____/ BearItAll on Friday 09 November 2007 13:06 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> A Year of Microsoft and Novell Partnership
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | One year after former arch-rivals Microsoft and Novell partner up, what
>> | has resulted from their alliance?
>> `----
>>
>>
> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2214178,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594
>>
>> Microsoft-Novell: Has Their Deal Made a Difference?
>>
>
> I have to say that I don't get it. Can anyone here and point at their Linux
> where it's operability with Windows has improved since last year? I have
> upto date SLES's and openSuse's coming out of my ears but I couldn't point
> at it.
>
> Stick on the users, enter them as samba folk, samba does the rest for us. It
> isn't a difficult thing any more.
True. That's /exactly/ what technical writers keep saying. Novell is only using
the /perception/ that it works better.
> I know that this {do you mind if I just call it InterOp, I have a poorly
> typing finger} was one of the targets of their agreement and that the new
> smb packets were involved, which we do need access to and our mates at
> Novell will get it for us. But I can't really say that I have seen any
> evidence that they are changes to last years systems in that area. I can
> still open the network browser and get bugger all until I actually type the
> named device into it :)
They could argue that their SUSE /will/ (some day) work better with Microsoft's
hypervisor, but everyone uses VMWare anyway.
> I know that the modules for mono->.NET are meant to be in a good state right
> now, I assume that MS has helped out there. I haven't tried for myself, I
> abandoned .NET in favour of staying with php/ajax, but have been told that
> compatibility is very good, with some care needed on some of the common
> modules/libs. Young up coming programmers are bound to opt for .NET, Linux
> needs either mono to work or for a .NET interface to work for us, or we
> could start to fall behind in the web applications arena.
>
> I will also give another plug for mono commandline while I'm here, I really
> have warmed to it, I tend to use that where I would once have scribbled
> down a Ruby script. Ruby's pain is always long loop operations, traversing
> a few directories or files, calculating on a lot of database data, and you
> tend to dump it and pick up Perl instead, mono c# is better than Ruby in
> that area (not as good as Perl yet, but better than Ruby, and from a
> scripting point of view just as quick to write as Ruby is).
Mono is a complex story and having it supported may do more harm than good. I
bet Microsoft is not just assisting but also funding this Trojan horse, via de
Icaza and co.
> Having said that, I ought to give Ruby rails a plug too. Because although I
> can drop Ruby very easily. Ruby Rails is another matter entirely. Very easy
> to learn and very easy to design good web site applications/pages. Is it as
> easy to learn as .NET/c# ? Well the answer has to be 'no', but still you
> have a major advantage in that your web host can be UNIX/Linux, cheaper
> hosting while still getting more per package than the Windows hosts. I
> particularly liked Rails for the simple reason that I hate writing HTML,
> yes I am that sod that writes webpages using an openoffice document as a
> template. Rails meant I just had to write little snippets of HTML. Still
> came out luminous green on yellow back grounds, but I can't really blame
> Rails for my bad taste. But most important of all is that Rails encourages
> you, whether you like it or not, to put the parts of your work into the
> right place to aid maintenance at a later date.
>
> 'ecourages whether you like it or not', I like that one, if i ever become
> dictator I will use it as my slogan.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Linux: does exactly what it says on the tin
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
run-level 2 2007-10-30 19:49 last=
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
