On 02/14/2011 03:04 PM, Stephen Russell wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Leland Jackson<[email protected]> > wrote: > >> So, tell me how to debug a Microsoft complied application or OS, when it >> starts going wierd or throwing C5s. Perhaps you have some kind of sixth >> sense allowing you to mystically see into the binary ones and zeros, >> turning them into human readable source code. Most of Microsoft code, >> including its OS code and Application code, is binary, copyrighted, and >> and held in strickest secrecy.a network admin or a programmer? Over the >> past 10 years both sides of > ----------------- > > C000055555 is a error from VFP that few people agree on where it comes > from. Well only VFP people seem to get it because searching on it I > seem to only fine VFP issues at had. I remember getting them as well. > > Now if I had the Watson C code or the M$ C code could i track it back? > Maybe. Nope just kidding there. I remember getting one on an old > computer of mine that also had VS2003 on it and the C debugger came up > trying to help me get it. I didn't know enough them to do any good. > > My guess it is in a header file so that should be real easy to target, > just a PITA to test. > > >>> I know that I don't know it all in today's environment. Are you >>> a network admin or a programmer? >> I'm both a network admin and programmer among many other things that it >> takes to run a small business. >> >>> Over the past 10 years both sides of >>> the equation have gotten larger and teh ability in cross over becomes >>> harder. >>> >>> Talking to our java lead programmer about builds and management of >>> code leads me to believe that we need to hire someone with experience >>> in this so she can learn from them. Could be contractor to start or a >>> FTE because there is going to be so much new work in this area. >>> >>> Back to your main point. I think that the value of tweaking existing >>> code in a product is overrated compared to someone who uses that >>> product for their daily tasks. I'll say that tweaking the codebase >>> for VFP is not what a VFP developer should be doing. So tossing >>> around that is a benefit to have it is not worth a lot. >> ############## >> Excerpt: >> >> Posted on Wednesday, August 5, 2009 by Erlik >> >> When people think about adopting an Open Source solution, the first >> factor that comes to mind is the price: it is usually cheaper than >> proprietary alternatives. What a lot of people fail to consider is that >> there are a lot of other advantages to Open Source that can be much more >> important than the price factor. Let's have a look at a few of them: > --------------- > > Agree to the primary reason to use Open Source is cost. Little > thought went into the what if ... happens or What do we do when that > happens. > >> No forced end of life >> >> One of the most overlooked advantage of Open Source is that there is no >> real end of life for any project. If a driver is released as Open Source >> and part of the Linux kernel your hardware will probably work out of the >> box for as long as you care to use that piece of equipment. In the >> proprietary world it is common for hardware manufacturers not to release >> a decent driver to run older hardware on newer operating systems to >> drive sales of newer models. When Windows Vista was released Creative >> Labs released a Vista driver that did not support all the features >> present in the XP driver for its older hardware, thus consumer were >> forced to buy the newer models just to have on Vista the same features >> as their old hardware on XP. This could not have happened if the drivers >> were Open Source, as any developer would have been able to port the XP >> driver to Vista or to modify the Vista driver to support all of the old >> hardware features. The same is true for software: even if the company >> that built your software does not support it anymore as long as a >> developer is willing to maintain it you are good, and if you really need >> that software nothing prevents you to hire that developer. > ------------------ > > I give up at who you are upset with here? Vista or Creative Labs? I > read more pointers to M$ OS versions but it is the Creative Labs > driver the forked up correct? > > > > >> True competition rather than lock in >> >> One of the easiest way for any software company to make long term money >> is software 'lock in'. The idea is to sell you a piece of software >> without telling you its inner workings or how to convert the files it >> produces to other formats. This means that the original vendor is the >> only one that can sell you upgrades or maintenance on that piece of >> software since he is the only one that know how it was built. That >> exclusivity often comes at a premium price since the software vendor has >> virtually no competition for your custom. In the case of Open Source the >> inner working of your software and the files it produces are known, >> meaning that several companies can offer support and maintenance for it, >> as well as develop and sell compatible alternatives. This creates real >> competition, encourages innovation and brings prices down for the consumer. > ------------------- > > > For all of your products that you have written are any of them a > vertical product? Yes, Prometheus is a shopping cart application I've written.
> Made for an industry and intended to be resold many > times? Yes. > If so is your source free of charge allowing any of your > clients the ability to tweak any aspect of your applications? Prometheus is written in Perl, so yes. The source is available and mostly free. > Does > this apply to everything you have sold? NO. > I can read what your presenting but I find FEW companies that can > follow in that. that is compared to ALL the other companies who feel > that they have invested a lot of talent and capital and have a > wonderful product on their hands complete with a sales and maybe a > marketing staff. > > On a rating of 1-10 least to most where to consider Oracle in respect > to "Open Source", please rate their evilness for me. I have no experience on which to gage Oracle's intentions with regards to Open Source, but I do own some of their stock. I also have some stock in Microsoft. LOL > Are they more evil because they buy up potential completion that is > open source today? Wasn't that the Edison model? Do you become more > upset that people sell out when offered a ton of money and the new > owner can change things as they feel? Isn't it their "stuff" and were > sharing it with you from the beginning because they thought it was > best for the product in the early days? I hope Oracle isn't to evil; because, they acquire a bunch of Open Source project with their buyout of Sun including, Solaris, Virtualbox, Java, netbean development stack, Open Office Org, MySQL, and much more. Just in case, Redhat, including Fedora, have forked Java to their openjdk, which includes jre. I installed DB Solo and it ran great under openjdk. Also IBM and many others have forked off Oracle's Open Office Org. >> Security transparency >> >> Do you know if Windows is secure? Do you know if it has any back-doors? >> No you don't, only Microsoft knows that. With closed source software you >> have no way to know if the software was properly tested for security >> holes or if unwanted code has been added to the software. With Open >> Source everything is transparent: you know exactly what you are running >> and anybody can easily look for security vulnerabilities. > ---------------------------- > > There are always going to be holes found as more diabolical people > start trying to find them. Humans built this stuff and nothing is > perfect. Sorry but everything is vulnerable unless you are off the > internet and your network allows no outside devices. Hard to maintain > isn't it? > > >> The right to fork >> >> What do you have to say about the direction that Windows has taken in >> the recent years? Not , much! If you do not like what Microsoft did with >> Vista and Windows 7 too bad, it's that or nothing. With Open Source >> software you can Fork. This means that if you do not like the direction >> that a piece of software is taking you can always create your own >> version and push it in the direction you like. Of course this comes with >> some problems: it causes fragmentation and reduces the resources that >> can be invested in each fork, but often forking is actually not >> necessary. When the developers or maintainers of an Open Source software >> project realize that a significant part of their users are unhappy with >> what they are doing and are ready to fork they sometimes change their >> plans to make everyone happy. Sometimes forks also merge after some >> time, or sometimes the less popular fork dies. This means that users >> actually have much more control on the direction in which the Open >> Source software they use evolves than with closed source software. > ------------------ > > I like out of the box thinking. Long time now I have repeated if > everyone is doing it it is probably wrong. Changes to XP -> Vista -> > 7 I liked and wanted. I see it as moving forward instead of captured > on my little iceberg afloat in the ocean. Branch off today and > cripple yourself tomorrow. Stick with VFP and you may find the next > OS doesn't really consider 32 bit apps worthy of maintaining past 2015. The Microsoft cycle: 1) New hot product emerges. 2) Microsoft begins work to introduce competing product. 3) Get your checkbook out and buy the first release. 4) Begin using the new product and discover many problems. 5) Get your checkbook out to buy second release, which promises to fix first release. 6) Many new problems introduced in second release. 7) Get your checkbook out to buy third release. 8) After many year and much labor you finally begin benefiting from the software. 9) New hot product emerges 10) Microsoft's success with your product put all competitor out of business. 11) New hot product emerges. 12) Microsoft announces end of life to your product, and refuses to release it to open source or another commercial enterprise. 13) loop; LOL >> These are only some of the advantages of Open Source. This is why I >> would always prefer to purchase hardware for which there is an Open >> Source driver, or application that are Open Source. It is not only a >> question of price! >> If you keep evanglisling Microsoft like this, we will have to make you a >> Microsoft MVP next year. LMAO > --------------- > > I am saying that sticking with Open Source because you can fix is a > myth for the typical user or small business operator. This seem the be the prevailing attitude from user who are moving from Windows to something like Linux, but it's not true of anyone who has experience using Linux. you have sold. The people coming from Window seem to prefer "The Microsoft Cycle". > you have sold > them a ball of turds hook line and sinker and they are forever tied to > you because you can work with what they have. Instead if you were a > customer of Oracle you could find someone all over the world to help > you if and when you needed one. > > My memory of these role was well played out in Jurassic Park in the > character Dennis Nedry. The whole I'll save you notion evolves into > the they need me. Power always does this. > > > > _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
