We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good comparative 
points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.

Thank You,

"Abhishek" <Abhishek@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:38FFE4FB-CC37-4DF8-89A7-8E12DC0AC7EA@microsoft.com...
: We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our
: client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and
: much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
comparative
: points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
:

You're in the wrong group pal.  This forum is for VB6 and lower.  We do not 
deal with anything dot net here. 

There aint, you could also do it with VB6.

A windows service is mostly not a memory consuming program so the main 
factor is the price. That price is not affected by the tool, but by your 
knowledge of the tool.

If your clients wants to do it with Java, then there should be something 
which makes that he wants to do it with that.  Find out what are the factors 
for him that count that it should be Java.

Probably is only something biased, for that are no argumentations.

JMO

Cor

"Abhishek" <Abhishek@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message 
news:38FFE4FB-CC37-4DF8-89A7-8E12DC0AC7EA@microsoft.com...
> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our
> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and
> much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
> comparative
> points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>
> Thank You,
>
> 

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 21:40:02 -0700, Abhishek <Abhishek@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

� We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
� client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
� much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good comparative 
� points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
� 
� Thank You,

I would recommend posting your question to a .NET forum where you're more likely to get a good
answer:

http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vbgeneral/threads


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in
news:#w6b0e#JLHA.5668@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl: 

> There aint, you could also do it with VB6.

Is an answer to what question ?

This one ?............

"I would like to know some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 
over Java in windows service development." ....... ?


So there are no good points for using .Net over Java ?

(I understand English isn't your first language, but the use of 
aint is typically reserved for the uneducated hillbilly redneck 
type, or as a word used in many cliche's.)

You might as well use the plural form of 'you' also...... that 
would be 'yous'.

My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I never hear an 
English song.

Seems to me that by instance the song

"There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.

I had not the idea that the performers of this song where most hillbilly 
rednecks
(can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British in the US 
revolutionary war.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz-UvQYAmbg

But if you call the performers of this song uneducated, then we know what 
you are.

Cor

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote in message 
news:Xns9DBB7663BA783thisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
> "Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in
> news:#w6b0e#JLHA.5668@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
>
>> There aint, you could also do it with VB6.
>
> Is an answer to what question ?
>
> This one ?............
>
> "I would like to know some good comparative points for .NET 4.0
> over Java in windows service development." ....... ?
>
>
> So there are no good points for using .Net over Java ?
>
> (I understand English isn't your first language, but the use of
> aint is typically reserved for the uneducated hillbilly redneck
> type, or as a word used in many cliche's.)
>
> You might as well use the plural form of 'you' also...... that
> would be 'yous'.
>
> 

After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
> much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good comparative 
> points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.

Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  
Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Cor wrote on 7/20/2010 :
> My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I never hear an 
> English song.
>
> Seems to me that by instance the song
>
> "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
>
> I had not the idea that the performers of this song where most hillbilly 
> rednecks
> (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
> Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British in the US 
> revolutionary war.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz-UvQYAmbg
>
> But if you call the performers of this song uneducated, then we know what you 
> are.
>
> Cor
>

Cor - Dan is correct.  Ain't is not considered a valid english 
construct - at least in the US.  It is generally only used regularly by 
small children or the more uneducated segments of US society :)

-- 
Tom Shelton

Karl E. Peterson brought next idea :
> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
>> much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good comparative 
>> points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>
> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.

LOL... You should get a clue.  I have services that were written 9+ 
years ago in .NET 1.0 still running happily without a single issue.

I just did one in C# for another team at my current employer - reason?  
They asked the C++ guys, and they bid like 460 hours... I did the whole 
thing start to finish in about 120.

-- 
Tom Shelton

I know Tom, but sometimes I wanna do it in another way

:-)


"Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> wrote in message 
news:i24huv$sb1$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Cor wrote on 7/20/2010 :
>> My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I never hear an 
>> English song.
>>
>> Seems to me that by instance the song
>>
>> "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
>>
>> I had not the idea that the performers of this song where most hillbilly 
>> rednecks
>> (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
>> Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British in the US 
>> revolutionary war.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz-UvQYAmbg
>>
>> But if you call the performers of this song uneducated, then we know what 
>> you are.
>>
>> Cor
>>
>
> Cor - Dan is correct.  Ain't is not considered a valid english construct - 
> at least in the US.  It is generally only used regularly by small children 
> or the more uneducated segments of US society :)
>
> -- 
> Tom Shelton
>
>
> 

Writing services in .NET is pretty easy, and (in my experience, which is 
somewhat limited) reliable.  If the service has an real low-level (device 
driver interaction), then writing in C/C++ might make sense.  Most service 
don't need this, IMO.

Picking Java over .NET?  I wouldn't.  But, I don't have any evidence.

Dick

-- 
Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue 
Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net 
Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th 
Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 
2006. 

Karl,

You started this in this newsgroup.  .Net is almost native to Windows OS 
systems newer then NT5.1 while non NT Windows systems don't even have the 
possibility of Windows Server.

But that does not make that a .Net language will be better choice to use 
then Java. Microsoft cannot permit themselves (in my perception) to break 
any Java running code on a Microsoft OS in the favour of .Net.

Cor

"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> wrote in message 
news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
>> and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>
> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>
> -- 
> .NET: It's About Trust!
> http://vfred.mvps.org
>
>
> 

Tom Shelton wrote on 7/20/2010 :
> Karl E. Peterson brought next idea :
>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
>>> much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>>
>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
>> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>
> LOL... You should get a clue.  I have services that were written 9+ years ago 
> in .NET 1.0 still running happily without a single issue.

Oh, I *know* that it's been supported to do that, ever since then.  
It's just stupid.  That's all.  I've even seen video drivers that use 
the flamework.  (Can you spell "BSOD"?  I knew you could! <g>)

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

DickGrier used his keyboard to write :
> Writing services in .NET is pretty easy, and (in my experience, which is 
> somewhat limited) reliable.  If the service has an real low-level (device 
> driver interaction), then writing in C/C++ might make sense.  Most service 
> don't need this, IMO.

I'd always recommend C/C++ or Delphi for a service.  There's no need to 
drag in a 100MB+ dependency for what should be a teensy-eensy little 
piece of code.

> Picking Java over .NET?  I wouldn't.  But, I don't have any evidence.

And I'd reject both, without hesitation.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:03:08 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <karl@exmvps.org> wrote:

� After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
� > We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
� > client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
� > much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good comparative 
� > points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
� 
� Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
� machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  
� Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.

Yup, it's quite simple to create one in Visual Basic .NET. Unlike Java or VB 6.0, no wrappers,
toolkits or ActiveX controls are required.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> wrote in message 
news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...

>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
>> and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>
> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.

Been working fine for me. I have several .NET services going and they do the 
job.

You'd think someone who comes from a language that other programmers look 
down on wouldn't treat other languages the same way....

"But...but...but...Dependency!!" What a load of crap. The Windows API is 
just one big dependency too.

The pissing and moaning just for the sake of it is getting old. 

It happens that Karl E. Peterson formulated :
> Tom Shelton wrote on 7/20/2010 :
>> Karl E. Peterson brought next idea :
>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>>>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
>>>> and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>>>
>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
>>> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>
>> LOL... You should get a clue.  I have services that were written 9+ years 
>> ago in .NET 1.0 still running happily without a single issue.
>
> Oh, I *know* that it's been supported to do that, ever since then.  It's just 
> stupid.  That's all.  

And why do say that?  In every infrastructure I've worked in .NET is 
already installed on the servers anyway.  And you noticed that I got my 
service up and runing almost 4 times faster then the C++ guys could?

And so far, it's been 100% reliable running for a couple months in a 
production environment processing many thousands of requests a day...  
And I seriously doubt in this case that a C++ app would be any faster, 
since this app is pretty network bound...

So, what good reason would there be to pay a team of C++ guys to do the 
work when I could do it, by myself, in just over a quarter of the time?

>I've even seen video drivers that use the flamework.  
> (Can you spell "BSOD"?  I knew you could! <g>)

I immagine your talking about the MSI catalyst package.  The drivers 
don't use .NET.  The configuration package does.  If you experienced 
BSOD's, then it almost certainly wasn't .NET at fault - since it would 
be runnign in user space.  It would be the actual driver implementation 
which is most likely C/C++/Assembly (or a combo thereof).

-- 
Tom Shelton

"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
>> and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>
> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>
> -- 
> .NET: It's About Trust!
> http://vfred.mvps.org
>
>

Like VB6 ;)
I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.

/Henning

Henning was thinking very hard :
> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
>>> much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>>
>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
>> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>
>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>
>>
>
> Like VB6 ;)
> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>
> /Henning

As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...

-- 
Tom Shelton

"Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Henning was thinking very hard :
>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 
>>>> 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>> development.
>>>
>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue! 
>>> Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>>
>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Like VB6 ;)
>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>
>> /Henning
>
> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>
> -- 
> Tom Shelton
>
>

No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.

/Henning

Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>>>>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
>>>>> and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>>> development.
>>>>
>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue! Try 
>>>> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>>>
>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>
>>> /Henning
>>
>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>
>> -- Tom Shelton
>>
>>
>
> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>
> /Henning

As it is on most desktops in the world as well....

-- 
Tom Shelton

Tom Shelton formulated on Tuesday :
> It happens that Karl E. Peterson formulated :
>> Tom Shelton wrote on 7/20/2010 :
>>> Karl E. Peterson brought next idea :
>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>>>>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
>>>>> and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>>> development.
>>>>
>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
>>>> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>>
>>> LOL... You should get a clue.  I have services that were written 9+ years 
>>> ago in .NET 1.0 still running happily without a single issue.
>>
>> Oh, I *know* that it's been supported to do that, ever since then.  It's 
>> just stupid.  That's all.
>
> And why do say that?  In every infrastructure I've worked in .NET is already 
> installed on the servers anyway. 

Maybe you're confused?  I'm not limiting my comments to servers in any 
way.  In fact, the thought of servers, specifically, hadn't even 
crossed my mind.

> And you noticed that I got my service up 
> and runing almost 4 times faster then the C++ guys could?

And you noticed that I've rejected the "If it's good for developers, it 
*must* be good for users!" meme from the get-go?

> So, what good reason would there be to pay a team of C++ guys to do the work 
> when I could do it, by myself, in just over a quarter of the time?

One word: Stability!

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
> And almost right is still wrong ,)

Right!

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Paul Clement pretended :
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:03:08 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <karl@exmvps.org> wrote:
>
> � After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
> � > We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
> � > client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
> and  � > much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
> comparative  � > points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
> development. � 
> � Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
> � machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  
> � Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>
> Yup, it's quite simple to create one in Visual Basic .NET. Unlike Java or VB 
> 6.0, no wrappers, toolkits or ActiveX controls are required.

If you don't count the framework a wrapper, sure.   Pfffft!

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

After serious thinking Jeff Johnson wrote :
> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> wrote in message 
> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
>>> much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>>
>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  Try 
>> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>
> Been working fine for me. I have several .NET services going and they do the 
> job.
>
> You'd think someone who comes from a language that other programmers look 
> down on wouldn't treat other languages the same way....
>
> "But...but...but...Dependency!!" What a load of crap. The Windows API is just 
> one big dependency too.

Bullshit.

> The pissing and moaning just for the sake of it is getting old.

I agree.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Tom Shelton wrote :
> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 
>>>>>> 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>>>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>>>> development.
>>>>>
>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue! Try 
>>>>> something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>
>>>> /Henning
>>>
>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>
>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>
>> /Henning
>
> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....

That too, is incorrect.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
> Tom Shelton wrote :
>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 
>>>>>>> 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some 
>>>>>>> good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>>>>> development.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>>>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue! 
>>>>>> Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Henning
>>>>
>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>
>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>>
>>> /Henning
>>
>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>
> That too, is incorrect.

You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of the OS from 
XPSP3 on....  And part of many applications, for instance driver 
configuration packages.

-- 
Tom Shelton

Karl E. Peterson laid this down on his screen :
> Tom Shelton formulated on Tuesday :
>> It happens that Karl E. Peterson formulated :
>>> Tom Shelton wrote on 7/20/2010 :
>>>> Karl E. Peterson brought next idea :
>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 
>>>>>> 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>>>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>>>> development.
>>>>>
>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  
>>>>> Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>>>
>>>> LOL... You should get a clue.  I have services that were written 9+ years 
>>>> ago in .NET 1.0 still running happily without a single issue.
>>>
>>> Oh, I *know* that it's been supported to do that, ever since then.  It's 
>>> just stupid.  That's all.
>>
>> And why do say that?  In every infrastructure I've worked in .NET is 
>> already installed on the servers anyway.
>
> Maybe you're confused?  I'm not limiting my comments to servers in any way.  
> In fact, the thought of servers, specifically, hadn't even crossed my mind.
>

Desktops as well, though I've rarely had call to write a service for a 
desktop machine....

>> And you noticed that I got my service up and runing almost 4 times faster 
>> then the C++ guys could?
>
> And you noticed that I've rejected the "If it's good for developers, it 
> *must* be good for users!" meme from the get-go?
>

Hmmm... In this case, it was the users that decided it was good for 
them.  As a customer, would you rather pay for 460 hours of development 
or 120?


>> So, what good reason would there be to pay a team of C++ guys to do the 
>> work when I could do it, by myself, in just over a quarter of the time?
>
> One word: Stability!

Define stability?  Remember, I've written services that are happily 
running 9 or 10 years now without a single incident or change.

Or are you implying that somehow the C++ version would have less bugs?  
Or would have less then 0 crashes?

Or are you implying language stability?  Oh wait, C++ and C# are both 
ISO language standards.  Can't be that then...



-- 
Tom Shelton

Tom Shelton brought next idea :
> Karl E. Peterson laid this down on his screen :
>> Tom Shelton formulated on Tuesday :
>>> It happens that Karl E. Peterson formulated :
>>>> Tom Shelton wrote on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>> Karl E. Peterson brought next idea :
>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 
>>>>>>> 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some 
>>>>>>> good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>>>>> development.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>>>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  
>>>>>> Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL... You should get a clue.  I have services that were written 9+ 
>>>>> years ago in .NET 1.0 still running happily without a single issue.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I *know* that it's been supported to do that, ever since then.  It's 
>>>> just stupid.  That's all.
>>>
>>> And why do say that?  In every infrastructure I've worked in .NET is 
>>> already installed on the servers anyway.
>>
>> Maybe you're confused?  I'm not limiting my comments to servers in any way. 
>>  In fact, the thought of servers, specifically, hadn't even crossed my 
>> mind.
>
> Desktops as well, though I've rarely had call to write a service for a 
> desktop machine....

I know you are speaking within the confines of the environement(s) you 
are most familiar with.

>>> And you noticed that I got my service up and runing almost 4 times faster 
>>> then the C++ guys could?
>>
>> And you noticed that I've rejected the "If it's good for developers, it 
>> *must* be good for users!" meme from the get-go?
>
> Hmmm... In this case, it was the users that decided it was good for them.  As 
> a customer, would you rather pay for 460 hours of development or 120?

460.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Karl E. Peterson has brought this to us :
> Tom Shelton brought next idea :
>> Karl E. Peterson laid this down on his screen :
>>> Tom Shelton formulated on Tuesday :
>>>> It happens that Karl E. Peterson formulated :
>>>>> Tom Shelton wrote on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>>> Karl E. Peterson brought next idea :
>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>>>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on 
>>>>>>>> .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know 
>>>>>>>> some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows 
>>>>>>>> service development.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why 
>>>>>>> people's machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a 
>>>>>>> f'n clue!  Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core 
>>>>>>> Windows itself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL... You should get a clue.  I have services that were written 9+ 
>>>>>> years ago in .NET 1.0 still running happily without a single issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, I *know* that it's been supported to do that, ever since then.  It's 
>>>>> just stupid.  That's all.
>>>>
>>>> And why do say that?  In every infrastructure I've worked in .NET is 
>>>> already installed on the servers anyway.
>>>
>>> Maybe you're confused?  I'm not limiting my comments to servers in any 
>>> way.  In fact, the thought of servers, specifically, hadn't even crossed 
>>> my mind.
>>
>> Desktops as well, though I've rarely had call to write a service for a 
>> desktop machine....
>
> I know you are speaking within the confines of the environement(s) you are 
> most familiar with.
>

True - as are you I suspect.

>>>> And you noticed that I got my service up and runing almost 4 times faster 
>>>> then the C++ guys could?
>>>
>>> And you noticed that I've rejected the "If it's good for developers, it 
>>> *must* be good for users!" meme from the get-go?
>>
>> Hmmm... In this case, it was the users that decided it was good for them.  
>> As a customer, would you rather pay for 460 hours of development or 120?
>
> 460.

Figures....  Noticed you failed to address the stability issues.  What 
I'm seeing here is argument for argument sake.  You don't have anything 
real to back you up - just your dislike of .net.

Cool.

-- 
Tom Shelton

Tom Shelton has brought this to us :
> Karl E. Peterson has brought this to us :
>> I know you are speaking within the confines of the environement(s) you are 
>> most familiar with.
>
> True - as are you I suspect.

I think I may be speaking from a bit wider perspective.

>>>>> And you noticed that I got my service up and runing almost 4 times 
>>>>> faster then the C++ guys could?
>>>>
>>>> And you noticed that I've rejected the "If it's good for developers, it 
>>>> *must* be good for users!" meme from the get-go?
>>>
>>> Hmmm... In this case, it was the users that decided it was good for them.  
>>> As a customer, would you rather pay for 460 hours of development or 120?
>>
>> 460.
>
> Figures.... 

Damn straight.  For a system service, I want someone who cares about 
more than just getting the job done quick.  Generally, that sort of 
quality construction costs more.

> Noticed you failed to address the stability issues.  What I'm 
> seeing here is argument for argument sake. 

You may be arguing for argument's sake.  I'm choosing not to 
participate.

I offered A) my opinion, and, when asked, B) my rationale.

I just don't have time for whack-a-troll today.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Karl E. Peterson was thinking very hard :
> Tom Shelton has brought this to us :
>> Karl E. Peterson has brought this to us :
>>> I know you are speaking within the confines of the environement(s) you are 
>>> most familiar with.
>>
>> True - as are you I suspect.
>
> I think I may be speaking from a bit wider perspective.
>

Maybe - but, you can only assume as you've provided no evidence to the 
contrary...

>>>>>> And you noticed that I got my service up and runing almost 4 times 
>>>>>> faster then the C++ guys could?
>>>>>
>>>>> And you noticed that I've rejected the "If it's good for developers, it 
>>>>> *must* be good for users!" meme from the get-go?
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm... In this case, it was the users that decided it was good for them. 
>>>>  As a customer, would you rather pay for 460 hours of development or 120?
>>>
>>> 460.
>>
>> Figures....
>
> Damn straight.  For a system service, I want someone who cares about more 
> than just getting the job done quick.  Generally, that sort of quality 
> construction costs more.
>

I care about quality construction.  Getting the job done quicker does 
not mean less quality, Karl.  If that was the case you never would have 
started using VB.

>> Noticed you failed to address the stability issues.  What I'm seeing here 
>> is argument for argument sake.
>
> You may be arguing for argument's sake.  I'm choosing not to participate.
>
> I offered A) my opinion, and, when asked, B) my rationale.
>

Fine, I'm content to leave this alone.  I understand your feelings and 
perspective, wrong though they maybe :)

-- 
Tom Shelton

"Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
news:i24t0o$e74$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>> Tom Shelton wrote :
>>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows 
>>>>>>>> service. Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are 
>>>>>>>> emphasising on .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I 
>>>>>>>> would like to know some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over 
>>>>>>>> Java in windows service development.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why 
>>>>>>> people's machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a 
>>>>>>> f'n clue! Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core 
>>>>>>> Windows itself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>
>>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>>>
>>>> /Henning
>>>
>>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>>
>> That too, is incorrect.
>
> You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of the OS from XPSP3 
> on....  And part of many applications, for instance driver configuration 
> packages.
>
> -- 
> Tom Shelton
>
>

Hope that is not the case, just installed SP3 on my so far .netfree 
computer. Any certain file to look for?
If not, then make that maybe Vista and on.

/Henning

Henning presented the following explanation :
> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
> news:i24t0o$e74$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>>> Tom Shelton wrote :
>>>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>>>>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on 
>>>>>>>>> .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know 
>>>>>>>>> some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows 
>>>>>>>>> service development.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why 
>>>>>>>> people's machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a 
>>>>>>>> f'n clue! Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core 
>>>>>>>> Windows itself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Henning
>>>>
>>>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>>>
>>> That too, is incorrect.
>>
>> You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of the OS from XPSP3 
>> on....  And part of many applications, for instance driver configuration 
>> packages.
>>
>> -- Tom Shelton
>>
>>
>
> Hope that is not the case, just installed SP3 on my so far .netfree computer. 
> Any certain file to look for?
> If not, then make that maybe Vista and on.
>
> /Henning

You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it.  Vista up 
does.  XP makes it part of windows update.  Still, I've not come 
accross many machines while helping out friends and neighbors that 
didn't have it :)

-- 
Tom Shelton

"Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
news:i251q4$46c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Henning presented the following explanation :
>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>> news:i24t0o$e74$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>>>> Tom Shelton wrote :
>>>>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows 
>>>>>>>>>> service. Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are 
>>>>>>>>>> emphasising on .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I 
>>>>>>>>>> would like to know some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over 
>>>>>>>>>> Java in windows service development.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why 
>>>>>>>>> people's machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get 
>>>>>>>>> a f'n clue! Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core 
>>>>>>>>> Windows itself.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>
>>>>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>>>>
>>>> That too, is incorrect.
>>>
>>> You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of the OS from XPSP3 
>>> on....  And part of many applications, for instance driver configuration 
>>> packages.
>>>
>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Hope that is not the case, just installed SP3 on my so far .netfree 
>> computer. Any certain file to look for?
>> If not, then make that maybe Vista and on.
>>
>> /Henning
>
> You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it.  Vista up does. 
> XP makes it part of windows update.  Still, I've not come accross many 
> machines while helping out friends and neighbors that didn't have it :)
>
> -- 
> Tom Shelton
>
>
Not in any update yet, must be if it is installed.

Was that before or after helping :))

/Henning

Tom Shelton used his keyboard to write :
> Karl E. Peterson was thinking very hard :
>> Tom Shelton has brought this to us :
>>> Karl E. Peterson has brought this to us :
>>>> I know you are speaking within the confines of the environement(s) you 
>>>> are most familiar with.
>>>
>>> True - as are you I suspect.
>>
>> I think I may be speaking from a bit wider perspective.
>
> Maybe - but, you can only assume as you've provided no evidence to the 
> contrary...

Oh, I think perhaps I have.

>>> Noticed you failed to address the stability issues.  What I'm seeing here 
>>> is argument for argument sake.
>>
>> You may be arguing for argument's sake.  I'm choosing not to participate.
>>
>> I offered A) my opinion, and, when asked, B) my rationale.
>
> Fine, I'm content to leave this alone.  I understand your feelings and 
> perspective, wrong though they maybe :)

There's that limited perspective, again. <g>

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Henning formulated on Tuesday :
> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev: 
>> You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it.  Vista up does. 
>> XP makes it part of windows update.  Still, I've not come accross many 
>> machines while helping out friends and neighbors that didn't have it :)
>
> Not in any update yet, must be if it is installed.
>
> Was that before or after helping :))

LOL!

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Henning pretended :
> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
> news:i251q4$46c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Henning presented the following explanation :
>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>> news:i24t0o$e74$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>>>>> Tom Shelton wrote :
>>>>>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows 
>>>>>>>>>>> service. Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are 
>>>>>>>>>>> emphasising on .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I 
>>>>>>>>>>> would like to know some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over 
>>>>>>>>>>> Java in windows service development.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why 
>>>>>>>>>> people's machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a 
>>>>>>>>>> f'n clue! Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core 
>>>>>>>>>> Windows itself.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>>>>>
>>>>> That too, is incorrect.
>>>>
>>>> You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of the OS from XPSP3 
>>>> on....  And part of many applications, for instance driver configuration 
>>>> packages.
>>>>
>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hope that is not the case, just installed SP3 on my so far .netfree 
>>> computer. Any certain file to look for?
>>> If not, then make that maybe Vista and on.
>>>
>>> /Henning
>>
>> You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it.  Vista up does. 
>> XP makes it part of windows update.  Still, I've not come accross many 
>> machines while helping out friends and neighbors that didn't have it :)
>>
>> -- Tom Shelton
>>
>>
> Not in any update yet, must be if it is installed.
>

It's an optional update.  You won't get automatic updates for it until 
it is installed.  It's been that way for years on xp :)

> Was that before or after helping :))

I never install uninstall anything that I don't specifically ask 
first... And I have never installed the .NET runtime on any machine but 
my own.

-- 
Tom Shelton

"Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
news:i2539b$b40$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Henning pretended :
>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>> news:i251q4$46c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Henning presented the following explanation :
>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>> news:i24t0o$e74$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>>>>>> Tom Shelton wrote :
>>>>>>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>>>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows 
>>>>>>>>>>>> service. Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are 
>>>>>>>>>>>> emphasising on .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I 
>>>>>>>>>>>> would like to know some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 
>>>>>>>>>>>> over Java in windows service development.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why 
>>>>>>>>>>> people's machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!? 
>>>>>>>>>>> Get a f'n clue! Try something with *zero* dependencies other 
>>>>>>>>>>> than core Windows itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>>>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That too, is incorrect.
>>>>>
>>>>> You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of the OS from 
>>>>> XPSP3 on....  And part of many applications, for instance driver 
>>>>> configuration packages.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hope that is not the case, just installed SP3 on my so far .netfree 
>>>> computer. Any certain file to look for?
>>>> If not, then make that maybe Vista and on.
>>>>
>>>> /Henning
>>>
>>> You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it.  Vista up 
>>> does. XP makes it part of windows update.  Still, I've not come accross 
>>> many machines while helping out friends and neighbors that didn't have 
>>> it :)
>>>
>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>
>>>
>> Not in any update yet, must be if it is installed.
>>
>
> It's an optional update.  You won't get automatic updates for it until it 
> is installed.  It's been that way for years on xp :)
>
>> Was that before or after helping :))
>
> I never install uninstall anything that I don't specifically ask first... 
> And I have never installed the .NET runtime on any machine but my own.
>
> -- 
> Tom Shelton
>
>

Sorry about that, but I couldn't resist...

/Henning

Henning submitted this idea :
> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
> news:i2539b$b40$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Henning pretended :
>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>> news:i251q4$46c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Henning presented the following explanation :
>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>> news:i24t0o$e74$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>>>>>>> Tom Shelton wrote :
>>>>>>>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>>>>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> service. Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> emphasising on .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would like to know some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> over Java in windows service development.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why 
>>>>>>>>>>>> people's machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!? Get 
>>>>>>>>>>>> a f'n clue! Try something with *zero* dependencies other than 
>>>>>>>>>>>> core Windows itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>>>>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That too, is incorrect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of the OS from 
>>>>>> XPSP3 on....  And part of many applications, for instance driver 
>>>>>> configuration packages.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope that is not the case, just installed SP3 on my so far .netfree 
>>>>> computer. Any certain file to look for?
>>>>> If not, then make that maybe Vista and on.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Henning
>>>>
>>>> You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it.  Vista up does. 
>>>> XP makes it part of windows update.  Still, I've not come accross many 
>>>> machines while helping out friends and neighbors that didn't have it :)
>>>>
>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Not in any update yet, must be if it is installed.
>>>
>>
>> It's an optional update.  You won't get automatic updates for it until it 
>> is installed.  It's been that way for years on xp :)
>>
>>> Was that before or after helping :))
>>
>> I never install uninstall anything that I don't specifically ask first... 
>> And I have never installed the .NET runtime on any machine but my own.
>>
>> -- Tom Shelton
>>
>>
>
> Sorry about that, but I couldn't resist...
>
> /Henning

That's cool.  it was funny.  I meant to put a smiley on that :)

-- 
Tom Shelton

"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@swspectrum.com> wrote in message 
news:6rob461vvgq95ji8se8gj7v5885fn75kc1@4ax.com...
: Yup, it's quite simple to create one in Visual Basic .NET. Unlike Java or 
VB 6.0, no wrappers,
: toolkits or ActiveX controls are required.

I've written services in VB6 with NO wrappers of dependancies.  Nice try. 
Next. 

"Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> wrote in message 
news:i251q4$46c$1@news.eternal-september.org...

: You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it.  Vista up
: does.  XP makes it part of windows update.  Still, I've not come
: accross many machines while helping out friends and neighbors that
: didn't have it :)

It's probably because of you your friend have dot nxt on their machines. 
And with friends like you, who needs enemas. 

"Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> skrev i meddelandet 
news:i25ah8$bfu$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@swspectrum.com> wrote in message
> news:6rob461vvgq95ji8se8gj7v5885fn75kc1@4ax.com...
> : Yup, it's quite simple to create one in Visual Basic .NET. Unlike Java 
> or
> VB 6.0, no wrappers,
> : toolkits or ActiveX controls are required.
>
> I've written services in VB6 with NO wrappers of dependancies.  Nice try.
> Next.
>

Done it too, only dep is a reference to MSCommLib.

/Henning

 
> Cor - Dan is correct.  Ain't is not considered a valid
> english construct - at least in the US.  It is generally
> only used regularly by small children or the more
> uneducated segments of US society :) 

Unfortunately, as I understand, 'aint' has been added to the 
dictionary.

But still, I'm old enough that I was taught that it wasn't a 
word. I'm a bit of a stickler on grammar.


 

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:13:05 -0600, Tom Shelton
<tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> wrote:


>
>Cor - Dan is correct.  Ain't is not considered a valid english 
>construct - at least in the US.  It is generally only used regularly by 
>small children or the more uneducated segments of US society :)

Ain't that the truth.

-ralph

ralph <nt_consulting64@yahoo.net> wrote in
news:fthc465sb2ecebmtn9md39h4b2g8ap2rbd@4ax.com: 

> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:13:05 -0600, Tom Shelton
> <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> wrote:
> 
> 
>>
>>Cor - Dan is correct.  Ain't is not considered a valid
>>english construct - at least in the US.  It is generally
>>only used regularly by small children or the more
>>uneducated segments of US society :) 
> 
> Ain't that the truth.
> 
> -ralph

...which fits right in with my description...

".....or as a word used in many cliche's."

Acceptable in cliche's.......'if it aint broke.......'

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message 
news:OlLFFPCKLHA.5464@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
: My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I never hear an
: English song.
:
: Seems to me that by instance the song
:
: "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
:
: I had not the idea that the performers of this song where most hillbilly
: rednecks
: (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
: Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British in the US
: revolutionary war.

: But if you call the performers of this song uneducated, then we know what
: you are.

Well, I know what you are, you judgmental wanna be high and mighty piece of 
shit.  Marvin Gaye was far from a redneck, ass.  Besdies not knowing the 
English language, you have a very incorrect understanding of the American 
culture.  So stop making a fool of yourself and go back to whatever forum is 
part of your country of origin.  You don't deserve to share the same space 
as me or other Americans. 

"Henning" <computer_hero@coldmail.com> skrev i meddelelsen 
news:i24psb$tbp$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
> news:i24num$jp1$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Cor laid this down on his screen :
>>> You started this in this newsgroup.
>>
>> Bite me.
>>
>>> .Net is almost native to Windows OS
>>
>> Almost counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
>>
>> -- 
>> .NET: It's About Trust!
>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>
>>
>
> And almost right is still wrong ,)
>
> /Henning
>
>

What an incredible bumlicker you always are, Henning.
Doesn't suits a Swede at all. And they aren't. You're such a
weak person. Thank your God for not being an us-immigrant.

> Wow... what a lot of noice. Am I supposed to do something now, like a 
> reply in the same spirit?

> /Henning

And:  "noice"
- Is it anything other than "noise".
/se

"Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> skrev i meddelelsen 
news:i26280$vsf$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message
> news:OlLFFPCKLHA.5464@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> : My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I never hear 
> an
> : English song.
> :
> : Seems to me that by instance the song
> :
> : "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
> :
> : I had not the idea that the performers of this song where most hillbilly
> : rednecks
> : (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
> : Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British in the US
> : revolutionary war.
>
> : But if you call the performers of this song uneducated, then we know 
> what
> : you are.
>
> Well, I know what you are, you judgmental wanna be high and mighty piece 
> of
> shit.  Marvin Gaye was far from a redneck, ass.  Besdies not knowing the
> English language, you have a very incorrect understanding of the American
> culture.  So stop making a fool of yourself and go back to whatever forum 
> is
> part of your country of origin.  You don't deserve to share the same space
> as me or other Americans.
>

I'm sure, the german server you're posting to/and from (or any other
newsgroup servers for that matter), does not deserve having a real
genuine psychopath like you as being a participator.

Someday the light will came into your sick squeezed head. Though, In
your case it will happen late; around an age of 60-70.

Hopefully, you'll find or buy a robe and do the final exit before that.
It will be a tremendous relief even for your butter cookie gay friends.
And not at least for your mom and her basement, where you apparently
is living, as is being reported all over on the internet.

Meanwhile; it's remarkable, a Troll like you, who even has been given
a Trolls-Award, has been managed here in so many years without yet
being on the dead row. Anyone who wants to know the reason of this,
should read up on "psychopathy diagnosis". You, yourself, should do
it too. Though, both your IQ deficiency (your squeezed head) and
your character deficiency disease won't suffice in giving your insight
of your own sick personality.

"Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelelsen 
news:i253la$cod$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Henning submitted this idea :
>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>> news:i2539b$b40$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Henning pretended :
>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>> news:i251q4$46c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> Henning presented the following explanation :
>>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>> news:i24t0o$e74$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>>>>>>>> Tom Shelton wrote :
>>>>>>>>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>>>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>>>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i meddelandet 
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> service. Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emphasising on .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to know some good comparative points for .NET 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> people's machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!? 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Get a f'n clue! Try something with *zero* dependencies other 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> than core Windows itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a server.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That too, is incorrect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of the OS from 
>>>>>>> XPSP3 on....  And part of many applications, for instance driver 
>>>>>>> configuration packages.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hope that is not the case, just installed SP3 on my so far .netfree 
>>>>>> computer. Any certain file to look for?
>>>>>> If not, then make that maybe Vista and on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>
>>>>> You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it.  Vista up 
>>>>> does. XP makes it part of windows update.  Still, I've not come 
>>>>> accross many machines while helping out friends and neighbors that 
>>>>> didn't have it :)
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Not in any update yet, must be if it is installed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's an optional update.  You won't get automatic updates for it until 
>>> it is installed.  It's been that way for years on xp :)
>>>
>>>> Was that before or after helping :))
>>>
>>> I never install uninstall anything that I don't specifically ask 
>>> first... And I have never installed the .NET runtime on any machine but 
>>> my own.
>>>
>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Sorry about that, but I couldn't resist...
>>
>> /Henning
>
> That's cool.  it was funny.  I meant to put a smiley on that :)
>
> -- 
> Tom Shelton
>
Looking at his post through the years.
I begun to see him as a fool. All of his post look the same.

Noticed his bumlickering here through the years,
I think his dreaming of being an american.
/se 

"Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote in message>
> You don't deserve to share the same space as me or other Americans.
>
This is a UseNet newsgroup. A UseNet newsgroup is meant for everybody on 
earth, what colour they have, what religion they have, what nationality they 
have,  what sexual preference they have or whatever.

Guys like you who write like this are direct responsible for many killed 
American soldiers who try to do a good job outside the USA.

Cor 

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> skrev i meddelelsen 
news:uF6kpALKLHA.4780@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
>
> "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote in message>
>> You don't deserve to share the same space as me or other Americans.
>>
> This is a UseNet newsgroup. A UseNet newsgroup is meant for everybody on 
> earth, what colour they have, what religion they have, what nationality 
> they have,  what sexual preference they have or whatever.
>
> Guys like you who write like this are direct responsible for many killed 
> American soldiers who try to do a good job outside the USA.
>
> Cor

True; a gay like him would shoot directly into a
crawd of women and children. Psychopaths is short of normal
feelings and blockings. He clearly showed this here and all over
on the internet. The ones here still backing him up got to be short
too.
/se 

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:58:52 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <karl@exmvps.org> wrote:

� Paul Clement pretended :
� > On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:03:08 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <karl@exmvps.org> wrote:
� >
� > � After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
� > � > We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
� > � > client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
� > and  � > much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
� > comparative  � > points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
� > development. � 
� > � Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
� > � machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  
� > � Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
� >
� > Yup, it's quite simple to create one in Visual Basic .NET. Unlike Java or VB 
� > 6.0, no wrappers, toolkits or ActiveX controls are required.
� 
� If you don't count the framework a wrapper, sure.   Pfffft!

If the .NET Framework is a wrapper then practically everything is a wrapper. Perhaps you should
suggest that it be written in machine language instead of C++ or Delphi. ;-)

I'm simply drawing a distinction between what is natively supported in the development environment
and what is not. It isn't in either Java or VB 6.0.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:12:39 -0400, "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote:

� 
� "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@swspectrum.com> wrote in message 
� news:6rob461vvgq95ji8se8gj7v5885fn75kc1@4ax.com...
� : Yup, it's quite simple to create one in Visual Basic .NET. Unlike Java or 
� VB 6.0, no wrappers,
� : toolkits or ActiveX controls are required.
� 
� I've written services in VB6 with NO wrappers of dependancies.  Nice try. 
� Next. 

Not so fast. You didn't exactly expand on your implementation but there is no native support in VB
6.0 for Windows Services. Without the aforementioned tools you would need to resort to API function
calls such as CreateThread. Anyone who has used or attempted to use this API function call in VB 6.0
knows that it's an unsupported implementation that is somewhat fragile as a result of the
thread-safe limitations built into the VB 6.0 threading model. So while it's doable, you have to
keep your fingers crossed with respect to reliability.

..NET supports the development of Windows Services natively w/o having to jump through hoops in order
to get it to work.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:37:32 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <karl@exmvps.org> wrote:

� >
� > Hmmm... In this case, it was the users that decided it was good for them.  As 
� > a customer, would you rather pay for 460 hours of development or 120?
� 
� 460.

I bet you work for the government. ;-)


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

::yawn::

tl;dr


"se" <se@onfakeplace&.atbigfix> wrote in message 
news:i26815$nct$1@news.eternal-september.org...
:
: "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> skrev i meddelelsen
: news:i26280$vsf$1@news.eternal-september.org...
: >
: > "Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message
: > news:OlLFFPCKLHA.5464@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
: > : My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I never hear
: > an
: > : English song.
: > :
: > : Seems to me that by instance the song
: > :
: > : "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
: > :
: > : I had not the idea that the performers of this song where most 
hillbilly
: > : rednecks
: > : (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
: > : Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British in the US
: > : revolutionary war.
: >
: > : But if you call the performers of this song uneducated, then we know
: > what
: > : you are.
: >
: > Well, I know what you are, you judgmental wanna be high and mighty piece
: > of
: > shit.  Marvin Gaye was far from a redneck, ass.  Besdies not knowing the
: > English language, you have a very incorrect understanding of the 
American
: > culture.  So stop making a fool of yourself and go back to whatever 
forum
: > is
: > part of your country of origin.  You don't deserve to share the same 
space
: > as me or other Americans.
: >
:
: I'm sure, the german server you're posting to/and from (or any other
: newsgroup servers for that matter), does not deserve having a real
: genuine psychopath like you as being a participator.
:
: Someday the light will came into your sick squeezed head. Though, In
: your case it will happen late; around an age of 60-70.
:
: Hopefully, you'll find or buy a robe and do the final exit before that.
: It will be a tremendous relief even for your butter cookie gay friends.
: And not at least for your mom and her basement, where you apparently
: is living, as is being reported all over on the internet.
:
: Meanwhile; it's remarkable, a Troll like you, who even has been given
: a Trolls-Award, has been managed here in so many years without yet
: being on the dead row. Anyone who wants to know the reason of this,
: should read up on "psychopathy diagnosis". You, yourself, should do
: it too. Though, both your IQ deficiency (your squeezed head) and
: your character deficiency disease won't suffice in giving your insight
: of your own sick personality.
:
:
:
:
:
: 

Paul,

We need not to do Net advocacy here.
The question is between Java and Net.
However, everybody is in my perception free  to try VB6 for that, you will 
not do that, Tom will not do that, Jeff will not do that, Dick will not do 
that, the OP will not do that, and I will not do that.

But if somebody wants to do that, whatever, it is done before and biased 
persons do that, they learn from their own mistakes (which others have done 
already before), there is much more which is easier with Net. That we have 
already told more times to this audience, I don't know if this Dutch phrase 
is used in Texas. "If you don't want to hear it, then you must feel it".

You or I are not responsible if somebody wants to do it.

The community in here has declared this newsgroup as only for VB before VB7. 
Now that it goes out of the Microsoft domain, I think that they have the 
right to do that.

JMO

Cor

"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@swspectrum.com> wrote in message 
news:njpd461bof5tii7rhhjhch3egubc8qq67v@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:12:39 -0400, "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote:
>
> �
> � "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@swspectrum.com> wrote in 
> message
> � news:6rob461vvgq95ji8se8gj7v5885fn75kc1@4ax.com...
> � : Yup, it's quite simple to create one in Visual Basic .NET. Unlike Java 
> or
> � VB 6.0, no wrappers,
> � : toolkits or ActiveX controls are required.
> �
> � I've written services in VB6 with NO wrappers of dependancies.  Nice 
> try.
> � Next.
>
> Not so fast. You didn't exactly expand on your implementation but there is 
> no native support in VB
> 6.0 for Windows Services. Without the aforementioned tools you would need 
> to resort to API function
> calls such as CreateThread. Anyone who has used or attempted to use this 
> API function call in VB 6.0
> knows that it's an unsupported implementation that is somewhat fragile as 
> a result of the
> thread-safe limitations built into the VB 6.0 threading model. So while 
> it's doable, you have to
> keep your fingers crossed with respect to reliability.
>
> .NET supports the development of Windows Services natively w/o having to 
> jump through hoops in order
> to get it to work.
>
>
> Paul
> ~~~~
> Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
> 

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message 
news:uF6kpALKLHA.4780@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
:
: Guys like you who write like this are direct responsible for many killed
: American soldiers who try to do a good job outside the USA.
:

So you're a coo-coo clock islamic extremist now?  Figures.  That would 
explain the ease at which you are brainwashed and your blind ability to 
follow whatever you are told my your masters without question. 
MSFT=Mohammed?  Maybe.

Anyhoo, it's statements like that, which is going to cause you to lose 
whatever American friends you think you have.  I'll be sure to pass your 
name and location info on to every friend I have in the military.  You think 
you're being harrassed for being a general douche bag now?  LOL!  Oh boy, 
you havn't seen anything yet.

Enjoy. 

"senn" <senn@homeplace&.fix> wrote in message 
news:uDKnIrLKLHA.4780@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
:
: True; a gay like him would shoot directly into a
: crawd of women and children. Psychopaths is short of normal
: feelings and blockings. He clearly showed this here and all over
: on the internet. The ones here still backing him up got to be short
: too.

blah, blah, blah

To anyone else who even remotely wastes their times reading this hate laden 
drivel, old cenn the hen is making a veiled threat:  Don't agree with me, 
defend me or in any other way act like you or I might be on friendly terms. 
Don't suggest I am helpful or have ever done a single thing for this 
community (even tho I've been here years longer than you, cenn the hen, 
bock-bock).  Doing so in any public manner will earn you the hen's rebuke, 
will cause him to review every post you've ever made and subject it to 
extreme scrutiy (you know, the same way IAB goes through a cop's 61 forms 
and DD5 forms looking for mistakes), and then finally for repeated public 
thrashings (assuming you can forge through his broken English). 
Unfortunately, our colleage Henning found this out the hard way (but when 
cenn the hen doesn't seem to grasp is that Henning DOESN'T CARE.)  So, save 
yourself the  :snicker:: misery gentlemen.  The last thing you want is the 
board butter cookie crying and throwing one of his legendary temper tantrums 
with your name attached to it (even tho the chump can't and won't use his 
own name, coward he is).  Because he will Google the piss out of you looking 
for the slightest little thing written about or against you for display. 
Sadly, this is what he does for some sick sexual thrill (ever seen the 
Family Guy episode where Michael Jackon blasts his crotch away so it's a 
bloody, meaty mess?  That's when the hen does with his information about 
people he hates.  Sad, eh?).  Even so, no one deserves to be mocked by an 
insignificant little butter cookie, as amusing as it is.

Ah, fuck it...open fire, that is of course if you're bored and have nothing 
better to do...you know, like wash your hair, trim your beards, clip 
toenails, anything more important.  :-)

Come to think of it, I have to sweep MY floors (versus that imaginary 
basement I am said to live it, even tho THERE ARE NO BASEMENTS IN FLORIDA, 
DUH!!!!) now, so here endeth my post.  More important things to do and all 
that.  <eg> 

"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@swspectrum.com> wrote in message 
news:njpd461bof5tii7rhhjhch3egubc8qq67v@4ax.com...
: .NET supports the development of Windows Services natively w/o having to 
jump through hoops in order
: to get it to work.

A bazillion MB in runtime files, along with the slugishness of dot next 
written apps is a pretty big hoop in and of itself.  Fail. 

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:54:20 +0200, "Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote:

� Paul,
� 
� We need not to do Net advocacy here.
� The question is between Java and Net.
� However, everybody is in my perception free  to try VB6 for that, you will 
� not do that, Tom will not do that, Jeff will not do that, Dick will not do 
� that, the OP will not do that, and I will not do that.
� 
� But if somebody wants to do that, whatever, it is done before and biased 
� persons do that, they learn from their own mistakes (which others have done 
� already before), there is much more which is easier with Net. That we have 
� already told more times to this audience, I don't know if this Dutch phrase 
� is used in Texas. "If you don't want to hear it, then you must feel it".
� 
� You or I are not responsible if somebody wants to do it.
� 
� The community in here has declared this newsgroup as only for VB before VB7. 
� Now that it goes out of the Microsoft domain, I think that they have the 
� right to do that.
� 
� JMO
� 
� Cor

Cor,

You misunderstand. I wasn't advocating, just responding to statements made by others. If I wanted to
advocate I would have answered the OP's question here rather than referring them to the Visual Basic
..NET forum.

And hey, stop capitulating to those who beat up on you in the newsgroup. ;-)


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:15:44 -0400, "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote:

� : .NET supports the development of Windows Services natively w/o having to 
� jump through hoops in order
� : to get it to work.
� 
� A bazillion MB in runtime files, along with the slugishness of dot next 
� written apps is a pretty big hoop in and of itself.  Fail. 

Actually it's a gazillion MB runtime and you would know that if you actually used .NET. ;-)

In any event, .NET Windows Services are quite snappy performance-wise.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in
news:OlLFFPCKLHA.5464@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl: 

> My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I
> never hear an English song.
> 
> Seems to me that by instance the song
> 
> "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
> 
> I had not the idea that the performers of this song where
> most hillbilly rednecks
> (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
> Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British
> in the US revolutionary war.

That was Red Coats....not Rednecks.

But you never answered my question about you claifying what 
you meant, so my original question is below.


>>
>>> There aint, you could also do it with VB6.
>>
>> Is an answer to what question ?
>>
>> This one ?............
>>
>> "I would like to know some good comparative points for
>> .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development."
>> ....... ? 
>>
>>
>> So there are no good points for using .Net over Java ?

Paul,

> You misunderstand. I wasn't advocating, just responding to statements made 
> by others. If I wanted to
> advocate I would have answered the OP's question here rather than 
> referring them to the Visual Basic
> .NET forum.
>
Like you probably know, I had seen that, that's why I was a little bit 
surprised that you start the debate, but I know the 
cattle...................................................

:-)

Cor 

DanS wrote :
> "Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in
> news:OlLFFPCKLHA.5464@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl: 
>
>> My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I
>> never hear an English song.
>> 
>> Seems to me that by instance the song
>> 
>> "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
>> 
>> I had not the idea that the performers of this song where
>> most hillbilly rednecks
>> (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
>> Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British
>> in the US revolutionary war.
>
> That was Red Coats....not Rednecks.
>
> But you never answered my question about you claifying what 
> you meant, so my original question is below.
>
>
>>> 
>>>> There aint, you could also do it with VB6.
>>> 
>>> Is an answer to what question ?
>>> 
>>> This one ?............
>>> 
>>> "I would like to know some good comparative points for
>>> .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development."
>>> ....... ? 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> So there are no good points for using .Net over Java ?

On a strictly language/runtime comparison I would say that one was as 
good as the other - though, I have no experience writing a service in 
Java.  Which is the reason I would pick .NET over Java - experience.

I know I could code a service in Java if asked.  I used to do quite a 
bit of Java programming, but, that was 8 years ago or so I would need 
to do some refreshing :)

-- 
Tom Shelton

Are you the OP or just challenging

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ain-t

http://dictionaries.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=aint*1+0&dict=A

Any guess what I mean with There aint

It seems that your dictionary is a little bit different from the cambridge 
dictionary, for American English and classic English.

But I understand now that in your perception that cambridge university is a 
redneck university, you are much to educated to been to such a low level 
university.

Cor

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote in message 
news:Xns9DBC72C1BBDA2thisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
> "Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in
> news:OlLFFPCKLHA.5464@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
>
>> My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that I
>> never hear an English song.
>>
>> Seems to me that by instance the song
>>
>> "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
>>
>> I had not the idea that the performers of this song where
>> most hillbilly rednecks
>> (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
>> Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the British
>> in the US revolutionary war.
>
> That was Red Coats....not Rednecks.
>
> But you never answered my question about you claifying what
> you meant, so my original question is below.
>
>
>>>
>>>> There aint, you could also do it with VB6.
>>>
>>> Is an answer to what question ?
>>>
>>> This one ?............
>>>
>>> "I would like to know some good comparative points for
>>> .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development."
>>> ....... ?
>>>
>>>
>>> So there are no good points for using .Net over Java ?
> 

After serious thinking Paul Clement wrote :
> practically everything is a wrapper. 

*whack*

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in
news:eLSjxGPKLHA.4240@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl: 

You shouldn't try to be a so smart just because you found 
something you think supports your point. It doesn't.


> Are you the OP or just challenging
> 
> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ain-t
> 
> http://dictionaries.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=aint*1+0&am
> p;dict=A 
> 
> Any guess what I mean with There aint
> 
> It seems that your dictionary is a little bit different
> from the cambridge dictionary, for American English and
> classic English. 
> 
> But I understand now that in your perception that cambridge
> university is a redneck university, you are much to
> educated to been to such a low level university.

Actually, if you would have looked at the definition you had 
posted....

ain't   short form /e?nt/ not standard

Do you know what NON_STANDARD means ?

And did you see the example ?!?! A retard wrote it.

"Can I have a fag?" "I ain't got none left."

Yes, a fag is a smoke in the UK, but "I ain't got none left." 
is complete retard speak.

.........I'll post the reply to the e-mail I just sent to 
Cambridge University pointing this out.

















> 
> Cor
> 
> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote
> in message 
> news:Xns9DBC72C1BBDA2thisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131... 
>> "Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in
>> news:OlLFFPCKLHA.5464@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> My English is know gibberish, but that does not mean that
>>> I never hear an English song.
>>>
>>> Seems to me that by instance the song
>>>
>>> "There aint no mountain high enough" is well know enough.
>>>
>>> I had not the idea that the performers of this song where
>>> most hillbilly rednecks
>>> (can be that I don't understand what you mean with it)
>>> Rednecks is in my perception the nick name for the
>>> British in the US revolutionary war.
>>
>> That was Red Coats....not Rednecks.
>>
>> But you never answered my question about you claifying
>> what you meant, so my original question is below.
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>> There aint, you could also do it with VB6.
>>>>
>>>> Is an answer to what question ?
>>>>
>>>> This one ?............
>>>>
>>>> "I would like to know some good comparative points for
>>>> .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development."
>>>> ....... ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So there are no good points for using .Net over Java ?
>> 
> 

Hi,

Karl E. Peterson schrieb:
> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 
>> 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some 
>> good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>> development.
> 
> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!  

<g>. Just did a little research on my XP machine. There is running a 
host of services (nearly all of them from MS), and none of them uses the 
..NET framework, at least now. Earlier I had installed the ATI graphics 
card software, which just shows a little tray icon to have instant 
access (by clicking it or by hot key) to the cards setup and option GUI. 
Boy, they used .NET and it did cost me literally hundreds of megs of ram 
just for this tray icon sitting there and waiting.

> Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.

At least zero dependency other than MSVBM60.dll ;-)

-- 
Ulrich Korndoerfer

VB tips, helpers, solutions -> http://www.prosource.de/Downloads/
MS Newsgruppen Alternativen -> http://www.prosource.de/ms-ng-umzug.html

Ulrich Korndoerfer brought next idea :
> Karl E. Peterson schrieb:
>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 and 
>>> much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service development.
>> 
>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!
>
> <g>. Just did a little research on my XP machine. There is running a host of 
> services (nearly all of them from MS), and none of them uses the .NET 
> framework, at least now.

Microsoft is *certainly* not stupid enough to write services with that 
POS.  (They only want their customers to be *that* stupid. <g>)

> Earlier I had installed the ATI graphics card 
> software, which just shows a little tray icon to have instant access (by 
> clicking it or by hot key) to the cards setup and option GUI. Boy, they used 
> .NET and it did cost me literally hundreds of megs of ram just for this tray 
> icon sitting there and waiting.

I've seen that very one.  Absolutely pathetic.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

| Earlier I had installed the ATI graphics
| card software, which just shows a little tray icon to have instant
| access (by clicking it or by hot key) to the cards setup and option GUI.
| Boy, they used .NET and it did cost me literally hundreds of megs of ram
| just for this tray icon sitting there and waiting.
|

   Why not just stop that service? Adjusting graphics is
not something that usually needs to be done once
things are set up.
  I have no .Net or Java -- on XP. (OpenOffice wants to
use Java, unfortunately, but I haven't installed it. I still
don't know exactly what functionality I'm missing, but it
doesn't seem to matter.)

  I've never come across anything I need or want that
requires .Net/Java. If I did I'd have to look for an alternative.
It's one thing to run .Net/Java applets server-side (where
they belong and where the support may be already installed).
It's another thing to write software for SOHo machines that
may need 300+ MB of support files installed in order to run.
There's just no excuse for that kind of stupidity and lack
of consideration. 

Mayayana schrieb:

> | Earlier I had installed the ATI graphics
> | card software, which just shows a little tray icon to have instant
> | access (by clicking it or by hot key) to the cards setup and option GUI.
> | Boy, they used .NET and it did cost me literally hundreds of megs of ram
> | just for this tray icon sitting there and waiting.
> |
> 
>    Why not just stop that service? Adjusting graphics is
> not something that usually needs to be done once
> things are set up.

Of course. And, if needed, a click on the GUIs exe restarted all. So in 
the very rare cases one would want to adjust things, a simple click on 
the GUIs exe would have brought up the setup GUI, and the tray icon and 
the service too.

The startup took quite a while of course (.NET typical), but for this 
rare cases then this might have been tolerable. However there was no 
simple means to get rid of this thing after it had been started. AFAIR I 
had to kill the processes using the task manager. And then for the few, 
seldomly used, options the GUI offered the overhead used was ridiculous. 
Formerly the old ATI tools were some hundred kiBs on disk, now 
(excluding the .NET framework!) lots of miBs. Loaded the old tool used 
few miBs of RAM, now hundreds of miBS. And it made me angry that I had 
to manually remove the automatic startup of the service on system start. 
What did those guys think delivering such crap?

It was not worth it and I deinstalled it.

-- 
Ulrich Korndoerfer

VB tips, helpers, solutions -> http://www.prosource.de/Downloads/
MS Newsgruppen Alternativen -> http://www.prosource.de/ms-ng-umzug.html

On 22/07/2010 00:51, Ulrich Korndoerfer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Karl E. Peterson schrieb:
>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service.
>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on
>>> .NET 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know
>>> some good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows
>>> service development.
>>
>> Use a *real* language to write services. Sheesh! This is why people's
>> machines crap out. Java or .NOT for a service?!?!? Get a f'n clue!
>
> <g>. Just did a little research on my XP machine. There is running a
> host of services (nearly all of them from MS), and none of them uses the
> .NET framework, at least now.

And probably equally many using Java :).

Most (native) MS services are working at a much lower level than is 
practical in .NET or Java hence using native code.

-- 
Dee Earley (dee.earley@icode.co.uk)
i-Catcher Development Team

iCode Systems

(Replies direct to my email address will be ignored.
Please reply to the group.)

Ulrich,

I understand your confusion, NT does not mean Net, NT is much older than Net 
and has not changed, you can even run outdated programs on it, so it is 
clear that Microsoft keeps the same services.

But the question is not Java or NT but Java or Net, the OP knows himself 
probably very good what is the difference between NT and Net (he even 
precise by Net 4, which is in fact a service pack while the older ones are 
native in all OS systems then Server 2003 (Net versions which existed at RTM 
time from those OS systems).

Cor

"Ulrich Korndoerfer" <ulrich_wants_nospam@prosource.de> wrote in message 
news:i2817a$e0k$1@online.de...
> Hi,
>
> Karl E. Peterson schrieb:
>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. Our 
>>> client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0 
>>> and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>> development.
>>
>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!
>
> <g>. Just did a little research on my XP machine. There is running a host 
> of services (nearly all of them from MS), and none of them uses the .NET 
> framework, at least now. Earlier I had installed the ATI graphics card 
> software, which just shows a little tray icon to have instant access (by 
> clicking it or by hot key) to the cards setup and option GUI. Boy, they 
> used .NET and it did cost me literally hundreds of megs of ram just for 
> this tray icon sitting there and waiting.
>
>> Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>
> At least zero dependency other than MSVBM60.dll ;-)
>
> -- 
> Ulrich Korndoerfer
>
> VB tips, helpers, solutions -> http://www.prosource.de/Downloads/
> MS Newsgruppen Alternativen -> http://www.prosource.de/ms-ng-umzug.html
> 

Guess what, we *all* know the difference... I can't see anyone, but you, 
refering to NT.

/Henning

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> skrev i meddelandet 
news:%23lYoEpXKLHA.6100@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Ulrich,
>
> I understand your confusion, NT does not mean Net, NT is much older than 
> Net and has not changed, you can even run outdated programs on it, so it 
> is clear that Microsoft keeps the same services.
>
> But the question is not Java or NT but Java or Net, the OP knows himself 
> probably very good what is the difference between NT and Net (he even 
> precise by Net 4, which is in fact a service pack while the older ones are 
> native in all OS systems then Server 2003 (Net versions which existed at 
> RTM time from those OS systems).
>
> Cor
>
> "Ulrich Korndoerfer" <ulrich_wants_nospam@prosource.de> wrote in message 
> news:i2817a$e0k$1@online.de...
>> Hi,
>>
>> Karl E. Peterson schrieb:
>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 
>>>> 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some good 
>>>> comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>> development.
>>>
>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!
>>
>> <g>. Just did a little research on my XP machine. There is running a host 
>> of services (nearly all of them from MS), and none of them uses the .NET 
>> framework, at least now. Earlier I had installed the ATI graphics card 
>> software, which just shows a little tray icon to have instant access (by 
>> clicking it or by hot key) to the cards setup and option GUI. Boy, they 
>> used .NET and it did cost me literally hundreds of megs of ram just for 
>> this tray icon sitting there and waiting.
>>
>>> Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>
>> At least zero dependency other than MSVBM60.dll ;-)
>>
>> -- 
>> Ulrich Korndoerfer
>>
>> VB tips, helpers, solutions -> http://www.prosource.de/Downloads/
>> MS Newsgruppen Alternativen -> http://www.prosource.de/ms-ng-umzug.html
>> 

I guess not,

Who would have the idea that an integrated NT services should be Net if he 
does not mix that up. Seems a little bit unlikely to me if you want to keep 
your system upwards compatible.

You should not fix what is not broken.

Also if you don't install Net you won't see Net service on an XP. XP is a 
system from before Server 2003 where the framework is not native.




"Henning" <computer_hero@coldmail.com> wrote in message 
news:i2948h$cog$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Guess what, we *all* know the difference... I can't see anyone, but you, 
> refering to NT.
>
> /Henning
>
> "Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> skrev i meddelandet 
> news:%23lYoEpXKLHA.6100@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Ulrich,
>>
>> I understand your confusion, NT does not mean Net, NT is much older than 
>> Net and has not changed, you can even run outdated programs on it, so it 
>> is clear that Microsoft keeps the same services.
>>
>> But the question is not Java or NT but Java or Net, the OP knows himself 
>> probably very good what is the difference between NT and Net (he even 
>> precise by Net 4, which is in fact a service pack while the older ones 
>> are native in all OS systems then Server 2003 (Net versions which existed 
>> at RTM time from those OS systems).
>>
>> Cor
>>
>> "Ulrich Korndoerfer" <ulrich_wants_nospam@prosource.de> wrote in message 
>> news:i2817a$e0k$1@online.de...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Karl E. Peterson schrieb:
>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop a windows service. 
>>>>> Our client want this to be develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 
>>>>> 4.0 and much more comfortable with .NET. I would like to know some 
>>>>> good comparative points for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service 
>>>>> development.
>>>>
>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh!  This is why people's 
>>>> machines crap out.  Java or .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue!
>>>
>>> <g>. Just did a little research on my XP machine. There is running a 
>>> host of services (nearly all of them from MS), and none of them uses the 
>>> .NET framework, at least now. Earlier I had installed the ATI graphics 
>>> card software, which just shows a little tray icon to have instant 
>>> access (by clicking it or by hot key) to the cards setup and option GUI. 
>>> Boy, they used .NET and it did cost me literally hundreds of megs of ram 
>>> just for this tray icon sitting there and waiting.
>>>
>>>> Try something with *zero* dependencies other than core Windows itself.
>>>
>>> At least zero dependency other than MSVBM60.dll ;-)
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Ulrich Korndoerfer
>>>
>>> VB tips, helpers, solutions -> http://www.prosource.de/Downloads/
>>> MS Newsgruppen Alternativen -> http://www.prosource.de/ms-ng-umzug.html
>>>
>
>
> 

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in
news:eLSjxGPKLHA.4240@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl: 

> Are you the OP or just challenging
> 
> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ain-t
> 
> http://dictionaries.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=aint*1+0&am
> p;dict=A 
> 
> Any guess what I mean with There aint
> 
> It seems that your dictionary is a little bit different
> from the cambridge dictionary, for American English and
> classic English. 
> 
> But I understand now that in your perception that cambridge
> university is a redneck university, you are much to
> educated to been to such a low level university.
> 
> Cor
> 

Here's the reply to the initial e-mail........

Report ID: 0068635

Dear xxx xxxxxxx,

Thank you for your email.

I can confirm Cambridge University Press is a publishing 
company separate to the University.

I have forwarded your comments to the developers.

I am sorry for any inconvenience caused.

Kind regards

xxxxx xxxxx
Customer Services Representative
Online Publications
Cambridge University Press
Shaftesbury Road
Cambridge, CB2 8RU

Email: onlinepublications@cambridge.org
Tel: 01223 326098
Fax: 01223 325152
------------------------------------------------

So to start, the online dictionary you linked is a completely 
separate entity from the university.

I think you are being stubborn.  The dependency already is there -- it is 
part of the OS, at least for this (.NET) discussion.  It certainly doesn't 
affect performance, except on the boundary, where C/C++ are appropriate. 
I've never deployed the .NET Framework.  The Java runtime argument exists, 
but not .NET.

Dick

-- 
Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue 
Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net 
Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th 
Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 
2006. 

|I think you are being stubborn.  The dependency already is there -- it is
| part of the OS, at least for this (.NET) discussion.  It certainly doesn't
| affect performance, except on the boundary, where C/C++ are appropriate.
| I've never deployed the .NET Framework.  The Java runtime argument exists,
| but not .NET.

  Speak for yourself. To assume that hundreds
of MB of dependencies are something that you
can just consider to be part of the OS is
irresponsible at best. It might be true for your
specific situation, but not for many.

  To assume that everyone can afford to run such
unnecessary bloat in RAM, or wants to, is also an
irresponsible assumption.

   Mark Russinovich speculated half-jokingly, when
..Net was in its early days, that .Net bloat was so
extreme one had to wonder whether MS was investing
in RAM companies. Sure enough, in the intervening
years, with no notable changes to the functionality
of Windows, the basic reassonable RAM level has
gone from about 256MB to about 4GB. 

In my perception it was about 16K to 4Tb and strange enough did the price 
for that not change.

(I am not writing about toy computers, but real ones)

"Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote in message 
news:i29qls$134$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> |I think you are being stubborn.  The dependency already is there -- it is
> | part of the OS, at least for this (.NET) discussion.  It certainly 
> doesn't
> | affect performance, except on the boundary, where C/C++ are appropriate.
> | I've never deployed the .NET Framework.  The Java runtime argument 
> exists,
> | but not .NET.
>
>  Speak for yourself. To assume that hundreds
> of MB of dependencies are something that you
> can just consider to be part of the OS is
> irresponsible at best. It might be true for your
> specific situation, but not for many.
>
>  To assume that everyone can afford to run such
> unnecessary bloat in RAM, or wants to, is also an
> irresponsible assumption.
>
>   Mark Russinovich speculated half-jokingly, when
> .Net was in its early days, that .Net bloat was so
> extreme one had to wonder whether MS was investing
> in RAM companies. Sure enough, in the intervening
> years, with no notable changes to the functionality
> of Windows, the basic reassonable RAM level has
> gone from about 256MB to about 4GB.
>
>
> 

"Henning" <computer_hero@coldmail.com> wrote in
news:i252ua$9uf$1@news.eternal-september.org: 

> 
> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i
> meddelandet news:i251q4$46c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Henning presented the following explanation :
>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i
>>> meddelandet 
>>> news:i24t0o$e74$1@news.eternal-september.org... 
>>>> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>>>>> Tom Shelton wrote :
>>>>>> Henning explained on 7/20/2010 :
>>>>>>> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> skrev i
>>>>>>> meddelandet 
>>>>>>> news:i24ps8$v7v$1@news.eternal-september.org... 
>>>>>>>> Henning was thinking very hard :
>>>>>>>>> "Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> skrev i
>>>>>>>>> meddelandet 
>>>>>>>>> news:i24hc0$l0q$1@news.eternal-september.org... 
>>>>>>>>>> After serious thinking Abhishek wrote :
>>>>>>>>>>> We have a requirement, in this we need to develop
>>>>>>>>>>> a windows service. Our client want this to be
>>>>>>>>>>> develop in Java, we are emphasising on .NET 4.0
>>>>>>>>>>> and much more comfortable with .NET. I 
>>>>>>>>>>> would like to know some good comparative points
>>>>>>>>>>> for .NET 4.0 over Java in windows service
>>>>>>>>>>> development. 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Use a *real* language to write services.  Sheesh! 
>>>>>>>>>> This is why people's machines crap out.  Java or
>>>>>>>>>> .NOT for a service?!?!?  Get a f'n clue! Try
>>>>>>>>>> something with *zero* dependencies other than core
>>>>>>>>>> Windows itself.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- .NET: It's About Trust!
>>>>>>>>>> http://vfred.mvps.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Like VB6 ;)
>>>>>>>>> I did it... 42K .exe, the runtime is already there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As is the .NET runtime on most windows servers...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No big deal, but it isn't stated to be run on a
>>>>>>> server. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Henning
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As it is on most desktops in the world as well....
>>>>>
>>>>> That too, is incorrect.
>>>>
>>>> You have numbers to back that up?  It's a base part of
>>>> the OS from XPSP3 on....  And part of many applications,
>>>> for instance driver configuration packages.
>>>>
>>>> -- Tom Shelton
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hope that is not the case, just installed SP3 on my so
>>> far .netfree computer. Any certain file to look for?
>>> If not, then make that maybe Vista and on.
>>>
>>> /Henning
>>
>> You're right - I had forgoten that sp3 didn't include it. 
>> Vista up does. XP makes it part of windows update.  Still,
>> I've not come accross many machines while helping out
>> friends and neighbors that didn't have it :) 
>>
>> -- 
>> Tom Shelton
>>
>>
> Not in any update yet, must be if it is installed.
> 
> Was that before or after helping :))

I don't think it matters......the non-computer-literate 
segment will try to install anything on their PCs, and that 
includes anything else needed to run 'anything', so on a PC 
that didn;t come with it, that's how it most likely got there.

on 7/22/2010, DickGrier supposed :
> I think you are being stubborn. 

Heh, well, that has been known to happen, sure.

> The dependency already is there -- it is 
> part of the OS, at least for this (.NET) discussion. 

No it's not.  Been a long time since you ran XP, maybe?  The great bulk 
of machines out there, especially in the Enterprise, are still running 
it and will be for some time to come.  The various .NET frameworks all 
need to be specifically installed on that platform, and in many 
Enterprise situations (again) they're not.  There are lots of IT 
departments that are busy enough just patching all the actual security 
holes already present, to bother implementing a push on optional bloat.

> It certainly doesn't affect performance, except on the boundary, 
> where C/C++ are appropriate. 

I guess I do have a tendency to see drivers and services as *** by 
definition *** on the boundary, yeah.  They must be there, so they 
*must* be as optimized as any piece of code on the box.  If a service 
isn't written to those standards, it doesn't deserve to be installed.

> I've never deployed the .NET Framework. 

Me either.  ;-)

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Ulrich Korndoerfer pretended :
> It was not worth it and I deinstalled it.

<AOL>

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
> on 7/22/2010, DickGrier supposed :
>> I think you are being stubborn.
>
> Heh, well, that has been known to happen, sure.
>
>> The dependency already is there -- it is part of the OS, at least for this 
>> (.NET) discussion.
>
> No it's not.  Been a long time since you ran XP, maybe?  The great bulk of 
> machines out there, especially in the Enterprise, are still running it and 
> will be for some time to come.  The various .NET frameworks all need to be 
> specifically installed on that platform, and in many Enterprise situations 
> (again) they're not.  There are lots of IT departments that are busy enough 
> just patching all the actual security holes already present, to bother 
> implementing a push on optional bloat.
>

And that's where I think your wrong...   Especially in Enterprise 
situations.  I work with a company that has many 10's of thousand 
employees all over the world - our standard xp image contains the .net 
framework.

Before this job I worked for a company that serviced the timeshare, 
hotel, and condo markets.  They had some very large customers, some of 
whom I know you know.  Again, 10's of thousands of users on xp 
machines.

..NET is used in to many enterprise situations for that to be the 
case....

Seriously, unless you can back that up with hard numbers, I'm going to 
call BS :)

-- 
Tom Shelton

Tom Shelton explained on 7/22/2010 :
> Karl E. Peterson expressed precisely :
>> on 7/22/2010, DickGrier supposed :
>>> I think you are being stubborn.
>>
>> Heh, well, that has been known to happen, sure.
>>
>>> The dependency already is there -- it is part of the OS, at least for this 
>>> (.NET) discussion.
>>
>> No it's not.  Been a long time since you ran XP, maybe?  The great bulk of 
>> machines out there, especially in the Enterprise, are still running it and 
>> will be for some time to come.  The various .NET frameworks all need to be 
>> specifically installed on that platform, and in many Enterprise situations 
>> (again) they're not.  There are lots of IT departments that are busy enough 
>> just patching all the actual security holes already present, to bother 
>> implementing a push on optional bloat.
>>
>
> And that's where I think your wrong...   Especially in Enterprise situations. 
>  I work with a company that has many 10's of thousand employees all over the 
> world - our standard xp image contains the .net framework.
>
> Before this job I worked for a company that serviced the timeshare, hotel, 
> and condo markets.  They had some very large customers, some of whom I know 
> you know.  Again, 10's of thousands of users on xp machines.
>
> .NET is used in to many enterprise situations for that to be the case....
>
> Seriously, unless you can back that up with hard numbers, I'm going to call 
> BS :)

Well, I also work with some large orgs that may "get around to" 
including a new framework in their XP image(s) several years after it 
ships.

It's never pushed out as part of, say, Patch Tuesdays, though.

So that leaves folks getting an install when they get a new machine, or 
they toast their current one to the point it needs to be re-flattened.  
And at that, they're likely not getting the most recent.

I suppose if you have an IT staff actively building crap with it, 
that'd be different.  Lacking such a hardcore MSFT affiliation, though, 
there's really no need for them to keep up with the framework-du-jour.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@exmvps.org> wrote in message 
news:i2a5pi$3qi$1@news.eternal-september.org...
: on 7/22/2010, DickGrier supposed :
: > I think you are being stubborn.
:
: Heh, well, that has been known to happen, sure.
:
: > The dependency already is there -- it is
: > part of the OS, at least for this (.NET) discussion.
:
: No it's not.  Been a long time since you ran XP, maybe?  The great bulk
: of machines out there, especially in the Enterprise, are still running
: it and will be for some time to come.  The various .NET frameworks all
: need to be specifically installed on that platform, and in many
: Enterprise situations (again) they're not.  There are lots of IT
: departments that are busy enough just patching all the actual security
: holes already present, to bother implementing a push on optional bloat.
:
: > It certainly doesn't affect performance, except on the boundary,
: > where C/C++ are appropriate.
:
: I guess I do have a tendency to see drivers and services as *** by
: definition *** on the boundary, yeah.  They must be there, so they
: *must* be as optimized as any piece of code on the box.  If a service
: isn't written to those standards, it doesn't deserve to be installed.
:
: > I've never deployed the .NET Framework.
:
: Me either.  ;-)

It looks like old Dick has gone over to the dark side as well.  It's not the 
first time I've gently reminded him that dot next answers are inappropriate 
here, only to be ignored.  Guess it's time to make more room in the 
killfile.  Sad. 

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:09:18 -0400, "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote:

� : I guess I do have a tendency to see drivers and services as *** by
� : definition *** on the boundary, yeah.  They must be there, so they
� : *must* be as optimized as any piece of code on the box.  If a service
� : isn't written to those standards, it doesn't deserve to be installed.
� :
� : > I've never deployed the .NET Framework.
� :
� : Me either.  ;-)
� 
� It looks like old Dick has gone over to the dark side as well.  It's not the 
� first time I've gently reminded him that dot next answers are inappropriate 
� here, only to be ignored.  Guess it's time to make more room in the 
� killfile.  Sad. 

You were referring to Karl's inappropriate response that triggered Dick's correcting reply right?
Or, are you operating with your head up your "dark side"?


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

Of course, I'm speaking for myself.  For whom else should I be speaking?

Karl is one of the few here who has been using VB longer than I. Perhaps, 
even longer than you.  Karl and I have been friends for almost 20 years.

Facts are facts.  Microsoft decides what is part and parcel to the OS, not 
you nor I.  Try running a Windows PC without the .NET framework installed, 
and see what application set you get, and what is cannot be used.  Then, 
decide if you really want to continue to use Windows, of move somewhere else 
(where there are equivalent dependencies -- this is the way of the world). 
Again, IMO.

Here is a suggestion... Go to Control Panel and uninstall all versions of 
the .NET framework that you find.  Have you done that?

Dick

-- 
Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue 
Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net 
Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th 
Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 
2006. 

No, I use is occasionally.  Take a look at your XP(s).  Do you have SP3 
installed?  Is the .NET framework present?  If not, there is something funny 
going on.

-- 
Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue 
Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net 
Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th 
Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 
2006. 

Kevin Provance used his keyboard to write :
> It looks like old Dick has gone over to the dark side as well.  It's not the 
> first time I've gently reminded him that dot next answers are inappropriate 
> here, only to be ignored.  Guess it's time to make more room in the 
> killfile.  Sad. 

It'd be sad to ignore his input, actually.  In the areas he specializes 
in, I know of no superior.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Fortunatly there is none, and I have all the apps I need.

/Henning

"DickGrier" <dick_grierNOSPAM@msn.com> skrev i meddelandet 
news:OG2L33nKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Of course, I'm speaking for myself.  For whom else should I be speaking?
>
> Karl is one of the few here who has been using VB longer than I. Perhaps, 
> even longer than you.  Karl and I have been friends for almost 20 years.
>
> Facts are facts.  Microsoft decides what is part and parcel to the OS, not 
> you nor I.  Try running a Windows PC without the .NET framework installed, 
> and see what application set you get, and what is cannot be used.  Then, 
> decide if you really want to continue to use Windows, of move somewhere 
> else (where there are equivalent dependencies -- this is the way of the 
> world). Again, IMO.
>
> Here is a suggestion... Go to Control Panel and uninstall all versions of 
> the .NET framework that you find.  Have you done that?
>
> Dick
>
> -- 
> Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue 
> Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net 
> Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th 
> Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 
> 2006. 

Why is that? I have SP3, and no .net.

/Henning

"DickGrier" <dick_grierNOSPAM@msn.com> skrev i meddelandet 
news:%23V03F5nKLHA.4312@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> No, I use is occasionally.  Take a look at your XP(s).  Do you have SP3 
> installed?  Is the .NET framework present?  If not, there is something 
> funny going on.
>
> -- 
> Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue 
> Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net 
> Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th 
> Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 
> 2006. 

DickGrier pretended :
> No, I use is occasionally.  Take a look at your XP(s).  Do you have SP3 
> installed?  Is the .NET framework present?  If not, there is something funny 
> going on.

..NET is not a part of XP/SP3.  It's an optional Windows Update item.  
Here's a couple screenshots of a fairly clean XPMode VM, used just to 
build VB6 stuff:

   http://www.mvps.org/temp/CleanXP-SP3a.gif
   http://www.mvps.org/temp/CleanXP-SP3b.gif

This was just downloaded and built a couple-few months ago.  For the 
most part, it's up to date on updates.

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@swspectrum.com> wrote in message 
news:5b3j46dcm55bnjjlc5c9510a95rm1sbraf@4ax.com...
: You were referring to Karl's inappropriate response that triggered Dick's 
correcting reply right?
: Or, are you operating with your head up your "dark side"?

I'm sorry, why are you here again?  It's certainly not to help with classic 
vb questions?

Again you need reminding, you don't get dingleballs for posting your 
bullshit here, little boy.

-- 
Customer Hatred Knows No Bounds at MSFT
Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org
ClassicVB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc

Bawwk!  Paulie want a dingleball, bawwk! 

| Of course, I'm speaking for myself.  For whom else should I be speaking?
|

You said: "I think you are being stubborn.
The dependency already is there" ..."I've never
deployed the .Net framework."

  It's there in your world, but not in everyone's. I wouldn't
have spoken up if you had said that it's not an issue *for you*.
But you didn't. You just said it's not an issue. Tom does the
same thing. People who work in corporate environments get
used to their limited world and then make general statements
that simply don't apply to SOHo PCs, or even to all corporate
situations.

|Try running a Windows PC without the .NET framework installed,
| and see what application set you get, and what is cannot be used.  Then,
| decide if you really want to continue to use Windows, of move somewhere 
else
| (where there are equivalent dependencies -- this is the way of the world).
| Again, IMO.
|

   As I said in an earlier post, I don't have any .Net or
Java installed. I have OpenOffice installed, but I've
installed the no-Java version. Whatever is missing is not
something I need. (I'm hoping the OO people will eventually
get their act together and clean out the Java dependency
before I do need it.)

  What would I need .Net for? Paint.Net? Symantec bloatware?
I'm looking at this not just from the point of view of someone
using VB, but also as a non-corporate end-user. On the
infrequent occasions when I look for software and find that
something needs .Net, I just keep looking. It doesn't
make sense to install 70-300+ MB of bloat with possible security
issues down the line, just to use a single program.
(And if it was written in .Net that implies either 1] the author
is an MS partner writing extreme bloat or 2] the author is
a beginner who probably doesn't even know about the framework
requirement.)

  Among friends and family, most are using XP. Some
may have .Net installed. I don't know of anyone who
does offhand. If I were writing .Net software for public
release, therefore, I'd have to assume that the runtime
may need to be installed, especially if I were using greater
than .Net 2. (At my own website, which gets a lot of
tweakers and corporate admins looking for scripts, most
people using IE have .Net 3.5 installed. But a fair number
have only .Net 2. Very few have .Net 4. .Net v. 2 is 5 years
old now. Are all you DotNettiacs just stopping with the
2005 version? That might help explain why you don't think
the framework needs to be installed.)

| Here is a suggestion... Go to Control Panel and uninstall all versions of
| the .NET framework that you find.  Have you done that?
|

  No need. It's already clean. :)
  You really are living in an isolated environment if you
think that Windows isn't worth using without .Net, or that
the framwork dependency is a non-issue.

   Looking at my installed software, on XP SP3, I've got VS6,
several editors, OO, Paint Shop Pro 5, GIMP, IrfanView, ImgBurn,
DVD Flick, some ZIP programs, hex editors, HTML Help
Workshop, VLC Media Player, Foxit, OCR software, Filezilla,
Firefox, K-Meleon, a firewall, a downloader program for large
files, several Sysinternals programs, and probably a dozen
other small utilities. (Defragger, installer unpackers, TweakUI,
etc.)
....None of them needs .Net.

  I also have a very good boot manager/disk imager/partition utility
called BootIt. I bought it when I needed to upgrade from Partition
Magic/Drive Image. It fits on a floppy and cost me $35. The
DorNettified Drive Image costs more, is over 40 MB, and does
far less than BootIt. (Imagine trying to write something low-level
like that in .Net?! :) 

You may be right.  I have only one "clean" XP machine (no development 
environments of any kind installed) and it has .NET.  However, it may have 
been installed as an option that I thought was part of SP3.  Anyway (IMO) 
the "baggage" is trivial.  Note, I said:  IMO.

Actually, I do have one application installed on that machine that may or 
may not be .NET.  I've never thought to see if that is so.

Dick

-- 
Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue 
Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net 
Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th 
Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 
2006. 

Mayayana submitted this idea :
>> Of course, I'm speaking for myself.  For whom else should I be speaking?
>> 
>
> You said: "I think you are being stubborn.
> The dependency already is there" ..."I've never
> deployed the .Net framework."
>
>   It's there in your world, but not in everyone's. I wouldn't
> have spoken up if you had said that it's not an issue *for you*.
> But you didn't. You just said it's not an issue. Tom does the
> same thing. People who work in corporate environments get
> used to their limited world and then make general statements
> that simply don't apply to SOHo PCs, or even to all corporate
> situations.
>

Oh, enlighten us great Mayayana...  Shower us with your wisdom and 
knowledge that we may share your vision...

In case you didn't detect that, the above was sarcasam.  I sure would 
like to know what makes you think you are the one with the wide 
perspective.  From what I can see, you are small time independant 
software vender.  Nothing wrong with that, I in fact admire you for 
having the courage to make a go of it - and to succeed at it.  But, I 
don't exactly think that gives you some extra special view of the 
software industry beyond maybe your limited customer base.  In fact, 
reading your website and some of your rants here - especially regarding 
security - proves to me the exact opposite.

>> Try running a Windows PC without the .NET framework installed,
>> and see what application set you get, and what is cannot be used.  Then,
>> decide if you really want to continue to use Windows, of move somewhere  
>> else (where there are equivalent dependencies -- this is the way of the 
>> world). Again, IMO.
>> 
>
>    As I said in an earlier post, I don't have any .Net or
> Java installed. I have OpenOffice installed, but I've
> installed the no-Java version. Whatever is missing is not
> something I need. (I'm hoping the OO people will eventually
> get their act together and clean out the Java dependency
> before I do need it.)
>

It will not be removed.  It is the basis for OOo's automation api.  
Besides, Java came from Sun, Start Office came from Sun, OOo comes from 
the Star Office code base.  So, dream on.

>   What would I need .Net for? Paint.Net? Symantec bloatware?
> I'm looking at this not just from the point of view of someone
> using VB, but also as a non-corporate end-user. On the
> infrequent occasions when I look for software and find that
> something needs .Net, I just keep looking. It doesn't
> make sense to install 70-300+ MB of bloat with possible security
> issues down the line, just to use a single program.
> (And if it was written in .Net that implies either 1] the author
> is an MS partner writing extreme bloat or 2] the author is
> a beginner who probably doesn't even know about the framework
> requirement.)
>

Again with the arrogance - and from a VB developer no less.  You are 
sounding just like those C/C++ guys that used to down VB all the time.

>   Among friends and family, most are using XP. Some
> may have .Net installed. I don't know of anyone who
> does offhand.

Of course not, how would you unless you were to inspect there 
machine's.  In fact, I'm sure most of them wouldn't know either - or 
actually care.

But, my suspicion is that, if you were to inspect those machines you 
would find that many of them DID already have it installed.

> If I were writing .Net software for public
> release, therefore, I'd have to assume that the runtime
> may need to be installed, 

Of course, just like it used to be practice to assume the vb runtime be 
installed... Duh.  It's part of the standard installer to check and run 
the .NET installer boot strapper.

> especially if I were using greater
> than .Net 2. 

Greater then 2.0 - you will likely have to install yes.

> (At my own website, which gets a lot of
> tweakers and corporate admins looking for scripts, most
> people using IE have .Net 3.5 installed. 

Told ya.

> But a fair number
> have only .Net 2. 

Yep.

> Very few have .Net 4. 

of course, it was just released.

> .Net v. 2 is 5 years
> old now. Are all you DotNettiacs just stopping with the
> 2005 version? 

No.  VS2008 and VS2010 let you target the 2.0 runtime.  In fact, .NET 
3.0 and 3.5 are simply extensions to the 2.0 libraries.  They all use 
the same core runtimer.  .NET 4, is the first new runtime since 2.0.

Of course, if you target 2.0 you can't use some of the new libraries - 
those make up WPF, WCF, WF, and Linq stuff.  But, you can still use all 
of the new language features.

> That might help explain why you don't think
> the framework needs to be installed.)
>
>> Here is a suggestion... Go to Control Panel and uninstall all versions of
>> the .NET framework that you find.  Have you done that?
>> 
>
>   No need. It's already clean. :)
>   You really are living in an isolated environment if you
> think that Windows isn't worth using without .Net, or that
> the framwork dependency is a non-issue.
>

It is a non-issue.  For most people it's about a 5 minute deal to 
isntall over the internet.  And, the new client profile starting with 
3.5 sp1 is something like a 28MB install package.

But go ahead, keep exagerating the size.  It's the lamest argument you 
have on a modern PC, but, OK.

>    Looking at my installed software, on XP SP3, I've got VS6,
> several editors, OO, Paint Shop Pro 5, GIMP, IrfanView, ImgBurn,
> DVD Flick, some ZIP programs, hex editors, HTML Help
> Workshop, VLC Media Player, Foxit, OCR software, Filezilla,
> Firefox, K-Meleon, a firewall, a downloader program for large
> files, several Sysinternals programs, and probably a dozen
> other small utilities. (Defragger, installer unpackers, TweakUI,
> etc.)
> ...None of them needs .Net.
>

Good.

>   I also have a very good boot manager/disk imager/partition utility
> called BootIt. I bought it when I needed to upgrade from Partition
> Magic/Drive Image. It fits on a floppy and cost me $35. The
> DorNettified Drive Image costs more, is over 40 MB, and does
> far less than BootIt. (Imagine trying to write something low-level
> like that in .Net?! :) 

LOL...  I guarentee you that it would be easier to write something low 
level like that in .NET then VB.CLASSIC.

-- 
Tom Shelton

| >   It's there in your world, but not in everyone's. I wouldn't
| > have spoken up if you had said that it's not an issue *for you*.
| > But you didn't. You just said it's not an issue. Tom does the
| > same thing. People who work in corporate environments get
| > used to their limited world and then make general statements
| > that simply don't apply to SOHo PCs, or even to all corporate
| > situations.
| >

| I sure would
| like to know what makes you think you are the one with the wide
| perspective.

  I make no claims. Perhaps you could read what I
actually wrote (above). It seems clear enought to me.

|> OpenOffice installed...Java dependency
|
| It will not be removed.  It is the basis for OOo's automation api.

  Ah. Thanks. I wondered about that. Hopefully
I'll never need to install it.

Mayayana brought next idea :
>>>   It's there in your world, but not in everyone's. I wouldn't
>>> have spoken up if you had said that it's not an issue *for you*.
>>> But you didn't. You just said it's not an issue. Tom does the
>>> same thing. People who work in corporate environments get
>>> used to their limited world and then make general statements
>>> that simply don't apply to SOHo PCs, or even to all corporate
>>> situations.
>>> 
>
>> I sure would
>> like to know what makes you think you are the one with the wide
>> perspective.
>
>   I make no claims. Perhaps you could read what I
> actually wrote (above). It seems clear enought to me.
>

I have read it... You accuse Dick and I of making statements based on a 
narrow perspective.  Are you admiting here that you do the same?

-- 
Tom Shelton

"DickGrier" <dick_grierNOSPAM@msn.com> skrev i meddelandet 
news:%23f72o10KLHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> You may be right.  I have only one "clean" XP machine (no development 
> environments of any kind installed) and it has .NET.  However, it may have 
> been installed as an option that I thought was part of SP3.  Anyway (IMO) 
> the "baggage" is trivial.  Note, I said:  IMO.
>
> Actually, I do have one application installed on that machine that may or 
> may not be .NET.  I've never thought to see if that is so.
>
> Dick
>
> -- 
> Richard Grier, Consultant, Hard & Software 12962 West Louisiana Avenue 
> Lakewood, CO 80228 303-986-2179 (voice) Homepage: www.hardandsoftware.net 
> Author of Visual Basic Programmer's Guide to Serial Communications, 4th 
> Edition ISBN 1-890422-28-2 (391 pages) published July 2004, Revised July 
> 2006.

I not only may be right, I am right!
Not important what you have or not, XP SP3 does *not* include the flamework!

Also belive me or not, but there isn't one single app I'm missing.

/Henning

"Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> skrev i meddelelsen 
news:i2fsp0$el4$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@comcast.invalid> wrote in message
> news:i2fi1e$6k9$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> : Kevin Provance presented the following explanation :
> : > Judge not Skelton, lest ye be judged thyself.  Oh wait...you can't
> handle
> : > that, can you?
> : >
> :
> : Whatever, ass.
>
> Ah yes, the response beaten trolls give when they have no real comeback.
>
> : > What was it I told paulie about you evangelists spouting off your
> bullshit
> : > here, making it a shithole worse than mexico?
> : >
> :
> : LOL... Prove me wrong, ass.  If I'm so full of it...
>
> I don't have to, the fact thqat you are here beating yourself off with all
> things dot next tells all.  And yes, you are so full of it.  Thanks for
> finally admitting it.  Finally admitting you are here just to be a troll 
> is
> the first step towards saving yourself.  The next is to go away and never
> come back.  Stay with your own dumb-dumbs over in the dingleball forum.
>
> : What I am pretty sure of, Kevin, is that I have forgotten more about it
> : then you have probably ever known.
>
> LMAO!!!  That I know is you spanking to yourself in the mirror, wishing 
> you
> were half the man and programmer I am.  If you ask nicely, I'm sure cenn 
> the
> henn and vicki will let you join in their circle jerk of those obsessed 
> with
> me.  You just can't get me out of your head, can you?  I revel in the fact
> that I'm wedged in there just enough to keep you coming back for more 
> abuse,
> since your clearly not here for any other reason.
>
> You sir, are my bitch.  Now go take your place next to all the others and 
> do
> not speak unless spoken to, bitch.
>


Go find or pick-up that rope. Do it now, psycho-Troll!.
Get done with it !.
I told you why!.
Now again:

A gayTroll like you, who clearly told us of suffering
hate to womens, have no justice of living on this
earth. Hate against womens is against fundamentals
of life itself.

Below; a copy of your confession to the whole world.
The very serious is that your confession is real:

Birthday:  November 04, 1971
Occupation:  20/21 Century Backstep
Advisor
Website:  www.chronos.ws
Marital Status:  Single Again
No. of Children:  1
From C. Kevin:
Um, lessee....got into computers in the early 90's
when that was the big new thing.  Wrote some software
the became popular, made a bunch of money, got married
too young which did produce one awesome son.
Got divorced too soon (not my doing, women are just plain evil),
went into seclusion, developed some new theories in
inter-dimensional communication and was eventually
recruited by Chronos Technologies.  Now I advise
them on current events for future studies which
enable chrononauts a less paradoxical backstep
into the 21st century.  Eventually I will become
a mentor in turn of the century history, teaching
in the last 22nd century to most of your grandkids.
Take that Class of '89.

Oh yeah, pictures to come later,
should anyone really care. 

"se" <se@onfakeplace&.atbigfix> wrote in message 
news:i2gqrq$pli$1@news.eternal-september.org...

> Newsgroups always been knowned also as
> a play-room for psychopaths

You mean a place where people can speak their minds, as opposed to a place 
like the Micro$oft forums where people are coerced into saying only what 
pleases Micro$oft! You're a little pussy, Se (or whatever your real name is 
under the name you are hiding behind). You're a little Micro$oft pussy cat. 
Go lick your master's arse on one of his forums. In fact on such a forum you 
can post a little picture of yourself licking his arse. He'd like that. You 
would probably get some of those little Micro$oft boy scout forum badges for 
it.

The Tom Shelton person you are defending has already publicly admitted that 
he has long abandoned VB Classic, and he did so again just yesterday, and he 
is clearly here purely to cause trouble. So WTF are you defending him? The 
implication is that you also are here purely to cause trouble, so why don't 
you just fuck off.

Mike

 

"Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> skrev i en meddelelse 
news:i2hbj0$i0c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> Rut roh, did the board henn stick his chicken neck back in again?  Careful
> what you say Mike...and whiff of remotely defending me or my position will
> get you labeled a psychopath - and a load of other names I'm sure I missed
> since killfiling the little bitch.
>
> Even so, it would have read something like:  Bock, bock-bock, cluck-cluck.
> Bock, buh-bock!  Easier to read then his mangling of the English language.
> <g>
>


The above was said by a whipper-snapper.
Just look-up the photo posted on ms-newsserver
and see it.

"se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> wrote in message 
news:i2himd$qjr$1@news.eternal-september.org...

> Beaten-up by your papa 60 years ago, and still
> needs your puddle-pot, right?.

You really are a dick brain, se, or whatever your real name is. WTF you get 
from making things up is anyone's guess, but I suppose pretending to know 
things makes up in some small way for your lack of actual knowledge, at 
least in your own cluttered up little head. As I've said before, you are 
about as useful here as a chocolate teapot, a waste of good bandwidth.

Mike

"Mike Williams" <Mike@WhiskyAndCoke.com> skrev i en meddelelse 
news:i2houo$7ho$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> "se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> wrote in message 
> news:i2himd$qjr$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> Beaten-up by your papa 60 years ago, and still
>> needs your puddle-pot, right?.
>
> You really are a dick brain, se, or whatever your real name is. WTF you 
> get from making things up is anyone's guess, but I suppose pretending to 
> know things makes up in some small way for your lack of actual knowledge, 
> at least in your own cluttered up little head. As I've said before, you 
> are about as useful here as a chocolate teapot, a waste of good bandwidth.
>
> Mike
>
>

"Mike Williams" <Mike@WhiskyAndCoke.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:d2s34v$43i$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...

> Well, you seem to have invented some new stuff there, Ako! The only things 
> I used to work on in my "electronic days" (admittedly some years ago!) 
> that had collectors and emitters were standard transistors. The FET (Field 
> Effect Transistors) that you mention have three connections called 
> "Drain", "Source" and "Gate". By the way, I do know quite a bit about 
> FETs, so don't try to kid me, AQko! You're not on the whisky and Coke� are 
> you, by any chance!
>
> Mike

Yeah, I see. you don't know anything, but just pretending
to know. Been a taxi-driver plying with building door bells
in your spare time. As you see of your 5 year old thread above,
your dick brain showed lack of actual knowledge already
that far back.
http://www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irg4p254s.pdf
This can't give you other than complexes of inferiority.

Want to see your own "puddle-pot post" from 5 years back.
I can find it !. Do you remember:
Drunken, weeping of missing your puddle-pot !.
You have it all Mike; that's why it never
came to more than a "driver" and no friends according to
your own awareness; the snipe of yours below. Where you
state that you lost your friends. You should really correct
this; "You never had friends". The same is true for the two
other, the Award-Master-Troll of the year and the
"hen (Henning)".

> In fact in my previous postings I have specifically invited others here in 
> the group to download your code from your own provided link and to check 
> it out with those size of bitmaps on their own machines. I cannot be 
> fairer than that. Unfortunately (mostly through my own fault I will admit, 
> because of my overly aggressive arguments with micro$oft and with dotnet 
> evangelists) I seem to have run out of friends here in the group over the 
> last couple of years and so nobody has yet responded (and my enemies are 
> hardly likely to report a crash!), but hopefully some people will respond 
> eventually.

> Mike 

> In fact in my previous postings I have specifically invited others here in 
> the group to download your code from your own provided link and to check 
> it out with those size of bitmaps on their own machines. I cannot be 
> fairer than that. Unfortunately (mostly through my own fault I will admit, 
> because of my overly aggressive arguments with micro$oft and with dotnet 
> evangelists) I seem to have run out of friends here in the group over the 
> last couple of years and so nobody has yet responded (and my enemies are 
> hardly likely to report a crash!),

Yeah... man
You're making yourself enemies !.

> but hopefully some people will respond eventually.

> Mike

"se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> wrote in message 
news:i2htb8$man$1@news.eternal-september.org...

>> [One of the anonymous se's extracts from a recent post of Mike Williams]
>> In fact in my previous postings I have specifically invited others here
>> in the group to download your code from your own provided link
>> and to check it out with those size of bitmaps on their own machines.
>> I cannot be fairer than that. Unfortunately (mostly through my own
>> fault I will admit, because of my overly aggressive arguments with
>> micro$oft and with dotnet evangelists) I seem to have run out of
>> friends here in the group over the last couple of years and so nobody
>> has yet responded (and my enemies are hardly likely to report a crash!),
>
> Yeah... man
> You're making yourself enemies !.

Yes I know. So what's wrong with that. I'm not frightened of making enemies, 
especially if (as is usually the case) they have become my enemy because I 
have told the truth about Micro$oft's nasty and thoroughly dishonest 
business practices and if I have repeatedly spoken up against those in the 
group who dishonestly defend Micro$oft simply because they up Micro$oft's 
backside. If those people, as in the specific example you quoted, would 
sooner hide the fact that Ulrich Korndoerfer's code crashes on the large 
number of bitmap sizes I mentioned (an on many others) rather than confirm 
it as a fact, which it indeed is, then that's up to them. I don't need 
friends like that, and would sooner have them as my enemy.

Mike

"Mike Williams" <Mike@WhiskyAndCoke.com> skrev i en meddelelse 
news:i2hu06$h3t$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> "se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> wrote in message 
> news:i2hsne$k4r$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
> What's wrong with being a taxi driver, dick brain. I have never hidden 
> that fact. Mike
>
>
Knewed it beforehand.
There's nothing wrong being a taxi driver. Then once more:
You couldn't lift yourself to be anything other than a
"fork lift truck driver". And then lied to the community about
having knowledge of fets power devices. Like below:

> Well, you seem to have invented some new stuff there, Ako! The only things 
> I used to work on in my "electronic days" (admittedly some years ago!) 
> that had collectors and emitters were standard transistors. The FET (Field 
> Effect Transistors) that you mention have three connections called 
> "Drain", "Source" and "Gate". By the way, I do know quite a bit about 
> FETs, so don't try to kid me, AQko! You're not on the whisky and Coke� are 
> you, by any chance!
>
> Mike

Yeah, I see. you don't know anything, but just pretending
to know. Been a taxi-driver plying with building door bells
in your spare time. As you see of your 5 year old thread above,
your dick brain showed lack of actual knowledge already
that far back.
http://www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irg4p254s.pdf
This can't give you other than complexes of inferiority.

You dick brain simply can't produce a single electrical "Spark"
FOAD !.
 

"Mike Williams" <Mike@WhiskyAndCoke.com> skrev i en meddelelse 
news:i2hveb$jmh$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> "se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> wrote in message 
> news:i2htb8$man$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>>> [One of the anonymous se's extracts from a recent post of Mike Williams]
>>> In fact in my previous postings I have specifically invited others here
>>> in the group to download your code from your own provided link
>>> and to check it out with those size of bitmaps on their own machines.
>>> I cannot be fairer than that. Unfortunately (mostly through my own
>>> fault I will admit, because of my overly aggressive arguments with
>>> micro$oft and with dotnet evangelists) I seem to have run out of
>>> friends here in the group over the last couple of years and so nobody
>>> has yet responded (and my enemies are hardly likely to report a crash!),
>>
>> Yeah... man
>> You're making yourself enemies !.
>
> Yes I know. So what's wrong with that. I'm not frightened of making 
> enemies, especially if (as is usually the case) they have become my enemy 
> because I have told the truth about Micro$oft's nasty and thoroughly 
> dishonest business practices and if I have repeatedly spoken up against 
> those in the group who dishonestly defend Micro$oft simply because they up 
> Micro$oft's backside. If those people, as in the specific example you 
> quoted, would sooner hide the fact that Ulrich Korndoerfer's code crashes 
> on the large number of bitmap sizes I mentioned (an on many others) rather 
> than confirm it as a fact, which it indeed is, then that's up to them. I 
> don't need friends like that, and would sooner have them as my enemy.
>
> Mike
>
>
OK, that one was acceptable. 

Did henn actually accuse you of making enemies?  LMFAO!!!!!

I guess in butter cookie land, they are not familiar with "Pot, meet kettle"

What a quivering piece of panty waste coward who can't even use his real 
identity to make his attacks.

I'll have to print out his post and take it to some of my hens in the 
backyard, maybe they can translate, since I don't understand " basic 
chicken".  <eg>



"Mike Williams" <Mike@WhiskyAndCoke.com> wrote in message 
news:i2hveb$jmh$1@speranza.aioe.org...
: "se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> wrote in message
: news:i2htb8$man$1@news.eternal-september.org...
:
: >> [One of the anonymous se's extracts from a recent post of Mike 
Williams]
: >> In fact in my previous postings I have specifically invited others here
: >> in the group to download your code from your own provided link
: >> and to check it out with those size of bitmaps on their own machines.
: >> I cannot be fairer than that. Unfortunately (mostly through my own
: >> fault I will admit, because of my overly aggressive arguments with
: >> micro$oft and with dotnet evangelists) I seem to have run out of
: >> friends here in the group over the last couple of years and so nobody
: >> has yet responded (and my enemies are hardly likely to report a 
crash!),
: >
: > Yeah... man
: > You're making yourself enemies !.
:
: Yes I know. So what's wrong with that. I'm not frightened of making 
enemies,
: especially if (as is usually the case) they have become my enemy because I
: have told the truth about Micro$oft's nasty and thoroughly dishonest
: business practices and if I have repeatedly spoken up against those in the
: group who dishonestly defend Micro$oft simply because they up Micro$oft's
: backside. If those people, as in the specific example you quoted, would
: sooner hide the fact that Ulrich Korndoerfer's code crashes on the large
: number of bitmap sizes I mentioned (an on many others) rather than confirm
: it as a fact, which it indeed is, then that's up to them. I don't need
: friends like that, and would sooner have them as my enemy.
:
: Mike
:
: 

"se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> wrote in message 
news:i2i1ki$i11$1@news.eternal-september.org...

> Knewed it beforehand.
> There's nothing wrong being a taxi driver. Then
> once more: You couldn't lift yourself to be anything
> other than a "fork lift truck driver".

Actually my very last job was a taxi driver, and I was never a fork lift 
truck driver, not ever, but even if I had been I would not be ashamed of it. 
As I said, I was a fork lift truck electrical engineer. I used to repair and 
rebuild drive motors and pump motors and electronic switching control panels 
for traction and hydraulic drives. If you think that is a demeaning job then 
that's up to you, but for me it was a good, honest job.

> And then lied to the community about having
> knowledge of fets power devices.

Not that it's any of your business, but I didn't lie to anybody about that. 
I only vaguely remember that post you dug up from years ago, but as far as I 
recall the OP was talking about small FET semiconductors, which indeed did 
have connections called drain, source and gate, as in the following 
description:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field-effect_transistor

The high current semiconductors used in fork lift truck traction and 
hydraulic motor control switching circuits, at least during the many years 
that I worked rebuilding and reconditioning and testing them, were a 
different thing and were called silicon controlled rectifiers, or 
thyristors. Here is a description of them:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_controlled_rectifier

In a fork lift truck those things usually handle average currents of many 
hundreds of amps and their connections were generally called Anode, Cathode 
and Gate. Those are the things that I used all the time in my work at 
Lansing Bagnall and Regentruck, where I was the senior electrician and 
Foreman in charge of a team of about a dozen electricians. You can get your 
little team of investigators out and you can check those details if you 
wish. Now if you think those jobs are somehow demeaning then again that's up 
to you, but I think they were good, honest jobs.

Incidentally, I have never, ever tried to conceal the fact that programming 
in general and Visual Basic in particular has been and still is purely a 
hobby for me. Do you have a problem with that too?

You really are an arrogant little bastard, whoever you are.

Mike

"se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> skrev i meddelandet 
news:i2htb8$man$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In fact in my previous postings I have specifically invited others here 
>> in the group to download your code from your own provided link and to 
>> check it out with those size of bitmaps on their own machines. I cannot 
>> be fairer than that. Unfortunately (mostly through my own fault I will 
>> admit, because of my overly aggressive arguments with micro$oft and with 
>> dotnet evangelists) I seem to have run out of friends here in the group 
>> over the last couple of years and so nobody has yet responded (and my 
>> enemies are hardly likely to report a crash!),
>
> Yeah... man
> You're making yourself enemies !.
>

Not at all, on the contrary he has only a very few enimies in this group.

/Henning

"se" <se@onfakeplace&.bigfix> skrev i meddelandet 
news:i2hi27$kbs$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> skrev i en meddelelse 
> news:i2hbj0$i0c$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> Rut roh, did the board henn stick his chicken neck back in again? 
>> Careful
>> what you say Mike...and whiff of remotely defending me or my position 
>> will
>> get you labeled a psychopath - and a load of other names I'm sure I 
>> missed
>> since killfiling the little bitch.
>>
>> Even so, it would have read something like:  Bock, bock-bock, 
>> cluck-cluck.
>> Bock, buh-bock!  Easier to read then his mangling of the English 
>> language.
>> <g>
>>
>
>
> The above was said by a whipper-snapper.
> Just look-up the photo posted on ms-newsserver
> and see it.
>

And once again, who do you think cares. Anyone said thank you?

/Henning

"Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote in message 
news:i2i8vb$3b0$1@news.eternal-september.org...

> Old cenn the henn has something out there he doesn't
> want us to know (and based on his attitude and general
> nature, it's probably something in the neighborhood of
> sex offender or paedophile). Just killfile the little bastard
> butter cookie and move on.  I did.

Actually if you look at the two relevant postings made on 16th July in the 
Access 2000 Limitations thread that was started on 14th July you will see 
that Se / Senn are (is) posting from Denmark. I think this is probably the 
man you need to contact:

    http://dk.linkedin.com/pub/thomas-senn-ryttersgaard/6/790/b02

Mike

> Incidentally, I have never, ever tried to conceal the fact that 
> programming in general and Visual Basic in particular has been and still 
> is purely a hobby for me. Do you have a problem with that too?
>

It is not a problem at all, probably you are able to find much more in a 
different way then others who are busy on a timeline.

However, you forget to often that persons who make a living of programming 
cannot do the things like you. That is because they have to do with 
principals who have more demands then: "Do it as cheap as possible". 
Although there were also who asked even in 2008:  "Do it with VB6 and then 
had the idea it was cheaper"  Most of those are now probably screaming that 
Microsoft is stealing because it is now so expensive to emigrate and that it 
is the fault of Microsoft that VB6 is not anymore working on every new OS; 
while they were warned in fact already in 2002 for that.

In this case it is a principal who says do it with Java.

Like I wrote and in fact Tom(not so implicit later) the only argument can 
then be the price. It is not like VB6, from which is told in 2002 it would 
stop. Java is going on.

That is in my idea what you to often forget as an hobbyist and give then 
arguments which can be true, but professionals simply cannot use them.

Cor 

"Cor" <Notmyfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message 
news:uYVu4zJLLHA.148@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> [Mike Williams wrote] Incidentally, I have never, ever tried
>> to conceal the fact that programming in general and Visual
>> Basic in particular has been and still  is purely a hobby for
>> me. Do you have a problem with that too?
>
> It is not a problem at all, probably you are able to find much
> more in a different way then others who are busy on a timeline.
> [big snip] That is in my idea what you to often forget as an
> hobbyist and give then arguments which can be true, but
> professionals simply cannot use them.

That's very true, but I'm not sure what you are specifically referring to 
when you say that I forget that fact. My arguments with Micro$oft are not 
confined to the fact that they have abandoned VB6, in fact that is only a 
very small part of my argument with them. What really concerns me, and what 
specifically concerned me if you check back on my postings during the period 
I was a Micro$oft MVP (which incidentally were the cause of them failing to 
reinstate me at the end of my year) is that they at that they were totally 
ripping off people living in the EU, and England in particular, by charging 
us grossly exorbitant prices for their software, most of which was actually 
produced in their factory in Ireland, and on a number of occasions 
dishonestly attempting to explaining that away with all sorts of reasons, 
one of which specifically mentioned of the cost of producing different 
language versions, and they were doing dirty under the counter dishonest and 
almost certainly illegal deals with various people in order to dishonestly 
maintain that massive price difference. I mean, they were selling people in 
England what was described as an English version of Windows, and at one time 
explaining away the massive cost difference in the specific way I have 
described, and yet it was not even an English version at all. They lied to 
us. It was totally American! Additionally, as a company they have the 
corporate morals of a sewer rat. There are numerous examples of this and in 
Africa in particular I am of the opinion that they behaved like corporate 
gangsters.

Mike

"Mike Williams" <Mike@WhiskyAndCoke.com> skrev i meddelelsen 
news:i2jcsf$po9$1@speranza.aioe.org...
> "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote in message 
> news:i2i8vb$3b0$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> Old cenn the henn has something out there he doesn't
>> want us to know (and based on his attitude and general
>> nature, it's probably something in the neighborhood of
>> sex offender or paedophile). Just killfile the little bastard
>> butter cookie and move on.  I did.
>
> Actually if you look at the two relevant postings made on 16th July in the 
> Access 2000 Limitations thread that was started on 14th July you will see 
> that Se / Senn are (is) posting from Denmark. I think this is probably the 
> man you need to contact:
>
>    http://dk.linkedin.com/pub/thomas-senn-ryttersgaard/6/790/b02
>
> Mike
>

Doing a very big mistake connecting a complete none-involved third
person in accuses of  paedophile. You're both going way over the border.
Enthough aioe you're posting from has a very relaxed view on abuses,
it probably gets consequences.  Perhaps a case for the
Jurisdiction in Tampa too. They most sure already know Kevin.
But perhaps the innocent person you're trying to involve in this nasty
accusation will do something against it. 

"se" <se@onfakeplace&.atbigfix> wrote in message 
news:i2joog$pi9$1@news.eternal-september.org...

> You're both going way over the border.

Wow. Going way over the border eh! That's rich coming from a nasty hatchet 
man such as yourself.

"se" <se@onfakeplace&.atbigfix> wrote in message 
news:i2joog$pi9$1@news.eternal-september.org...

> You're both going way over the border.

Cool�, man. That's really Cool� coming from a nasty piece of work like you. 
By the way, why are you posting as both Se and Senn? Why are you posting 
using two slightly different aliases from  two different fake addresses? Why 
don't you use just one alias and one fake address? Maybe the Senn one? 
What's the idea behind that?

Mike

"Mike Williams" <Mike@WhiskyAndCoke.com> wrote in message 
news:i2jcsf$po9$1@speranza.aioe.org...
:
: Actually if you look at the two relevant postings made on 16th July in the
: Access 2000 Limitations thread that was started on 14th July you will see
: that Se / Senn are (is) posting from Denmark. I think this is probably the
: man you need to contact:
:
:    http://dk.linkedin.com/pub/thomas-senn-ryttersgaard/6/790/b02

I already knew Se and Senn (buh-gawk!) were the same douche bag.  The 
LinkedIn profile is interesting.  Guess I'll have to mess with him a little 
more outside the NG, since he's already done so.

Thanks mate!  I owe you! 

DickGrier formulated the question :
> "baggage" is trivial.  Note, I said:  IMO.

Accepted.  :-)

-- 
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org