S
StrandElectric
....continual Micro$oft changes. And is the C# that is part of the visual
studio 'vb2008Express' download, the 'real' C#?
studio 'vb2008Express' download, the 'real' C#?
C
Cor
Of course, although the current version is 2010, try it, to love VB (any
version) more.
And who do we think will not agree with that.
Cor
"StrandElectric" wrote in message
....continual Micro$oft changes. And is the C# that is part of the visual
studio 'vb2008Express' download, the 'real' C#?
version) more.
And who do we think will not agree with that.
Cor
"StrandElectric" wrote in message
....continual Micro$oft changes. And is the C# that is part of the visual
studio 'vb2008Express' download, the 'real' C#?
T
Tom Shelton
It happens that StrandElectric formulated :
Huh? There is nothing really wrong with VB.NET - I personally like
C-style languages better, so I use C#... It also has an advantage,
IMHO, because it is backed by an actual standards body (ECMA and ISO) -
and the most support on alternative runtimes such as Mono - which means
easier porting to OS's other then Windows. It also can be used more
easily for more MS platforms, such as Windows Phone 7, Zune, XBox 360,
etc - but, unless your wanting to target those devices it's not a big
deal.
Both languages continue to evolve, so it's not like your not going to
have changes from one version to the next - though, MS has done a dang
good job in .NET so far of not breaking code as you move forward.
In other words, if VB.NET is meeting your needs - there's not a real
reason to switch. In most ways, especially after the current 2010
release - the languages are pretty much on par feature wise...
Huh? There is nothing really wrong with VB.NET - I personally like
C-style languages better, so I use C#... It also has an advantage,
IMHO, because it is backed by an actual standards body (ECMA and ISO) -
and the most support on alternative runtimes such as Mono - which means
easier porting to OS's other then Windows. It also can be used more
easily for more MS platforms, such as Windows Phone 7, Zune, XBox 360,
etc - but, unless your wanting to target those devices it's not a big
deal.
Both languages continue to evolve, so it's not like your not going to
have changes from one version to the next - though, MS has done a dang
good job in .NET so far of not breaking code as you move forward.
In other words, if VB.NET is meeting your needs - there's not a real
reason to switch. In most ways, especially after the current 2010
release - the languages are pretty much on par feature wise...
C
Cor
Good reply Tom, I had to smile, friendly of course.
Have a good weekend,
Cor
"Tom Shelton" wrote in message
It happens that StrandElectric formulated :
Huh? There is nothing really wrong with VB.NET - I personally like
C-style languages better, so I use C#... It also has an advantage,
IMHO, because it is backed by an actual standards body (ECMA and ISO) -
and the most support on alternative runtimes such as Mono - which means
easier porting to OS's other then Windows. It also can be used more
easily for more MS platforms, such as Windows Phone 7, Zune, XBox 360,
etc - but, unless your wanting to target those devices it's not a big
deal.
Both languages continue to evolve, so it's not like your not going to
have changes from one version to the next - though, MS has done a dang
good job in .NET so far of not breaking code as you move forward.
In other words, if VB.NET is meeting your needs - there's not a real
reason to switch. In most ways, especially after the current 2010
release - the languages are pretty much on par feature wise...
Have a good weekend,
Cor
"Tom Shelton" wrote in message
It happens that StrandElectric formulated :
Huh? There is nothing really wrong with VB.NET - I personally like
C-style languages better, so I use C#... It also has an advantage,
IMHO, because it is backed by an actual standards body (ECMA and ISO) -
and the most support on alternative runtimes such as Mono - which means
easier porting to OS's other then Windows. It also can be used more
easily for more MS platforms, such as Windows Phone 7, Zune, XBox 360,
etc - but, unless your wanting to target those devices it's not a big
deal.
Both languages continue to evolve, so it's not like your not going to
have changes from one version to the next - though, MS has done a dang
good job in .NET so far of not breaking code as you move forward.
In other words, if VB.NET is meeting your needs - there's not a real
reason to switch. In most ways, especially after the current 2010
release - the languages are pretty much on par feature wise...
S
stukie
Not sure where MSFT is with this today:
http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Charles/Luca-Bolognese-C-and-VBNET-Co-
Evolution-The-Twain-Shall-Meet
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/scottwil/archive/2010/03/09/vb-and-c-
coevolution.aspx
T
Tom Shelton
stukie submitted this idea :
As noted, VB11 and C#4 are pretty much equal. I am expecting that the
last couple of features will cross over in C#5 and VB12 (inline xml for
C# and iterators for VB12).
As noted, VB11 and C#4 are pretty much equal. I am expecting that the
last couple of features will cross over in C#5 and VB12 (inline xml for
C# and iterators for VB12).
S
StrandElectric
Funnily enough Tom, vb6 was meeting my need! I am invetsigating changing toTom Shelton said:
vb.net in case classic will not work in future versions of windows.
On another tack, have had look at some C# code, and no thanks! What tedium
with the non-intuitve curly brackets for example. And I note the use of the
term namespace and also the Catch Try structure. So no doubt a lot of the
development of vb.net is influenced by C proponents.
T
Tom Shelton
StrandElectric laid this down on his screen :
And, it most likely will not - at least on some version anyway.
Try/Catch is used in most modern lanugages - or some variation of such
- C based or not. Most modern OOP languages, support the idea of
structured exception handling, and those words seem to really capture
that nature the best
And, it most likely will not - at least on some version anyway.
Try/Catch is used in most modern lanugages - or some variation of such
- C based or not. Most modern OOP languages, support the idea of
structured exception handling, and those words seem to really capture
that nature the best
M
Mayayana
| On another tack, have had look at some C# code, and no thanks! What
tedium
| with the non-intuitve curly brackets for example. And I note the use of
the
| term namespace and also the Catch Try structure. So no doubt a lot of the
| development of vb.net is influenced by C proponents.
|
The idea was to force everyone to move to managed
code. .Net was to copmete with Java. (Which it did
quite well.) Then it turned out to be just the thing
for the SaaS craze. And now it's a great way for MS
to pull an Apple, mediating between developers and
end-users, and taking a cut. (Today Phone 7, tomorrow
the world.)
With C*, many of the C/C++ people are somewhat
vain about their language and look down on Basic, so
their version of .Net always has to be just a little
better, else they wouldn't use .Net. If you look at the
MS pages for info. and download you'll see that C# is
for adults and VB.Net is marketed as "good enough for
hobbyists". Yet they both use the same basic framework.
tedium
| with the non-intuitve curly brackets for example. And I note the use of
the
| term namespace and also the Catch Try structure. So no doubt a lot of the
| development of vb.net is influenced by C proponents.
|
The idea was to force everyone to move to managed
code. .Net was to copmete with Java. (Which it did
quite well.) Then it turned out to be just the thing
for the SaaS craze. And now it's a great way for MS
to pull an Apple, mediating between developers and
end-users, and taking a cut. (Today Phone 7, tomorrow
the world.)
With C*, many of the C/C++ people are somewhat
vain about their language and look down on Basic, so
their version of .Net always has to be just a little
better, else they wouldn't use .Net. If you look at the
MS pages for info. and download you'll see that C# is
for adults and VB.Net is marketed as "good enough for
hobbyists". Yet they both use the same basic framework.
S
StrandElectric
Actually I agree about that!Tom Shelton said:StrandElectric laid this down on his screen :
And, it most likely will not - at least on some version anyway.
Try/Catch is used in most modern lanugages - or some variation of such - C
based or not. Most modern OOP languages, support the idea of structured
exception handling, and those words seem to really capture that nature the
best
S
StrandElectric
Hmm... My old cyncism is returning...Mayayana said:
T
Tom Shelton
Mayayana laid this down on his screen :
Yes, .NET was created to compete with Java. But, the fact that MS felt
the need to compete should tell you something. The fact, is that
VB.CLASIC's mainstay was the internal corporate stuff. It was being
slowly killed by Java.
And it did compete well, because it was a much better product.
What SaaS craze? That has never seriously materialized - until very
recently. And even then, only for things like Office - and that is
response to competition from Google.
What MS is doing for WP7 is right for the consumer. It protects them
from serious security threats - some of which are already starting to
materialize in that Android market - because of the ability to willie
nilly download software from any place.
This is true. It's partly the language - BASIC has a tradition of
insulating the developer from the machine. It's not that this is bad
by it's self, but many (not all) BASIC developers have tended to be
more blue collar in their approach to programming. They aren't
interested in learning new techniques or writting maintainable code -
it's get in get the job done now. That has tend to lead to really
crappy code, that often was brittle and took major effort to make
serious changes.
Now this part is utter crap. VB and C# have both had their strengths
and weaknesses. But, the actual usage often comes down to syntactical
preference when dealing with .NET - not my language is better then
yours. For instance, I used to use VB when it came to automating
anything with office, because it's late binding was easier (I would
usually write a VB.NET class library that I would call in my C# app).
As for the marketing, well - sure, why not? MS has always targeted VB
towards beginers and hobbyists - why would you expect them to change
that tradition now?
Yes, .NET was created to compete with Java. But, the fact that MS felt
the need to compete should tell you something. The fact, is that
VB.CLASIC's mainstay was the internal corporate stuff. It was being
slowly killed by Java.
And it did compete well, because it was a much better product.
What SaaS craze? That has never seriously materialized - until very
recently. And even then, only for things like Office - and that is
response to competition from Google.
What MS is doing for WP7 is right for the consumer. It protects them
from serious security threats - some of which are already starting to
materialize in that Android market - because of the ability to willie
nilly download software from any place.
This is true. It's partly the language - BASIC has a tradition of
insulating the developer from the machine. It's not that this is bad
by it's self, but many (not all) BASIC developers have tended to be
more blue collar in their approach to programming. They aren't
interested in learning new techniques or writting maintainable code -
it's get in get the job done now. That has tend to lead to really
crappy code, that often was brittle and took major effort to make
serious changes.
Now this part is utter crap. VB and C# have both had their strengths
and weaknesses. But, the actual usage often comes down to syntactical
preference when dealing with .NET - not my language is better then
yours. For instance, I used to use VB when it came to automating
anything with office, because it's late binding was easier (I would
usually write a VB.NET class library that I would call in my C# app).
As for the marketing, well - sure, why not? MS has always targeted VB
towards beginers and hobbyists - why would you expect them to change
that tradition now?
M
Mayayana
| >
| Hmm... My old cyncism is returning...
|
I didn't see anyplace where you actually said
what you're doing in terms of projects. .Net is
sort of the only game in town at this point, in
many ways. VB is arguably the most widely
supported tool, running almost dependency-free
on Win95 to Win7, but it's really just for 32-bit
PC software. As Tom said, .Net is being adapted
to a lot of things. If you want to write phone
"apps" for Windows Phone 7 that would be .Net.
If you're writing server-side applets on a corporate
network that's probably .Net. Silverlight? .Net.
And there's talk that Win8 may be "Desktop as
a Service":
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/windows-8-to-showcase-desktop-as-a-service/7975
That would imply lots of web services that people
use from any machine they're on... and probably
some kind of MS App Store for that as well. That's
likely to be something where only .Net can be used.
On the other hand, Desktop .Net is silly. Silverlight is
being scaled back. The ARM chips
that Tom mentions are for phones. Smart phones are a
current gimmick that few make money at. And Windows
smart phones are notably unsuccessful so far. So what's the
real value of all these places where .Net can be used? You're
looking at something like a replay of the shareware craze
on phones, but with MS controlling your connection to customers.
If they can pull off that kind of control on Win8 then no doubt
they will. Vista/7 is already a restrictive corporate workstation
with MS as SysAdmin. All MS needs to do now is to clamp
down on "unrecognized and potentially unsafe" software
installation and suddenly their PCs are just like gigantic
smart phones, with you having to rent software through safe,
official online stores. (I imagine that Mr. Ballmer must salivate
over the tight control Apple manages to keep over both Apple
developers and the customers... not to mention the 30% (?)
cut they get on software sales for the iPhone.)
To me all of that leads to much bigger questions: What
will computers be in 3-4 years? If you're writing software
for others to use, what do you want to write, will anyone
care, and will they be able to install it? Will you be able to
really write Windows software, or only nonsense like iPhone
apps for smart phone addicts to play with while crossing
busy city streets?
I saw a bit on Saturday Night Live recently that captured
the feverish and off-kilter quality of the current landscape.
I have to paraphrase. It was on the news segment and went
something like:
"The IRS is now making tax forms available for the iPhone.
Great. Now you can fill out those really confusing forms on
a much smaller screen."
| Hmm... My old cyncism is returning...
|
I didn't see anyplace where you actually said
what you're doing in terms of projects. .Net is
sort of the only game in town at this point, in
many ways. VB is arguably the most widely
supported tool, running almost dependency-free
on Win95 to Win7, but it's really just for 32-bit
PC software. As Tom said, .Net is being adapted
to a lot of things. If you want to write phone
"apps" for Windows Phone 7 that would be .Net.
If you're writing server-side applets on a corporate
network that's probably .Net. Silverlight? .Net.
And there's talk that Win8 may be "Desktop as
a Service":
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/windows-8-to-showcase-desktop-as-a-service/7975
That would imply lots of web services that people
use from any machine they're on... and probably
some kind of MS App Store for that as well. That's
likely to be something where only .Net can be used.
On the other hand, Desktop .Net is silly. Silverlight is
being scaled back. The ARM chips
that Tom mentions are for phones. Smart phones are a
current gimmick that few make money at. And Windows
smart phones are notably unsuccessful so far. So what's the
real value of all these places where .Net can be used? You're
looking at something like a replay of the shareware craze
on phones, but with MS controlling your connection to customers.
If they can pull off that kind of control on Win8 then no doubt
they will. Vista/7 is already a restrictive corporate workstation
with MS as SysAdmin. All MS needs to do now is to clamp
down on "unrecognized and potentially unsafe" software
installation and suddenly their PCs are just like gigantic
smart phones, with you having to rent software through safe,
official online stores. (I imagine that Mr. Ballmer must salivate
over the tight control Apple manages to keep over both Apple
developers and the customers... not to mention the 30% (?)
cut they get on software sales for the iPhone.)
To me all of that leads to much bigger questions: What
will computers be in 3-4 years? If you're writing software
for others to use, what do you want to write, will anyone
care, and will they be able to install it? Will you be able to
really write Windows software, or only nonsense like iPhone
apps for smart phone addicts to play with while crossing
busy city streets?
I saw a bit on Saturday Night Live recently that captured
the feverish and off-kilter quality of the current landscape.
I have to paraphrase. It was on the news segment and went
something like:
"The IRS is now making tax forms available for the iPhone.
Great. Now you can fill out those really confusing forms on
a much smaller screen."
T
Tom Shelton
Mayayana formulated the question :
You can not side-load software (well, unless you use of the two jail
breaking apps - one of which won't be released until after the first
update).
I haven't put anything out yet... Thinking about it though.
The don't tell you want you can write.
Not a big fan, no.
You can not side-load software (well, unless you use of the two jail
breaking apps - one of which won't be released until after the first
update).
I haven't put anything out yet... Thinking about it though.
The don't tell you want you can write.
Not a big fan, no.
T
Tom Shelton
Mayayana brought next idea :
Hardely anyone cares about that anymore... Yikes.
Applets? Could you be anymore condescending? You make it sound as if
real work is not being done... I can guarentee you that the software I
write does more "real work" than you push on your site.
LOL... Simply not true. Especially since .NET is part of every new
windows installation. .NET is actually far superior on the modern
desktop - you really don't know anything about WPF do you? Hardware
accelerated graphics, resolution independant, etc, etc.
Not true. You should read the stories that came out AFTER that
statement was made.
Not just phones. They are system on a chip. They are used in many
small electronic devices - such as the iPad and several netbooks.
They are goign to be powering servers and desktops soon as well... Why
do you think ms is porting Windows to arm in the first place?
A gimmick? Really? Have you not been paying attention. I suggest you
look at the motorla atrix for a glimps of the future. If anything its
Microsoft and the traditional desktop that is fast becomming the
gimmick.
LOL... It's been out 4 months world wide and only 3 months in the US.
The app store has already almost crossed the 7,000 app mark in 3
months. It is growing faster right now then the Apple Store.
I just saw an article predicting that WP7 will be the fastest growing
smart phone OS in 2011. But, don't expect it to overtake iOS or
Android for a few years - there are just too many of those out there.
I'm not even going to bother with the rest of this. Your wrong. It's
simple as that. The market is shifting - and the fact is, MS may not
survive it - at least in it's current form. If you don't want to open
your eyes and see it - then that's ok with me.
Hardely anyone cares about that anymore... Yikes.
Applets? Could you be anymore condescending? You make it sound as if
real work is not being done... I can guarentee you that the software I
write does more "real work" than you push on your site.
LOL... Simply not true. Especially since .NET is part of every new
windows installation. .NET is actually far superior on the modern
desktop - you really don't know anything about WPF do you? Hardware
accelerated graphics, resolution independant, etc, etc.
Not true. You should read the stories that came out AFTER that
statement was made.
Not just phones. They are system on a chip. They are used in many
small electronic devices - such as the iPad and several netbooks.
They are goign to be powering servers and desktops soon as well... Why
do you think ms is porting Windows to arm in the first place?
A gimmick? Really? Have you not been paying attention. I suggest you
look at the motorla atrix for a glimps of the future. If anything its
Microsoft and the traditional desktop that is fast becomming the
gimmick.
LOL... It's been out 4 months world wide and only 3 months in the US.
The app store has already almost crossed the 7,000 app mark in 3
months. It is growing faster right now then the Apple Store.
I just saw an article predicting that WP7 will be the fastest growing
smart phone OS in 2011. But, don't expect it to overtake iOS or
Android for a few years - there are just too many of those out there.
So what's the
real value of all these places where .Net can be used? You're
looking at something like a replay of the shareware craze
on phones, but with MS controlling your connection to customers.
If they can pull off that kind of control on Win8 then no doubt
they will. Vista/7 is already a restrictive corporate workstation
with MS as SysAdmin. All MS needs to do now is to clamp
down on "unrecognized and potentially unsafe" software
installation and suddenly their PCs are just like gigantic
smart phones, with you having to rent software through safe,
official online stores. (I imagine that Mr. Ballmer must salivate
over the tight control Apple manages to keep over both Apple
developers and the customers... not to mention the 30% (?)
cut they get on software sales for the iPhone.)
To me all of that leads to much bigger questions: What
will computers be in 3-4 years? If you're writing software
for others to use, what do you want to write, will anyone
care, and will they be able to install it? Will you be able to
really write Windows software, or only nonsense like iPhone
apps for smart phone addicts to play with while crossing
busy city streets?
I saw a bit on Saturday Night Live recently that captured
the feverish and off-kilter quality of the current landscape.
I have to paraphrase. It was on the news segment and went
something like:
"The IRS is now making tax forms available for the iPhone.
Great. Now you can fill out those really confusing forms on
a much smaller screen."
I'm not even going to bother with the rest of this. Your wrong. It's
simple as that. The market is shifting - and the fact is, MS may not
survive it - at least in it's current form. If you don't want to open
your eyes and see it - then that's ok with me.
C
Cor
<snipped>
If you look at the
MS pages for info. and download you'll see that C# is
for adults and VB.Net is marketed as "good enough for
hobbyists".
<snipped>
Saw, no way anymore, that was a while.
There will be still some old pages who are like that.
If you look at the
MS pages for info. and download you'll see that C# is
for adults and VB.Net is marketed as "good enough for
hobbyists".
<snipped>
Saw, no way anymore, that was a while.
There will be still some old pages who are like that.
S
StrandElectric
Mayayana said:
Accounting applications that accept keyboard or barcode input and output
meaningful financial reports. And to try out vb.net, I successfully cobbled
together enough code to read an old 8,200 + record random access file
containing business info. .
M
Mayayana
| > Silverlight is being scaled back.
|
| Not true. You should read the stories that came out AFTER that
| statement was made.
After this one, less than 3 months ago?
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-our-strategy-with-silverlight-has-shifted/7834
Even if they go back to SL for the Web, Silverlight
for Windows software is still as dead as Adobe's AIR.
They're both desperate attempts at control of the market,
with lots of ambition and little common sense.
|
| > The ARM chips
| > that Tom mentions are for phones.
|
| Not just phones. They are system on a chip. They are used in many
| small electronic devices - such as the iPad and several netbooks.
|
Aren't we talking about .Net Windows development?
ARM for Windows, other than phone, is still in the
vaporware labs.
| They are goign to be powering servers and desktops soon as well... Why
| do you think ms is porting Windows to arm in the first place?
|
More opinion as fact. And more opinion that's being
colored by your own personal hopes. Maybe real Windows
will get to ARM. (They can barely fit it onto a PC at
this point.) I haven't seen anything about ARM servers
and PCs. What I've read is an ongoing discussion about
whether Windows will ever get to ARM in the first place,
and that's only in the context of tablets. (Then of course
there's the question of who might be buying these
theoretical tablets, and whether they'll actually use software
or perhaps just twiddle their Facebook and send photos.)
So maybe there's a future for Windows programming on
ARM ... somewhere down the road. And maybe there isn't.
If you're going to market .Bloat for ARM then you really should
include the caveats.
| > Smart phones are a current gimmick that few make money at.
|
| A gimmick? Really? Have you not been paying attention. I suggest you
| look at the motorla atrix for a glimps of the future. If anything its
| Microsoft and the traditional desktop that is fast becomming the
| gimmick.
|
Glimpses of the future? You're such a consumer.
The most successful app on iPhones is Angry Birds.
Then there's the Moron Test. And hundreds of thousands
of other fluff trinkets. It looks an awfully lot like
the shareware market of 2000 to me. A few people
hit it big. A lot more made pocket money. Then the
market evaporated. Everyone was talking about the
Internet, but it was just the latest fad.
I think you do have a point in one sense, though:
When people become addicted to sucking on a pacifier
on a nearly constant basis, you can't just take it
away. So for the phone addicts who survive crossing the
street, something will have to replace their phone apps.
But we don't know what that is. Yo yos? Sudoku on the
inside of their glasses? ...Let me guess, .Net is being
ported to glasses?
| I'm not even going to bother with the rest of this. Your wrong. It's
| simple as that.
Or another way one could put it: I have a different
opinion.
|
| Not true. You should read the stories that came out AFTER that
| statement was made.
After this one, less than 3 months ago?
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-our-strategy-with-silverlight-has-shifted/7834
Even if they go back to SL for the Web, Silverlight
for Windows software is still as dead as Adobe's AIR.
They're both desperate attempts at control of the market,
with lots of ambition and little common sense.
|
| > The ARM chips
| > that Tom mentions are for phones.
|
| Not just phones. They are system on a chip. They are used in many
| small electronic devices - such as the iPad and several netbooks.
|
Aren't we talking about .Net Windows development?
ARM for Windows, other than phone, is still in the
vaporware labs.
| They are goign to be powering servers and desktops soon as well... Why
| do you think ms is porting Windows to arm in the first place?
|
More opinion as fact. And more opinion that's being
colored by your own personal hopes. Maybe real Windows
will get to ARM. (They can barely fit it onto a PC at
this point.) I haven't seen anything about ARM servers
and PCs. What I've read is an ongoing discussion about
whether Windows will ever get to ARM in the first place,
and that's only in the context of tablets. (Then of course
there's the question of who might be buying these
theoretical tablets, and whether they'll actually use software
or perhaps just twiddle their Facebook and send photos.)
So maybe there's a future for Windows programming on
ARM ... somewhere down the road. And maybe there isn't.
If you're going to market .Bloat for ARM then you really should
include the caveats.
| > Smart phones are a current gimmick that few make money at.
|
| A gimmick? Really? Have you not been paying attention. I suggest you
| look at the motorla atrix for a glimps of the future. If anything its
| Microsoft and the traditional desktop that is fast becomming the
| gimmick.
|
Glimpses of the future? You're such a consumer.
The most successful app on iPhones is Angry Birds.
Then there's the Moron Test. And hundreds of thousands
of other fluff trinkets. It looks an awfully lot like
the shareware market of 2000 to me. A few people
hit it big. A lot more made pocket money. Then the
market evaporated. Everyone was talking about the
Internet, but it was just the latest fad.
I think you do have a point in one sense, though:
When people become addicted to sucking on a pacifier
on a nearly constant basis, you can't just take it
away. So for the phone addicts who survive crossing the
street, something will have to replace their phone apps.
But we don't know what that is. Yo yos? Sudoku on the
inside of their glasses? ...Let me guess, .Net is being
ported to glasses?
| I'm not even going to bother with the rest of this. Your wrong. It's
| simple as that.
Or another way one could put it: I have a different
opinion.
T
Tom Shelton
Mayayana has brought this to us :
For windows - but, those arm devices aren't running windows. They are
runnign iOS and Linux variants. And by the way, Mono works on arm.
It's not personal hope, it's fact. It's already started to happen with
the OLPC - the new versions are ARM.
LOL... Windows is already running on arm. But, whatever.
As for the future:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Server-CPU-Xeon-Opteron-ARM,10302.html
http://gigaom.com/cloud/nvidia-turns-to-arm-for-server-chips-and-to-kill-intel/
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4199239/Marvell-ARM-Servers
The industry is shifting to arm because of the low price and power
requirements.
LOL... 2012 - when Windows 8 is going to be released.
You didn't actually look up what the atrix is did you?
It's a dual core arm based android phone, with a gig of ram. It has a
docking station that when plugged in it acts as a desktop machine. In
other words, it is the core of a desktop system that you unplug and
take with you.
These smartphones and tablets are in a position to threaten the
conventional desktop. It will be a few more years, but, even intel has
said they are building an atom based phone running full windows 8.
These small devices are the future - like it or not.
Nope. It's now Buble Ball - written by a 14 year old in Spanish Fork,
UT. It's a free app, just passed angry birds.
What your seeing is the begining of an industry.
It won't have to be, because those glasses will almost certianly be arm
based, and .NET is already there
If you say so.
For windows - but, those arm devices aren't running windows. They are
runnign iOS and Linux variants. And by the way, Mono works on arm.
It's not personal hope, it's fact. It's already started to happen with
the OLPC - the new versions are ARM.
LOL... Windows is already running on arm. But, whatever.
As for the future:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Server-CPU-Xeon-Opteron-ARM,10302.html
http://gigaom.com/cloud/nvidia-turns-to-arm-for-server-chips-and-to-kill-intel/
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4199239/Marvell-ARM-Servers
The industry is shifting to arm because of the low price and power
requirements.
LOL... 2012 - when Windows 8 is going to be released.
Glimpses of the future? You're such a consumer.
You didn't actually look up what the atrix is did you?
It's a dual core arm based android phone, with a gig of ram. It has a
docking station that when plugged in it acts as a desktop machine. In
other words, it is the core of a desktop system that you unplug and
take with you.
These smartphones and tablets are in a position to threaten the
conventional desktop. It will be a few more years, but, even intel has
said they are building an atom based phone running full windows 8.
These small devices are the future - like it or not.
Nope. It's now Buble Ball - written by a 14 year old in Spanish Fork,
UT. It's a free app, just passed angry birds.
What your seeing is the begining of an industry.
It won't have to be, because those glasses will almost certianly be arm
based, and .NET is already there
If you say so.
T
Tom Shelton
Mayayana used his keyboard to write :
LOL.. That was one of the articles that started that rumor.
Here is teh official clarification:
http://team.silverlight.net/announcement/pdc-and-silverlight/
Silverlight is not going anywhere.
LOL.. That was one of the articles that started that rumor.
Here is teh official clarification:
http://team.silverlight.net/announcement/pdc-and-silverlight/
Silverlight is not going anywhere.