My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise - Questions

This is a discussion on My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise - Questions ; John Bailo wrote: > Portablility means a different thing in the age of VMs. I guess.. the only meaning I can give it here, is: VB is such a restrictive language (more a set of macros than a programming language) ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 106

Thread: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

  1. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    John Bailo wrote:


    > Portablility means a different thing in the age of VMs.


    I guess.. the only meaning I can give it here, is: VB is such a
    restrictive language (more a set of macros than a programming language)
    that the programs are always completely clean Windows-applications so
    they will happily run in any Windows emulator.

    Maybe that's how I should read it?

    Maurits.


  2. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
    > John Bailo wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Portablility means a different thing in the age of VMs.

    >
    > I guess.. the only meaning I can give it here, is: VB is such a
    > restrictive language (more a set of macros than a programming
    > language) that the programs are always completely clean
    > Windows-applications so they will happily run in any Windows emulator.
    >
    > Maybe that's how I should read it?


    Read it any way you like. It won't change your ****wittery.


    --
    Your Free Insult: Thou drubbing, puffing, foppish housefly subjecting owl.





  3. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    > On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 09:24:38 +0100, Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
    >
    >> Dr. Abraham Weiss PhD wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> because contrary to popular belief, ASP and VB can go just as low
    >>> level as C can, and the latest .NET VB compiler produces code that
    >>> is more portable and faster than C.

    >>
    >> ROTFL!
    >>
    >> ASP is an interpreter language, ran and interpreted by a server that
    >> is most likely programmed in C itself. And if VB can go more low
    >> level than C, how come I can still only program code for events that
    >> M$ prepared for me?

    >
    > He's also got a bizarre notion of "portable". C code is portable
    > because, if written according to the standard, the code can be
    > compiled on (or for) almost any platform out there. VB code, last I
    > checked, was exclusive to Windows.


    And yet again, another dumb**** retard opens his fat mouth and sticks his
    foot in it. The the latest .NET VB compiler is the same as the latest .NET C
    compiler. Do you get that, ****tard? Hmmm? They are one and the same.
    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


    --
    Your Free Insult: Thou capsising, idolatrising, battered hollow-head scrabbling shoe.











  4. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
    > John Bailo wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Portablility means a different thing in the age of VMs.

    >
    >
    > I guess.. the only meaning I can give it here, is: VB is such a
    > restrictive language (more a set of macros than a programming language)
    > that the programs are always completely clean Windows-applications so
    > they will happily run in any Windows emulator.
    >
    > Maybe that's how I should read it?
    >
    > Maurits.
    >


    Well -- I think you are taking too much for granted.

    What VB6 is, is a *glue* for COM objects. That's why it's so 'stable'
    in and of itself, because all the real functionality was pushed into the
    external libraries. Now *those* on the other hand are a mixed bag of
    stable, working/nonworking, available/nonavailable programs ( as anybody
    who has tried working with the Outlook OM can attest to ).

    So, I generally think of VB as a Fool's Paradise -- yes it's easy, yes
    it's stable (in and of itself) because it's so dependent and limited.
    And even there, there are notorious problems with simple things like the
    Package Install and Setup procedures. And threading was completely
    ****ed until .NET !

    ..NET is somewhat cooler (like java, which I prefer) because it takes a
    middle ground between glue/COM objects and low-level programming by
    fractionalizing COM objects into method assemblies. So, for example, I
    can write my own ftp library using connection points and sockets -- very
    neat stuff (!) that gives me a lot of control and doesn't leave me in
    the hands of expensive and unreliable COM programmers.

    YET -- in my personal life, I find that native c/c++ using STL and
    things SDL is just not that dam hard either (!) In fact, the more I use
    gcc, the less magic I see in c# -- because so much of the templates
    and libraries and toolkits ( like gtk) make it almost as easy to
    program in c as in these so called 'easier' languages.

    Thus, linux, gnu gcc, ddd, gtk SDL, STL are my *fun* environment right
    now and as linux gains desktop, I would like to write applications using
    those and just eschew the whole java/.net layers...





  5. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 10:27:30 -0600, Ivan Marsh wrote:

    > On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 19:01:09 -0800, Dr. Abraham Weiss PhD wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > Do you just keep this message around and post it every once in a while?
    > This is at leat the second time this has been posted in the last year.
    > If you're going to troll you shouldn't do it with a form letter.


    FUD FUD FUD FUD FUD .... warning FUD alert. This is bull**** in so many
    ways.

    "Linux version 9" .. no such distribution

    "Shareware version" - if this consultant (hahaha) is such an "expert" how
    come he doesnt know the diff between GPL and shareware.

    "Mod-perl cases kernel panic !"
    Bzzz - wrong ! How can user space code kernel panic a machine..... Only
    IIS runs server code in kernel space :-)

    "Poor SMP for 4 way boxes"
    Less poor than W2k ...

    "I even used the latest version of gcc (3.1) to increase the execution
    time of the binaries"
    Sarcastic or stupid - cant tell ... probably both

    "Furthermore, he found out that the 'x' in Linux was a tribute to the
    former Communist philosopher, Karl Marx -
    HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHH HHA HH HAHHAHHAHAHA hehheheheh

    "because our IIS servers running on Windows2000 had never experienced a
    worm attack"
    Dont make me laugh W2K with IIS is the "f*** me up the arse prostitute"
    of the O/S world. Nothing gets f****d harder and more often than a W2K
    IIS server.. unpatched its lasts about 1 week in my experience, patched
    with a firewall maybe 1 year - but add SQL services and you are back to 6
    months.








  6. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    root wrote:

    > FUD FUD FUD FUD FUD .... warning FUD alert. This is bull**** in so
    > many ways.


    Ok, thanks for the warning...

    [bull**** snipped]




  7. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:


    > And yet again, another dumb**** retard opens his fat mouth and sticks his
    > foot in it. The the latest .NET VB compiler is the same as the latest .NET C
    > compiler. Do you get that, ****tard? Hmmm? They are one and the same.
    > BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


    You really enjoy proving your ignorance don't you. Are you trying to
    tell us that C and VB are identical now? Or that the compiler just
    handles two different syntaxes?

    Maurits.


  8. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:


    > Read it any way you like. It won't change your ****wittery.


    Seeing that this was my first post in this thread, I miss your point
    about how that made me "****wittery". Furthermore, your entire point in
    this discussion is "everybody who doesn't agree with me is a ****wit
    because they don't agree with me" but you haven't really proven a point.

    Oh yes you have, further down where you say the VB and C compilers are
    the same so VB must be as good as C. Erm right.

    Really, you're not making a very intelligent impression here. And
    swearing at everyone who proves you are an idiot is not exactly helping
    your cause.

    Maurits.


  9. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
    > Dr. Abraham Weiss PhD wrote:
    >
    >
    >> because contrary to popular belief, ASP and VB can go just as low
    >> level as C can, and the latest .NET VB compiler produces code that is
    >> more portable and faster than C.

    >
    > ROTFL!
    >
    > ASP is an interpreter language


    Er, read it again, dumb****. Focus in on "the latest .NET VB compiler", yes?
    You ****ing idiot.


    --
    Your Free Insult: Thou carting, composing, open-eyed gill fungus assaulting wussie.



  10. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
    > Kadaitcha Man wrote:
    >
    >
    >> And yet again, another dumb**** retard opens his fat mouth and
    >> sticks his foot in it. The the latest .NET VB compiler is the same
    >> as the latest .NET C compiler. Do you get that, ****tard? Hmmm? They
    >> are one and the same. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    >
    > You really enjoy proving your ignorance don't you. Are you trying to
    > tell us that C and VB are identical now?


    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    zzz


    --
    Your Free Insult: Thou frizzling, ruffling, trout sniffing flaccidity parting frump.


  11. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:
    > Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
    >
    >>Kadaitcha Man wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>And yet again, another dumb**** retard opens his fat mouth and
    >>>sticks his foot in it. The the latest .NET VB compiler is the same
    >>>as the latest .NET C compiler. Do you get that, ****tard? Hmmm? They
    >>>are one and the same. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    >>
    >>You really enjoy proving your ignorance don't you. Are you trying to
    >>tell us that C and VB are identical now?

    >
    >
    > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    > zzz
    >
    >


    Wait..isn't that one of your Godwin's, K-Twerp ?


  12. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:


    > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    > zzz


    You're still not proving much of a point.

    Maurits.


  13. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:


    > Er, read it again, dumb****. Focus in on "the latest .NET VB compiler", yes?
    > You ****ing idiot.


    That doesn't change the fact that ASP is an interpreter language (focus
    back on that) and cannot go more low-level than it's interpreter, which
    is certainly not written in assembler and not likely in VB.


  14. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise


    > Really, you're not making a very intelligent impression here.


    No doubt Neil Armstrong would not have made an impression on the moon had
    there been no dust there either.


  15. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:


    > No doubt Neil Armstrong would not have made an impression on the moon had
    > there been no dust there either.


    Nor if all he did was say "we can go to the moon you ****wits!" instead
    of actually going there.

    Maurits.


  16. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Maurits van de Kamp wrote:

    > (focus back on that)


    Why? You brought up ASP. The OP was talking about .NET. **** off and deal
    with it. Better still, **** off and die.


    --
    Your Free Insult: Thou refusing, essaying, scandalmongering grunter flinching foot-licker.


  17. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
    > Kadaitcha Man wrote:
    >
    >
    >> No doubt Neil Armstrong would not have made an impression on the
    >> moon had there been no dust there either.

    >
    > Nor if all he did was say "we can go to the moon you ****wits!"
    > instead of actually going there.



  18. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:


    > Why? You brought up ASP.


    What? Read again. Here's your blabbering:

    >>>> because contrary to popular belief, ASP and VB can go just as low
    >>>> level as C can, and the latest .NET VB compiler produces code that is
    >>>> more portable and faster than C.


    And here's my very first post in this thread:

    >> ROTFL!
    >>
    >> ASP is an interpreter language


    > The OP was talking about .NET.


    I wasn't talking to the OP, I was talking to you.

    > **** off and deal
    > with it. Better still, **** off and die.


    If there is any truth in that operating systems influence personality
    (as you claim), the above statement demonstrates what we can expect from
    Windows.

    Maurits.


  19. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:

    >

  20. Re: My experiences trying to leverage the power of Linux in the enterprise

    Looks like I was wrong, it was the OP who said it, not you. In other
    words, the OP *was* talking about ASP. Your posts make less ans less sence..

    Maurits.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast