SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 90
  1. #51
    SitePoint Enthusiast nbaxley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    78
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I should have explained what happened a little better. Our problem was with the DataGrid web control. We stuck it in the page and it allowed us to get our data displayed in a grid (table) quickly. It supposedly provided sorting and linking to data details, but once we tried to use these features, we ended up doing more work than would have been required had we written the data grids from scratch.

    I can see a developer with less experience just forgetting the extra functionality and leaving the page incomplete. That's where I see the IDE, and more specifically the web contorls breaking down. I guess now that I thinkabout it, it really was the web contorls fault, which are one of the "advantages" to paying for the full Studion.net. The other problem we ran into with the web controls was that their CSS properties were generated differntly for a non IE browser than for IE. This just ticked me off mostly. Using the standard HTML components seems a much better route, and they are available in the free IDE.
    Nate Baxley
    http://www.baxleys.org - no excusses, it is what it is.

  2. #52
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Back on the MFC tip, I'm still hunting for that link (sigh) but it makes sense to me that Microsoft built on top of (rather than re-writing) MFC with .NET.

    What seems to be the case as well (from some reading of forums all over) is .NET provides a route through it's API to the MFC classes. Whether you're actually required to use this I don't know but my guess is this is the reason why Mono are having to use GTK+ (a open source equivalent to MFC usually used with Linux apps) to "simulate" the MFC classes.

  3. #53
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    To clarify, the MFC (Microsoft Foundation Classes) are what are commonly called "Base Classes". Not really sure why, but in the .NET Framework you CAN access these (can't remember the Namespace, sorry) if you need to. I know we've done so for mail sending when the .NET class wasn't quite what we needed.

    This isn't the same as ".NET uses the MFC" or ".NET requires the MFC" at all, anymore than "PHP uses Java" or "PHP requires Java". It's an extension to the base functionality, and one which few people need.

    As I, and Vincent, has already said, the MFC is an absolutely piece of garbage. I am probably safe in assuming Vincent's opinion of the MFC is much like his opinion of PEAR: Great idea, crap poor result.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  4. #54
    SitePoint Enthusiast nbaxley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    78
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't know much about client side development, but isn't that the only time you'd use MFC? For web pages (ASP.NET) you don't need any windows specific code. You can generate all your HTML regardless of the OS. The form element display is handled by the OS, but that is the client OS and shouldn't affect the server. You may find that there are some windows specific components used to create the html and JS used by the web compnents, but those should be easy to duplicate since the end result is, relatively, simple.
    Nate Baxley
    http://www.baxleys.org - no excusses, it is what it is.

  5. #55
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, the MFC would be purely app development. I guess it's possible it coudl be the "tying block" between various elements, but I don't really see a reason for it.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  6. #56
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by voostind
    MS SQL Server? you've got to be joking! As of version 8 (2000) it has finally become a database server you can do some serious work with, but it's still not that good! (And there are much better Open Source database servers.) Mind that I'm not disagreeing with the fact that MS does have some very good products (Office, .NET). It's just that SQL Server isn't one of them...
    Now, we might be barging off topic with this, but you are the FIRST person I've heard say this. I'm pretty much a fool when it comes to database issues, so I don't know - care to enlighten me on why it's bad and what's better?
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  7. #57
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    592
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Now, we might be barging off topic with this, but you are the FIRST person I've heard say this. I'm pretty much a fool when it comes to database issues, so I don't know - care to enlighten me on why it's bad and what's better?
    SQL Server 7 had big problems with CASCADES and NO RESTRICT. In fact: it didn't support them. Because it did support triggers (to some extent) it wasn't quite in the same league as MySQL (not a DBMS), but not too much better either. (By the way: SQL Server 7 was based on Sybase, which is now available as free software (not OpenSource)) SQL Server 2000 implements CASCADES and NO RESTRICTs much better, but to some extent. The server goes crazy when you give it a perfectly valid SQL schema with cyclic CASCADE or RESTRICT dependencies. Also, the SQL Enterprise Manager leads lots to be desired. I once had to upgrade a version 7 to a version 8, and in the end I just had to reinstall the whole thing. Finally, I installed SQL Server 2000 on two exact same machines (hardware & software) and yet they behaved completely different. It used different character sets for example, and there was no way to change it.

    You won't hear many complaints about SQL Server, because it has little competition (in the same league) on the Windows platform. Oracle is mucho expensive, as is DB2 (and not in the same league). Interbase used to be dead slow, but it seems they've done lots of work on it, and if I'm not mistaking it's now available for free.

    Now on Unix it is possible to run database servers without the additional Cygwin overhead (even MySQL has it!). The one that really shines on Unix is PostgreSQL. It's fast, complete (as in: supports ANSI SQL92, unlike MySQL and SQL Server) and it never crashes. And better yet: it's OpenSource. PostgreSQL is, in a technical sense, far superior to SQL Server. It doesn't have the fancy point-and-click user interfaces SQL Server does, but in the end that's not what a proper DBMS is all about, is it?

    Vincent

  8. #58
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks, that cleared some stuff up!
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  9. #59
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    36
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by voostind
    MS SQL Server? you've got to be joking! As of version 8 (2000) it has finally become a database server.....
    I used MS SQL quite a lot before using Firebird/MySQL. Why SQL Server 7 is bad ? Just because it cannot handle CASCADES statements ? SQL Server 6.5 Device is a bad idea. However it has it own advantages such as extensive GUI to monitor the database. Not to say it support most relational DBMS features such as stored procedures, triggers,views, domain ,roles. And it is far cheaper than most other commercial database out there not including Firebird and Sybase ASA 11(Linux).

    Code:
    CPU DB2      Oracle   SQL Server  Firebird 
    1   43,000   40,000   20,000      F.O.C		
    2   85,900   80,000   40,000      F.O.C		
    4   171,700  160,000  80,000      F.O.C		
    8   343,000  320,000  160,000     F.O.C
    Up to now ,nobody had complained of data loss or data corruption with SQL Server 7. Or slow response time with complex queries. Not to say it has one of the most stable OLEDB and ODBC Driver around. However I do agree that backup and restore functions are quite troublesome only if you use different Windows version. Once I use Chinese version of Windows to restore those backup under English version of Windows. And all the index had to be drop and recreated.

    Interbase used to be dead slow, but it seems they've done lots of work on it, and if I'm not mistaking it's now available for free.
    In fact , Firebird/Interbase is one of the best Open Source Database around . The installation file for Windows is only 2.6 MB and it only occupied 8.6 MB hard disk space. It is ANSI SQL-92 compliance and supports UNICODE. And it supports stored procedures, triggers,views, domain ,roles. Besides, it run on Windows 95/98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Linux, HP/UX, Solaris, FreeBSD.

    "and if I'm not mistaking it's now available for free."
    It had been available free of charge since 25 July 2000 , 30 months ago.

    Now on Unix it is possible to run database servers without the additional Cygwin overhead (even MySQL has it!).
    I thought Cyqwin is use to run Unix/POSIX application on Windows NT subsystem . Unix OS don't required Cyqwin or Interix to run native code

  10. #60
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    592
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just because it cannot handle CASCADES statements?
    Among others, yes. This is not a 'just'. This is a Very Important Point, because cascades (and restricts) are essential for any slightly good DBMS.

    It had been available free of charge since 25 July 2000 , 30 months ago.
    I remember reading about it once while I was still developing Delphi apps. Didn't know it was that long ago though...

    I thought Cyqwin is use to run Unix/POSIX application on Windows NT subsystem . Unix OS don't required Cyqwin or Interix to run native code
    That's correct. Cygwin (or Interix) provide a layer on top op Windows NT so that it supports POSIX. As Unix already is POSIX compliant, such a layer isn't needed. But that's more or less what I said already, or wasn't it?

    Vincent

  11. #61
    No. Phil.Roberts's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    1,142
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think you did imply that Cygwin was somehow a factor even on native Unix systems. But it was probably a typo so I think you'll get away with it this time.
    THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW ARE OLD AND MAY BE INACCURATE.
    THIS INSTALL METHOD IS NOT RECOMMENDED, IT MAY RUN
    OVER YOUR DOG. <-- MediaWiki installation guide

  12. #62
    Mlle. Ledoyen silver trophy seanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,168
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by voostind
    Now on Unix it is possible to run database servers without the additional Cygwin overhead (even MySQL has it!)
    Seems Crystal to me

    Sean
    Harry Potter

    -- You lived inside my world so softly
    -- Protected only by the kindness of your nature

  13. #63
    No. Phil.Roberts's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    1,142
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    meh

    Who cares anyway? Its all just languagy stuff. *burp*
    THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW ARE OLD AND MAY BE INACCURATE.
    THIS INSTALL METHOD IS NOT RECOMMENDED, IT MAY RUN
    OVER YOUR DOG. <-- MediaWiki installation guide

  14. #64
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    5,748
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've been using PHP for a while now (1+ years) and I am seriously into developing server-side applications for the Web and Intranets.

    Though to be completely honest, to go further would be to only go down the route of Java. In my personnal view, I'd go the server-side route again; JSP.

    I made a comment to a fellow developer, who the lucky ******* is better placed than me I might add, I said:

    "Aye, I know PHP though I was thinking of picking up ASP as well" in return I got back:

    "What? Are you aff yer heed pal ? Don't be so f***ing stupid."

    So now, I am learning Java client-side, though I may as well drop this in favour of server-side instead, since I see more opportunities with server-side development.

    This is in Scotland, so other market's abroad would possibly be different, though when was the last time you seen an unemployed Java developer ?

    Exactly, the web is now global, and your skills set needs to be global as well.

    The two languages that I wouldn't touch for life nor love are ColdFusion and ASP.

  15. #65
    No. Phil.Roberts's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    1,142
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    To be honest, if you're pretty good with PHP then learning ASP is somewhat of a waste of time as you would gain no real advancement from it at all. You're better off going with something like Java or C#
    THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW ARE OLD AND MAY BE INACCURATE.
    THIS INSTALL METHOD IS NOT RECOMMENDED, IT MAY RUN
    OVER YOUR DOG. <-- MediaWiki installation guide

  16. #66
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ASP? Yeah, ASP is botched. .NET on the other hand...
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  17. #67
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Derbyshire, UK
    Posts
    4,411
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you're serious about Java on the server side then JSP alone is not enough, in any large scale system JSP would only be used for presentation, with Servlets doing the main gluing and EJBs doing the main body of the work.

    Technically whoever said Java is compiled, thus is bound to be faster (or something along those lines) is wrong, Java is still an interpreted language, it is only compiled to machine independant byte code, it is still interpreted by the VM, in much the same way as PHP or any other interpreted language is.
    Karl Austin :: Profile :: KDA Web Services Ltd.
    Business Web Hosting :: Managed Dedicated Hosting
    Call 0800 542 9764 today and ask how we can help your business grow.

  18. #68
    SitePoint Wizard gold trophysilver trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    2,479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Technically whoever said Java is compiled, thus is bound to be faster (or something along those lines) is wrong, Java is still an interpreted language, it is only compiled to machine independant byte code, it is still interpreted by the VM, in much the same way as PHP or any other interpreted language is.
    Very true though it is possible to write Java apps that perform well, if you make use of the JNI to make calls to to the underlying operating system, perhaps at the loss of platform independence.

    On interesting example is Eclipse, for which is was decided not to use the dog slow Swing library but implement their own Standard Widget Toolkit (SWT) which provides concrete implementations for many operating systems and is alot faster (although some things you can do on Windows, for example, you can't do on Linux and vice versa). There's a good article look at this here

    The bottom line - IBM (who developed SWT), unlike SUN, recognize the value of Java and know how to make it fly. Someone sell Sun to IBM before .NET get's entrenched...

  19. #69
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,123
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  20. #70
    No. Phil.Roberts's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    1,142
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For gods sake Harry! Ive spent over 70 on books for bloody C#, so lets not go wishing it into an early grave just yet.

    Besides which, theres nothing wrong with the language, it could go a long way provided Microsoft restrain their urges to act like *******s and actually allow people to port it to other platforms without slapping massive licensing fees on them.
    THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW ARE OLD AND MAY BE INACCURATE.
    THIS INSTALL METHOD IS NOT RECOMMENDED, IT MAY RUN
    OVER YOUR DOG. <-- MediaWiki installation guide

  21. #71
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    5,748
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ummm... Never been one for .NET myself.

    As with all things Microsoft, there is bound to be some security holes in .NET no ?

    Also, just how damn popular is the .NET anyway ? Does it pose a threat to Java for example ?

  22. #72
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Dr Livingston
    Ummm... Never been one for .NET myself.

    As with all things Microsoft, there is bound to be some security holes in .NET no ?

    Also, just how damn popular is the .NET anyway ? Does it pose a threat to Java for example ?
    .NET doesn't really follow the earlier "Microsoft rules" - it's actually a well implemented programming framework, with a kickbuttocks language (C#) to boot. I haven't heard of any significant security issues yet, which is a good sign, especially considering the fact that it's so new. Normally, software from Microsoft was swiss cheese until the second service pack.

    From a market standpoint, .NET is basically Java significantly better implemented, but (kind of) tied to the Windows platform. Java does have HUGE market acceptance which will not be moved by .NET in the near future (especially considering the fact that the newer line of cell phones, at least here in europe, supports Java). However, if Java doesn't shape up, it will eventually cave under the marketing might of Microsoft and the power of .NET.

    Now, in a battle like that, it's clear who the winner will be: Us. THe Developers. Sun/Java and Microsoft/.NET battling it out is a frickin' golden situation for us developers. Not only are the two biggest software development frameworks battling it out, constantly forcing eachother to improve their products, but the technologies in question are so similiar to the developer, we don't even have to choose! We can simply jump between them like happy sqirrels and reap in the cash.
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  23. #73
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Derbyshire, UK
    Posts
    4,411
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Actually there have already been security issues with .NET framework if you look at the patches MS has issued for it - but it is a new technology so it's hardly surprising, all software has security holes. The other thing to note is that .NET isn't widely used yet, when it is, a lot more problems will come to light, they always do.
    Karl Austin :: Profile :: KDA Web Services Ltd.
    Business Web Hosting :: Managed Dedicated Hosting
    Call 0800 542 9764 today and ask how we can help your business grow.

  24. #74
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    5,748
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm in total agreement with you Karl.

    As pointed out by M. Johansson though, that .NET will overpower Java through the marketing muscule of Microsoft - this is what I'm afraid of.

    From what I read, I think Java is the better platform to develop for - I have absolutely no interest in .NET and Microsoft.

    And there is bound to be (guaranteed) security holes in .NET currently, and in the future; there always has been, and always will be with Microsoft.

  25. #75
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Derbyshire, UK
    Posts
    4,411
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm with HarryF, Sun need to let IBM in on Java big time, they really do make Java work and work well. I do actually quite like Java, it's not a bad language when it boild down to it, it just needs a bit of TLC and some serious promotional muscle behind it.
    Karl Austin :: Profile :: KDA Web Services Ltd.
    Business Web Hosting :: Managed Dedicated Hosting
    Call 0800 542 9764 today and ask how we can help your business grow.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •