Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
No More IE for Mac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
oh yeah... we're really going to miss IE's NT Auth capabilities.
Give me a break!
I was stuck on a WinNT school network with my iBook, as were a bunch of my friends. IEmac unexpectedly quit every few pages you loaded... It is pretty much useless for NT Auth... It really does crash every minute or two. Disgraceful.
Hopefully someone works out a way of adding proper NT Auth support to Mozilla (and safari) -- that would be pretty useful. But i mean, come on, anyone who's used IE for NT Auth knows it SUCKS.
Give me a break!
I was stuck on a WinNT school network with my iBook, as were a bunch of my friends. IEmac unexpectedly quit every few pages you loaded... It is pretty much useless for NT Auth... It really does crash every minute or two. Disgraceful.
Hopefully someone works out a way of adding proper NT Auth support to Mozilla (and safari) -- that would be pretty useful. But i mean, come on, anyone who's used IE for NT Auth knows it SUCKS.
Re: Its a bad news indeed
More bull. You do know that the W3C DOES DO MORE THAN HTML right???
IBM & MS pulled out of the W3C for specific web services security specs, not for all HTML specs.
I am really sick of people writing about things, when they don't even bother reading past the headlines of the news stories they quote.
More bull. You do know that the W3C DOES DO MORE THAN HTML right???
IBM & MS pulled out of the W3C for specific web services security specs, not for all HTML specs.
I am really sick of people writing about things, when they don't even bother reading past the headlines of the news stories they quote.
IE is dead, SO WHAT?!
- this is good, more and more people will migrate to 3rd party browsers like Netscape and Opera on PeeCee or Safari and Chamino on Mac (actually, most people I know don't use IE anyway...)
vSpacken
- this is good, more and more people will migrate to 3rd party browsers like Netscape and Opera on PeeCee or Safari and Chamino on Mac (actually, most people I know don't use IE anyway...)
vSpacken
I agree with your point of view on the mac side of things... but I don't know many people that use the IE alternatives on the pc side. I use mozilla on my pc, but I still need IE for some things (namely, when I go to click on an embeded windows media file in Mozilla, all I get is garbled text. In IE, it open windows media, and no, trying to save the link target doesn't work). I try to introduce people to the wonderful world of Mozilla and other browsers as often as possible (not to mention the mac), but more often than not, they find one website that doesn't work properly, and go right back to IE. It's unfortunate, but IE is THE standard for compatibility on the Windows side. And who controls the majority of desktops?....
Re: Re: Its a bad news indeed
you are driving a bit too far, my friend.
first, i see absolutely no need to apple to include Mono.
they have their own frameworks.
second, you sound just like a regular windoze user, who are religiously convinced they need embrace whatever M$ gives them.
How is .Net "far superior" than PHP? i'd like to see how you compare and end up with a funny results as such.
third, share your knoweldge with other is great. bashing others with is another issue. note not everyone here is a developer. and most people have no idea about .Net. i could bash you right to hell if you want to talk about music with me.
you are driving a bit too far, my friend.
first, i see absolutely no need to apple to include Mono.
they have their own frameworks.
second, you sound just like a regular windoze user, who are religiously convinced they need embrace whatever M$ gives them.
How is .Net "far superior" than PHP? i'd like to see how you compare and end up with a funny results as such.
third, share your knoweldge with other is great. bashing others with is another issue. note not everyone here is a developer. and most people have no idea about .Net. i could bash you right to hell if you want to talk about music with me.
I think its big
As far i know, IBM & MS backed away from W3C to create a Web services standard. I think this is a big news, if you think of it.
here is the news item
As far i know, IBM & MS backed away from W3C to create a Web services standard. I think this is a big news, if you think of it.
here is the news item
Re: Its a bad news indeed
Well said!
This doesn't matter if IE is the defacto standard that web developers write for. Microsoft will bring in there own standards again, that web developers will use, and the others browsers out there will take the fall (along with the OS there on). Don't get me wrong, this will take many many years to complete but its exactly what Microsoft is trying to do.
Once that battle is won, Microsoft will go after Java. Microsoft is scared of being taken down. Their tatics suck when beating the competition but I'm not real sure what people can do. MS just has so much damn cash and computers running windows..
Well said!
This doesn't matter if IE is the defacto standard that web developers write for. Microsoft will bring in there own standards again, that web developers will use, and the others browsers out there will take the fall (along with the OS there on). Don't get me wrong, this will take many many years to complete but its exactly what Microsoft is trying to do.
Once that battle is won, Microsoft will go after Java. Microsoft is scared of being taken down. Their tatics suck when beating the competition but I'm not real sure what people can do. MS just has so much damn cash and computers running windows..
Re: wow
Dark indeed.
blakespot
Actually, if one were to use a brain to think about this for any length of time, the tragic nature of the departure of IE from the Mac would be realized. This will necessarily hurt the viability of the Mac to some degree. >80% of Internet users use IE and many sites are IE only. You may say they are not worth visiting because they are not cross-browser. That makes no difference. The truth is, this is a dark day for the Macintosh.
Dark indeed.
blakespot
Re: Re: Re: Its a bad news indeed
Funny you should say that, I own 3 windows machines, 3 macs, and 3 linux boxes. All bought in the past year. The macs? 1 G4 imac, 2 dual XServes. So before you attack me as a religious windows user, understand that I will use whatever gets the job done best for the proper application.
And while you can do GUI stuff with PHP, its not integrated, PHP without Zend's software is interpreted, not compiled, and is not as powerful as .NET. This is not a proper place to get into discussions on programming, if you want, I can hold a discussion with you. I programmed in PHP for over 2 years. PHP also only has functions to access databases. ADO.NET will automatically build data grids, drop down boxes, etc, when given an in-memory represenation of a table.
I am sorry if I went to far with that statement, but its true. Claiming MS backed out of a W3C proposed standard with IBM is the end of world, when refering to browsers is bull. Why? W3C does many different standards. SOAP web services, which is what MS uses, is open and standard. The W3C standard that they backed out of was a security standard, which was implimented in a MS addon to .NET. MS and IBM have replacement in the works....but the thing is, no security is the default for .NET web services. Thats right, they mostly leave it up to you to impliment yourself. SO WHO CARES that MS left with IBM? So they make a competing standard....no one is required to use it, its not built in, and you can still interop with many .NET SOAP/XML services. So when I complain, its because people here comment before they understand what they are commenting on.....then everyone uses it as THEIR argument as why other technologies are bad. I could go around spouting falsehoods about the mac. I dont. Why? Because I try to understand the technology I work with, and I try to give people facts, not personal beleifs.
Funny you should say that, I own 3 windows machines, 3 macs, and 3 linux boxes. All bought in the past year. The macs? 1 G4 imac, 2 dual XServes. So before you attack me as a religious windows user, understand that I will use whatever gets the job done best for the proper application.
And while you can do GUI stuff with PHP, its not integrated, PHP without Zend's software is interpreted, not compiled, and is not as powerful as .NET. This is not a proper place to get into discussions on programming, if you want, I can hold a discussion with you. I programmed in PHP for over 2 years. PHP also only has functions to access databases. ADO.NET will automatically build data grids, drop down boxes, etc, when given an in-memory represenation of a table.
I am sorry if I went to far with that statement, but its true. Claiming MS backed out of a W3C proposed standard with IBM is the end of world, when refering to browsers is bull. Why? W3C does many different standards. SOAP web services, which is what MS uses, is open and standard. The W3C standard that they backed out of was a security standard, which was implimented in a MS addon to .NET. MS and IBM have replacement in the works....but the thing is, no security is the default for .NET web services. Thats right, they mostly leave it up to you to impliment yourself. SO WHO CARES that MS left with IBM? So they make a competing standard....no one is required to use it, its not built in, and you can still interop with many .NET SOAP/XML services. So when I complain, its because people here comment before they understand what they are commenting on.....then everyone uses it as THEIR argument as why other technologies are bad. I could go around spouting falsehoods about the mac. I dont. Why? Because I try to understand the technology I work with, and I try to give people facts, not personal beleifs.
Re: How do I convert my IE Archives in WAFF to something else!?
Adobe Acrobat (not Acrobat Reader) will do a similar job to IE's WAFF archive, except you will have a pdf file, with absolute links, embedded graphics etc. You can't directly convert your WAFF files to this format, but it's a good alternative for a long term solution.
Adobe Acrobat has it's own browser so you can open the web site, to whatever depth you require, it will even capture the whole website. You then just save a pdf file.
You have a lot more options after that, eg exporting just the text, or just the jpegs etc. It's scriptable so you can automate your process, (possibly work out an applescript which opens the page you're looking at in Safari to open and save it in Acrobat as a pdf )
Alternatively, if you don't need the links to work in your archive, OSX allows you to print the current page to a pdf file from whatever app your in, including IE. That will embed all the graphics and layout neatly.
(Oh and Acrobat is not free)
Adobe Acrobat (not Acrobat Reader) will do a similar job to IE's WAFF archive, except you will have a pdf file, with absolute links, embedded graphics etc. You can't directly convert your WAFF files to this format, but it's a good alternative for a long term solution.
Adobe Acrobat has it's own browser so you can open the web site, to whatever depth you require, it will even capture the whole website. You then just save a pdf file.
You have a lot more options after that, eg exporting just the text, or just the jpegs etc. It's scriptable so you can automate your process, (possibly work out an applescript which opens the page you're looking at in Safari to open and save it in Acrobat as a pdf )
Alternatively, if you don't need the links to work in your archive, OSX allows you to print the current page to a pdf file from whatever app your in, including IE. That will embed all the graphics and layout neatly.
(Oh and Acrobat is not free)
This sucks to be a mac web dev... well not really, because the mac version was never anything like the windows version.
By the way, .NET makes php look like a joke. We need some .NET mac apps - to harness the power...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Its a bad news indeed
The list is quite long...
DOS
HTML
JAVA
Kerberos
COM
OS/2
Pocket PC/Smart Phone
and even stealling
source code
Open standards mean nothing.
They are just a means to "get in the door"
JAVA can do everything .NET does, (perhaps the dev tools aren't as category specific as VS.NET) but there really is no huge huge advantage that someone ,unless writting for 100% windows, would need to sell thier soul for...something that does what, arguably, is already being done with JAVA.
For now: don't forget Embrace Extend Extinguish.
The list is quite long...
DOS
HTML
JAVA
Kerberos
COM
OS/2
Pocket PC/Smart Phone
and even stealling
source code Open standards mean nothing.
They are just a means to "get in the door"
JAVA can do everything .NET does, (perhaps the dev tools aren't as category specific as VS.NET) but there really is no huge huge advantage that someone ,unless writting for 100% windows, would need to sell thier soul for...something that does what, arguably, is already being done with JAVA.
Re: How do I convert my IE Archives in WAFF to something else!?
I've been doing the same thing for some time now and both of us should be kicked in the butt for trusting such data and information to a proprietary MS format.
However, others have already thought about this and beat us to it. I just did some searching on versiontracker tonight and found a little program called WAFInspec that appears to extract Explorer archives into individual files. Very cool. Check it out.
--Rick
I've been doing the same thing for some time now and both of us should be kicked in the butt for trusting such data and information to a proprietary MS format.
However, others have already thought about this and beat us to it. I just did some searching on versiontracker tonight and found a little program called WAFInspec that appears to extract Explorer archives into individual files. Very cool. Check it out.
--Rick
I don't think there is a big issue with M$ pulling out of the Web Browser market specifically, the web browser has reached the end of it's development cycle to the point that the current set of innivations are small. The focus is turning to the web capabilities of the whole system (Unix vs M$).
Apple serves Microsoft probably more than it hinders it, by bringing innovations to market and testing the waters. Apple is not the fish M$ is after, the real competition and market share M$ is eyeing off is the server/enterprise system market. It wants to offer the whole widget to business, and it's easy to see a raft of component strategies eventually coming to gether to form the whole: .NET, Palladium, Longhorn. This will be a closed or at least a M$ rights managed system.
Open standards in browsers will matter while M$ is only a player in the Enterpriser/Server market, but when they become the biggest fish, M$ standards will be the only ones that matter.
Apple serves Microsoft probably more than it hinders it, by bringing innovations to market and testing the waters. Apple is not the fish M$ is after, the real competition and market share M$ is eyeing off is the server/enterprise system market. It wants to offer the whole widget to business, and it's easy to see a raft of component strategies eventually coming to gether to form the whole: .NET, Palladium, Longhorn. This will be a closed or at least a M$ rights managed system.
Open standards in browsers will matter while M$ is only a player in the Enterpriser/Server market, but when they become the biggest fish, M$ standards will be the only ones that matter.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Its a bad news indeed
ROFLMAO......bad bad examples.
Pocket PC? That's MS's own OS, an NT derivative. They didn't embrace or extend anything, totally different platform from Palm. Are you then saying Palm embraced and extended newton?
DOS? Don't make me laugh, Microsoft created it for IBM, then offered to buy it and IBM sold the rights. DOS was theres. Sure there were clones, but MS owned the rights to the real DOS. There were no official standards, but the competing DOS brands did keep up in compatibility and features.
I am not familiar with the changes to Kerbos or COM that MS has done that has upset you.
OS/2 was a stab in the back.
You do realize MS helped design CSS? How about that the only time MS ever added exclusive IE tags was in IE2 while in the most heated part of the browser wars.....and hey....guess what...Netscape was guilty too! They both ignored W3C. And you know what, we all benifited because it showed specialized tags sucked, and they went back to working together on standards.
Originally posted by Fukui
For now: don't forget Embrace Extend Extinguish.
The list is quite long...
DOS
HTML
JAVA
Kerberos
COM
OS/2
Pocket PC/Smart Phone
and even stealling
Open standards mean nothing.
They are just a means to "get in the door"
JAVA can do everything .NET does, (perhaps the dev tools aren't as category specific as VS.NET) but there really is no huge huge advantage that someone ,unless writting for 100% windows, would need to sell thier soul for...something that does what, arguably, is already being done with JAVA.
ROFLMAO......bad bad examples.
Pocket PC? That's MS's own OS, an NT derivative. They didn't embrace or extend anything, totally different platform from Palm. Are you then saying Palm embraced and extended newton?
DOS? Don't make me laugh, Microsoft created it for IBM, then offered to buy it and IBM sold the rights. DOS was theres. Sure there were clones, but MS owned the rights to the real DOS. There were no official standards, but the competing DOS brands did keep up in compatibility and features.
I am not familiar with the changes to Kerbos or COM that MS has done that has upset you.
OS/2 was a stab in the back.
You do realize MS helped design CSS? How about that the only time MS ever added exclusive IE tags was in IE2 while in the most heated part of the browser wars.....and hey....guess what...Netscape was guilty too! They both ignored W3C. And you know what, we all benifited because it showed specialized tags sucked, and they went back to working together on standards.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Its a bad news indeed
Apple did the same thing with BSD. They "stole" FreeBSD and the Mach kernel. But they're Apple, so they're not stealing. Right? Again, I redirect you to the BSD License.
Jeez. No Java can't do everything .NET can do, nor can .NET do everything Java can do. Microsoft did it right. Developers! Developers! Developers! If you build it, they will come.
To anyone who is intereted:
I can fully backup dguisinger 100%. He has not done anything wrong/said anything wrong.
macdong: Per your post about PHP vs .NET, you understand that PHP is far less powerful than .NET. .NET is very, very powerful, very, very object oriented, business oriented, made for the programmers' mind. PHP is just a puny script language that can't do as much as .NET can do with data, etc.
On Windows, sure. There are a lot more Java developers than you think. Java is popular in the server world.
Right out of the box, it's a good thing. My Linux portion works great with Kerberos.
How have they screwed people with COM? COM still works today with .NET. A .NET component can be a COM object and a COM object may be imported into .NET as an object as well. Smoother interoperability.
Come on be serious. That was IBM's fault. They charged people ridiculous prices for drivers, programs, etc. Microsoft knew this would lead OS/2's destructions so they quit and carried on to their own version of NT.
Stole what code? The BSD network stack. No, that wasn't stealing. Read the BSD License and come back to me.and even stealling
Apple did the same thing with BSD. They "stole" FreeBSD and the Mach kernel. But they're Apple, so they're not stealing. Right?
Again, I redirect you to the BSD License.So basically everything GPL is evil?
Jeez. No Java can't do everything .NET can do, nor can .NET do everything Java can do. Microsoft did it right. Developers! Developers! Developers! If you build it, they will come.
To anyone who is intereted:
I can fully backup dguisinger 100%. He has not done anything wrong/said anything wrong.
macdong: Per your post about PHP vs .NET, you understand that PHP is far less powerful than .NET. .NET is very, very powerful, very, very object oriented, business oriented, made for the programmers' mind. PHP is just a puny script language that can't do as much as .NET can do with data, etc.
Competition
The one thing that should be taken into consideration is that IE was at one time a formidable competitor and dominator of the apple browser contingency. In that sense it spurred competition which is always a positive thing. While IE may have been long dead, losing a once formidable browser is not necessarily entirely benevolent. It's always good to have someone beating down the door, and in the case of a huge developer like microsoft, their knocks are all the more loud. While I don't doubt apple is trying to make safari the best it can, at the same time, losing a powerful developer in some ways may make browser development on the mac platform more lathargic.
The one thing that should be taken into consideration is that IE was at one time a formidable competitor and dominator of the apple browser contingency. In that sense it spurred competition which is always a positive thing. While IE may have been long dead, losing a once formidable browser is not necessarily entirely benevolent. It's always good to have someone beating down the door, and in the case of a huge developer like microsoft, their knocks are all the more loud. While I don't doubt apple is trying to make safari the best it can, at the same time, losing a powerful developer in some ways may make browser development on the mac platform more lathargic.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Its a bad news indeed
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I'm sorry, too damn funny.
WebObjects can do just a FRACTION of .NET.
.NET is an entire framework composed of new Win32 API (much cleaner), new ASP.NET (which WebObjects compares, but you can't get the same power/ease of use as ASP.NET), Web Services, etc.
Seriously, has Apple updated WebObjects in a long time? ASP.NET can do so much more in so much less time.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I'm sorry, too damn funny.
WebObjects can do just a FRACTION of .NET.
.NET is an entire framework composed of new Win32 API (much cleaner), new ASP.NET (which WebObjects compares, but you can't get the same power/ease of use as ASP.NET), Web Services, etc.
Seriously, has Apple updated WebObjects in a long time? ASP.NET can do so much more in so much less time.
.NET == BULL CRAP!!
I have been reading this very long thread, and I have a few thoughts....
Many people are lamenting the loss of IE on Mac, with thoughts that MS now owns the web, and even go so far as to imply that sites will start severely breaking if you do not use IE.
OK, so in Safari, I don't have those annoying commercials that constantly get in the way when I go to Yahoo, but generally, I have had very little if any problem going to a large variety of site using Safari. At this point, I have found it more compatible than Netscape. When I do find a site that is incorrect, I hit the little bug up in the corner. Apple has done well at fixing many sites on Safari.
The comparison list was a little funny. I am an ex-OS/2'er. OS/2 died simply because IBM dropped support for it. It was comparable in price, and the driver support from IBM was pretty impressive. By version 4 of the product however, IBM decided that there was no more innovative dev cycles going into it. There are still features in Workplace shell that I would like to see in any current OS. In reality the list should have listed Stac, Central Point, and Netscape, since those are the most blatant examples of Microsoft's technique of killing competitors. If they could afford to give away free internet access, I am sure that they would have done so just to kill AOL. I have to wonder though if AOL can react quick enough from MSN's growing strength.
Finally...All those that want to sing the praises of .NET should try writing some serious apps using it. While the framework is very robust for the windows platform, there are many parts of it that really doesn't work well. **In my opinion**, JAVA is still a better general purpose programming platform, if for no other reason, but it's maturity and stability.
Now I am not saying that .NET should be eliminated. It is ( in my mind ) actually kinda wild that you have access to many easy to access Windows APIs from many different scripting and programming languages. It is just at this point, I am generally terrified to apply any service pack for .Net for fear that it breaks my apps. I will more likely feel a little better when .Net V2 comes out, and MS starts porting it to other Platforms ( planned ).
Every languages has proven that it has a place, and there is no end all to beat all. People here want to say that .NET beats the crud out of BASIC / PHP / PERL / JAVA / etc. I will remind them that .NET framework can't hold a candle to unmanaged C / C++ / Assembly / DHTML code. ( all can be made web friendly )
In short, be careful when comparing size..someone's might be larger.
One last final thought. For those who think innovation is dead in web browsers, try right clicking on a word ( in Safari ) the next time you post. I know of no other browsers where I can spell check forms. MS has stopped developing IE because they have perfected the ability to put TV commercials on web sites.
Max
I have been reading this very long thread, and I have a few thoughts....
Many people are lamenting the loss of IE on Mac, with thoughts that MS now owns the web, and even go so far as to imply that sites will start severely breaking if you do not use IE.
OK, so in Safari, I don't have those annoying commercials that constantly get in the way when I go to Yahoo, but generally, I have had very little if any problem going to a large variety of site using Safari. At this point, I have found it more compatible than Netscape. When I do find a site that is incorrect, I hit the little bug up in the corner. Apple has done well at fixing many sites on Safari.
The comparison list was a little funny. I am an ex-OS/2'er. OS/2 died simply because IBM dropped support for it. It was comparable in price, and the driver support from IBM was pretty impressive. By version 4 of the product however, IBM decided that there was no more innovative dev cycles going into it. There are still features in Workplace shell that I would like to see in any current OS. In reality the list should have listed Stac, Central Point, and Netscape, since those are the most blatant examples of Microsoft's technique of killing competitors. If they could afford to give away free internet access, I am sure that they would have done so just to kill AOL. I have to wonder though if AOL can react quick enough from MSN's growing strength.
Finally...All those that want to sing the praises of .NET should try writing some serious apps using it. While the framework is very robust for the windows platform, there are many parts of it that really doesn't work well. **In my opinion**, JAVA is still a better general purpose programming platform, if for no other reason, but it's maturity and stability.
Now I am not saying that .NET should be eliminated. It is ( in my mind ) actually kinda wild that you have access to many easy to access Windows APIs from many different scripting and programming languages. It is just at this point, I am generally terrified to apply any service pack for .Net for fear that it breaks my apps. I will more likely feel a little better when .Net V2 comes out, and MS starts porting it to other Platforms ( planned ).
Every languages has proven that it has a place, and there is no end all to beat all. People here want to say that .NET beats the crud out of BASIC / PHP / PERL / JAVA / etc. I will remind them that .NET framework can't hold a candle to unmanaged C / C++ / Assembly / DHTML code. ( all can be made web friendly )
In short, be careful when comparing size..someone's might be larger.
One last final thought. For those who think innovation is dead in web browsers, try right clicking on a word ( in Safari ) the next time you post. I know of no other browsers where I can spell check forms. MS has stopped developing IE because they have perfected the ability to put TV commercials on web sites.
Max
Re: .NET == BULL CRAP!!
What parts don't work well. I'd like to know.
Java is indeed a better "general purpose" programming platform for the time being. But one already has a robust framework on a robust OS (Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP) so it's useful right out of the box. Mono is coming along very well. They already have mcs programmed in C# and several people have already started programming seriously on Mono with GTK# and QT#. So it's getting as flexible as Java.
Why are you terrified to install SPs? They're very well done with .NET. I've gone through .NET 1.0 SP0, then SP1, SP2, then .NET 1.1 SP0 right now.. all are rock solid and it doesn't even break 1.0 programs because of side by side assemblies. Java can't beat that. .NET is definitely Microsoft's most robust piece of framework and software.
BTW, there's not much web friendliness with Assembly! No one in their right mind would program for the web in such a low level! It's not productive. PHP, PERL involve cumbersome code escaping and its very hard to modularize. That's not friendly to me.
No, OS/2 died because IBM decided to drop it due to the fact that NO ONE was buying it! Their stuff was too expensive.
I develop in .NET as well. I develop all kinds of serious applications, web backends, etc. Microsoft used it to program Visual Studio .NET (entirely in .NET), their massive sites, their next version of Windows basically has all basic programs done in .NET. Please don't tell me .NET isn't for serious development.
What parts don't work well. I'd like to know.
Java is indeed a better "general purpose" programming platform for the time being. But one already has a robust framework on a robust OS (Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP) so it's useful right out of the box. Mono is coming along very well. They already have mcs programmed in C# and several people have already started programming seriously on Mono with GTK# and QT#. So it's getting as flexible as Java.
.NET isn't just Windows API, but a generally defined API by the ECMA.
Why are you terrified to install SPs? They're very well done with .NET. I've gone through .NET 1.0 SP0, then SP1, SP2, then .NET 1.1 SP0 right now.. all are rock solid and it doesn't even break 1.0 programs because of side by side assemblies. Java can't beat that. .NET is definitely Microsoft's most robust piece of framework and software.
You haven't been following .NET, I take. You're wrong about unmanaged code. .NET can do it. You simply state an unsafe code region, but all other code regions are safe. In fact, this is an advantage over Java. You CAN run unmanaged code. You can even mix or match them.
BTW, there's not much web friendliness with Assembly! No one in their right mind would program for the web in such a low level! It's not productive. PHP, PERL involve cumbersome code escaping and its very hard to modularize. That's not friendly to me.
Re: Re: .NET == BULL CRAP!!
For anyone who is interested on why I am a proponent of .NET's data binding capabilities:
// Load the Data
MsSqlDataAdapter da = new MySqlDataAdapter();
da.SelectCommand
= new MsSqlCommand("SELECT * FROM tableA",sqlConnection);
DataSet ds = new DataSet();
da.Fill(ds,"tableA");
// Place in ListBox
ListBoxControl.DataSource = ds;
ListBoxControl.DataMember = "tableA";
ListBoxControl.DataTextField = "columnA";
ListBoxControl.DataValueField = "columnB";
ListBoxControl.DataBind();
// Place in DataGrid, which is a table with columns and rows, which gets built automatically in .NET.
//(Of course, still has flexability for people who want to format, etc)
DataGridControl.DataSource = ds;
DataGridControl.DataMember = "tableA";
DataGridControl.DataKeyField = "columnB";
DataGridControl.AutoGenerateColumns=true;
DataGridControl.DataBind();
See, thats all there is to it. And it gets better, with data set / table views, when using it in a windows form app, instead of a web app, state is stored. Selecting a value in a drop down list, will cause items in other fields to automatically change if they are in a row indexed by the drop down list. a 500 line program can be reduced to 25 lines or less. A Windows Forms app can not only show the data, but automatically update the dataset, and all you have to do is provide the SQL syntax and data adapter update command to UPDATE, INSERT, or DELETE the specific database entry corresponding the the UI data. Talk about slick.
Plus I ask anyone with experience with Web Objects, or PHP for that matter.
Do you work with web pages on the server side using an event model?
ListControl.OnSelectedIndexChanged = new EventHandler(this.OnListControlChange)
Its how you do GUI programming. Its how you do ASP.NET programming. While I don't know about WebObjects, I can tell you for a fact, PHP is not done this way. There is one entry point. No event driven interaction. Infact, PHP works on echo/print statements. .NET works on controls, which render their output to HTML, and post back events when clicked, or selections are changed, allowing for GUI style event-driven programming.
As for the question of how it compares to WebObjects, that may answer some, however: It doesnt compare. .NET is the equivilent in the Mac world of Java + Cocoa + WebObjects + XML combined into one, plus better integrated, more cleanly implimented, and much better documented (*ahem* cocoa)
For anyone who is interested on why I am a proponent of .NET's data binding capabilities:
// Load the Data
MsSqlDataAdapter da = new MySqlDataAdapter();
da.SelectCommand
= new MsSqlCommand("SELECT * FROM tableA",sqlConnection);
DataSet ds = new DataSet();
da.Fill(ds,"tableA");
// Place in ListBox
ListBoxControl.DataSource = ds;
ListBoxControl.DataMember = "tableA";
ListBoxControl.DataTextField = "columnA";
ListBoxControl.DataValueField = "columnB";
ListBoxControl.DataBind();
// Place in DataGrid, which is a table with columns and rows, which gets built automatically in .NET.
//(Of course, still has flexability for people who want to format, etc)
DataGridControl.DataSource = ds;
DataGridControl.DataMember = "tableA";
DataGridControl.DataKeyField = "columnB";
DataGridControl.AutoGenerateColumns=true;
DataGridControl.DataBind();
See, thats all there is to it. And it gets better, with data set / table views, when using it in a windows form app, instead of a web app, state is stored. Selecting a value in a drop down list, will cause items in other fields to automatically change if they are in a row indexed by the drop down list. a 500 line program can be reduced to 25 lines or less. A Windows Forms app can not only show the data, but automatically update the dataset, and all you have to do is provide the SQL syntax and data adapter update command to UPDATE, INSERT, or DELETE the specific database entry corresponding the the UI data. Talk about slick.
Plus I ask anyone with experience with Web Objects, or PHP for that matter.
Do you work with web pages on the server side using an event model?
ListControl.OnSelectedIndexChanged = new EventHandler(this.OnListControlChange)
Its how you do GUI programming. Its how you do ASP.NET programming. While I don't know about WebObjects, I can tell you for a fact, PHP is not done this way. There is one entry point. No event driven interaction. Infact, PHP works on echo/print statements. .NET works on controls, which render their output to HTML, and post back events when clicked, or selections are changed, allowing for GUI style event-driven programming.
As for the question of how it compares to WebObjects, that may answer some, however: It doesnt compare. .NET is the equivilent in the Mac world of Java + Cocoa + WebObjects + XML combined into one, plus better integrated, more cleanly implimented, and much better documented (*ahem* cocoa)