|
raddevus wrote: Android is far superior to all other platforms
Because there are so many to choose from!
As I see it the only real alternative is iOS and that's Apple and as far as tech goes it doesn't get much worse than Apple. I'm tempted to write an epistle on why Apple sucks so bad, but that's really not the point.
The point is that Android is superior because there is no real alternative.
Windows Phone is much better, simpler, faster, more elegant, and better looking, but it's missing the apps and as such is pretty useless.
Java, now that's a whole different story!
Plenty of alternatives, most obvious being C#.
Now let's compare Java to C#... Wait, do I even have to? It seems to me like we have a clear winner already 
The only pro Java has is that it's multi-platform, but why would you want any other platform than Windows anyway? Hold on, I'm going to answer that myself, Windows 8 and 10.
Besides, C# is coming to other platforms as well, it's just a matter of time!
Dang Sander, you do make some very good points!
I am so brilliant sometimes 
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely brilliant!
You've covered it all from all viewpoints.
I do prefer Android because it is more open to devs, but obviously it is a bit more dangerous to users also (possibly).
Also, I started with C# In The Beginning... and came to it from C++ so I'm a huge C# fan.
But that's probably also because I remember when Java was released and i built an applet and ran it in Netscape Navigator and IE (2.x maybe) at the time and it was terrible.
After that I disrespected Java until Google brought it to Android. Now I really like the Android libraries which I access via Java. Google has done a fantastic job really and not bad documentation.
It's a fun platform to develop for.
I'm a windows developer original and I have no idea what the current microsoft phone platform is even called.
Way to fail, Microsoft.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: As I see it the only real alternative is iOS
Ah, so you're limiting yourself to hand-held platforms? And here I was all set to argue that OpenVMS is superior in every way too. 
|
|
|
|
|
I consider Internet trolls as borderline psychopaths. They derive pleasure from hurting others. 
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
And they don't come out into the open either.
Just crawling around under the bridges.
I don't know why I let it bother me this time, just annoying when you are actually trying to talk about development issues on a development site and get set as spam when others are talking about politics or whatever and i don't care. Okay, my rant is complete now. 
|
|
|
|
|
And according to those academic studies you might be one 
Now stay away from me, borderline psychopath 
|
|
|
|
|
Boooo! Hope that scared you. 
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
If you think about it, the internet isn't the only place where people act out because they feel anonymous.
The roads are another place. People treat each other terribly when they are enclosed inside their automobiles.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
True! True!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
You are very right about that. Good point.
And some of those people who are acting out while driving are obviously also using their phones at the same time to post trolling messages.
Double-dipping-trolls!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
To get fed. You just fed a troll. Please don't do that.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: To get fed. You just fed a troll.
I know. You are definitely right. I've ignored these so many times. Just this one time it got to me.
I think it got to me because I was really trying to have a simple conversation about an interesting thing I put a lot of work into.
Thanks for the input. 
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: Why?
Because they get rep points for doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
PompeyThree wrote: Because they get rep points for doing so.
Well then, it all makes sense to me now. 
Thanks. I understand there's really no explanation for such behavior. I appreciate everyone's input though. 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this but...
I'm developing a 64-bit app that interfaces with Access databases, which works fine with the 64-bit ACE drivers. However, due to some inexplicable co-mingling, you can't have 32-bit and 64-bit Access drivers existing on the system without 'tricking' Windows. This also works fine, until Windows update 'fixes' your trickery, forcing your 32-bit Office installation to repair itself and break your 64-bit drivers.
Some solutions are obvious, but stupid (switch to SQL, turn off Windows Update, force users to use 64-bit Office...) and I'd like to get Microsoft's official recommendation.
They're going to make me pay for that aren't they?
|
|
|
|
|
Kyudos wrote: you can't have 32-bit and 64-bit Access drivers existing on the system without 'tricking' Windows
I haven't found that to be true. But maybe because our servers don't have Office installed? Do you have proper servers? Without Office?
|
|
|
|
|
It's a consumer app - it'll be on people's machines with their whatever-version of Office. If they happen to have 64-bit Office (unlikely) it'll all work OK, but if they have our 64-bit plugin, and 32-bit Office (more likely) its a potential problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Then it sounds like it's up to the customer to be sure it runs. Not your problem.
|
|
|
|
|
I wish! It'd be our app that fails, which means they ring us...
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe it does not work, but why do you not release a 32 bit version of your app for people running 32 bit office with 32 bit drivers?
Within you lies the power for good - Use it!
|
|
|
|
|
It's a plugin - if they have a 64-bit version of the host app, they need a 64-bit version of our product. Of course, we will have a 32-bit version too, but forcing the user to acquire a different 'bit-version' of the host app isn't ideal. Inevitably they will tend to ignore the requirement, and then complain about our app 'not working'.
It would all have been academic if Microsoft hadn't made their drivers mutually exclusive...
|
|
|
|
|
What if you determine the bitity on install and then make sure the correct plugin version is used?
|
|
|
|
|
There is no problem matching bitity of host and plugin - the problem arises when that bitity is not matched by the installed version of Office. Not many people use 64-bit Office, so people using 64-bit host are likely to have 32-bit Office.
|
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't you be able to find out which version of Office is installed, too?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
