|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: we swapped to Devexpress
We've used their WinForms control suite.
The controls were beautiful, worked really well, and had lots of features!
Whenever we did have a problem or question their support was great.
We got the same support you got, usually a reply within 24 hours and more often than not a fix or workaround.
I can't recommend DevExpress highly enough!
Too bad we couldn't use their reporting suite.
Our customer used Crystal and had hundreds of custom made reports.
They did have someone who knew how to create Crystal reports, but no one who could create DevExpress reports... 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: but no one who could create DevExpress reports
I could do the switch, so why couldn't they?
|
|
|
|
|
Because they just made reports, that went pretty well (mostly, some issues there as well).
We made the software. It's the Crystal SDK that's a steaming pile of sh*t.
We had the problem, not our customer. As far as they were concerned we just didn't know how Crystal worked (and I guess that's true as Crystal made sure no one would ever understand their SDK) 
|
|
|
|
|
Crystal Reports is [REDACTED] and needs to be launched into the sun.
The 'developers' behind it need to be put in the sun as well.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
Hope it's not contagious?
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta tomorrow (noun): a mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation and achievement is stored.
|
|
|
|
|
This is probably a rare case of the Y2K-bug.
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
If you swim with mammals, are you made to feel whalecome?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
If you run with wolves, do they howl about it?
If you whisper to horses, will they say Neigh?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: If you whisper to horses, will they say Neigh?
I was once asked if I was a horse. My answer was "neigh."
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: whalecome
Is this KSS? 
|
|
|
|
|
It was in my mind.
What it conjures up in yours is not my concern... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I thought the same thing when I first read it.
|
|
|
|
|
That says a whole lot more about you than it does about OG.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
It says that OG tells terrible jokes and I tell rude ones.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: If you swim with mammals, are you made to feel whalecome?
Are there a lot of seamen floating around?
|
|
|
|
|
Apple Fights Order to Unlock San Bernardino Shooter's iPhone[^].
Normally I would side with Apple, but I live 20 minutes from San Bernadino so this one hits home.
The Gov isn't asking hem to unlock EVERYONE's phone - just this one. It could start a dangerous precedent, but I think the opportunity to discover valuable intel trumps Apple.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Would the term precedent mean anything? - once they open pandora's box they can't close it.
Just a thought if the incident had happened in Sidcup rather than San Bernardino (i.e. not somewhere close to home for you as a person), would you still be saying the same thing?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know. It's hard to decide what the right balance is. While I believe that each of us has a right to our privacy, the good of the many outweighs the good of the one.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: the good of the many outweighs the good of the one.
On this I agree, but I am not convinced that setting a precedent which allows the unlocking of phones and possibly reducing the security of many other users to do it represents the many over the few.
|
|
|
|
|
But the problem is; who decides if it's for the good of the many?
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta tomorrow (noun): a mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation and achievement is stored.
|
|
|
|
|
The courts. Just like getting a warrant for anything else. The authorities would have to prove "just cause" to obtain a warrant.
If your spouse, child or parent were being held hostage and the authorities got the phone of one of the abductors, and it was hoped that information in the phone might help lead to their recovery, wouldn't it be worth it?
|
|
|
|
|
Just cause is a very broad term.
I was pulled over in Texas and they searched me and the vehicle that I was driving because the officer said that my Garmin was obstructing my view. It was on the windshield under the rear view mirror just like thousands of other people. He stopped me because I had long hair and he just knew I was transporting drugs.
In other words just cause is a fabrication, it can be anything.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta tomorrow (noun): a mystical land where 99% of all human productivity, motivation and achievement is stored.
|
|
|
|
|
NOT so -- in the case of getting a warrant or court order. The authorities have to PROVE that just cause exists to a judge. In your case (which I'm sure happens a lot more than we realize), the officer "bluffed" just cause which may or may not have held up in court after the fact if the stop had been challenged. To get a warrant or court order - they start off in court proving their case
|
|
|
|
|
the good of the many outweighs the good of the one
well the world does not work this way (or neither of us would sit in front of a computer and talk about this) - remember: we (as in the west) are not the many when you see it globally
And the context here really matters: it's not for the good of anyone if Apple give in - the bad will just go and use some other - more secure - means of communication, while we all would lose even more of our privacy.
“If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy.”
(Philip Zimmermann)
|
|
|
|
|
GStrad wrote: once they open pandora's box they can't close it
Yes they can. Lots and lots of legal decisions - both good and bad - get overturned every day.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
