VS.NET is the MS OS of the future

[Torsten Rienow]

if you really look behind the curtain you will recognize, the VS.NET is the
second step to a new OS. The MS Internet Explorer will become the end users
desktop. NET Runtimes will be available for all major platforms. As much as
MS avoids us from accessig the OS directly, we will forget to handle BITS,
BYTES and POINTERS.

The first step was to cover Device Drivers into COM Objects. Best example is
DIRECTX. Is there any reason to access Hardware thru COM? Yes, a good reason
for MS, because you forget the underlying API. And this is what MS wants you
to do. Another example ADO,TAPI, Windows Media.
The COM wrappers are a complete programming language.

MS makes you blind for the real world. in my mind is this fact a kind of
conspiracy against the whole world.

The new genaration of programmers will no longer learn what memory is, or
what a device driver is. they will not learn what a philosphie is. they will
learn to PLUG AND PLAY. this OK as long as i want to plug and play. but most
of my time i want to program and not to code.

[Daniel Anderson]

Torsten,
An interesting note on your comment regarding Internet Explorer. Rumor has
it that Microsoft may not be giving IE away anymore. Supposedly, Redmond is
kicking the idea around, very seriously, to charge money for IE 6. This is
of course rumor, unless someone at Microsoft who reads this group would care
to comment!<g>


"Torsten Rienow" <trienow@os-net.de> wrote in message
news:3a759607@news.devx.com...
> if you really look behind the curtain you will recognize, the VS.NET is
the
> second step to a new OS. The MS Internet Explorer will become the end
users
> desktop. NET Runtimes will be available for all major platforms. As much
as
> MS avoids us from accessig the OS directly, we will forget to handle BITS,
> BYTES and POINTERS.
>
> The first step was to cover Device Drivers into COM Objects. Best example
is
> DIRECTX. Is there any reason to access Hardware thru COM? Yes, a good
reason
> for MS, because you forget the underlying API. And this is what MS wants
you
> to do. Another example ADO,TAPI, Windows Media.
> The COM wrappers are a complete programming language.
>
> MS makes you blind for the real world. in my mind is this fact a kind of
> conspiracy against the whole world.
>
> The new genaration of programmers will no longer learn what memory is, or
> what a device driver is. they will not learn what a philosphie is. they
will
> learn to PLUG AND PLAY. this OK as long as i want to plug and play. but
most
> of my time i want to program and not to code.
>
>
>

[Mike Mitchell]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:15:20 +0100, "Torsten Rienow"
<trienow@os-net.de> wrote:

>The new genaration of programmers will no longer learn what memory is, or
>what a device driver is. they will not learn what a philosphie is. they will
>learn to PLUG AND PLAY. this OK as long as i want to plug and play. but most
>of my time i want to program and not to code.
>

You are *so* right there, in my view. Programming is just too
complicated, unwieldy, time-consuming, and buggy for the modern world.
We are still at the equivalent stage of development as when the magic
lantern first flickered, compared with today's movies. We have such a
long way to go. However, I, too, enjoy writing code (Let a = 1 and so
on), so it will not be something I shall want to do for a living.
Perhaps programmers in the future will become advisers, who never need
to interact with hardware, but will each control several hundred
companies in their client portfolio by providing 2-minute service
calls for when the auto-generators go slightly awry.

GLORIFIED HELP DESK STAFF!

MM

[Torsten Rienow]

now you have some control over what you do. you can decide what you want to
use. in the future you can eat or die.
example? you get all the ms media stuff for free. really all? try to create
a streaming solution with pay while/per view for 1000 simultaniuos viewers.
you need a sql server (with enough licences). you need site server (with
enough licences). you need at least 2 nt server licences. i seriuosly
suggest first to read ms licence agreements/conditions and finally take your
pocket calculator. look behing the curtain. not all is gold what shines
bright.
have you ever ask why you do not get access to a compressed video/audio
frame from media sdk?
maybe you could write your own streaming solution. the winsock api is easy
to use from vb
but it is not plug and play. you have to deal with bits bytes and pointers.
now ask ms for its intention.
i would like to use wm7/8, if i could get a preview. with vb at the moment.
oops, preview is not com compliant.
the only chance to use mpg47 codec from ms is the media sdk. ms has a well
working api (called vcm/icm, acm) for video/audio compression. i want to use
this instead of media sdk. why? i do not like the ms media file format and
want to use my own. well i can eat or die.
finally, i want to make my own bugs. i am sick about searching errors i have
not caused.
belive me, you get nothing for nothing. the day will come, when you have to
open your money pocket.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Mitchell" <kylix_is@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: vb.vb7
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 12:49 AM
Subject: Re: VS.NET is the MS OS of the future


> On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:15:20 +0100, "Torsten Rienow"
> <trienow@os-net.de> wrote:
>
> >The new genaration of programmers will no longer learn what memory is, or
> >what a device driver is. they will not learn what a philosphie is. they
will
> >learn to PLUG AND PLAY. this OK as long as i want to plug and play. but
most
> >of my time i want to program and not to code.
> >
>
> You are *so* right there, in my view. Programming is just too
> complicated, unwieldy, time-consuming, and buggy for the modern world.
> We are still at the equivalent stage of development as when the magic
> lantern first flickered, compared with today's movies. We have such a
> long way to go. However, I, too, enjoy writing code (Let a = 1 and so
> on), so it will not be something I shall want to do for a living.
> Perhaps programmers in the future will become advisers, who never need
> to interact with hardware, but will each control several hundred
> companies in their client portfolio by providing 2-minute service
> calls for when the auto-generators go slightly awry.
>
> GLORIFIED HELP DESK STAFF!
>
> MM

[Sjoerd Verweij]

> I am not sure how layers on top of an OS *become* the OS, though, which is
> what you are claiming. Most of the core text stuff in VB.NET (for example)
> translates into GDI+/Uniscribe stuff that wraps ExtTextOutW calls as
needed.
> So sure it hides the complexities but they still exist.

However, an application written on the Win32 CLR/FrameWorks, when they stay
away from Microsoft.Win32, could just as well run on a Linux CLR/FrameWorks.
Or... on a CLR/FrameWorks without any underlying OS at all.

[Jason Kaczor]

>"Sjoerd Verweij" <nospam.sjoerd@sjoerd.org> wrote in message

>> > I am not sure how layers on top of an OS *become* the OS, >> > though,
which is what you are claiming. Most of the core
>> > text stuff in VB.NET (for example)
>> > translates into GDI+/Uniscribe stuff that wraps ExtTextOutW
>> > calls as needed.
>> > So sure it hides the complexities but they still exist.

Yep, but isn't that what scared the crap out of Microsoft with regards to
Java/Netscape? The operating system would become irrelevant. Software would
be written to a common platform, where it *could* be expected to work without
change, regardless of the underlying operating system implementation.

That's what abstraction is all about. Kylix will do the same with CLX.
Your code calls "classes" that will internally handle the native requirements.

Regards
Jason Kaczor