|
Check this out.[^]
I've found a living worth working for, but I haven't found work worth living for.
<marquee>![Beer | [beer]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif)
![Jig | [Dance]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/jig.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm hoping to avoid the new telly-tubby experience.
If they can just keep delaying it until after I retire, then I never will be forced to use it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Back in '94, two of my brothers and i scraped together enough cash to finally buy a decent video card. It was great. Fat VESA interface, lots of memory, fast vector acceleration. Except, the OS/2 drivers didn't support the accelerated drawing, or even non-banked memory access. It was pitiful. Win3.11 supported it all. Win3.11 wasn't actually useful for anything, but it sure was exciting to watch how fast those Solitaire cards were drawn.
Later, i bought Win95. It was faster than OS/2 and more useful than Win3.11. I could play games in it. (i didn't - i rebooted into DOS to play games, because they crashed less and appreciated the extra memory... but i could have, if i'd been insane.) Best of all, Win95 supported the vector acceleration and non-banked memory access! Now i could watch Solitaire and Pinball draw quickly...
Fast forward five years. Win2000 is out, and the video card i'm using supports a whole lot more than simple vector acceleration. It does 3D rendering, shading, texture mapping, alpha blending, and even (really slow, really sh*tty) anti-aliasing. And Win2000 supports... none of this. Windows still draw as slowly as in Win98 (unless you count the time it took to reboot Win98, in which case Win2k refreshed aprox. 11 hundred gazillion times faster). Then WinXP came out, with all sorts of new eye candy, and no support for hardware rendering of this eye candy whatsoever. It was quickly followed by a new drawing library named "GDI+", which supported 2D rendering, shading, texture mapping, alpha blending, and even (really slow, kinda sh*tty) anti-aliasing. No hardware supported for that either. But, soon, there would be a new OS, an OS named "Vista", and it would take advantage of my spiffy new hardware. And, in this Win95 for the new Millennium, i'll be able to not only run games, but even editors, and compilers.
Not that i would. I mean, that'd be insane. VS2005 chews up enough memory all by itself. But i could, if i completely lose what little sanity i still cling to.
And i'll bet Solitaire looks just awesome...
|
|
|
|
|
You are so wasted in your current job.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
You are so wasted in your current job.
That even works as a double-entendre
'--8<------------------------
Ex Datis:
Duncan Jones
Merrion Computing Ltd
|
|
|
|
|
Heh, yeah... i mean, i'm even more wasted on my days off...
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: You are so wasted in your current job.
I was thinking the same thing.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
What I'm not looking forward to is buying a new machine capable of running it. It's not that I don't like new machines, but I know even with the faster machine, the new OS will run slower than the old machine, with the old OS. 
- S
50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
|
|
|
|
|
My company just converted from VS2003 to VS2005. Something that seemed like it should have been straightforward... ya right.
I can only image how much fun we will have moving to Vista. That should keep a few of us gainfully employed for awhile.
Pooty
|
|
|
|
|
Everyone likes Job Security... I know I do, and that would be the only thing I would like to thank Microsoft & computers in general for. Because if I know something for sure software & hardware will eventually break somehow and somewhere. 
|
|
|
|
|
I have been using Beta 2 since it came out. No major problems at all. No BSOD till now. I do have some minor annoyances but apart from that everything is great. Actually, it is an ultimate Beta machine where I have beta versions of several different products: office, minefield, LINQ. Once in a while when I boot back to XP and XP looks primitive.
My Blog
|
|
|
|
|
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote: I have been using Beta 2 since it came out. No major problems at all. No BSOD till now. I do have some minor annoyances but apart from that everything is great. Actually, it is an ultimate Beta machine where I have beta versions of several different products: office, minefield, LINQ. Once in a while when I boot back to XP and XP looks primitive.
The good thing is it works for you. The bad thing is that you are in a minority
Regards,
Nish
|
|
|
|
|
You should keep a 486 system around running Windows 3.1, just so you don't lose your perpective.
I am just getting used to looking at allt he extra crap XP puts on my screen.
Now I have to adjust again 
I've seen better runs in my shorts! - Patches O'Houlihan
|
|
|
|
|
For me too, well almost that is. I sometimes get noise through my speakers when playing mp3 songs. Its a kind of cracking noise, I think it has something to do with the drivers. Soundblaster drivers are still in the beta stage too 
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
|
|
|
|
|
WillemM wrote: Soundblaster drivers are still in the beta stage too
And not only on Vista
modified 12-Sep-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously I am tried of hearing about it. My only hopes are:
1) That they don't force everyone to upgrade
2) My software will still function properly (with only a few changes)
It took me 5 years to move to XP, and by the looks of Vista it will be no different.
That's all just me
|
|
|
|
|
diilbert wrote: That they don't force everyone to upgrade
Not likely, since most of the stuff will be available for XP. I think originally that wasn't the plan. Developers stuck to Win2k (of which I'm sure there are a lot) will miss out though. So they will be forced to upgrade!
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
And I just happen to be one of those developers that still use 2k for 50% of my development :p
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a contractor so I typically encounter a number of Windows OSes for development - even Win 98 three years ago. And a painful experience that was!
At home I have a laptop with Win2k and a desktop with XP. Fortunately that meant I could have VS 2005 on both. Won't be so lucky for the next VS though - but then I expect my laptop will be past its sell by date anyway.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
Why is it I always feel that I'm in the minority when thinking that WF, WCF, and WPF are significant advances and something to get excited about? I've worked on teams that have tried to mash together a rules engine with a workflow package with 3rd party vendors, new databases, old databases, mainframes, etc. Standardized rules and workflow embedded right into Windows is a big thing for me. So are secure, reliable, and transactional services. And so is moving graphics processing off to the video cards instead of forcing everything through the aging GDI stuff. It's not going to solve all my problems, but it's going to give me the ability to do things that were once expensive and time-consuming. I could care less about what Microsoft was unable to deliver with Vista because there's still so much to look forward to.
I don't think we should be constantly singing Microsoft praises while ignoring their failures, it's good to keep these guys accountable for what they promise and never deliver. But all I hear is negative, which reminds me of why I stopped reading slashdot.
Logifusion[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Dustin Metzgar wrote: Standardized rules and workflow embedded right into Windows is a big thing for me.
In my experience, actually determining the proper workflow(s) is the hard part, and the part that usually never gets quite finished. Slapping a UI on top is cake by comparison...
|
|
|
|
|
Shog9 wrote: In my experience, actually determining the proper workflow(s) is the hard part, and the part that usually never gets quite finished.
I guess that's maybe where I don't get it then. Our workflows and rules were all created. The most difficult problem we had was getting all the third party software, legacy databases, new databases, security systems, contractors, and consultants to work together harmoniously. Standing in the middle was a workflow system and a rules system that only a few knew how to use and nobody else had the time to bother with it. The whole system ended up taking way more time and money than it was supposed to. This makes the business think poorly of it. At least with workflow and rules right in Windows, more developers can learn it and be expected to have that knowledge when hired. The hard part should be getting the workflows defined, not getting the system to work.
Logifusion[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Dustin Metzgar wrote: Standing in the middle was a workflow system and a rules system that only a few knew how to use and nobody else had the time to bother with it.
Oh, that. Sorry, misunderstood what you meant by "workflow".
Yeah, we've got that sort of workflow. And yeah, it's kinda hard getting the actual users to actually use it, 'cause it doesn't really flow with how they're used to working. But dammit, we'll hammer those square pegs into this CRM-shaped hole eventually, even if it kills 'em...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just griping. 
We've been rolling out someone's grand idea of how our sales people should work for a good long while now. Lots of progress made, lots of congratulatory back-slapping... Not so much evidence though, that this is actually anything useful to the sales people. But then, i'm not really in a position to talk.
FWIW, i do agree that having workflow support built into Windows is a Good Thing.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
