Knock Knock.... Neo Wake up! about agent longhorn..
3seas
(recent slachdot article)
But it is sitting on top of the Common Language Infrastructure Translator
(The CLI of .NET) which generates Common Intermediate Language (CIL)
Bytecode that then can run on the run time engine of .NET (forgot what its
actually labeled. See the ECMA doc on it).
The Common Language Infrastructure is what amounts to, in simple terms, the
collection up of programming concepts and datatypes of many programming
languages. Then boiled down and integrated in a non conflicting manner,
that is easier for the CIL to generate bytecode from.
Also there is the effort to create and standardize GUI functionality (for
programming code use)
Of course .NET is also about IPC/RPC. The interconnecting of parts that may
be spread locally or remotely.
There is even effort towards a data base search engine.
Of course MS is seaking patents on teh run time engine and as corporate
does, seeking patents on anything and everything it can about all of this.
OK, so what?
The Neo of GNU needs to wake the fu& up!!!
While MS has companies like SCO and HP doing MS evil bidding and causing
distractions.... You can be sure MS/Bill Gates and company have read teh
art of war...
The above in parts, may not look to threatening, but together, integrated as
is becomming very obvious, it is a serious threat to GNU, FreeSoftware and
Open Source Software.
Yeah, so GNU may have compariable parts, like dotgnu (which is currently
releasing version 0.1) various shells and several flavors of GUI and IPC
functionality, even currently being developed with the help many such as
freedesktop.org .. etc..
BUT THERE IS NO FOCUS ON REALLY INTEGRATING THESE AS WELL AS IS NEEDED.
What exactly is the threat?
Of what value is open source software when it requires a method of
development that will become old and shown to be more problemmatic and time
consuming to develope and maintain?
WARNING: Arrogance will only lead to ignorance that then gets educated the
hard knocks way.
Microsoft is building such components with the intent of integrating them
together, along with a dynamic code fragment database (the more time they
have to develope this database the more of an industry hold they will
obtain upon release). The sum total of which will be an autocoding
environment.
To express the difference between how coding is done today, regardless of
methodology used and how it can and will be done in the not to distant
future. Is like the difference between how coding is done today and the
fiction of star trek holodeck level of programming, where a kid can do it,
even by speaking directly to the computer input mic. (which BTW, MS is also
working on speech to text conversion)
Where does this put the real software engineers? Working on the dynamic code
fragment database, from which psuedo software engineers use to create from,
just as the typical end user will be far more able to do so then they are
today. And where do you think user are likely to go, that want this ability
or even just the higher quality and quanity of applications generated from
such autocoding?
BTW: the evolving other end of the spectrum "autocoding" is a part of you
will find "code generation" engines and such.
How do I know all of this? Its the simplist of all answers. I'm the fu&'in
Lunatic/genuis that preceived the core of how to do autocoding (general
automation that includes automating code use and creation) 15 years ago,
and have since NOT been quiet about it. They same guy who is crazy or
conscious enough to come to see the code, and know what to expect, of MS
applying the art of war tactics on one side and the arrogance, elitism and
expertise in complexity programming babel of many (certainly not all) on
the FreeSoftware and OSS side (as well as in the software industry in
general). Personally, I think it genuniely sucks being in the middle being
beat around or pushed off to the sidelines being expected to pay for
admission to what amounts to a king of the hill battle while the false
advertising promotion is to come to the event and become more productive.
Whether it be Commercial hype of the words of the "hackers ethic."
I believe it is mans natural right to take what those before them and beside
them have done and to improve upon it. Otherwise what the fu& are we
conscious and with the ability to think in terms of higher level
abstractions, for?
My advice to the OSS and FreeSoftware Neo and community ZION, is to consider
what is written above and start putting some serious gawd damn focus and
developement efforts into developing and integrating the parts mention
above and into an easy for even the user to use manner, before it becomes a
hard knocks lesson. AS I have given up on preceiving FS and OSS as being
innovative ENOUGH!
In RL, the name is not Neo.
--
3 S.E.A.S -- Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC)
Changing how we preceive and use computers
email @ not to net, remove capitols & one .
web @ http://threeseas.net
Alan Connor
>
>
> MONAD is MSs effort to finally improve their Command Line Interface.
> (recent slachdot article)
>
> But it is sitting on top of the Common Language Infrastructure Translator
> (The CLI of .NET) which generates Common Intermediate Language (CIL)
> Bytecode that then can run on the run time engine of .NET (forgot what its
> actually labeled. See the ECMA doc on it).
>
You seem to think that GNU and M$ are competing corporate entities.
They are *supposed* to operate in two entirely different realms of
activity.
So either you are wrong or GNU is dead.
--
Alan C this post ends with w
q
David Kastrup
Your comment does not seem to apply at all to what you have quoted.
Did you just quote the wrong thing, or did you make the connection
while stoned?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum