Invisible wrote:
> Does *anybody* use Vista yet? Still seems pretty rare.

Lots of people like it and use it in the home environment. It's slower to 
catch on in the business environment, where people have more specialized 
tools they need to keep working.

>> Sure, if you're running an OS version that was released before .NET 
>> was, it makes it hard to come with.
> 
> I thought maybe you were claiming that it was added by one of the 
> service packs or something. 

No, but it was a WU update.

> (The Windows Firewall didn't exist before SP2, for example.)

Yes it did. It was just turned off by default. SP2 turned it on.

>>> The 25 to 30 minutes was just thrashing the HD back and forth.
>>
>> You just like complaining, don't you? :-)
> 
> The Java runtime takes, like 2 minutes _maximum_ to install. Only the 
> .NET framework takes 25 minutes.

I'm not denying it takes a while. Since you don't have assemblies or sxs in 
Java, it's easier to package things up into one big file that's faster to 
install. I'm just saying that of all the things for a professional 
operations manager to complain about in Windows, "it takes 30 minutes to 
install" seems kind of low on the list. :-)

> Assuming there's no buffer overruns in the runtime engine itself.

That's pretty easy. There's only a handful of instructions where you have to 
check it's right, and then everyone gets the benefit. It's not like every 
class has to get checked for buffer overruns - just the runtime system.

> notice how as soon as I install .NET, a whole bunch of extra hotfixes 
> show up as needing to be applied...)

Not every hotfix is fixing a buffer overrun. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message