If .net and j2ee are so great...

[=^.^=]

Re: .PDF Files .

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 21:42:39 -0700, Jeff Relf
<___Jeff-Relf@NCPlus.NET > wrote:
[color=blue]
>Hi 42 , You say :
>" Remove the file association for .PDF files . "[/color]
[color=blue]
>Good idea . Why didn't I think of that ?[/color]

itz the shit in the air from industry in the valley...

it boggles the mind, not to mention making the car run ruff

....pull-up outta that miazmah into Rat City, and itz c00l again

[Frans Bouma]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

Can this discussion be held OUTSIDE the C# newsgroup? I don't see why talk
about linux, java or other technologies are related in ANY way to C#.

Please do not crosspost to the C# newsgroup.

So, Chad, stop crossposting. If you want to battle Linux- and Java-
jehova's, go ahead, but outside this newsgroup. Thanks

FB

"Chad Myers" <cmyers@N0.SP.A M.austin.rr.com > wrote in
news:OR0nrXnaDH A.1580@tk2msftn gp13.phx.gbl:
[color=blue]
>
> "GreyCloud" <cumulus@mist.c om> wrote in message
> news:3F490DEC.E 12369AB@mist.co m...[color=green]
>> Chad Myers wrote:[/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > Not that I would consider anything
>> > "The Inquirer" said since it's just a
>> > salacious, sensationalist, piss rag,
>> > but in this article, they just happen
>> > to be regurgitating the statements of
>> > other security experts, so I'll comment.
>> >[/color]
>>
>> Tell that to the OpenVMS people in comp.os.vms. You'll get
>> laughed at.[/color]
>
> Not that I would care one bit what OpenVMS people thought...
>
> I mean, I just see so many OpenVMS boxes around, so
> they must be doing something right... right?
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > How are these problems (fundamental
>> > stack problems, memory access problems,
>> > etc) that much different from other
>> > Kernel-space/user-space memory model
>> > OSes? How does Linux protect this,
>> > since I get the implication that you
>> > think Linux's model is vastly superior.
>> >[/color]
>>
>> You didn't read the article very closely did you.
>> It was already explained in the article. Go over to
>> comp.os.vms and look up some of Keith Paris posts about this
>> topic.[/color]
>
> Again, why should I care what OpenVMS people think?
>
> How come all these organizations and companies I go into
> have not a single OpenVMS box? They run Solaris, Windows, Linux,
> AIX, and a few others. No OpenVMS.
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>> > I here lots of people bashing on
>> > Windows for this or that, but the
>> > problems with Windows are the same
>> > fundamental problems with lots of other
>> > OSes, yet no one bashes on them.
>> > That's what leads me to just ignore
>> > the dumbasses spewing this stuff
>> > because they're completely hypocritical.[/color]
>>
>> I think you are in a deep state of denial. Ever hear of
>> defcon 9? Where experts cracked into many different systems
>> using various o/ses? Well, after three days, the time
>> limit, they couldn't even get into OpenVMS even with a login
>> account. It took them three minutes to crack into an NT
>> box.[/color]
>
> What about Linux? Unix (Solaris, AIX, etc)? How did they fair?
> How did they get into the NT box? A buffer overflow?
>
> Buffer overflows are not the problem of the OS, they are the
> problem of the person who wrote the code that allowed the
> OS. It's a fundamental problem with pointer-based coding
> like C/C++. When we get away from that and move to managed
> frameworks like Java and .NET, those problems will go away
> almost completely. The problems, when they arise, will be
> easy to fix because there will be just ONE place to patch
> it, not thousands.
>[color=green]
>> Like the man said, you can patch windows till your blue in
>> the face and you'll still get worms and viruses. Only until
>> M$ does a total rewrite will the problems go away.[/color]
>
> But the problems are buffer overruns. Doing a rewrite will
> not fix this as there will always be bugs and imperfections
> because humans cannot make anything perfect.
>
> I fail to see how any OS can protect against this. If you
> have a buffer overrun and the EAX pointer in the CPU is
> allowed to be overwritten, you're hosed. This situation
> is present in, at least, Linux, Windows, all Unix variants,
> MacOS (now BSD/Unix based), and almost every other OS.
>
> Does OpenVMS not use pointers or the CPU to set the next
> instruction pointer?[/color]

[Tim Tyler]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

43 <jabailo@earthl ink.net> wrote:

: http://linux.oreillynet.com/pub/a/li....html#choosing

: C++ Memory Management: From Fear to Triumph
: by George Belotsky
: 05/08/2003

: 'It is possible to learn how to use a language such as C++
: correctly. On the other hand, trying to get Java's garbage
: collector (just to pick one example) to take a specific
: action at a certain time is an impossible task. Sometimes
: it will work, then break with no explanation. The behavior
: will depend on which JVM you are using, so your code will
: not be portable. Even on the same platform, JVM upgrades
: will unleash mystifying, subtle errors. This is precisely
: the kind of nightmare that is typically associated with memory
: allocation errors in C++!'

Rather pathetic pro-C++, anti-Java FUD.

The only time garbage collection timing can make a difference to
program flow in Java is if you use finaliser methods - and you
should never do that.

Oh well - at least the author 'fessed up to the nightmareish
nature of memory allocation errors in C++.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ tim@tt1.org

[Tim Tyler]

Re: .PDF Files .

In comp.lang.java. advocacy Jeff Relf <___Jeff-Relf@ncplus.net > wrote:

: I wish my IE6 allowed me to block all launchings of .PDF files .

It does ;-)
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ tim@tt1.org

[The Ghost In The Machine]

Re: If .net and j2ee are so great...

In comp.lang.java. advocacy, Tim Tyler
<tim@tt1.org>
wrote
on Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:12:07 GMT
<HK1Es7.Aps@bat h.ac.uk>:[color=blue]
> In comp.lang.java. advocacy The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.a thghost7038suus .net> wrote:
>: In comp.lang.java. advocacy, Tim Tyler <tim@tt1.org>
>:> In comp.lang.java. advocacy Chad Myers <cmyers@n0.sp.a m.austin.rr.com > wrote:
>
>:>: It just happens that .NET compile code's runtime environment
>:>: is more compact and consistent across platforms.
>:>
>:> It more consistently doesn't exist if that's what you mean:
>:>
>:> Platform .NET
>:> Windows Y
>:> Linux N
>:> Solaris N
>:> FreeBSD N
>:> Mac OS N [...]
>
>: Erm...what about Mono? [...]
>
> Mono is not ".NET".
>
> ``.Net is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation.''
>
> - http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...00/CorelPR.asp
>
> ...and Microsoft have not published any license terms allowing
> non-Microsoft implementations .[/color]

They've also patented the .NET API. Sure wouldn't want anyone to
infringe on that patent, no sirree... :-)

After all, it's the most important new computer innovation this
or last millennium, allowing people to share code between machines.

(What's that? People were doing that prior to the IBM PC? Pay
no attention to the ancient history behind the curtain!)

--
#191, ewill3@earthlin k.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.