CSS3 is apparently Turing complete, so one could technically class it as a programming language.
226 posts • joined 2 Jul 2014
> In corporate environment Windows devices are far simpler to manage, maintain, Control and secure.
Then you get home and your Mac just works for years and years, while Windows requires extensive hand-holding to keep humming. Before you ask, yes I use both on a daily basis.
> As for Chrome I can't think of a more insecure (it sends all your data to a someone else, surely that is the definition of insecure) browser that eats all the resources on your computer.
Edge slurps more than Chrome does. FWIW I'm not a fan of Chrome either.
Short-term, maybe. Long-term, no. I volunteer for charity work on a routine basis and we all use our own computers at the office. All the other volunteers use relatively new Windows 10 laptops and still ask me to do all the printing to the office printers as theirs never work properly while the Mac just works without effort.
Since I bought the MacBook (my first) eight years ago all of the other staff have been through at least two (many three) brand new laptops due to parts breaking and general slow downs, while mine still looks and runs like brand new. They are all tempted by my MacBooks reputation in this org but still balk at purchase cost, despite admitting they've spent a higher combined total on their laptops over the same period as I have. I'll probably sell this laptop soon and still get a reasonable amount for it.
Sure it's possible to get long life from PC hardware if you pay up front for it and carefully manage the OS throughout its lifetime, but then you still have a largely worthless machine after five years in terms of resale, even if it still works fine.
> Nobody was force to use IE.
Yes they were - for a while it was only only browser that worked for a good portion of the web, as websites prioritised supporting IE over web standards.
> The complaint was from companies who wanted to sell copies of their own browsers.
Somewhat; the other big issue with the web's dependence on IE was that is in turn created a dependence on Windows, as nothing else could run IE. So effectively the web was in danger of becoming locked to a single vertically-integrated platform stack. Fortunately the world has managed to move on, however Microsoft still pull the same tricks with vertical integration - for example two decades later many of their web services still only work properly in a single browser.
The big difference between not and then is that they've just finally figured out how to incorporate open source into their business model.
Apart from the licensing craziness in TFA, this is the other reason I don't get why anyone would run SQL Server containers in Windows. My understanding is that the container runs SQL Server for Linux, which is a Windows app running on shims to translate Linux API calls (pretty much the inverse of WSL v1), then that in turn gets executed within a Linux kernel running in a VM on Windows, which in most cases is probably also virtualised on another hypervisor layer in the datacenter. That goes against the entire premise of running containers for efficiency.
> Open Source, you dont have to licence it, but if if it breaks you will want support and you may have to pay based on every physical core evrywhere in your estate, just in case.
Or you simply pay for support for the dev environment, reproduce the issue, apply the fix, test, then apply the same fix to production. A lot of folks run a mix of RHEL and CentOS following this same model. Much more cost effective than paying for absolutely everything, and avoids the continual wasted time of accounting for it all.
> Once again, just because you don't have to pay licenses for it.
Wrong. I know of nobody who uses Linux because it is free, except in business where using it at scale on servers saves a fortune over proprietary offerings.
Remember that desktop Windows for home use is free also.
All Linux desktop users I know of prefer it over Windows, myself included. And the few of us who need the odd commercial app not supported in Linux paid for a Mac and are happy with that too. And I speak as a previously devout Windows fan from 3.1 through to Vista.
Different strokes for different folks; deriding others over their own choice of OS is silly, especially when combined with arguments that don't hold water.
> Think about all those Active Directories goodies for free - something Linux still sorely lacking for whatever is not a public web server....
IPA for Linux just works and is a very fine solution. There's no direct equivalent of GPO though, but plenty of exceptionally capable CM tools out there as alternatives.
Software patents are unnecessary. Copyrights prevent software from being copied, unless the original author permits it. If you write software and don't want someone to copy it, that system already works. If someone figures out another way to implement the same thing with their own unique code, that's perfectly fine too, as it should be.
Functional devices can't be copyrighted, so we have patents instead - if you publicly document the workings (implementation) of a widget via a patent, in exchange you get a temporary legal monopoly for producing it. If someone comes up with a different method for doing the same thing they quite likely won't infringe the patent. If you don't patent it then anyone is free to copy or adapt the implementation.
Software patents on the other hand often prevent others from implementing something even if they don't have access to the inner workings (source code) and come up with their own unique implementation. This concept is absurd and is why patents don't translate well to software. Perhaps if software patents made working example source code a mandatory part of submission then they would better reflect their traditional counterparts, so that others would be able to invent their own non-infringing implementations.
You nailed it. This move is great PR plus it means exFAT support will become standard issue in Android, further cementing it as a standard.
Android vendors mostly don't bother at the moment as it's currently an extra cost that eats into already thin margins. The completely proprietary implementations (e.g. cameras) still need to pay.
It's also low risk; at this point MS have well passed recovering any R&D costs involved in developing the format, and with cloud services bringing in the real revenue it's not really a big deal if the proportionately small income stream from exFAT starts to dry up a bit.
This is only a good thing. Although overdue, better late than never. I really never thought I'd see it this soon.
It's clever too; my understanding of this is that it's only open source implementations that are protected from patents. It's likely that proprietary implementations (e.g. in cameras) still need to pay fees, so if anything this move may help push exFAT adoption and in turn wring more money out of those implementing exFAT but not wishing to join the open source bandwagon. Just a theory.
It's because Microsoft understands that 'aaS' offerings are where its bread is buttered now. Linux dominates servers, so much better to properly support that and make buckets of money by hosting it and providing good tools for devs than ignoring it and missing a huge slice of cloud market. Azure would be less than half the size it is now if Microsoft chose to ignore Linux.
Totally agree that Windows DNS is rubbish for any serious work, but it does function. If you've got the time and resources of course it's possible to put together a far better solution for DHCP/DNS than Windows and often for less cost, but orgs who lack ability probably don't know what they are missing with it anyway and for them it's quick, easy and does in fact work perfectly well enough.
I repeat: horses for courses.
As a Linux guy at heart I somewhat agree with your sentiments, but for MS-centric shops there's little to gain from deploying ISC just to do DHCP and then trying to train admins who often have little mroe than MS certification how to drive it. Whether it's good or not is fairly subjective, but this is just how things are for many orgs.
It's extremely common in Windows-centric corporate environments using Active Directory, and in those cases it makes perfect sense as you check a box and DHCP just works with dynamic DNS updates and all the trimmings.
Yes Windows DHCP is a bit less flexible than the likes of ISC DHCP if you want to get into more advanced functionality, but in the above cases the time and effort saved more than makes up for the difference.
As always, horses for courses.
> Adobe have pretty much said they hate Linux and will NEVER port Photoshop
I wouldn't say that's entirely true - never say never!
> Don't you ever notice such behaviour in the past twenty years? How do you believe people not using a mouse go back?
> Or you're quite new to those things called "browsers"?
I've been using "browsers" for over 20 years. It's been a long time since I've used one where the backspace key went a page backwards, probably some old version of IE. It's a silly feature anyway as it's prone to accidents when focus moves out of a text field so I don't miss it in the slightest.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020