Re: Mono hasn't really seen any love or attention in years
well, that's what Ops think.
3760 posts • joined 16 Nov 2009
well, that's what Ops think.
Could I get a 7 foot longbow in it? How about 6'8" tent poles? Could I do this by only dropping one rear seat, leaving one for the child-seat?
If so, potentially interested.
If not, anyone got any recommendations?
None of you care because you can change YOUR default search provider and obviously, it's all about YOU YOU YOU and only YOU, right?
I use Firefox and I'm concerned. Seems to me that the second Chrome shows a higher market share than FF, Google stop supporting what is probably the single most widely known F/OSS project in existence.
I'd like to see MS and Apple pick up that particular tab as an obligation-free donation. Firefox and Mozilla gave us the open web and prevented web standards from being a bad joke. Chrome and its horrible -webkit extensions are bringing us rapidly back to the days of IE6.
Everyone benefits from Mozilla. I hope Google lose an extremely significant percentage of search traffic for dumping them.
> Wow, so much negativity on a pro-Microsoft article.
No, it looks like all the usual fandroids are right here.
This is almost certainly the case.
However, we still have hippies^Wpeople who think 56 is 56 too many and we must shown all nuclear power. Because of reasons.
Honestly, more people have died from bloody windfarms..
> Smokers get dementia, which can be a long-lasting and very expensive malady, earlier and more often.
Actually, that one's bollocks. Smokers get less dementia, probably because we thoughtfully and considerately don't live long enough to get it really badly.
The cost of emphysema and lung cancer is minimal because so few smokers undergo treatment. Most just die.
>We shall see the evidence of this when China's smokers reach a certain age and start to die in massive numbers, slowly and expensively, or cheaply and horribly depending on the state of their state at the time.
That one'll haunt you if it doesn't actually end up happening.
I have a clue about Oracle and that clue is that it hates you (where "you"=="developers").
Selecting Oracle means a) add a year to any development time for hassles in dealing with fucking Oracle and b) somebody got paid off.
Probably not. Tax law is far better defined than "control of electronic assets" law.
> The wholly Irish company is wholly owned by the American company. i.e. ALL the shares, and therefore ultimately in control.
Legally, and in terms of ownership of assets, there is absolutely no difference between owning one share and wholly owning - in both cases, the "owner" owns dick unless/until that asset is liquidated.
I currently work for lawyers.
The actions of the US Government in this case are clearly illegal.
This action effectively says that a wholly Irish company (Microsoft Ireland Operations Ltd) must hand over data to the US Government simply because it has a shareholder (Microsoft Corp) based in the USA.
So doubtless my bank (Barclays Plc) has US-based shareholders and therefore Uncle Sam has an absolute right to look at my bank statements?
I think not.
> All of this makes hydrogen cost 10 times as much as petrol!
So since "green" taxation wouldn't apply, at the pump it would probably cost about the same.
Under the terms of the Play license, all Google services must be front and centre, all "own brand" stuff relegated to the App Drawer.
Which is pretty much the same as "deprecated".
Yes really. Nokia could have gone with Google but in doing so they would have scrapped billions of dollars worth of services and time spent on those services.
Instead, they went with Microsoft and got $2billion cash per year and somebody to buy off their sinking handset division.
Pre-Elop, you could accuse the Nokia board of many types of foolishness. Post and during, all they've done is score win after win in terms of shareholder value. I understand that you're personally betrayed because "M$" and tiles and not doing things you like so therefore everyone involved is simultaneously an evil genius and an absolute cretin but Nokia walked away with very full pockets and overperforming business areas.
As far as the board are concerned (and I want you to brace yourself because this may be a bit of a shock) it is not and never was about what you want.
It's the Nokia Xn writ a bit larger, hence no Google Play because of Here again.
It may not be "polluted with windows" but it hasn't taken a great big internal creampie from your beloved Google either.
So no, you won't buy it.
> Didn't Nokia want to (abide by and) sign the contract with Google giving them access to the Play Store in return for sticking to certain specifications, etc.?
That's the main reason why they never went Android in the first place.
Nokia have an enormous investment in services. What used to be Ovi is now Here (or just Nokia) and supplies a whole lot of really good maps and other shit which Google would relegate to "thing in App Drawer that you never use because of all the Google services". That would have been basically pissing away everything they spent on making those services (which are still Nokia, not Microsoft) excellent.
Google Play was always the problem. Not Elop, not burning platforms, just Google.
Not that anyone here wants to admit it.
It does not run Google Play because Nokia still aren't keen on throwing away their own services as Google would require.
They weren't keen before Elop, they weren't keen during Elop and they're not keen post-Elop.
This is why Nokia never got into bed with Google. Google wouldn't (and still won't) let them bring their own pillows.
36 (72 per cent) of the top 50
Thanks, I don't feel patronised.
Turns out it was just another Foxconn android tablet.
I was actually thinking "femtocell".
I shall try this if I get time at the weekend.
Upvoted for providing a testplan.
FUD FUD FUDdy FUDdy FUD.. you do love your FUD don't you?
Because this is either a) ignorance or b) outright lies. .NET framework versions used to be cumulative - 1.1 will run 1.0 assemblies without issue, 2.0 will run 1.1 and 1.0, 3.0 will run 2.0, 1.1 and 1.0 and 3.5 will run 3.0, 2.0, 1.1 and 1.0*
With 4, they started moving toward the Core model and you're going to need the 3.5 framework if you want to run anything earlier than 4.0. So that's two versions. Which, according to your post in another thread is a "gazillion". Or you're a liar.
*The essential caveat here is that if you are a truly shitty programmer then it is entirely possible that you've written your assemblies to check for a specific framework version and refuse to run without it. Does that sound like you, Hans 1?
I don't think it does. I think you just prefer making shit up.
Apart from his frankly retarded idea that prohibition is effective, I'd prefer David Davis to Cameron and regardless of opinions, Prescott is always going to be an improvement on Milliband.
Being able to code means that you understand what people can do with a computer
but not really. Because "being able to code" doesn't specify what you're able to code. Six months reading github might teach you what other people are able to do with a computer but if all you can do is write a "Hello world" HTML page, that's not really comparable.
You're full of shit - he had to use one to take the damn test.
You guys are awesome. No, you guys are truly amazing. If only everyone was secure enough in their own skills to publicly sneer at little children on the internet.
The point is - many adults fail these tests. He didn't. He's clearly a very clever kid.
Shitting on his achievement this way must mean that each and every one of you is Carl Sagan.
Go you, you high-flying big-bucks earning super geniuses.
I am, of course, operating under the assumption that every comment here was made without bias, on personal experience and that none of the above commentards are semi-employable halfwits who read a fucking support script for a living.
were you five?
"The history of Windows dates back to September 1981, when Chase Bishop, a computer scientist, designed the first model of an electronic device and project "Interface Manager" was started." - Wikipedia
I never said "released". Troll harder. I'm at least not claiming that anyone supports a v1 OS anymore.
Says the man who thinks .NET frameworks previous to 4 aren't cumulative.
Nobody can take anything you say about anything MS seriously.
They pay enough for my little boy to go to nursery.
Very well put, Anon.
> The root problem has NOTHING to do with Europe, and is not fixable in Europe.
Well yes, hence an amicus brief.
(I currently work for lawyers - don't hate me, I do enough of that for all of us)
The problem is that even if it flies and the EU run with it, the Tories and UKIP will then spin it as a bad thing and immediately hand over everything.
> Did you have to?
Yes, I really did.
I could have mentioned that he looks like David Cameron too if I'd been feeling really vindictive.
And he has serious cameltoe.
Next time, you'll see it and then you'll always see it.
I'm sick of suffering this alone.
Pronounced "Git Milton Keynes".
"We want to identify people for who they are, not what they remember"
That looks like exactly the type of Steve Bong! bullshit that Matt Asay used to write here.
Honestly, it was buzzword bingo with every article, opinions gathered from breathless press releases and a level of information-free baseless enthusiasm usually reserved for fat people blogging about Zumba and for televangelists.
Adobe and Matt Asay deserve each other.
A product of the superior American education system, I see.
I wrote -
> MS is aggressively opening up the source of the .NET stack.
and two people downvoted it.
How'd you feel now, suckers?
It's not even true. The 3.x runtime will happily run code compiled against 2.0 unless the idiot who wrote that code has explicitly told it not to run without 2.0.
3.5 will run any previous code. 4.6 will run any 4.x code.
The maximum number of .NET framework versions you need is two. So we have learned that for Hans, "two" equals "a gazillion".
> In IBM's case they're still supporting an OS that was shipping before Bill flunked college.
That goes two ways. IBM don't support any codebase older than 9 years without special (expensive) arrangement. I know this because the company I work for has just upgraded rather than enter into such an arrangement. Now, the name "DB2" may be older than 9 years - the version is not.
SlackWare, Suse and RedHat do not support "OSes that predate Microsoft's NT 3.51" - they support more recent iterations.
If I were judging MS the way you judge IBM et al, I could say "Microsoft have been supporting this single OS (Windows) since September 1981" but that would be disingenuous at best so I won't. I would be obliged if you'd show others the same courtesy.
> What will you do if you have developed something, run in on Linux machines... and one day Microsoft decided not to support Linux any longer.
What happens if Steve Ballmer's angry ghost comes along and rapes your penguin?
Let's not deal in paranoia, shall we?
> There's always been a fear that they will, purely from their track record.
What, a track record of supporting operating systems longer than any other vendor and development frameworks for - if we count the switch from Sun to Oracle as a new owner, which it is - longer than any other vendor?
About the only framework MS ever axed without legal pressure (JScript) is Silverlight and as I recall, all the massed ranks of El Reg commentards laughed at Silverlight because it was stupid and M$ and clearly shitty M$ stuff and useless.
Does my memory fail me?
Well, it's been around for 13 years so far. It's probably not going to get EOLd anytime soon.
> Can I run VS on Linux yet? Until I can, I don't care whether it's cross-platform, it's no use to me.
Not yet but given that VS is a WPF application, it's not impossible anymore.
As I understand it, the Community version is not cloud-friendly because they want enterprise devs writing for Azure, not hobbyists.
> You all talk a lot but say very little....
You're assuming there's more than one.