It’s not quite as impressive when you consider an M5 engine glows like that while running, especially since it has to stay on the road much longer than 311 miles before hitting its next service 🙂.
Honestly, there’s really no point in us bickering about this. My point was that we could find a better example, not that the topic itself is bad. If you want to learn C#, this is actually great material. The difference between good and great just comes down to the details. Regardless, nobody needs to worry about this thread becoming a problem. I might not agree with Daniel Fowler9 even one percent, but that doesn't change the quality of the work.
Let's just spark up a joint (modern times 😁) and move on to a different conversation 🙂
Am I foaming at the mouth? You clearly haven't seen me when I actually lose my cool. As for my American English, it’s because I haven't lived stateside in twelve years. If you want, I can switch to a more global standard to fix the grammar, though I doubt you'd follow along.
Regarding my stance against Microsoft, I think I have a pretty solid reason for it. It wasn't my intention to shut down her topic or anything like that; I just suggested she could have used a better example.
If I'm bothering you so much, then go ahead and push your luck—maybe my boss will let me go. Then you can sell your Microsoft propaganda to Daniel Fowler9 all you want. I'm just waiting for you guys to start a thread about how wonderful life will be once the TCPA kicks in.
So, I guess I’m not allowed to have an opinion? Just because I’m a moderator doesn't mean I have to stay silent. If you think I actually messed up my duties—like moving a thread or deleting something improperly—then let me know. But I still have a right to my own views.
As for the criticism, I’ve already made my point. It’s a lot easier to stay motivated when you see actual utility coming from the software. Maybe you've forgotten what it was like when you were first learning to code.
And regarding competition, we all want it. It’s just that Microsoft is incredibly aggressive—and frankly, shady—when it comes to crushing anyone else in the market.
Elizabeth Hughes says Montezemolo: I disagree... if anyone's actually to blame here, it’s Ralph. Just watch the replay of that start.
How was he supposed to know those two were going to pile up there? Standard driving rules dictate the person behind has to stay alert, not just the guy in front.
Kim couldn't have seen a thing because Ferrari was blocking his line.
I’m not saying my opinion is the only one that matters, but I tend to look a bit further down the road. Being technically superior isn't always the smartest move in the long run. But then again, who actually cares about things like market monopolies when you can just play in the .NET ecosystem and feel like a big shot for using it?
Like I said before. It only makes sense if it’s actually efficient.
From what I've seen, people learn way more effectively when they're working with practical, real-world examples. It actually gives them a reason to care, and maybe even sparks enough curiosity to start tinkering with new features. That’s just not going to happen with her example.
If she had done the exact same thing for Google, you might actually be able to argue there was some utility to it—though it probably would have been better as a browser extension or something that her "brilliant" .NET technique could actually improve.
Just forget about being a programmer for a second and ask yourself: how much would you actually want to learn from examples that are completely useless?
Bryan Fisher7 said:slycrane94, man, just stop embarrassing yourself.
Don't be an idiot. I might not be a developer, but that doesn't mean I don't know how to use software.
Why bother making a program that’s completely useless except as a demo? If you're going to build an example, why not make something actually useful, like a desktop widget for the weather or a TV guide? Instead, we're fighting over Amazon. Honestly, Amazon's site is perfectly functional as it is. You always have your browser open anyway, and it's much easier to order books there—something you can't even do through this garbage.
Bottom line: the utility of this program is zero. If you think that's some kind of win, then enjoy it.
Look, he’s the only one who really stepped up when things got messy. I’m not saying he’s to blame, but if anyone is, it’s him. Isn't that just how it works?
Daniel Fowler9 said:Axmi, what you just said is complete nonsense! I explained the benefits in great detail on the other thread! You should have at least read it first! 😠
Daniel Fowler9🙄
I haven't seen a single intelligent explanation yet. I spend most of my time on Amazon—that's where I buy all my college textbooks—and since I always have a browser open, why would I bother using a command prompt that offers way fewer options than the actual Amazon site? I find what I need, toss it in the cart, and I'm done. But here, I’d have to go back to their website anyway just to actually buy the book. Is there really any time being saved here?
While you’re busy opening Notepad, I could be browsing through every book on Amazon.com. Where's the actual utility in that? It’s just like Microsoft—if they can find a way to make something unnecessarily complicated or slow, they'll do it.
As for their testing methods, I haven't seen them rely on anything remotely objective. If Microsoft pays for the study, you can bet the outcome is already decided. Using a fake application for benchmarks shouldn't surprise anyone.
Just look back at Intel and those EIDE controllers they claimed were faster than SCSI counterparts in their tests...
Look at the facts—how can anyone actually be blamed here? They all just crowded the space at once. Maybe Kim was the biggest offender, but honestly, he was clearly trying to push his luck too.
Daniel Fowler9 said:I have no idea how Bryan Fisher7 is going to react. I just hope he isn't in one of his typical spitting fits where he trashes the document without actually reading it first.
Daniel Fowler9🙄
I've looked it over, and honestly, it’s hard not to tear it apart. It's just more corporate garbage cooked up for PR reasons, produced by people who clearly don't understand the subject matter they're supposedly auditing. It's pathetic, really. But then again, it's aimed at Wall Street "experts," not the people actually doing the work.😁