Are you a sales rep for MS ? This is a truely stupid and untrue assertion. Should we mention all the server side Java development that is going on, or the massive number of web sites built with PHP, Perl, Python, all the open source development happening in C/C++ and countless other examples ? What about Apple ? Are these people stupid and not serious ? And guess what ? They will be forward compatible with 64 bit hardware and OS. Unlike all the previous MS development environment gems.
LOL, no, I am not a sales rep for MS. As I said, not only I love all platforms but I am also well versed in all of them. Very few people can honestly say that Well, I will not entertain this. No ofense please (and I really mean it) but unless you are software engineer or equaly qualified professional with real cross-platform development experience, you should not be so opinated like you are coming across right now. Now, lets all act like grown ups here, lets not start a microsoft vs the world debate pls. Everybody is entitled their opinions and we are here to share not to fight. Isnt that right? Peace MrTwo
You obviously only touched M$. I have been with M$ NT since the first beta back in 1994(?). Not my choice but being chased away from Sun because of work demands related to price. Coming from UNIX, Oh boy, what crap! I started to migrate back to linux since about 2 years and I am now fully linux. You are most absolutely wrong with your Visual Studio bit. During above migration period I had to take care that every new development was done in a fully portable way. This is not easy and makes things certainly look pretty unattractive for still M$ attached cash cow victims. IDE's on linux/unix? I don't know what you are developing but I may call myself a rather hi-powered 'lazy' type. I only touch what really works perfectly (almost) and I hate unnecessary sweat in programming. Luckily, I have never touched Visual 2005 but I went through them all right from the beginning. Never, never did I run into a situation were stuff was properly documented. If you ran into problems - plain vulgar bugs - M$ NEVER could help me. They always learned from me. With each new version, older gee-whiz kid stuff disappeared to be replaced by new gismos. I was never able to properly migrate an application between versions. Portability. Forget it man. You're locked in 300%. Visual2005? Aren't they rewriting the .NET and C# stuff already. Good luck! Keep on dreaming about lack of IDE's in linux. nononsense PS: don't forget keeping your MSDN subscriptions paid up
Nope, you are wrong on that one, I actually have more hours of Unix/Linux development under my belt than Microsoft Oh man, NT 3.5 was awful, I sure remember that. Back then I was a HP-UX / Solaris developer and I remember asking myself why Microsoft was even trying to break in that market Still, they are where they are now, I wonder why... lets see, they charge a lot for their bad software that is apparently inferior to open source still, people keep paying for it, weeeeeird, why would these companies pay for something they could have better for free? Unless... no, it cant be.... maybe, just maybe, they deserve their "monopoly"? Well, we are not even talking about the same thing here. If you never used 2005 you are just not informed enough to make a judgement on their technology. What happen to the old habit of evaluating before criticizing? Are we software engineers or groupies? Strange, I worked with the same Microsoft, always had amazing support from them and never had major portability problems. Even the Visual C++ 6.0 to .Net migration was remarkably painless. Errrr, No? Oh my, Linux people are funny. So passionate, so emotional... I didnt say there were no IDE's for Linux, I just said they are primitive. And I will repeat it: Linux IDEs are primitive when compared with Microsoft's Visual Studio and that is a fact, really, just download it, try it and you see, I dont even know why we are arguing here. A productive argument requires that both sides are well informed and well educated, isnt that right? Well, I know very well what the Linux world has to offer and I still say it pales in comparison with Microsoft's current platform. Now, if anyone wants to contest my opinion on this, please make sure you have at least used Visual Studio 2005 for C++ development. Otherwise, we are just wasting time here, really!
Now, before we have another exciting Microsoft vs Linux post on this Automated Trading thread (yeah, that is what we were talking about...) lets clarify some points: 1. I am talking C++ here. When I say that the available IDEs for Linux are primitive when compared to Visual Studio 2005, the scope of my comment is C++ only. 2. I am not a Microsoft lover or hater 3. I am not a Linux lover or hater either 4. No one should be a 'lover' or 'hater' of any kind of platform, that is a big waste of energy. Now, lets resume our automated trading discussion. If you want to get passionate about technology, this isnt the right place
You are carefully sidestepping the question. It's not a matter of Visual Studio 2005 being for once OK now. It's only oven fresh. Your talk is plain marketing drumming Barnum and Bailey style. Talk about things that have been supporting development activities CORRECTLY over the last 10 years or so. That's the ONLY thing you can go on when looking in the future. Another 'latest model', obsolesence designed-in Visual, hell, no. Don't even want to touch it with an 18ft pole anymore. Comparing only CC compiler quality between systems is very revealing. From all over the place, I stumble on trouble being reported in compiling for Win32 well seasoned software with MSVC: 'don't try to compile with MSVC but use gcc, Borland, Intel, MinGW32, ....'. IDE? Man you don't know what you are talking about. Of course, if you have M$ engraved on your eyeballs, only VS will do, that's the way they designed their trap. Useless to discuss this any further. I am only interested in tools that let me do WHATEVER I want to in the OPTIMUM way. NOBODY will ever get me locked in anymore. I don't believe in anything, except in what I have known to work. Nobody is playing games with me any longer - learned my lesson.
I think MrTwo's point about "getting work done" is legitimate, reasonable and well founded...based on my experiences with both hard and soft real-time kernels and the internals of HAL, NT, RSTS, RSX, VMS, Sun-OS, OpenOSF, Linux, VRTX, VxWorks and many others. I enjoy dabbling in technology and for others similarly inclined some of these links may be interesting: Hard Real-time Windows NT - RTX is designed from the ground up as an optimized extension to the Windows operating system; it is not a RTOS ported to Windows. RTX provides precise control of IRQs, I/O, and memory to ensure that when a particular task needs to execute, it happens on-time, every-time. By operating in Ring 0, RTX ensures high performance right out of the box, supporting sustained interrupt rates of 30 KHz with an average IST latency of < 1 microsecond. http://www.vci.com/embedded/products.aspx?ID=70 The Leading Experts in Embedded Software Development http://www.ghs.com Continuous Availability Mission Critical 99.999% Uptime: http://www.stratus.com/products/ftserverwseries/index.htm http://www.marathontechnologies.com/Continuous_Avail.html Low-cost embarrassingly parallel Unix super computing: http://www.beowulf.org http://sourceforge.net/search/?words=beowulf&type_of_search=soft NYtimes 11/27/05: Designer of Supercomputers Leaves Cray to Join Microsoft - Microsoft announced two weeks ago that it planned to introduce a new version of its Windows software for scientific and engineering users, and that Mr. Smith would be involved. http://www.isnaini.com/2005/11/27/nytimes-designer-of-supercomputers-leaves-cray-to-join-microsoft/ In the end though, it all comes down to choosing the right tool for the job...no need to try and dig the foundation for a house with a hammer or try to frame the house with a backhoe...it's just a matter of understanding the problem and choosing the best tool for the job. -jmho
If you are interested in distributed/super computing, you should have done a little prior search on ET. Lots of stuff on it compared to what you come up with here.
Whatever nononsense, you are not informed to make coments on this one Actually, you sound like a over-optimized curve-fitting system that is only able to trade the past. Basically what you are saying is that 'no matter the current state, it is bad because it was bad in the past'. Not a good argument you know. Software development is an iterative process and Microsoft's products have evolved sooooo much on the past few years. Ignoring that is a *emotional* mistake. Now lets drop this discussion ok? Maybe we can revisit it in 10 years to verify who was more sucessful. At this point, it is just a biiiiiig waste of time.
Whatever mrtwo, you are a pretentious little rascal to post so much nonsense on this board Undoubtedly this cute little excerpt will suffice to illustrate the unbelievable silliness of your contributions: "I had a chance to step thru their code using a disassembler a while ago and I must say it is quite good. " Many rather highly skilled persons at ET's will have weighed you in on that one nononsense