Open-source

[Tormod]

Originally posted by: gekoWith regard to using other software not from MS (such as XP etc.,), will applications that say "Operating System = 95/98/me/2000/xp" run on other operating systems such as linux?

 

No software is usually platform dependent, so if it says "95/98/me/2000/xp" then that means windows only. Likewise, Mac applications will not run on Windows etc. Linux apps can often be compiled for different versions but it requires a bit of programming insight. Better stick with one version, like RedHat, and get apps that will work with it (there are literally tons of it).

 

Or is that what the open source thing is all about so you can program it to run what you like?

 

No, the open-source thing has nothing to do with operating systems, although an OS can be open source. An "open-source" software is usually free and can be changed by any programmer, as long as they follow the license with which the software has been released.

 

I'm sure FT et al can give more info on this.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: geko

I downloaded a copy of this mozilla browser after reading this (the firefox version) and my first impressions of it is, i'm going to keep using it.

Glad you like it. The onl real problem I have found in using a non-IE browser is the occasional site that is designed exclusively for IE. However that probelm is about to go away. The "special programming" used in those IE exclusive sites took advantage of certain internal "hooks" that linked IE with Windows OS itself. The same internal links that have become security nightmares for MS and IE. Now that those internal links are being shut off by MS (as in SP2) even IE won't work at IE only sites.

 

Meanwile it is a much better browser and is fully industry compliant as far as programming. ANd it's e-mail capablities far outshine Outlook Express and is far safer to use.

Not sure how to reprogram it with the open-source option,

Not relevant.

not even sure where this option is but hey, time will tell.

Let me explain what Open Source is.

 

Open source is a philosophy as much as anything. Software is obviously nothing more than code written to run on a computer. Someone has to sit down and write the code. Most of what the average consumer is familiar with is writen by companies. Such as Microsoft and all of it's software. It is written to sell as a profitable business model.

 

However a lot of higher level users would write little programs to help themselves out with specific tasks. In some more advanced environments these little programs would get passed around. The next guy might add to or improve the program. Or come up with a different one to compliment it.... In the more advanced computer segment some suppliers would put together a bundle of these programs and help pass them around at no charge. Just one batch of codeheads helping out their associates.

 

Now we are in a philosophical battle. Some of the Corp giants like Microsoft are using preditory practices to force people to use their programs no matter how poorly written the programs are. And they hide the actual program code to stop anyone else from redesigning it. So this group of personally dedicated coders put in their own efforts to write competitive programs and offer them free of charge. This is collectively known as "Open Source". The "source code", the basic programming code is available free of charge and published "openly" for anyone that wants to not only use, but to redesign the code to fit more specific needs.

 

So let's say you are buying a batch of compueter hardware. Perhaps a x86 based system. That would be AMD or Intel processors that would often be associated with MS Windows. But you have not only the hardware costs, but the software costs. With Open Source programs you can buy the hardware and get all the software you need for it for free.

 

Frankly the Open Source software does not currently offer as wide of a range of programs as Widows does. And there are some compatiblity issues, such as full compatibility with an XL spreadsheet or WORD document. There is nothing in Open Source which will do a Power Point presentation. Plus there is the question of the business model. If the software is free, who will write it if they are not paid?

 

The business model for Open Source is usually "support". e.g. we as an IT company might set up an Open Source system for a company. They don't pay for the SOFTWARE, but they pay us to make it work for them. Thus we may write some utility or modify some existing code to do something specific. So we make it availaible to the Open Source community in exchange for others doing the same.

 

Ultimately this provides a reduced overall cost to the end user and software written with the intent of making it the best rather than the most profitable.

Is 'staroffice' an OS?

[geko]

Thanks for the explanation of open-source - i had totally the wrong idea.

 

 

Originally posted by: Freethinker

So let's say you are buying a batch of compueter hardware. Perhaps a x86 based system. That would be AMD or Intel processors that would often be associated with MS Windows. But you have not only the hardware costs, but the software costs. With Open Source programs you can buy the hardware and get all the software you need for it for free.

 

This is what im intending to do. Build the comp from the ground up. I'd really want it "clean" when i get it so i can install and build it up as i like. So much crap comes with windows (not sure what this crap is but know it's there ). XP requires a 1/4 gig stick of ram for arguments sake just to run the thing i believe - how annoying is that.

 

The trouble is that some of the applications/software that i want to use say that it requires the OS to be some form of windows. I play the command and conquer series for an example (games) and from a quick look at them they all state they need an MS OS.

 

....what i can see from the explanations we're stuck at the mo with MS OS'?

 

I'm even thinking about buying it clean and installing '98 on it, but then i run into the trouble with future (and even some now) applications and software requiring a new version of windows.

 

But...

 

The business model for Open Source is usually "support". e.g. we as an IT company might set up an Open Source system for a company. They don't pay for the SOFTWARE, but they pay us to make it work for them. Thus we may write some utility or modify some existing code to do something specific. So we make it availaible to the Open Source community in exchange for others doing the same.

 

so i could, for arguments sake, buy the system clean and hire some guy like yourself to build me an OS? Which would then be able to run all the applications that I want (including software that as standard requires a MS OS)? viz [?]With Open Source programs you can buy the hardware and get all the software you need for it for free.

 

Is it 100's or 1000's for such a service?

 

Sorry if im seeming to be naive and ignorant but dont really know squat about software or programming yet - i seem to be spending all the time that i research computers on the hardware side.

 

Any links to info. (pdf's, DOC's etc) on software etc., that you dont mind spending the time to share?

[Freethinker]

If you can, get 2000 OS. XP is an offshoot, so there is a lot of compatibility and it is much more stable, more drivers available, loadds fast, takes less mem, and has fewer security holes.

[geko]

Originally posted by: geko

so i could, for arguments sake, hire some guy... build me an OS... to run all the applications that I want (including software that as standard requires a MS OS)?

 

I'm thinking that maybe in your post before this one i didnt read

 

Originally posted by: Freethinker

However a lot of higher level users would write little programs to help themselves out with specific tasks. In some more advanced environments these little programs would get passed around. The next guy might add to or improve the program.

 

 

Some of the Corp giants like Microsoft are using preditory practices to force people to use their programs..... And they hide the actual program... So this group of personally dedicated coders put in their own efforts to write competitive programs... This is collectively known as "Open Source". ...the basic programming code is available free of charge... redesign the code to fit more specific needs.

 

 

and yet i even said

 

Originally posted by: geko

Thanks for the explanation of open-source - i had totally the wrong idea.

 

lol

 

daft...

 

 

2000 it is then.... (unless i do decide to wait for pci express to get into notebooks in which case i may be back... )

[alexander]

I havent replied in a little while, but ill try to catch up.

Tinny said:

frankly, I'm not a serious programmer. Just doing fairly simple database programs and a few games here and then. so, vb.net, c#.net and asp.net would suffice. and I think a lot of people agree too. I can still make money part-time doing small applications for students who are doing some sort of project or factories that need to manage their resources. seriously, the only factor i take into consideration is ease of use, saves an awful lot of time. I think this is what propelled vb as the most widely used language in the world. Now, Microsoft has just gone a step further with OOP for vb.net and all the other jargon that I hardly understand or even bother. But in comparison, .net is a big improvement compared to vb and asp.

Just for information purposes, Microsofts entire .NET platform was developed for VB. VB is probably the only language that was really improved in .NET, but again you cant run .net programs if you dont have .NET platform installed on your system. As to ease of use, I agree that VB is easy to use, its just not very powerful language + its very high level, but ease of use and OOP extension to original basic do it good...

TeleMad said:

 

And .NET XML Web Services can be consumed by programs regardless of platform, an platforms are irrelevant for ASP.NET Web apps too. The restriction of Windows-only applies to Windows Forms applications, which are becoming the minority of apps ("everyone" is moving their apps to the web).

Web programming languages are different in the way they run. When you type in a URL and a page is opened it is ran on the server and the output is sent to your web browser in form of HTML. Besides there are much better web programming languages out there then ASP.NET. By the way if you have a server configured to run ASP programms, if someone recompiles your site in ASP.NET and tries running it on the same server, the pages will most likely give out fatal errors; it is not untill you install .NET framework on the server that you'd be able to run your .NET scripts on it.

 

In reply to freethinkers reply "YOU GO FREETHINKER!!!", nice explanation...

 

Freethinker said:

If you can, get 2000 OS. XP is an offshoot, so there is a lot of compatibility and it is much more stable, more drivers available, loadds fast, takes less mem, and has fewer security holes.

2000 proffesional was a good windows ("good windows" is an oxymoron but in any case), It was definately more secure, but only to an extent. XP offers a little different password encryption and XP with Service Pack 2 offers interesting security solutions... Actually if you want the most secure OS install BSD, its Unix-based and has had only 2 updates that both dealt with minor security risks ever since it came out (now in comparison windows XP had almost hundreds of updates already 80% of which dealt with security)

[TINNY]

By the way if you have a server configured to run ASP programms, if someone recompiles your site in ASP.NET and tries running it on the same server, the pages will most likely give out fatal errors; it is not untill you install .NET framework on the server that you'd be able to run your .NET scripts on it

Of course. ASP and asp.net is totally different. why would anyone do that anyway?

as i mentioned before, it's not that difficult to obtain the .net framework

I agree that VB is easy to use, its just not very powerful language + its very high level, but ease of use and OOP extension to original basic do it good...

since i don't have experience in languages other thatn vb, i hope you can clarify why vb is not very powerful? I don't get it. I've seen 3D shooter games built on vb 6, never mind vb.net which has much of the functionalities of c++ ( i read it somewhere, not sure to what extent)

Just for information purposes, Microsofts entire .NET platform was developed for VB. VB is probably the only language that was really improved in .NET

i thought c# was the main language and purpose of .NET, not VB.

[alexander]

Tinny said:

 

it's not that difficult to obtain the .net framework

Are you saying that .net framework is the greatest and the easiest thing to obtain? Can i get a .net framework for anything other than windows? Even though it is the most used OS, most hardcore programmers use Linux or SunOS or BSD or straight Unix, that must be why most of them dislike .NET?

since i don't have experience in languages other thatn vb, i hope you can clarify why vb is not very powerful? I don't get it. I've seen 3D shooter games built on vb 6, never mind vb.net which has much of the functionalities of c++ ( i read it somewhere, not sure to what extent)

as you say yourself,

i don't have experience in languages other thatn vb

3D shooters can be made in Original Basic if you want to spend your time doing that, they can and are made in VB, but they are not as fast as anything developed in low level programming languages such as C or C++. That is why todays greatest graphic engines are not developed in VB, but are made in C++. If you want an example of what VB can't do, here: you should know that RAM is composed of 2 sections, one that is accessible to all programs, the other that is only accessible to bios and computer needs (system processes), as an example VB can not view or vodify any of the sectors that are accessible by the system...

i thought c# was the main language and purpose of .NET, not VB.

C# was one of the main reasons why .NET was developed, but .NETs biggest achievement was VB.NET

[TeleMad]

Alexander: Just for information purposes, Microsofts entire .NET platform was developed for VB.

 

No, you've got the cart leading the horse. .NET was the new target being aimed at and as a side affect, VB needed to be fitted to it: not the other way around.

 

Alexander: As to ease of use, I agree that VB is easy to use, its just not very powerful language +

 

VB .NET is a very powerful language.

 

Alexander:

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TeleMad: And .NET XML Web Services can be consumed by programs regardless of platform, an platforms are irrelevant for ASP.NET Web apps too. The restriction of Windows-only applies to Windows Forms applications, which are becoming the minority of apps ("everyone" is moving their apps to the web).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Alexander: Web programming languages are different in the way they run.

 

Which misses the point. .NET apps are not restricted to being run on Windows only, and one doesn’t have to have the .NET framework in order to make use of .NET apps. And since “everyone” is moving away from Windows apps and instead moving to .NET Web services and ASP.NET Web forms apps, the client’s platform is irrelevant.

[TeleMad]

Alexander: C# was one of the main reasons why .NET was developed, but .NETs biggest achievement was VB.NET

 

Nope, you've got it backwards again. The .NET platform was the new target being developed, and programminglanguages were modified/created to work with it.

[alexander]

I can see that I have missed some discussion here so let me catch up...

As to everything concerning why .NET platform was developed:

I truly have no idea, not because i cant find any info, but because i dont want to find it, as I said, i think that the language that benifit from its libraries the most is VB...

 

VB .NET is a very powerful language

As I have said: "3D shooters can be made in Original Basic if you want to spend your time doing that, they can and are made in VB, but they are not as fast as anything developed in low level programming languages such as C or C++. That is why todays greatest graphic engines are not developed in VB, but are made in C++. If you want an example of what VB can't do, here: you should know that RAM is composed of 2 sections, one that is accessible to all programs, the other that is only accessible to bios and computer needs (system processes), as an example VB can not view or vodify any of the sectors that are accessible by the system... "

Its not that VB cant do it, although there are some tasks that it cant, another example is that VB can not communicate with the operating system and tell it what to do, its that VB will take longer to do so...

Let the doctor explain here:

the lowest level of programming language is Assembly, in it you have to tell the computer what to do and how to do it, for example if you needed to assign a value to print something, you would have to tell the computer to allocate a certain ammount of memory put a value in each memory cell, then take the values from that place in memory and display them on the monitor (luckily you dont have to do that pixel by pixel) the library has a routine that will take something out of a providid space in memory and display it on the screen. In a middle level language you would make a variable (initially telling the computer the ammount of memory you will allocate to it) then assign a value to it and then print it, there are more broad functions here, that will allocate the ammount of space you asked for in memory, and another that will take the variable name, from it find out where the values of that variable are allocated and then take the information value by value and print it. As you can imagine, a middle-level task will take longer to compleate due to its broadness. In a high-level language you might only need to say to assign a value to a variable and then print it. A function, will first reserve enough space to store a considerable ammount of information in memory, then it will assign the value to the spots that it chooses, freeing up the rest of the space, and only then execute the printing process which will again crossreference a variable to the locations in memory and then print them one by one on the screen. As you can see, most of the process in a high level language is automated, someone already programmed the function that you use in and you only need to give the computer broad directions. But the more broad directions are, the more code has to go into functions, because noone can predict what you want the print function to display for example, and whether it is a variable or a typed in value, and although you dont use that functionality, the code is there, and it takes up more space in memory... I hope you got the gist of what i meant, in this example VB is the high-level programming language, well as it is in real life.

 

Which misses the point. .NET apps are not restricted to being run on Windows only, and one doesn’t have to have the .NET framework in order to make use of .NET apps. And since “everyone” is moving away from Windows apps and instead moving to .NET Web services and ASP.NET Web forms apps, the client’s platform is irrelevant.

As i have said before: "Web programming languages are different in the way they run."

When you type in the name of the webpage you are trying to access, your request is sent to the proxy server that is connected to your computer,

[TeleMad]

Alexander: As i have said before: "Web programming languages are different in the way they run."

 

No duh. (PS: And your little attempts to lecture me on how things in the computer world work are laughable. I have a BS in CIS, graduating summa *** laude with a perfect 4.0 cumulative GPA, and I've been employed as a programmer/database manager at the corporate offices of a multinational corporation for the past seven years. Save your patronizing speeches for someone else)

 

You originally said:

 

Alexander: …again you cant run .net programs if you dont have .NET platform installed on your system.

 

That’s false in that anyone with a browser can run any .net programs that exist as .NET Web Services or .NET Web Forms app. The fact that the code is not running directly on their own CPU is completely immaterial…they launched the program, they can provide input to the program, then can get output from the program, with that output tailored to the input they themselves provided, and they can stop that program.

 

Let me recap the details of your complaint about needing the .NET framework.

 

1) It applies to 0% of .NET Web services

 

2) It applies to 0% of .NET Web Forms apps

 

3) It applies to only ~10% of desktop users (the minority that aren’t running a Windows OS) and then only when they’re trying to run installed-on-their-machine apps

[TeleMad]

Alexander: If you want an example of what VB can't do, here: you should know that RAM is composed of 2 sections, one that is accessible to all programs, the other that is only accessible to bios and computer needs (system processes), as an example VB can not view or vodify any of the sectors that are accessible by the system...

 

Since when is RAM divided up into SECTORS?

 

RAM - physical memory - is divided up into frames, which map to logical addresses as pages. RAM can also be divided up into segments. Sectors, however, are what disks are divided up into.

[TeleMad]

Alexander: Its not that VB cant do it, although there are some tasks that it cant, another example is that VB can not communicate with the operating system and tell it what to do...

 

Wrong again. Ever here of the Win32 API?

[TeleMad]

Alexander: Let the doctor explain here:

the lowest level of programming language is Assembly…

 

The "doctor" is wrong again. The lowest level of programming is machine language. Assembly language is at a higher level than machine language.

[TeleMad]

Alexander: As you can see, most of the process in a high level language is automated, someone already programmed the function that you use in and you only need to give the computer broad directions. But the more broad directions are, the more code has to go into functions, because noone can predict what you want the print function to display for example, and whether it is a variable or a typed in value, and although you dont use that functionality, the code is there, and it takes up more space in memory.

 

You make it sound like that additional code is always loaded, wasting memory. That’s wrong. Demand paging pulls into physical memory only the code and data that are needed. If printing is not needed, that code is not (or at least should not) be in memory. Furthermore, if it has been brought into RAM and free physical memory is running low, the no-longer used frames containing the printing code will be paged back out to make room for incoming, needed frames.

 

In addition, frames (and their corresponding pages) are typically a fixed size. Now, even if 1 byte of code is needed, a full frame of physical memory is reserved (the wasting of memory within a frame is called internal fragmentation). So whether 1 byte of code or 3kB of code needed to be brought in, the same amount of physical memory would be allocated.

 

Alexander: I hope you got the gist of what i meant, in this example VB is the high-level programming language…

 

No, what I am getting out of your little speech is that you seem to be oblivious to the fact – or at least failed to mention it because doing so would undermine your position – that there is a tradeoff involved, and that modern programmers as a whole have rejected assembly language in favor of high level languages…such as VB.NET.

 

Why? Because with assembly language the programmer has to communicate with the computer on the computer’s own terms (so to speak), which takes too long to get anything useful coded. With high level languages, the programmer can leave the details to others and spend his/her time solving actual business problems. I can write something in a few minutes using a high level language that someone writing in low-level assembly would take hours or days to code. With the fast pace of the modern computer world, the vast majority of programmers simply don’t have the time (or the patience ) to write in assembly.

[alexander]

The lowest level of programming is machine language.

Well, I thought of putting that instead of assembly, the thing is, machine language really isnt a programming language as a language, in assembly there are words while in machine code there are only strings of ones and zeros, so what in assembly would be "print" in machine would be "01110000 01110010 01101001 01101110 01110110" (that is just an example, it doesnt mean that a "print" command exists in assembly or that the other command exists in machine, although the commands are the same). However you can program in machine code, so i admit i was in a way wrong.

that there is a tradeoff involved, and that modern programmers as a whole have rejected assembly language in favor of high level languages…such as VB.NET

Actually Python and Perl, most hackers ("A slang term for a computer enthusiast, i.e., a person who enjoys learning programming languages and computer systems and can often be considered an expert on the subject(s). " a part of a definition from webopaedia) dont use Windows unless they have to, they are good enough to use more powerfull operating systems than Windows...

Programming languages, as all things, get old and become less and less used, not saying that assembly is extinct, because those who write bioses for new processors still have to use the old ways, but as new languages are created and things like object oriented programming come into being, more hackers convert to the new ways.

I can write something in a few minutes using a high level language that someone writing in low-level assembly would take hours or days to code. With the fast pace of the modern computer world, the vast majority of programmers simply don’t have the time (or the patience ) to write in assembly.

Every language has its own use... People still program in fortran, because it suits their needs in what they do. Hey, aside from the fact that i'm defending the low-level languages, i know most Basic languages that exist, from original Basic to QBasic, VisualBasic, DarkBasic. I still use them i.e. if im playing around with encryption, algorithms, keys and all, i would rather use QBasic than C++, because i dont know whether my new idea will work or not, so why bother spending days creating classes and functions for all the stuff that i will use maybe once and find out that it didnt work, id rather spend a few hours writing the code that will be 200-500 lines long in QBasic rather than writing thousands of lines of code in C++, if it works i might rewrite it in C++, but for testing purposes, why bother?

Wrong again. Ever here of the Win32 API

ok, here is the one i know that VB cant do (at least last time i checked): VB cant iterate over the properties of a class like C++.