Linked by Howard Fosdick on Sat 24th Nov 2012 17:52 UTC
Editorial Do you depend on your computer for your living? If so, I'm sure you've thought long and hard about which hardware and software to use. I'd like to explain why I use generic "white boxes" running open source software. These give me a platform I rely on for 100% availability. They also provide a low-cost solution with excellent security and privacy.
Thread beginning with comment 543234
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Development
by HappyGod on Mon 26th Nov 2012 06:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Development"
HappyGod
Member since:
2005-10-19

Little Java humor here:

"When I see that the application I run is based on Java, I'm really happy" -No User Ever

"Knock knock?" "Who's there?" -5 seconds later "Java"

Also, I want to find the person responsible for creating the pop-up that reminds me to update Java, and punch them in the face.


Regards to the auto-updater: I have people out looking for him and also the one who did the Adobe Acrobat updater. I particularly love the Acrobat one, because right-clicking the tray icon which normally gives you the menu to close the craplet, actually just brings up the Acrobat updater window again.

It's amazing to me how limited some devs are that deal with OSS. They have obviously never actually done any serious work with .NET. Those old cliches about ineffecient apps from VS are just outdated rubbish now. They just make the people who make them look ill-informed.

ASP.NET MVC is IMHO up there with ROR in terms of robust (and fast) website creation. Although I will admit that the C# language has some ground to cover before it can challenge Ruby on brevity and dynamism. However, the amount of work that you can have done for you is immense in VS.

I really do think that MVC will be one of the products that will keep MS alive. Cause it sure as sh!t ain't going to be Windows 8.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Development
by moondevil on Mon 26th Nov 2012 09:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Development"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Although I will admit that the Ruby language has some ground to cover before it can challenge C# on performance.

Reply Parent Score: 2