>>> .NET comes with Windows nowadays.
> 
>> Oh, wait - you probably meant it comes with Vista.
> 
> That's pretty much what "nowadays" means, yes.

Does *anybody* use Vista yet? Still seems pretty rare.

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

>> 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.

>> In other words, it makes things easier for the developers, not the end 
>> users.
> 
> For both, really. Indeed, that's what the whole "one click" fiasco is 
> about. And you get less malware and unexplained lockups when the 
> software you're running is written in .NET, because it's checking for 
> buffer overruns and such.

Assuming there's no buffer overruns in the runtime engine itself. (I 
notice how as soon as I install .NET, a whole bunch of extra hotfixes 
show up as needing to be applied...)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Does *anybody* use Vista yet? Still seems pretty rare.

  How many new PCs (desktop and laptops) are sold each year?

  In how many of those PCs is Vista installed by default? How many buyers
simply accept the fact (either because they want Vista or because they
don't know too much about computers) and go with the purchase?

  The vast majority of Vistas out there are not because people using XP
would go out and buy Vista to upgrade their system. The vast majority is
because Vista is installed by default on all new PCs (without even asking
the customer). It's not really a choice for most people (especially those
who know little about computers).

  (This is, btw, why Steve Ballmer bragging about how Vista is the second
most popular OS in the world is so irritating. Yes, it's the second most
widely installed OS, but not by customer choice! It's the salesman who
makes the choice for the customer. The popularity is not correlated to
any quality merit Vista might have.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

> Really? That's interesting. So how do you explain the fact that I keep 
> having to manually install it?
>
> Oh, wait - you probably meant it comes with Vista.

It's also an MS automatic update download for XP (and included in some XP 
SP) IIRC.  So if you're in a company and have the updates managed locally 
then it should be fairly trivial to push it out to all XP machines.

> The 25 to 30 minutes was just thrashing the HD back and forth.

Sounds like you were running low on hard disc space or RAM, how old was the 
machine?

> In other words, it makes things easier for the developers, not the end 
> users.

Making things easier for developers has a positive knock-on effect for 
users.

Anyway, I would guess that most people have some version of .net installed 
by now anyway so I doubt it's such a big issue as a few years back.

Post a reply to this message

>> Does *anybody* use Vista yet? Still seems pretty rare.
> 
>   How many new PCs (desktop and laptops) are sold each year?

No idea. Presumably not many compared to the number already set up.

Certainly where I work, we're intentionally not installing any Vista 
systems.

>   The vast majority of Vistas out there are not because people using XP
> would go out and buy Vista to upgrade their system. The vast majority is
> because Vista is installed by default on all new PCs (without even asking
> the customer). It's not really a choice for most people (especially those
> who know little about computers).

Especially since XP is no longer on sale...

>   This is, btw, why Steve Ballmer bragging about how Vista is the second
> most popular OS in the world is so irritating.

Yeah, well, I just ignore that stuff.

Post a reply to this message

>> Really? That's interesting. So how do you explain the fact that I keep 
>> having to manually install it?
>>
>> Oh, wait - you probably meant it comes with Vista.
> 
> It's also an MS automatic update download for XP (and included in some 
> XP SP) IIRC.

I beg to differ. Just yesterday I set up a brand new laptop, installed 
XP, installed SP3, installed all critical updates. I still had to select 
to install the .NET framework seperately; it is *not* installed 
automatically. (But IE8 is, interestingly enough...)

> So if you're in a company and have the updates managed 
> locally then it should be fairly trivial to push it out to all XP machines.

Yes. In fact, that happens here (now). Apparently .NET 3.5 SP1 includes 
an update tp the RDP client which we need.

>> The 25 to 30 minutes was just thrashing the HD back and forth.
> 
> Sounds like you were running low on hard disc space or RAM, how old was 
> the machine?

It was a brand new Dell OptiPlex 755.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   How many new PCs (desktop and laptops) are sold each year?
> 
>   In how many of those PCs is Vista installed by default? How many buyers
> simply accept the fact (either because they want Vista or because they
> don't know too much about computers) and go with the purchase?

How many people buy an OS separately instead of assuming one will be 
bundled with the computer they get, and 'upgrade' when they get a newer 
computer?  Not me, at least.  I wanted to play around with both XP and 
Vista for a while after they were out, but waited to get a new system 
that had them on by default.

--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

Post a reply to this message

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

Invisible wrote:
>>   This is, btw, why Steve Ballmer bragging about how Vista is the second
>> most popular OS in the world is so irritating.
> 
> Yeah, well, I just ignore that stuff.

And that's why later you say nobody uses Vista.

Post a reply to this message

>>>   This is, btw, why Steve Ballmer bragging about how Vista is the second
>>> most popular OS in the world is so irritating.
>> Yeah, well, I just ignore that stuff.
> 
> And that's why later you say nobody uses Vista.

Oh, I'm sure a few people use it. But not very many. That's my point.

I'm pretty sure *everybody* ignores marketing nonesense...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>>   This is, btw, why Steve Ballmer bragging about how Vista is the
>>>>   second
>>>> most popular OS in the world is so irritating.
>>> Yeah, well, I just ignore that stuff.
>> 
>> And that's why later you say nobody uses Vista.
> 
> Oh, I'm sure a few people use it. But not very many. That's my point.
> 
> I'm pretty sure *everybody* ignores marketing nonesense...

Everybody?

As unbelievable as it may seem, spam actually works, you know?

Post a reply to this message