topic
regarding MS in *this group* anymore - do we?
And MS is in the meantime a bit too much at a
course of "cosying up to Novell" - to not be scared
about the future of Mono.
Just some questions:
Why did they choosed/contracted with Novell (with
all that "exclusive rights regarding MS-patents"- why not
with RedHat or Ubuntu?
Why all that noise regarding "we help Mono to evolve"
instead of simply releasing their framework for Linux?

My opinion is, that they have an interest, to bind
Mono-developer-resources (as much as possible)
under the Novell-flag for some years - and that there's
a high probability, that we see a byout of Novell at some
point in time (in case Mono starts to gain some serious
"move over to linux effects").
I'm not a lawyer, but for this scenario (a MS-buyout of
Novell) I see some serious chances for MS-lawyers,
to restrict the usage of the Mono-platform to
MS(former Novell)-Linux only - under their terms and
maybe new (more restrictive) licenses.
And yes, before you come up again with your FUD- and
paranoia-stuff - that *is* a speculation - but at least all
that ongoing "MS-Novell-interaction" smells somehow
"fishy" to me - but at least I tried to made some points,
on what could happen, which are not entirely "made out
of thin air".

I mean, *we* already know about MS, that they *really-
don't-care* - but the Mono-Devs don't have that bad
experience. Icaza apparently *has trust* into "MS's-new-
openness" - a failure IMO.
The crux of the matter is, that MS would only have to
react this way, *when* it comes to a serious "move over
effect".
And as long as that doesn't happen, they only have their
"food in the door" - talking about their openness.

And regarding the CLI - try to base a modern App only
at this subset - that's a joke.


And sorry, what don't you understand about the fact,
that I apparently made a mistake some years ago and
now try to work around the problem as efficient as possible?

Wow, 7 years is as efficient as possible ?
I don't know, what you are talking about here - VB6 is
for my purposes "raddish" enough, to not shy a comparison
with someone who thinks that .NET offers a "much greater
productivity". VB6-Apps run on Vista today.
And as said some postings above - I've invested my
time into my programming-skills without "jumping around",
so from my point of view these 7 years were not wasted time.

Even if I'd choose to use .NET *now* - I wouldn't
have wasted my time, because I could start with the
newer WPF-GUIs and WCF (the newer RPC-stuff)
there. Now I could say, that instead *you* have wasted
your time in .NET, investing too early into Apps based on
WinForms and Remoting.

Ah, now we're getting closer to the real truth.
It's your investment in your "knowledge".
Yes, that's the real truth - what is your point?

Which basically means you find it hard to port your
skills to other programming languages.
No - how are you coming to that conclusion?

Persoanlly, I found my skills adapted to VB.NET
(VB 7) very rapidly without any major issues.
Yep - and that is possible for any experienced developer,
at *any* time.
And therefore is no need, to jump on the .NET-bandwagon
that fast - and as my Winforms->WPF or Remoting->WCF-
argument shows, you were probably jumping too fast
on it - ergo: you wasted a great part of your time in the
last 7 years, to learn WinForms or Remoting.

And of course will I have to choose another language
and another environment at some point in the future,

Oh, so after seven years, even tought you claim to be
moving away from Microsoft and VB6, you still haven't
decided where ?
Regarding the language? No - VB6 does just fine for me.
Regarding the Operating-System? Yes - VB6 does fine there too.

but if that point in time comes,

"if" ????
My god, "when" if you want - english is not my native tongue.

Again, dotnet provides a non vendor lock in.
Dream on.


As GM said, of the 5000 on the waitlist, only 50 actually
took up the lease when offered.
Sigh, as GM said...?
Try to hear, what the *customers* have to say in this docu.
Try to compare, what we (the customers) say about the
"VB-story" - and what comes from MS's mouth about this
topic.

you blame "big oil" for it, but have absolutely no facts
to back that up.
So you are saying, it came all out of the brilliant mind
of G.B., what we see overseas now?

You ignore the real facts that the car had a limited range,
90-100 miles or so - and that on old battery-technology.
And apparently even that lower range seemed to be
"enough" for many customers - they wanted "more of that".

limited marketability,
Have you seen the ads GM has made for the EV1 -
now compare the "mood" of those clips with something
they made for the Hummer.

had supplier issues, and real cost was extrodonarilly
Bullshit.
E-motors are build for more than 100years now -
and modern e-motors already work for a long time
in the range of greater 90% C.O.P. (currently
between 94% and 98%).
And they are *not* expensive and work nearly
maintenance-free over very long periods.
Supplier-issues? - LOL - those parts are manufactured
in large numbers for the industries all over the world.
GM probably meant, that *they* are not the supplier
of the "motor-part" anymore.

The problem is you are viewign a niche market,
No, pure E-Motor-Cars are IMO not a niche market
anymore, if one of the *wellknown* car-manufacturers
would do *serious* advertising for it.

if there was a *viable* market then, other players and
investors from somewhere in the world would jump in
and take those profits.
Yes, but those smaller firms have to build up an appropriate
infrastructure first, to allow a high-volume series-production.
The big car-manufacturers already have that available -
and also the know-how - to make appropriate transmissions,
which are able to keep pace with the much higher torque of the
e-motors. "Big-oil" has to handle the *large* car-manufacturers,
regarding mass-productions of pure! e-cars on these capable
infrastructures, not the smaller "newcomers" in their sports-
wagon-niches, as e.g. Tesla.

Add to that the fact GM is bringing out the Volt, ...
As a concept car - "maybe! in 2010".
And this car is not designed as a pure plugin - it is a hybrid
with a GM-combustion-engine builtin.

Oh, and for the record, GM makes a range of cars. It
certainly does not force anyone to buy SUV's but people
do. It's that market pressure that they respond to ...
No, that's not market-pressure - nobody "needs" these
heavy, ill cars - that's market-forming by heavy "advertising",
addressing the "virtuous customer", which buys without
questioning himself, comparing his decision only with other
"virtuous customers" in "the neighbourhood".
In this regard SUVs are something like the .NET-version
of the car-manufacturers. ;-)

But at least (beside the "shameless advertising" for SUVs)
those are offering some alternatives too, which MS does not.

... you're just making things up now. If there was no broad
demand for VM based environment, then why are the leadign
two "platforms" Java and .NET ?
Wrong, neither Java nor .NET are the "leading two platforms"
to build Desktop-Apps.

AS desktops becoem mroe powerful, have multiple cores,
the very same reasons VM's are desirable on servers translates
to desktops.
And?
Where is MS-Office based on .NET, making use of all that
potent hardware-resources we have these days?
Does that need some other "seven years"? Until we have
8-Core-CPUs and 32GByte Ram on an average Desktop-
PC, only to achieve the same performance as the current
COM-based MS-Office?
Are all these resources needed, just to offer the customer
a "more colorful experience"?

The pure plug-in concept is a limited market.
The pure plug-in concept is a limited market, *because*
it is not addressed by the greater manufacturers.
The other greater manufacturers simply have not made
the mistake like GM, to demonstrate in reality, that it
would work.

Let's say you hop in your pure plug in car with a 40 mile
range ...
The EV1 had a 90-100 mile-range - and with modern
batteries you can achieve a > 200mile-range for a sports-
car as the current Tesla - and for a "family-car" with much
more available "battery-space" you could achieve even a
400mile-range.

Now lets say there's a blizard as is hte case in a
lot of places across northern america. Just how long
will you sruvive in that car in freezing temperatures ?
LOL, I'd say those "paranoid" (TM) people should
move to california - or buy a SUV, capable of pulling
a trailer with "tons of extra-fuel".

Hydrogen can be manufactured from water at abotu 25%
efficiency.
LOL, 25% of efficiency - followed by the need of a "physical
transport" of all that H2 to the customers car - later on burned
(or "converted" in a fuel-cell) working with ca. 60%efficiency -
suming up to a total efficiency of less than 15%!
Simply do your math (0.25 * 0.6).

The same energy could be transported over the already existing
E-Network with ca. 10% loss - another 5% loss whilst loading
the cars batteries - later on converted by a high-efficient e-motor
working at ca. 95%. That gives 0.9 * 0.95 * 0.95 = 81%
efficiency overall - from the energy-source to the street.

At the moment by products of gas, (mainly methane)
are the most economical source.
Yes, of course - that's what I'm saying (natural gas *is*
98% methane). The oil-industry is also the biggest supplier
of natural-gas - and they want to become the biggest
supplier of H2 - under the "green flag" of course, which is
more than questionable if you compare the over-all-efficiency
with a pure-plugin-concept.

Once you take into consideration power to weight ratios,
fuel cell lifetime verus battery lifetime, massively larger
range, ability to instantly refuel etc, hydrogen fuel cells
make a lot of sense.
You read that in the prospects of the large car-manufacturers,
right?
In fact the Fuel-Cell has large problems, to work reliable
under conditions below 0°C - (now tell that the people in
northern america).
Additionally there are serious H2-storage-problems, since
this little molecule is very "fleeting" - did you know, that
the H2-tank of your "shiny new green-powered BMW"
would be empty after only 3 weeks of parking?
With that concept you cannot even fly into holidays
for more than two weeks, without parking your H2-
Car beside a fuel-station. ;-)

<sigh> You really *want to believe* that there is an
evil empire otu there don't you ?
That's not a "believe" that's the sad reality!
Call it "evil empire" - I'd call it seriously "screwed up"
markets, caused by buyable managers, buyable politicians,
buyable media ... and yes, on the other end due to a whole
bunch of uncritical, "ad-lulled" customers out there (including
me for some time, yesss).

It's kind of like so called documentaries about the
conspiracy against electric cars, they'll show footage
of cars being crushed as if that is relevant.
I also don't like these "show-effects" in documentaries,
but the media (not me) seems to like it - and has put
this scene also into their "opener sequence" - but

It was full of crap like a couple of women sittign on a couch
blaming GM for sellign SUV's </sigh>
Why only talking about those "weaker scenes" - the movie
has a whole lot of "more impacting" points in it.
And some of them maybe a bit "overstressed" - but in sum
you cannot simply ignore them.

"Klappern gehört zum Handwerk" (sorry, cannot find
a good matching translation for this german proverb).

Then what's the point of posting it ?
Hoped for help from native speakers - a naive translation
like "craft needs some clattering" somehow sounds not
right to me.

I clearly stated I didn't want to wade into dealing with another
one of you silly conspiracy theories.
Then give up - be a virtuous consumer, believing in hale and
well working markets, the freedom in freedom-fries, whatever.

Leads me to a new sig-idea:

..NET - "I'm proud to be owned"

....or maybe "pwnd" as an even better matching word
for all those "real hackers" out there ;-)


Olaf



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: VW Losses in North America
    ... up to about 2-6 years maximum, for enough customers to realize they ... new line up to restore sagging sales.. ... Because a rusty car in your, ... their cars, feel duped, and of course, become jaded to the clever marketing ...
    (rec.autos.makers.vw.watercooled)
  • Re: VW Losses in North America
    ... traditional marketing hype......Especially VWs.. ... > long, because their customers figured out, by owning them, that they are ... Because a rusty car in your, ... > with a new lineup, and starts their Very clever marketing campaigns, to ...
    (rec.autos.makers.vw.watercooled)
  • Re: Blockbuster (Part 3)
    ... However, in 1991, this Blockbuster Entertainment ... other customers in the store, because he started off, so ... I looked over at Maria in the car. ... passed the line of customers at the other counter. ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: VW Losses in North America
    ... Anyone can find rust somewhere, on any car, anywhere.. ... DECIDED to raise the timing belt interval to get them out of warranty, ... those customers will not buy another one... ...
    (rec.autos.makers.vw.watercooled)
  • Re: 64-bit Windows for AMD 64 is here...
    ... I try not to have customers like that, but I do understand that some are ... This is precisely what dotNET is for. ... > performance compared to the others in the market. ... And you know that apps ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)