Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 10th Feb 2012 00:09 UTC, submitted by moondevil
Windows As you all know, Windows 8 will be the first release of Windows NT which supports the ARM architecture. Microsoft hasn't been particularly forthcoming about this new Windows variant, but that's changing today. The company has posted a long and in-depth blog post about Windows 8 on ARM.
Thread beginning with comment 506929
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Pfui !
by siride on Mon 13th Feb 2012 15:09 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pfui !"
siride
Member since:
2006-01-02

But they don't create crappy software. A lot of their software is actually quite good, especially for the amount of things it can do, compared to the competition. People here complain about MS Office, and it does have its flaws, but it is head and shoulders above the competition. Excel, for example, has no real counterpart in the FOSS world. All the FOSS equivalents are, dare I say, crappy (how's that for irony on your part). Eclipse is the closest equivalent to Visual Studio and it's only good because it's backed by IBM and the Apache Foundation and gets a ton of resources. There is no real FOSS equivalent to Access, Exchange, SharePoint or .NET. You may say these are crap, but they aren't (they have crappy parts, for sure, but they are otherwise remarkably capable and powerful tools and platforms), and businesses use them and they really help. People don't pay money to MS because they're idiots, they pay money because MS software *works* and does a lot of things they *need*. Try working in the real world and maybe you'll realize that.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Pfui !
by tanishaj on Mon 13th Feb 2012 17:33 in reply to "RE[4]: Pfui !"
tanishaj Member since:
2010-12-22

Eclipse is the closest equivalent to Visual Studio and it's only good because it's backed by IBM and the Apache Foundation and gets a ton of resources. There is no real FOSS equivalent to Access, Exchange, SharePoint or .NET.


About your Eclipse comment, I was going to say that MonoDevelop is getting pretty good and is very similar in spirit to Visual Studio:

http://monodevelop.com/

Then you said there was no FOSS equivalent to .NET which is absurd. First of all, there is a complete .NET clone--Mono.

http://mono-project.com/Main_Page

Second, there are many other environments which are good substitutes or "equivalents" for .NET around. Many people might consider Java as a candidate for example.

There is an army of FOSS CMS systems; they own the market. Your other selections are worthy of a bit of debate but you certainly overstate things:

http://www.open-xchange.com/en/home.html
http://www.zimbra.com/
http://www.sogo.nu/english.html
http://www.zarafa.com/content/home
http://www.horde.org/

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Pfui !
by siride on Mon 13th Feb 2012 17:56 in reply to "RE[5]: Pfui !"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

"Eclipse is the closest equivalent to Visual Studio and it's only good because it's backed by IBM and the Apache Foundation and gets a ton of resources. There is no real FOSS equivalent to Access, Exchange, SharePoint or .NET.


About your Eclipse comment, I was going to say that MonoDevelop is getting pretty good and is very similar in spirit to Visual Studio:

http://monodevelop.com/
"
Don't make me laugh. I've used both and Visual Studio wins hands down in terms of features, performance and usability. I mean, it's not perfect, but it's much better than the alternatives. With ReSharper, I can't imagine using any other tool to do .NET development.


Then you said there was no FOSS equivalent to .NET which is absurd. First of all, there is a complete .NET clone--Mono.

http://mono-project.com/Main_Page

It's not a complete clone, it's a half-completed, buggy clone. And more to the point: it's a clone. It's not something that the FOSS world came up with the provide a unified, cross-platform development system that integrates with all sorts of applications. .NET can be used to build PowerShell scriptlets, webservices, even database procedures. All using a common runtime with a common library. Where's the equivalent in the OSS world? There isn't. Even if Mono is a clone, it's not used in nearly the same capacity that .NET is on Windows.

Second, there are many other environments which are good substitutes or "equivalents" for .NET around. Many people might consider Java as a candidate for example.

Java wasn't developed by the OSS community. It's been open-sourced, sort of, kind of, maybe, but it's still primary developed by Oracle.

There is an army of FOSS CMS systems; they own the market. Your other selections are worthy of a bit of debate but you certainly overstate things:

http://www.open-xchange.com/en/home.html
http://www.zimbra.com/
http://www.sogo.nu/english.html
http://www.zarafa.com/content/home
http://www.horde.org/

Own the market? Again, I have to laugh. I'm sure plenty of people use these, but Exchange owns the market with well over 60% of marketshare, with Lotus Notes in a distant second in the teens and then all the rest.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Pfui !
by Wafflez on Tue 14th Feb 2012 04:02 in reply to "RE[5]: Pfui !"
Wafflez Member since:
2011-06-26

WPF and WCF are part of .NET and a pretty damn big and useful part. But you're just proving that Linux has copycat things, just not as useful... ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Pfui !
by rafaelnp on Mon 13th Feb 2012 20:10 in reply to "RE[4]: Pfui !"
rafaelnp Member since:
2009-06-03

Man, i use Vim, LaTeX and stuff like that, i do not use any other software for writing code. Visual Studio and Eclipse are a waste of time for me. The most important thing for me is technical excellence, and not fancy and useless features.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Pfui !
by siride on Mon 13th Feb 2012 20:16 in reply to "RE[5]: Pfui !"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

I love Vim as much as the next guy, but I wouldn't want to do my serious .NET work in it. If you haven't used Visual Studio + ReSharper, you might think that you're just missing out on a few frills. I'll say this, though: I am much more productive with the "frills" of Visual Studio and ReSharper than I am with just a plain text editor. The latter is fine for hobby projects, or projects written in C/C++, which lack the metadata and overall structure to be parsed and used by tools like ReSharper. When it's time to get work done, I'm going to use a powerful tool that'll let me get it done quickly and correctly. For C#, Vim is not that tool.

Reply Parent Score: 2