Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[psyn]

Actually, you need to reread, and comprehend that administrator == root is not nessecarily true.

WTF? Are you referring to the admin group in Ubuntu? An 'admin' account is no more privileged than a user account -- all it can do is execute sudo. Ubuntu's 'Administrator account' is an anachronism in that 'administrator' was previously (and still is) understood to be root/superuser.

Additionally, integrating into windows requires a larger file

Wrong. But it arguably could be optional.

and adds clutter to the system

Wrong.

so is great when you plan on using that system for a long time, but a hassle when moving systems(example that could happen: main computer fails, use a borrowed laptop for a week while system is repaired).

Copying 2,000 files is easier than clicking setup.msi?

Yes, you surely get more when you integrate with the system: More RAM usage

Wrong.

more files

Wrong. A plain EXE can just as easily install itself to %ProgramFiles%.

more startup time

Wrong.

more OS-alterations

Wrong. WTF does this mean?

more potential security flaws(because a debugger surely needs root-level permissions, so thats one more program where a security hole may exist)

Wrong. Uh, root-level permission/setuid has nothing to do where the program is installed. And if the user account is compromised, a hacker can modify that executable (signing could help here but IIRC no OSes do user program signing).

more product lock-in

Um... nope.

more potential for upgrade incompatibilities...

Wrong. You're looking for another word, 'less.'

Really, the only legitimate argument you have for local applications is that they are more convenient, under specific circumstances. Local-stored apps are a terrible feature for corporate domains because it prevents IT from rolling out updates.

I think I am going to go lay down. I feel dizzy from trying to interpret this post.

[Siquo]

qwerty, what have you done... When the lever has a sign that says "Release the iTrolls", you still have to pull it, don't you? 

[Blacken]

qwerty, what have you done... When the lever has a sign that says "Release the iTrolls", you still have to pull it, don't you? 

It's not trolling to correct somebody when they are consistently, willfully, and intentionally incorrect.

But that's okay. I understand the popular definition is "people who say things that make you sad." It's a wrong definition, but I do understand it.

[qwertyuiopas]

Once again, you blindly misinterpret my arguments to make yours seem plausible. I was arguing about programs that alter the OS for advanced features. Example, that exact debugger you were claiming was so great.

First, it either must already be running, or it must be started when any program crashes, consuming RAM. Considering current trends care more for startup time, advanced features, and disregard excessive RAM usage, it likely starts when windows does.

Additionally, the extra code to allow it to integrate with the OS does *not*, under *any* circumstance, make the program *smaller*.

Copying 2,000 files is easier than clicking setup.msi?

Copying a folder *IS* in fact, easier than clicking setup.msi, especially when setup.msi includes options and an EULA. XCOPY, in case you don't know, is the version of the old copy command that is able to copy folders. That is why it is called XCOPY deployment, because it can be "installed" by copying a folder, not by copying each single file.

Summary: I was talking about programs that integrate themselves into the OS, since you can't seem to comprehend that not everyone uses your specialy downgraded version of windows 3.1 that was designed specifically so that anyone with your lack of brainpower can't manage to damage anything.

I'm leaving this argument before you bother spouting any more of your meaningless, misdirected, drivel.

[Siquo]

It's not trolling to correct somebody when they are consistently, willfully, and intentionally incorrect.

I've looked at your past posts in your profile, at least 5 pages of them. This is exactly what you've been doing in almost every post in every thread. It's as if it's your only reason of existence on this forum.

Why do I take the trouble? Because I rarely dislike people, yet you somehow trigger something within me. With reluctance, I will continue my ignoring to keep this from escalating until I find out what it is that bothers me so much about you.

[/derail]

[psyn]

Once again, you blindly misinterpret my arguments to make yours seem plausible.

I don't know who you think I am. I have never responded to you before.

Stop getting so defensive, dude. I don't hate you, and I'm not going to eat your child.

I was arguing about programs that alter the OS for advanced features. Example, that exact debugger you were claiming was so great.

Blacken was not stating that the MSVC debugger is superior for installing to Program Files. Its integration with the OS is minimal at best. He wrote that the debugger is easier to use considering it's integrated with Visual Studio. And that's a fairly common sentiment. But considering I use Ollydbg regularly (and GDB every so often) I have no strong feelings about this. GDB even (loosely) integrates with Code::Blocks and Eclipse (with CDT? - IIRC) if you prefer that sort of thing.

First, it either must already be running, or it must be started when any program crashes, consuming RAM. Considering current trends care more for startup time, advanced features, and disregard excessive RAM usage, it likely starts when windows does.

I don't know where you got these misconceptions. MSVC does not run at boot and no part of it does so. It isn't integrated in the way a video driver or service is.

Additionally, the extra code to allow it to integrate with the OS does *not*, under *any* circumstance, make the program *smaller*.

It does no such thing.

Copying a folder *IS* in fact, easier than clicking setup.msi, especially when setup.msi includes options and an EULA. XCOPY, in case you don't know, is the version of the old copy command that is able to copy folders. That is why it is called XCOPY deployment, because it can be "installed" by copying a folder, not by copying each single file.

Thanks for the unnecessary briefer on xcopy. I don't know anyone who would rather copy 2,000 files to a local folder than globally install an MSI or DEB/RPM/APP. An MSI is actually more useful for proprietary products, because (1) it can easily coordinate domain installs across thousands of machines (but so can package management), and (2) blindly copying these files between machines is infringement. MSVC is heavily protected, and Microsoft actively defends against MSVC binary distribution from both corporations and consumers; even sharing the DLLs or minor tools (remember Spy++?) is prohibited. But if you prefer copying a 6GB application to the user folder, that's your choice. It's your right and I don't take issue with it.

Summary: I was talking about programs that integrate themselves into the OS, since you can't seem to comprehend that not everyone uses your specialy downgraded version of windows 3.1 that was designed specifically so that anyone with your lack of brainpower can't manage to damage anything.

I am sorry. Maybe you can elucidate your arguments a bit more next time. It seems you misinterpreted Blacken and failed to accurately posit your position, because it took me 10 minutes just to understand what you were trying to argue.

Why do I take the trouble? Because I rarely dislike people, yet you somehow trigger something within me. With reluctance, I will continue my ignoring to keep this from escalating until I find out what it is that bothers me so much about you.

I apologize to Blacken for preempting him, but if House ever made a keen observation, it was that being right counts for more than being polite. The best person will be both. But dealing with sarcasm, ridicule, and assholes is an everyday occurance in the technical and academic fields. The adept shut their mouth, learn from their mistakes, and move on, hopefully to not make the same mistake twice. It takes patience and strength not to respond in kind, and not to begrudge the one doing the berating. Professors do this daily, but are respected nonetheless.

I see all form of commentary in a non-technical or educational forum as vain in nature, including my own comments, so perhaps I am simply not surprised at this behavior.

[Siquo]

if House ever made a keen observation, it was that being right counts for more than being polite.

House is also lonely, has exactly one friend, has no romantic life to speak of, and generally leads a miserable life. That you have to deal with ridicule/sarcasm/assholes every day is no reason to behave like one. I hardly ever have to deal with them in my professional line of business, except here on the forums.

But who cares, when you're RIGHT?
(which, in my personal opinion, you are not. I wholeheartedly agree with qwerty on almost every point made so far, but will not enter the discussion any further than that)

[psyn]

if House ever made a keen observation, it was that being right counts for more than being polite.

House is also lonely, has exactly one friend, has no romantic life to speak of, and generally leads a miserable life.

House is also an extreme stereotype conjured by writers targetting the over-30 single lady demographic.

That you have to deal with ridicule/sarcasm/assholes every day is no reason to behave like one.

Save your accusations for others. I have yet to make an insult in this thread -- unlike qwerty, and yes, even Blacken, and now, yourself.

I hardly ever have to deal with them in my professional line of business, except here on the forums.

If you think this is extreme, then you don't work in any technical field. I see more vitriol espoused by PR e-mails on a regular basis.

But who cares, when you're RIGHT?
(which, in my personal opinion, you are not. I wholeheartedly agree with qwerty on almost every point made so far, but will not enter the discussion any further than that)

Unfortunately, absense of proof is not evidence of the contrary. qwerty has never used VS, as admitted by him, so it is dishonest to side with his unfounded and fearful claims. I have not said anything so far that cannot be backed by a 5-minute Google search.

[Blacken]

Blacken was not stating that the MSVC debugger is superior for installing to Program Files. Its integration with the OS is minimal at best. He wrote that the debugger is easier to use considering it's integrated with Visual Studio.

It also allows you to start it over a crashed process (similar to a core dump on *nix, although while the process is still in memory), thanks to--gasp--integration with Windows.

If a process commits a memory violation, for example, Windows asks if I want to debug it (in addition to the usual Close/Report to Microsoft crap). I click "yes", and VS starts up; if it's a release executable (stripped, etc.) it will present me with the x86 assembly of the code, at the point of fault, and if it's a debug assembly (something I was running outside of VS, or a debug build of code from somebody else) it will provide full symbol display.

GDB can do it too, but the kicker is, I don't have to run my applications under the VS debugger all the time to take advantage of crash investigation. I would need to do so with GDB under Windows, as it lacks this ability (Windows doesn't do core dumps, at least not in a way GDB can understand).

Which is what I was saying when pointing out that the silly assertion that "integration with the OS" is somehow bad is--well, silly.

[qwertyuiopas]

Windows asks if I want to debug it

Right there. OS-alteration, required for it's operation. This was what I was referring to this whole time, and yet you disregard it for a more favourable interpretation.

[psyn]

It also allows you to start it over a crashed process (similar to a core dump on *nix, although while the process is still in memory), thanks to--gasp--integration with Windows.

This isn't really 'integration' as I see it. It changes a few registry settings -- ones that exist despite the absence of MSVC. It doesn't even need to be installed for that; it only needs to run. I think qwerty saw this as MSVC literally conjoining itself with Windows, like a face-hugger from the movie Aliens.

GDB can do it too, but the kicker is, I don't have to run my applications under the VS debugger all the time to take advantage of crash investigation. I would need to do so with GDB under Windows, as it lacks this ability (Windows doesn't do core dumps, at least not in a way GDB can understand).

GDB could just as easily set this up at runtime.

Right there. OS-alteration, required for it's operation. This was what I was referring to this whole time, and yet you disregard it for a more favourable interpretation.

It's not integration, it's an optional runtime configuration modification available to any executed program, installed or not. It poses no overhead, and is configurable per user and does not require administrative privileges.

[Siquo]

If you think this is extreme, then you don't work in any technical field. I see more vitriol espoused by PR e-mails on a regular basis.

Well, if you say so, you must be right. Even then, it's no excuse to behave like that yourself, nor to accept it when other people treat you like that. Responding in kind will not make it better though.

Unless you like working in a vitriolic environment like that, in which case you're probably working at the right company and would be completely unable to work at mine

[sproingie]

Can we stop flinging poop and get back to recommended software?

Here's all the non-dev stuff I throw onto every new PC.  I doubt y'all are interested in my coding toolchain.

* Firefox
* VLC
* Cygwin with mtty
* PuTTY
* PS Hot Launch
* AutoIt v3
* Notepad++
* Password Safe
* Process Explorer
* The PSTools suite (also from MS sysinternals)
* CCleaner
* MyDefrag

BTW shenji, thanks for the pointer to project sikuli.  It looks crazy awesome.

[psyn]

Well, if you say so, you must be right. Even then, it's no excuse to behave like that yourself, nor to accept it when other people treat you like that. Responding in kind will not make it better though.

Unless you like working in a vitriolic environment like that, in which case you're probably working at the right company and would be completely unable to work at mine

You keep saying 'me' and yet I have not acted in an insulting manner in this thread, not could you establish such an accusation. Please stop reading into things that do not exist. Go over to LKML if you wish to see childish tantrums.

[Blacken]

Windows asks if I want to debug it

Right there. OS-alteration, required for it's operation. This was what I was referring to this whole time, and yet you disregard it for a more favourable interpretation.

Because it is beneficial for the user. That's why it exists. And it is not required, but is included because people want it.

But that's okay, qwerty. Keep stamping your feet and getting very gleeful when you think you found the tiniest point that might be in your favor. It makes this fun.

It also allows you to start it over a crashed process (similar to a core dump on *nix, although while the process is still in memory), thanks to--gasp--integration with Windows.

This isn't really 'integration' as I see it. It changes a few registry settings -- ones that exist despite the absence of MSVC. It doesn't even need to be installed for that; it only needs to run. I think qwerty saw this as MSVC literally conjoining itself with Windows, like a face-hugger from the movie Aliens.

I have long ago stopped trying to figure out what qwerty thinks, as he won't learn.

GDB can do it too, but the kicker is, I don't have to run my applications under the VS debugger all the time to take advantage of crash investigation. I would need to do so with GDB under Windows, as it lacks this ability (Windows doesn't do core dumps, at least not in a way GDB can understand).

GDB could just as easily set this up at runtime.

Could, but doesn't, and doesn't have the ability to do so wrt MDMPs either as far as I know.

Right there. OS-alteration, required for it's operation. This was what I was referring to this whole time, and yet you disregard it for a more favourable interpretation.

It's not integration, it's an optional runtime configuration modification available to any executed program, installed or not. It poses no overhead, and is configurable per user and does not require administrative privileges.

[/quote]But--but--installed program!