|
|
Posted by Jerry Stuckle on 09/12/07 17:08
Steve wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:u_idnTg1lo8NeHrbnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Steve wrote:
>>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>> news:VNqdnUb0dO53QnrbnZ2dnUVZ_uHinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:3_2dnRvfUIiaxXrbnZ2dnUVZ_o_inZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>> Steve wrote:
>>>>>>> "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:MNHFi.2377$Sd4.1809@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>>>>>>> Jim Carlock wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And I'm wondering why PHP says .net support = enabled where
>>>>>>>>> ..net is NOT installed. I'm baffled by this one. It appears PHP
>>>>>>>>> looks for one specific file and it exists, PHP declares .net
>>>>>>>>> enabled, but .net is actually at least a 50MB package of files
>>>>>>>>> which fill a few folders.
>>>>>>>> I seem to recall something from the docs in which the PHP folks
>>>>>>>> strangely note that this is just a place-holder for something they
>>>>>>>> hope to have PHP doing in the future.
>>>>>>> again, your recall is weak and with a little investigation on your
>>>>>>> part, you could keep yourself from embarasment. the documentation
>>>>>>> simply states that:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ======
>>>>>>> This extension is EXPERIMENTAL. The behaviour of this extension --
>>>>>>> including the names of its functions and anything else documented
>>>>>>> about this extension -- may change without notice in a future release
>>>>>>> of PHP. Use this extension at your own risk.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ======
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> now, does that sound *ANYTHING* like what you just dribbled from your
>>>>>>> keyboard?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's kinda like building a car with a sticker where the gas gauge
>>>>>>>> should be.
>>>>>>> more like an example of the twainian proverb:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a
>>>>>>> fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which is what the bulk of your posts consist of...opening your yap
>>>>>>> and removing all doubt.
>>>>>> You should take your own advice, Steve. Sanders is more right about
>>>>>> it than you are.
>>>>> i usually do. so, in what way(s) is this so?
>>>> His comments like:
>>>>
>>>> "Those are all Microsoft thingies.
>>>> COM is the Component Object Model - a version of the Windows Foundation
>>>> Classes.
>>>> DCOM is distributed COM - a patchwork add-on of Win95 that was added
>>>> because when 95 came out, MS had not considered certain internet
>>>> implications.
>>>> .NET is MS's latest attempt to build an all-in-one,
>>>> everything-to-everybody architecture. "
>>> lol. wiki is not entirely accurate as you know...and proven by the above.
>>> having worked with all three from their inception, these definitions are
>>> either wildly understated or wildy incorrect. take your pick. if my
>>> explanation of each seems less correct/accurate than the above...what can
>>> i say?
>> Steve,
>>
>> Nothing to do with wiki's. I've also worked on them since their
>> inception. And they are pretty accurate.
>
> so you're telling me you agree with his definition of DCOM (a patch work
> add-on) and .net?
>
>
Yep. DCOM was a patch-work addon when the internet because popular.
But then Win95 was patchwork, also.
Also, MS would love to see everyone drop Java, PHP, Perl and other
languages and just use .NET. And they're doing everything they can to
get people to do it.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|