Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > creating a file

Reply
Thread Tools

creating a file

 
 
Hans Vlems
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
> >Is it significantly more difficult to move from one Linux distribution
> >to another than to move from one versionof Windows to another?

>
> It very often is. Depending on which random packages you had in the
> distro you are moving form...
>


I wanted to stay out of this part of the discussion because it had
nothing to do with the OP
Very few platforms allow easy migration of executable codes. The IBM
360/370 and the Burroughs A series architectures are notable
exceptions. Both support OS implementations that will stil run 40 year
old exectables without modification. Other OS'es claim similar
performance. Basically Windows NT (as opposed to the Windows 95-98-ME
family) and its successors doesn't do too badly. Code compiled under
NT 3.51 can run under Windoes 2003 R2. In some occasions recompiling
or relinking is all that is needed.
Linux suffers perhaps most from the enthousiasm of its developers and
hence the resulting changes in its development environment. I remember
a change of C libraries a couple of years ago. Not particularly
complex may be but for a programmer who develops code on four
different platforms in five languages it is difficult to keep up with
sudden changes in one of them. Then again, this statement probably is
more a sign of old age . Anyway, I reduced my linux stations to
Debian (on Alpha) and Fedora (on x86).
Hans
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Chris H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
In message <(E-Mail Removed)
..com>, Hans Vlems <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>> >Is it significantly more difficult to move from one Linux distribution
>> >to another than to move from one versionof Windows to another?

>>
>> It very often is. Depending on which random packages you had in the
>> distro you are moving form...
>>

>
>I wanted to stay out of this part of the discussion because it had
>nothing to do with the OP
>Very few platforms allow easy migration of executable codes. The IBM
>360/370 and the Burroughs A series architectures are notable
>exceptions. Both support OS implementations that will stil run 40 year
>old exectables without modification. Other OS'es claim similar
>performance. Basically Windows NT (as opposed to the Windows 95-98-ME
>family) and its successors doesn't do too badly. Code compiled under
>NT 3.51 can run under Windoes 2003 R2. In some occasions recompiling
>or relinking is all that is needed.
>Linux suffers perhaps most from the enthousiasm of its developers and
>hence the resulting changes in its development environment. I remember
>a change of C libraries a couple of years ago. Not particularly
>complex may be but for a programmer who develops code on four
>different platforms in five languages it is difficult to keep up with
>sudden changes in one of them. Then again, this statement probably is
>more a sign of old age . Anyway, I reduced my linux stations to
>Debian (on Alpha) and Fedora (on x86).
>Hans


I have had similar reports from many who have to support Linux. As you
say much is down to the enthusiasm of the developers and the many
different distributions and there being no overall control or discipline
in development.

If your time is free (which is very rare these days) then it is not
such a problem. But where some one is paying you time is money and it
can cost a lot to iron out these small problems.

I was involved with a company that does estimation software for
projects. It is quite accurate if used properly and they costed out for
a client the true cost of migrating from one version of windows to
another. Not cheap..... I asked if they also looked at the cost of
moving to Linux, open office etc. they said they had also run that
though as well. And it came out at over three times the cost!

So I said it was not a fair comparison as one was an upgrade between
version of an OS and the other was changing OS. They had also run that
and for a large organisation it was still a lot more expensive to run
Linux. The ongoing maintenance and getting things to work. This was
for a mainstream Linux.





--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Hans Vlems
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
On 27 feb, 13:24, Chris H <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In message <(E-Mail Removed)
> .com>, Hans Vlems <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>
>
>
>
>
> >> >Is it significantly more difficult to move from one Linux distribution
> >> >to another than to move from one versionof Windows to another?

>
> >> It very often is. Depending on which random packages you had in the
> >> distro you are moving form...

>
> >I wanted to stay out of this part of the discussion because it had
> >nothing to do with the OP
> >Very few platforms allow easy migration of executable codes. The IBM
> >360/370 and the Burroughs A series architectures are notable
> >exceptions. Both support OS implementations that will stil run 40 year
> >old exectables without modification. Other OS'es claim similar
> >performance. Basically Windows NT (as opposed to the Windows 95-98-ME
> >family) and its successors doesn't do too badly. Code compiled under
> >NT 3.51 can run under Windoes 2003 R2. In some occasions recompiling
> >or relinking is all that is needed.
> >Linux suffers perhaps most from the enthousiasm of its developers and
> >hence the resulting changes in its development environment. I remember
> >a change of C libraries a couple of years ago. Not particularly
> >complex may be but for a programmer who develops code on four
> >different platforms in five languages it is difficult to keep up with
> >sudden changes in one of them. Then again, this statement probably is
> >more a sign of old age . Anyway, I reduced my linux stations to
> >Debian (on Alpha) and Fedora (on x86).
> >Hans

>
> I have had similar reports from many who have to support Linux. *As you
> say much is down to the enthusiasm of the developers and the many
> different distributions and there being no overall control or discipline
> in development.
>
> If your time is free (which is very rare these days) *then it is not
> such a problem. But where some one is paying you time is money and it
> can cost a lot to iron out these small problems.
>
> I was involved with a company that does estimation software for
> projects. *It is quite accurate if used properly and they costed out for
> a client the true cost of migrating from one version of windows to
> another. *Not cheap..... *I asked if they also looked at the cost of
> moving to Linux, open office etc. *they said they had also run that
> though as well. And it came out at over three times the cost!
>
> So I said it was not a fair comparison *as one was an upgrade between
> version of an OS and the other was changing OS. They had also run that
> and for a large organisation it was still a lot more expensive to run
> Linux. *The ongoing maintenance and getting things to work. *This was
> for a mainstream Linux.
>
> --
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
> \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills *Staffs *England * * /\/\/\/\/
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
>
> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -


Agreed, changing platforms is a costly business. Part of the
complexity is that you have to deal with two groups of experts and
generally either group doesn't understand the other system.
One of my projects involved moving a database from an IBM z series
(VSE) to Windows 2000 Server.
Everthing was different: dbms, programming environment, hardware, OS,
network hw and network protocol.
It went smoothly because all we had to do was move the data. And
understand both sides of the project, that was what kept the team and
progress together.
What drve the project business wise was money and performance. The
target platform saved the company nearly $ 1 million annually. The end
user saw response times of less than a second.
The price was the stability of the new platform. Microsoft produces as
many patches per day as IBM did in a year for VSE
The fact that the hardware changed as well made it easier for the
company as a whole to understand that this was a major move. Changing
from one OS to another while staying on regular Intel based hardware
makes that point more difficult to make perhaps.
Hans
 
Reply With Quote
 
BartC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
"Hans Vlems" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> Agreed, changing platforms is a costly business. Part of the

....
> The price was the stability of the new platform. Microsoft produces as
> many patches per day as IBM did in a year for VSE


That's not quite fair. MS don't design their own hardware, and it's more
challenging to create something that works across hundreds of combination of
hardware from different manufacturers. And that allows hundreds of different
peripherals to be plugged in and still work.

And there are a million different software products to buy or download for
Windows, which if nothing else, will bring obscure bugs to the surface due
to the sheer number of operating hours that the software runs for. (When I
sold software, each new sale meant, to me, another customer spending up to
forty hours a week trying to find bugs in my program; although my boss had a
different view..)

And then the popularity of the OS means a large number of people
deliberately and maliciously trying to find and exploit bugs.

I don't know VSE and the latest IBM hardware, but I'd guess this doesn't
apply so much ...

--
Bartc

 
Reply With Quote
 
Nick Keighley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
On Feb 25, 2:53*pm, David Resnick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Feb 25, 9:19*am, Anders Wegge Keller <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Chris H <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> > > In message <(E-Mail Removed)
> > > s.com>, Mark Bluemel <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
> > >>On Feb 24, 11:19*pm, Hans Vlems <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > >>> ... Most people on c.l.c. either use Windows or at least are
> > >>> familiar with it.

>
> > >>Cue for a debate (or even a flame war). I haven't taken a census, but
> > >>I'm far from convinced that the majority here have experience of
> > >>developing on Windows.

>
> > > Majority here or the majority of commercial developers? * (i.e. leaving
> > > aside home/hobby use) * Then the vast majority will be developing on
> > > Windows

>
> > *One thing is what we develop *on*, another thing is what we develop
> > *for*. Although my editor runs on a windows machine most of the time, I
> > have very little practical experience with windows as a development
> > target.

>
> > *And that aside, do you have a source for your estimate, other than
> > your own experience? The C developers I know, all work on embedded
> > systems, custom made machine controls, or various unixen. At my job,
> > we don't have a single line of in-house C in the Windows applications,
> > and looking at the offered jobs around here, almost all windows
> > development is Java or C#.

>
> I'm curious to see a number as well. *All significant development in
> our company of ~4000 people (mostly C++ or Java these days) is done on
> linux. *We use Windows for Office/email, but develop/deliver to
> customers on linux, and have since transitioning over from Windows NT
> many years back. *I "develop" on windows only the extent that I'm
> running an X-server on my Windows box to open terminals on my linux
> one. *"vast majority will be developing on Windows" sounds quite
> unlikely to me, but I could be convinced if there were a real source
> rather than someones perhaps parochial opinion ("nobody I know voted
> for Nixon, how did he win?"). * While the overwhelming majority of
> desktop PCs are still Windows (seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems,
> e.g.), I personally very much doubt that the "vast majority" of
> commercial development targets PCs, as opposed to say non-Windows
> based servers, embedded work, mobile devices, etc. *But that could
> just be my parochial opinion too...


I develop on and for Windows. But that's in C++.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Nick Keighley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
On Feb 25, 8:08*pm, "BartC" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "Mark Bluemel" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> > On Feb 24, 11:19 pm, Hans Vlems <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> ... Most people on c.l.c. either use Windows or at least are
> >> familiar with it.

>
> > Cue for a debate (or even a flame war). I haven't taken a census, but
> > I'm far from convinced that the majority here have experience of
> > developing on Windows.

>
> Anyone developing applications for ordinary consumers, until recently would
> probably have meant developing for PCs running Windows (since that hardware
> is ubiquitous, cheap, and can be purchased anywhere).


which also makes it a reasonable platform for "semi-embedded" stuff.
There are industrial PCs.

> But you're probably right in that probably a minority of the experts here
> (and a bigger proportion of the people asking questions) develop for
> Windows.
>
> --
> Bartc


 
Reply With Quote
 
Nick Keighley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
On Feb 25, 2:59*pm, jacob navia <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Le 25/02/11 15:10, Rui Maciel a crit :
>
> > jacob navia wrote:

>
> >> I develop under windows and iphone/Apple. Lately, I got bored with
> >> windows and changed to Apple, a great platform. It makes Unix
> >> shine, it is a very good combination of a good GUI with a powerful
> >> Unix system. Linux folks could learn something from them, after
> >> more than a decade their system is as "usable" as SCO + Xwindows
> >> was.

>
> > When was the last time you gave any linux distro a try?

>
> > Rui Maciel

>
> I am using Ubuntu, last time I used it was around 5 minutes ago.
> And when was the last time you used Mac OSX?
>
>
>
> What is missing in linux and what makes the strength of Mac OSX
> can be described in one word:
>
> INTEGRATION
>
> Cut and paste works very well, the applications have a similar look and
> feel, the GUI is nicely done, and the intuitive programs are easy on
> new people. My wife is using immediately her MacBook, without any
> training.
>
> Network configuration is done automatically, and it works. Integrated
> TV, music, DVD, camera, microphone, everything works.
>
> As in Linux. Everything works under linux too because if it doesn't
> (what is most often the case) *I* can make it work. I have never
> found any problem under Linux that I could not fix. It just costed
> me HOURS of googling, etc. And I know for sure that only a professional
> would have been able to do that.
>
> Sometimes it just wasn't worth the effort.
>
> Linux is nice, I have several virtual machines with it running in my
> Mac. I test my code under linux gcc (that is different from Apple's
> gcc).
>
> It is a useful system for system administrators and big companies
> that need a cheap server system.
>
> Nothing else.


I've seen it used in semi-embedded systems. Linux can be shrunk down
so it's quite small and boots very quickly. But you're quite right it
needs some very smart and motivated people to make it work. I wouldn't
lumber a naive user with the Linuxs I've seen. Maybe its better these
days but I doubt it.

 
Reply With Quote
 
David Resnick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
On Feb 27, 8:46*am, Nick Keighley <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2:53*pm, David Resnick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 25, 9:19*am, Anders Wegge Keller <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> > > Chris H <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> > > > In message <(E-Mail Removed)
> > > > s.com>, Mark Bluemel <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
> > > >>On Feb 24, 11:19*pm, Hans Vlems <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > > >>> ... Most people on c.l.c. either use Windows or at least are
> > > >>> familiar with it.

>
> > > >>Cue for a debate (or even a flame war). I haven't taken a census, but
> > > >>I'm far from convinced that the majority here have experience of
> > > >>developing on Windows.

>
> > > > Majority here or the majority of commercial developers? * (i.e. leaving
> > > > aside home/hobby use) * Then the vast majority will be developingon
> > > > Windows

>
> > > *One thing is what we develop *on*, another thing is what we develop
> > > *for*. Although my editor runs on a windows machine most of the time,I
> > > have very little practical experience with windows as a development
> > > target.

>
> > > *And that aside, do you have a source for your estimate, other than
> > > your own experience? The C developers I know, all work on embedded
> > > systems, custom made machine controls, or various unixen. At my job,
> > > we don't have a single line of in-house C in the Windows applications,
> > > and looking at the offered jobs around here, almost all windows
> > > development is Java or C#.

>
> > I'm curious to see a number as well. *All significant development in
> > our company of ~4000 people (mostly C++ or Java these days) is done on
> > linux. *We use Windows for Office/email, but develop/deliver to
> > customers on linux, and have since transitioning over from Windows NT
> > many years back. *I "develop" on windows only the extent that I'm
> > running an X-server on my Windows box to open terminals on my linux
> > one. *"vast majority will be developing on Windows" sounds quite
> > unlikely to me, but I could be convinced if there were a real source
> > rather than someones perhaps parochial opinion ("nobody I know voted
> > for Nixon, how did he win?"). * While the overwhelming majority of
> > desktop PCs are still Windows (seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems,
> > e.g.), I personally very much doubt that the "vast majority" of
> > commercial development targets PCs, as opposed to say non-Windows
> > based servers, embedded work, mobile devices, etc. *But that could
> > just be my parochial opinion too...

>
> I develop on and for Windows. But that's in C++.


Was sort of hoping for a reference from someone if such exists. But I
also
misread his statement, thought he was talking about developing FOR
Windows
rather than ON Windows, a matter on which I have equally no actual
data but
less opinion on...

-David
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
In message <(E-Mail Removed)
s.com>, Nick Keighley <(E-Mail Removed)> writes

>I've seen it used in semi-embedded systems. Linux can be shrunk down
>so it's quite small and boots very quickly.


Compared to what? Compared to embedded OS and RTOS it is neither
small, quick at booting or Real time. That said it does have it's
place

> But you're quite right it
>needs some very smart and motivated people to make it work. I wouldn't
>lumber a naive user with the Linuxs I've seen. Maybe its better these
>days but I doubt it.


It does have it's place as long as you appreciate the reality rather
then the religion it seem sot come with.

I know of one company that went bust directly because of its use of
Open Source... not because it use Open Source per say but the but the
religious indoctrination that came with it.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
In message <ikdioh$nqo$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org>, BartC
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>"Hans Vlems" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:1e5c72d2-849c-
>(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> Agreed, changing platforms is a costly business. Part of the

>...
>> The price was the stability of the new platform. Microsoft produces as
>> many patches per day as IBM did in a year for VSE

>
>That's not quite fair. MS don't design their own hardware, and it's
>more challenging to create something that works across hundreds of
>combination of hardware from different manufacturers. And that allows
>hundreds of different peripherals to be plugged in and still work.


That is often overlooked when people criticise Windows... (even if MS
are a bunch of bastards

Yes OSX is very reliable but Apple control both the HW and the SW

>And there are a million different software products to buy or download
>for Windows, which if nothing else, will bring obscure bugs to the
>surface due to the sheer number of operating hours that the software
>runs for. (When I sold software, each new sale meant, to me, another
>customer spending up to forty hours a week trying to find bugs in my
>program; although my boss had a different view..)
>
>And then the popularity of the OS means a large number of people
>deliberately and maliciously trying to find and exploit bugs.


True... Whilst the Linux crowd go on about vulnerabilities in Windows
there are usually as many in Linux. Also of course the first worms and
viruses targeted Unix. I expect when Linux gets as popular as windows it
too will have it's fair share of viruses and attacks.

However with 100's of distributions how with the Linux community solve
this problem?

At least with Windows and OSX all the fixes come from 1 place. What will
happen with Linux? How with the hundreds of distributions apply fixes
against viruses? We also have the problem that viruses my affect
different distributions differently .


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Creating a File object out of the contents of jar/zip file kotauk@gmail.com Java 5 04-06-2006 08:36 PM
"Error Creating Control" when creating a custom control (Design Time). Can't see tooltip message. Ravi Ambros Wallau ASP .Net Web Controls 0 06-01-2005 02:36 PM
"Error Creating Control" when creating a custom control (Design Time). Can't see tooltip message. Ravi Ambros Wallau ASP .Net 0 06-01-2005 02:36 PM
Any way to rename a current File without creating a new File object? C-man Java 9 04-11-2004 04:21 AM
What is better /standard for creating files. a cpp file with header or cpp and seperate file for header DrUg13 C++ 1 02-10-2004 09:20 AM



Advertisments