Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #343760 > unrolled thread

Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-02-16 23:42 +0000
    Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-02-16 19:41 -0500
      Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-02-17 00:59 +0000
        Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-02-17 20:40 -0500
          Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-02-18 01:59 +0000
            Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-02-17 23:40 -0500
      Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-02-17 01:20 +0000
        Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2016-02-17 12:38 +0000
          Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:52 -0800
          Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-02-17 22:57 +0000
        Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-02-17 20:38 -0500
          Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-02-18 10:31 +0000
            Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-02-19 09:26 -0500
              Re: Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-02-19 11:29 -0500

#343760 — Linux Compile; Windows Byte Code

Microsoft Windows is so fscking wishy-washy in a number of ways.
But the pinnacle of MSFT asininity is that it distributes most
executables as byte code (or MSIL for Microsoft Intermediate
Language).

Only after a program is loaded does it get translated into the
appropriate machine language (JIT), and the process is done piece by
fscking piece with many palpable lags.

What an idiotic scheme, but yet it is so typical of MSFT.  But I suppose
that such schemes are necessary to not reveal their precious source
code.  (If Microsoft ever did publish its source code, it is most
certain that many would discover the overall design to be an atrocious
monstrosity with many, many egregious oversights.)

Linux, in stark contrast, distributes all programs as source code
and the user, or distro, is free to compile and optimize at will.

Linux is how computing was always meant to be.

Microsoft obscures its pathetic nature with silly connivance.

Get the real thing created by real men.  Get Linux.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#343766

On 2/16/2016 6:42 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> Microsoft Windows is so fscking wishy-washy in a number of ways.
> But the pinnacle of MSFT asininity is that it distributes most
> executables as byte code (or MSIL for Microsoft Intermediate
> Language).
>
> Only after a program is loaded does it get translated into the
> appropriate machine language (JIT), and the process is done piece by
> fscking piece with many palpable lags.


Which lags are you referring to?

Win8 and later are very fast OSes.

MS Office is far more snappy than LibreOffice.




> What an idiotic scheme, but yet it is so typical of MSFT.  But I suppose
> that such schemes are necessary to not reveal their precious source
> code.

Do you give your work away for free?  So why are you complaining, 
hypocrite...



> (If Microsoft ever did publish its source code, it is most
> certain that many would discover the overall design to be an atrocious
> monstrosity with many, many egregious oversights.)


"...the quality of the code is generally excellent. Modules are small, 
and procedures generally fit on a single screen. The commenting is very 
detailed about intentions, but doesn't fall into "add one to i" redundancy."

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/15/71552/7795




> Linux, in stark contrast, distributes all programs as source code
> and the user, or distro, is free to compile and optimize at will.
>
> Linux is how computing was always meant to be.

hobby computing



> Microsoft obscures its pathetic nature with silly connivance.
>
> Get the real thing created by real men.  Get Linux.


Now with systemd and binary journals.

MS is doomed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343772

DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
> On 2/16/2016 6:42 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>> Microsoft Windows is so fscking wishy-washy in a number of ways.
>> But the pinnacle of MSFT asininity is that it distributes most
>> executables as byte code (or MSIL for Microsoft Intermediate
>> Language).
>>
>> Only after a program is loaded does it get translated into the
>> appropriate machine language (JIT), and the process is done piece by
>> fscking piece with many palpable lags.
> 
> 
> Which lags are you referring to?
> 
> Win8 and later are very fast OSes.
> 

Fastest unwanted OSes ever.

> MS Office is far more snappy than LibreOffice.
> 
> 

You misspelled far more crappy.

> 
> 
>> What an idiotic scheme, but yet it is so typical of MSFT.  But I suppose
>> that such schemes are necessary to not reveal their precious source
>> code.
> 
> Do you give your work away for free?  So why are you complaining, 
> hypocrite...
> 
> 
> 
>> (If Microsoft ever did publish its source code, it is most
>> certain that many would discover the overall design to be an atrocious
>> monstrosity with many, many egregious oversights.)
> 
> 
> "...the quality of the code is generally excellent. Modules are small, 
> and procedures generally fit on a single screen. The commenting is very 
> detailed about intentions, but doesn't fall into "add one to i" redundancy."
> 

Funnier in its entirety.

> http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/15/71552/7795
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343837

On 2/16/2016 7:59 PM, owl wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 2/16/2016 6:42 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>>> Microsoft Windows is so fscking wishy-washy in a number of ways.
>>> But the pinnacle of MSFT asininity is that it distributes most
>>> executables as byte code (or MSIL for Microsoft Intermediate
>>> Language).
>>>
>>> Only after a program is loaded does it get translated into the
>>> appropriate machine language (JIT), and the process is done piece
>>> by fscking piece with many palpable lags.
>>
>>
>> Which lags are you referring to?
>>
>> Win8 and later are very fast OSes.
>>
>
> Fastest unwanted OSes ever.

Win10: 11.85% user share after 6 months, free of cost to many
Linux:  1.71% user share after 20 years, free of cost to all

ouch!

Win8 was a pile of crap, 8.1 offered some fixes, and 10 got
them back on track.



>> MS Office is far more snappy than LibreOffice.
>>
>
> You misspelled far more crappy.

LibreOffice: now with limited macro recording.  No wonder - they've only 
had 13+ years of development...




>>> What an idiotic scheme, but yet it is so typical of MSFT.  But I
>>> suppose that such schemes are necessary to not reveal their
>>> precious source code.
>>
>> Do you give your work away for free?  So why are you complaining,
>> hypocrite...
>>
>>
>>
>>> (If Microsoft ever did publish its source code, it is most
>>> certain that many would discover the overall design to be an
>>> atrocious monstrosity with many, many egregious oversights.)
>>
>>
>> "...the quality of the code is generally excellent. Modules are
>> small, and procedures generally fit on a single screen. The
>> commenting is very detailed about intentions, but doesn't fall into
>> "add one to i" redundancy."
>>
>
> Funnier in its entirety.
>
>> http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/15/71552/7795


"the quality of the code is generally excellent" tells you all you need 
to know.

But... do you mean every line of MS code isn't perfect?  That it 
actually contains hacks to maintain many years of backward compatibility?

No way...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343840

DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
> On 2/16/2016 7:59 PM, owl wrote:
>> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>>> On 2/16/2016 6:42 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>>>> Microsoft Windows is so fscking wishy-washy in a number of ways.
>>>> But the pinnacle of MSFT asininity is that it distributes most
>>>> executables as byte code (or MSIL for Microsoft Intermediate
>>>> Language).
>>>>
>>>> Only after a program is loaded does it get translated into the
>>>> appropriate machine language (JIT), and the process is done piece
>>>> by fscking piece with many palpable lags.
>>>
>>>
>>> Which lags are you referring to?
>>>
>>> Win8 and later are very fast OSes.
>>>
>>
>> Fastest unwanted OSes ever.
> 
> Win10: 11.85% user share after 6 months,

after 6 months of doing everything in their power to force
it down everybody's throats.  Nobody wants it.  They are
happy with the OS that came with the machine they bought.
People just want to be left alone.

> free of cost to many
> Linux:  1.71% user share after 20 years,

after 20 years of being pre-installed practically nowhere.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343849

On 2/17/2016 8:59 PM, owl wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 2/16/2016 7:59 PM, owl wrote:
>>> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2/16/2016 6:42 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>>>>> Microsoft Windows is so fscking wishy-washy in a number of ways.
>>>>> But the pinnacle of MSFT asininity is that it distributes most
>>>>> executables as byte code (or MSIL for Microsoft Intermediate
>>>>> Language).
>>>>>
>>>>> Only after a program is loaded does it get translated into the
>>>>> appropriate machine language (JIT), and the process is done piece
>>>>> by fscking piece with many palpable lags.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which lags are you referring to?
>>>>
>>>> Win8 and later are very fast OSes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Fastest unwanted OSes ever.
>>
>> Win10: 11.85% user share after 6 months,
>
> after 6 months of doing everything in their power to force
> it down everybody's throats.Nobody wants it.


Win10 is #23 & #24 on the Amazon best seller list.  Take away all the 
seasonal tax and acctg software, and it's #11 & #12.

http://www.amazon.com/best-sellers-software/zgbs/software#2

Get it together, Linux advocate.




> They are
> happy with the OS that came with the machine they bought.
> People just want to be left alone.

Maybe you have halitosis?



>> free of cost to many
>> Linux:  1.71% user share after 20 years,
>
> after 20 years of being pre-installed practically nowhere.


There is only ONE situation in the world I know of where a totally free 
of cost product is almost completely ignored.

And it isn't yo' Momma...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343775

On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:41:19 -0500, DFS wrote:

> 
> Do you give your work away for free?
>

As a matter of fact I fscking do.

As a research scientist with three peer-reviewed publications,
I release the fruits of my labor free of charge to the world.
The goal of science is to improve civilization for the benefit
of all, and such goals cannot be met through secretive hording.

Open Source software has identical ambitions.  GNU/Linux is
open and free for the betterment of mankind.  MSFT is closed
and protected to reap a short-term profit for a tiny clique
of short-sighted shareholders.

You can take your fscking bourgeoisie idealism and cram
it into your favorite orifice.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343803

On 17/02/2016 01:20, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:41:19 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
>>
>> Do you give your work away for free?
>>
>
> As a matter of fact I fscking do.
>
> As a research scientist with three peer-reviewed publications,
> I release the fruits of my labor free of charge to the world.
> The goal of science is to improve civilization for the benefit
> of all, and such goals cannot be met through secretive hording.
>
> Open Source software has identical ambitions.  GNU/Linux is
> open and free for the betterment of mankind.  MSFT is closed
> and protected to reap a short-term profit for a tiny clique
> of short-sighted shareholders.
>
> You can take your fscking bourgeoisie idealism and cram
> it into your favorite orifice.
>

Hmm, you don't sound like a research scientist, most of the ones I know 
have a far more extensive vocabulary and don't need to lower themselves 
to insults to get their point across. They also have far higher thought 
processes and wouldn't waste their time in such a pointless Usenet group 
as this one.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343807

On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 7:38:44 AM UTC-5, Desk Rabbit wrote:
> On 17/02/2016 01:20, Fabian Russell wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:41:19 -0500, DFS wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Do you give your work away for free?
> >>
> >
> > As a matter of fact I fscking do.
> >
> > As a research scientist with three peer-reviewed publications,
> > I release the fruits of my labor free of charge to the world.
> > The goal of science is to improve civilization for the benefit
> > of all, and such goals cannot be met through secretive hording.
> >
> > Open Source software has identical ambitions.  GNU/Linux is
> > open and free for the betterment of mankind.  MSFT is closed
> > and protected to reap a short-term profit for a tiny clique
> > of short-sighted shareholders.
> >
> > You can take your fscking bourgeoisie idealism and cram
> > it into your favorite orifice.
> >
> 
> Hmm, you don't sound like a research scientist, most of the ones I know 
> have a far more extensive vocabulary and don't need to lower themselves 
> to insults to get their point across. They also have far higher thought 
> processes and wouldn't waste their time in such a pointless Usenet group 
> as this one.


He has got 3 peer-reviewed publications, rather than 400, Rodent!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343829

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:38:41 +0000, Desk Rabbit wrote:

> 
>  most of the ones I know 
> 

Well, you don't all of them, so your comments are invalid.

But let's just say that my research days are over -- of my own volition.

I suddenly decided to embark on a new career path, which is anathema
in this day and age.  The unwritten rule is "one career per lifetime."

At best, people will not believe you.  At worst, they will think that
you are insane.

Human beings are very strange creatures.  That's why I prefer Pseudomonas.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343834

On 2/16/2016 8:20 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:41:19 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
>>
>> Do you give your work away for free?
>>
>
> As a matter of fact I fscking do.
>
> As a research scientist

Bullshit.  You're an unemployed programmer who couldn't make it as a 
.NET developer.




> with three peer-reviewed publications,

By hobbyists, for hobbyists.



> I release the fruits of my labor free of charge to the world.

I can only imagine what kind of idiocy you "published".



> The goal of science is to improve civilization for the benefit
> of all,

A tiny few might be driven by altruism, but the vast majority just want 
to pay the bills.  If they can find a job in an interesting area of 
research that excites them, they're lucky.


> and such goals cannot be met through secretive hording.
>
> Open Source software has identical ambitions.  GNU/Linux is
> open and free for the betterment of mankind.


More bullshit.  It's open and free because some people like to code.

"Abstract:
In this paper we report on the results of a study of the effort and 
motivations of individuals to contributing to the creation of Free/Open 
Source software. We used a Web -based survey, administered to 684 
software developers in 287 F/OSS projects, to learn what lies behind the
effort put into such projects. Academic theorizing on individual 
motivations for participating in F/OSS projects has posited that 
external motivational factors in the form of extrinsic benefits
(e.g.; better jobs, career advancement) are the main drivers of effort. 
We find in contrast, that enjoyment-based intrinsic motivation, namely 
how creative a person feels when working on the project, is the 
strongest and most pervasive driver. We also find that user need, 
intellectual stimulation derived from writing code, and improving 
programming skills are top motivators for project participation. A 
majority of our respondents are skilled and experienced professionals
working in IT-related jobs, with approximately 40 percent being paid to 
participate in the F/OSS project."

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-352-managing-innovation-emerging-trends-spring-2005/readings/lakhaniwolf.pdf



> MSFT is closed
> and protected to reap a short-term profit for a tiny clique
> of short-sighted shareholders.

25+ years of near total PC OS dominance isn't "short-term", bozo.



> You can take your fscking bourgeoisie idealism and cram
> it into your favorite orifice.

You can take your /fucking/ lies and idiocy and cram them into your 
favorite orifice: your drooling piehole.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343855

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 20:38:14 -0500, DFS wrote:

> 
> I can only imagine what kind of idiocy you "published".
> 

You could never even begin to imagine -- let alone understand.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343924

On 2/18/2016 5:31 AM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 20:38:14 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
>>
>> I can only imagine what kind of idiocy you "published".
>>
>
> You could never even begin to imagine -- let alone understand.


Try me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#343932

"DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in message news:na78h6$s29$8@dont-email.me...
> On 2/18/2016 5:31 AM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 20:38:14 -0500, DFS wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I can only imagine what kind of idiocy you "published".
>>>
>>
>> You could never even begin to imagine -- let alone understand.
>
>
> Try me.
>

It's time for "advocate Fabian" to vanish and for "Vile" and "Lester" to 
make their return.

Yeah... he's a bright one alright.

-- 
"Internally, Microsoft still uses the former 8.3 filename notation (in 
Windows) because nothing else will work.  The more "liberal" file naming 
convention is just a cosmetic cover."

Idiotic nonsense from Fabian Russell
Nov 9, 2015 - <pan.2015.11.09.18.05.31@localhost.localdomain>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web