Delphi - desktop, Web, or USB?

[Steve Thackery]

The thread below - 'So long and thanks for all the fish' - has drifted
somewhat off topic, and in particular gone into the area of "what should
Delphi be targeting?".

I've argued that Win32/64 has a long future, and nobody other than CodeGear
has a credible RAD tool for it. I said that .Net ISN'T always the answer,
and that Win32 is - and will remain - a very viable platform. Therefore
CodeGear ought to "leverage" (ugh) this unique selling point and market the
hell out of it.

IMO, internet applications have and will continue to replace quite a few
of them. Email and office applications can been replaced for smaller
corporations and I believe we'll see that trend continue.

The thing is, they all have to be hosted in a browser, and that means the
inevitable "lowest common denominator" user interface.

Either that, or they run as separate Java programs, again with the usual
hideous interface.

I've used both, and had some fun with the various Google bits and bobs, and
although they will get the job done, they are annoyingly slow at times, and
have a distinctly clunky (almost Windows 3.1) look and feel to them. The
richest, slickest user interface is still to be had when using a real OS
such as Vista or Mac OSX. At least, that is my observation.

I'd like to explore and understand this a bit further. The implication of
this line of argument is that the multiple gigabytes of Vista and Mac OSX
are completely unnecessary - all you need is a Web browser and an
ultra-light kernel to host it on - something to look after the screen,
keyboard and mouse clicks. Everything else can be done from within the
browser, using Java to provide the programmatic stuff (or use some
server-side processing), and Flash or Silverlight for the UI. Presumably
you could make an Office 2007 clone like this? Or a Photoshop look- and
work-alike? A Windows Media Player replacement?

That seems hard to believe. Have Microsoft and Apple (and the Linux crowd)
made a dreadful mistake and written tens of millions of lines of code that
aren't actually needed? When all they needed to do was write a browser and
a lightweight kernel to generate the screen display and catch the key
strokes?

It just seems too simple.

IMO, the future here is not in traditional desktop model, but rather the
USB/Portable one. The registry, COM and program "installations" are
conceptual dinosaurs. There are no real technical and very few business
reasons not to treat PC's as generic "host" systems for applications
that each person carries around with them. I have run my
email/newsreader off a USB drive for a long time now and will never go
back to an installed email client.

Something doesn't add up. I'm puzzled. Just how much of the 25GB of
software on my hard disk can be ditched and delivered through IE and a Java
engine? Just how realistic is it to run an application like Word 2007, or
Photoshop, from a USB stick on any computer you happen to be near, without
touching the registry or "installing" anything?

Clearly I don't understand all the issues, but I think the discussion is
valuable. Was the all-singing all-dancing OS model - as in Windows, OSX and
Unix - a dreadful mistake? Are Web-hosted applications going to make
serious inroads into the domain of the traditional Windows desktop
applications? Can we realistically carry our applications around with us on
a USB stick?

Maybe by getting some insights into these areas we can identify where we
think Delphi could develop and flourish.

SteveT

[GrandmasterB]

Post by Steve Thackery
are completely unnecessary - all you need is a Web browser and an
ultra-light kernel to host it on - something to look after the screen,
keyboard and mouse clicks. Everything else can be done from within the
browser, using Java to provide the programmatic stuff (or use some

People have been declaring the death of the operating system since netscape
came out. Look where netscape is now.

In order to have all the necessary functionality to handle all the types of
apps people want to run, such browser environments would have to be, for all
practical purposes, operating systems themselves. Think about it - all the
networking, video, sound, input, storage functionality would need to be in
there. Once all thats in there, you're just basically arguing about
semantics - the browser is no longer a browser, but a de-facto OS itself.
Or an OS layer running on top of a kernel (like most modern OS's).

And... keep in mind... these browser apps need to be stored somewhere.
Which implies the need for other servers online to serve them up. Something
has to run those servers...

My personal suspicion is that a lot (not all, but a good deal) of the
original purpose behind the whole 'the browser is the future' movement is
just a carryover of the anti-MS movement. People saw netscape as -
'finally' - a potential rival for MS, and started pushing the idea of
everything being run in a browser as a means of breaking their 'monopoly'.
Ie, the reasons were political and business-related, not technical
superiority, for pushing the idea.

[Uwe]

In the late 1980's and early 1990's there was this hype called ASP's
(Application Service Providers). They popped up all over the globe and
vanished shortly afterwards due to the lack of highspeed network
architecture and due to security concerns. Nowadays we have the
infrastructure and also the tools to start all over again, but I doubt that
it will be successful this time. Just imagine those greedy telecom bigshots
like Comcast, Verizon and the like selling you their Office Suite. Would you
trust them and store your private and confidential data on one of their
servers? I wouldn't. Those companies hand over your personal data secretely
to the CIA or NSA, as it had happened just recently.

Uwe

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Uwe
In the late 1980's and early 1990's there was this hype called ASP's
(Application Service Providers). They popped up all over the globe and
vanished shortly afterwards due to the lack of highspeed network
architecture and due to security concerns.

Right, like Salesforce.com.

Post by Uwe
Nowadays we have the
infrastructure and also the tools to start all over again, but I doubt
that it will be successful this time. Just imagine those greedy telecom
bigshots like Comcast, Verizon and the like selling you their Office
Suite.

Like Google does today.

Post by Uwe
Would you trust them and store your private and confidential data
on one of their servers? I wouldn't.

Sure, why not? ETrade/Ameritrade has financial information for
thousands of people. Almost all banks and 401k investment firms have
online accessibility for their customers. Doesn't your bank?

Besides, if you're really paranoid or have extreme security concerns,
this can be addressed by the "portable/USB model" I've mentioned as well.

Post by Uwe
Those companies hand over your
personal data secretely to the CIA or NSA, as it had happened just
recently.

As if the CIA or NSA couldn't get that data anyway.

[Uwe]

Brian

Post by Brian Moelk
As if the CIA or NSA couldn't get that data anyway.

They probably could, but by far not as easy and not to that extent as they
can when all data they're looking for is readily available at your local
cable company. Besides: handing over private data of customers to the CIA
was illegal. No wonder that the carriers now seek immunity that protects
them from being sued for their criminal behaviour.

Uwe

[Pavel Sobek]

There is a thing I do not understand at all.
Why had not Microsoft offered us the possibility to install seamlessly
applets, applications etc., downloaded from the internet, into a sandbox
which would limit privileges of such applications to a minimum but which
could be elevated by the user as needed ? Something like ActiveX but more
secure ? Having access to only one directory instead of the whole filesystem
?
It would surely limit the proliferation of pseudo-applications "running in
the browser" but coded in some interpreted sort-of-a-language and using
libraries which are becoming bigger and bigger and bigger ....
I am sorry but I cannot see any progress in developing applications this
way.
Huuuge operating system used to run only one huuuge application serving as a
pseudo-operating system and making run other applications (coded in crappy
interpreted languages) ....
Total nonsense if you ask me.

Post by GrandmasterB

Post by Steve Thackery
are completely unnecessary - all you need is a Web browser and an
ultra-light kernel to host it on - something to look after the screen,
keyboard and mouse clicks. Everything else can be done from within the
browser, using Java to provide the programmatic stuff (or use some

People have been declaring the death of the operating system since
netscape came out. Look where netscape is now.
In order to have all the necessary functionality to handle all the types
of apps people want to run, such browser environments would have to be,
for all practical purposes, operating systems themselves. Think about
it - all the networking, video, sound, input, storage functionality would
need to be in there. Once all thats in there, you're just basically
arguing about semantics - the browser is no longer a browser, but a
de-facto OS itself. Or an OS layer running on top of a kernel (like most
modern OS's).
And... keep in mind... these browser apps need to be stored somewhere.
Which implies the need for other servers online to serve them up.
Something has to run those servers...
My personal suspicion is that a lot (not all, but a good deal) of the
original purpose behind the whole 'the browser is the future' movement is
just a carryover of the anti-MS movement. People saw netscape as -
'finally' - a potential rival for MS, and started pushing the idea of
everything being run in a browser as a means of breaking their 'monopoly'.
Ie, the reasons were political and business-related, not technical
superiority, for pushing the idea.

[Brian Moelk]

Post by GrandmasterB
Once all thats in there, you're just basically arguing about
semantics - the browser is no longer a browser, but a de-facto OS itself.
Or an OS layer running on top of a kernel (like most modern OS's).

The browser is pretty much that already.

Post by GrandmasterB
My personal suspicion is that a lot (not all, but a good deal) of the
original purpose behind the whole 'the browser is the future' movement is
just a carryover of the anti-MS movement. People saw netscape as -
'finally' - a potential rival for MS, and started pushing the idea of
everything being run in a browser as a means of breaking their 'monopoly'.

IMO, you're exaggerating a lot here and things are very different now
than they were back in the Netscape days.

Post by GrandmasterB
Ie, the reasons were political and business-related, not technical
superiority, for pushing the idea.

There are many strong business reasons to push things off individual
desktops. Think about roaming profiles and group security policies and
windows update services for corporate networks. So many of these things
that Microsoft has built are to provide a location independent solution
for users on a network of personal computers.

Why are so many companies moving corporate IT applications to the
browser? Because there are business reasons to do so: ease of/standard
deployment, better manageability/administration and location transparency.

Why are many companies outsourcing things like email to ASPs? Cost
savings and they don't want the IT staff required which distracts them
from their core business.

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Steve Thackery
I've argued that Win32/64 has a long future, and nobody other than
CodeGear has a credible RAD tool for it. I said that .Net ISN'T always
the answer, and that Win32 is - and will remain - a very viable
platform. Therefore CodeGear ought to "leverage" (ugh) this unique
selling point and market the hell out of it.

FTR, I do think that Win32/64 and .NET will have their place in the future.

Post by Steve Thackery
The thing is, they all have to be hosted in a browser, and that means
the inevitable "lowest common denominator" user interface.

The LCD UI is getting pretty darn good IMO. Check out ExtJS.com if you
want a look at my favorite heavyweight javascript library.

Post by Steve Thackery
Either that, or they run as separate Java programs, again with the usual
hideous interface.

Java interfaces are pretty darn good too. :)

Post by Steve Thackery
I've used both, and had some fun with the various Google bits and bobs,
and although they will get the job done, they are annoyingly slow at
times, and have a distinctly clunky (almost Windows 3.1) look and feel
to them.

We, as developers, I believe are hyper sensitive to these kinds of
things. Most end users do not care or even notice.

Post by Steve Thackery
The richest, slickest user interface is still to be had when
using a real OS such as Vista or Mac OSX. At least, that is my
observation.

Sure, but there are disadvantages to that approach as well.

Post by Steve Thackery
I'd like to explore and understand this a bit further. The implication
of this line of argument is that the multiple gigabytes of Vista and Mac
OSX are completely unnecessary - all you need is a Web browser and an
ultra-light kernel to host it on - something to look after the screen,
keyboard and mouse clicks.

I wouldn't go to that extreme; there are still some applications,
complex enough to require all the things in a modern OS. And as
GrandmasterB rapped, something has to run these web applications as well. :)

Post by Steve Thackery
Everything else can be done from within the
browser, using Java to provide the programmatic stuff (or use some
server-side processing), and Flash or Silverlight for the UI.

Don't even have to go as heavy weight as Flash or Silverlight. An
amazing amount of functionality can be built using Javascript within the
browser itself. Javascript is a pretty capable language if you dig a
bit deeper.

Post by Steve Thackery
Presumably you could make an Office 2007 clone like this? Or a
Photoshop look- and work-alike? A Windows Media Player replacement?

With Flash and Silverlight, I think we're going to get really close to that.

Post by Steve Thackery
That seems hard to believe. Have Microsoft and Apple (and the Linux
crowd) made a dreadful mistake and written tens of millions of lines of
code that aren't actually needed? When all they needed to do was write
a browser and a lightweight kernel to generate the screen display and
catch the key strokes?

Not a mistake, it's just evolution of systems and the cyclical swing of
heavy server/thin client to thin server/heavy client, etc. Tides roll
in, and they roll back out.

Post by Steve Thackery
Something doesn't add up. I'm puzzled. Just how much of the 25GB of
software on my hard disk can be ditched and delivered through IE and a
Java engine?

For a developer, there is less than the average home user. Most home
users surf the web, read/write email and do light office work. All that
stuff can be done online, in the browser. Also, from a collaboration
perspective the online apps work much better.

I was just looking at gliffy.com as a visio replacement for myself today...

Post by Steve Thackery
Just how realistic is it to run an application like Word
2007, or Photoshop, from a USB stick on any computer you happen to be
near, without touching the registry or "installing" anything?

Very realistic. I have Open Office running off my USB drive. I have
FileZilla, Thunderbird and Notepad++ as well. I could have Firefox, but
don't really need it since I use del.icio.us for bookmarking. Check out
www.portableapps.com, or anything regarding U3. Tons of things are
available already.

Delphi is perfectly suited to eliminate all that unnecessary coupling to
the Windows OS and make installations simple unzips. Use a nice
embedded database (I like NexusDB, but you can use DBISAM, SQLite, etc)
and you've got everything you need to build sophisticated applications
especially if you leverage synchronization/"the briefcase model" or even
webservices.

Post by Steve Thackery
Clearly I don't understand all the issues, but I think the discussion is
valuable. Was the all-singing all-dancing OS model - as in Windows, OSX
and Unix - a dreadful mistake? Are Web-hosted applications going to
make serious inroads into the domain of the traditional Windows desktop
applications? Can we realistically carry our applications around with
us on a USB stick?

Not a mistake, but born from an older model of what is emerging now.
From a time that was less connected than we are today. We now have fast
broadband speeds and ridiculously inexpensive and small flash memory
storage capabilities. There is no reason not to leverage that.

Post by Steve Thackery
Maybe by getting some insights into these areas we can identify where we
think Delphi could develop and flourish.

Make it support OSX and you've got a terrific USB application
development tool. Plug into Windows or a Mac and run your application
provided that they have a binary compatible data format.

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Brian Moelk
Don't even have to go as heavy weight as Flash or Silverlight. An
amazing amount of functionality can be built using Javascript within the
browser itself. Javascript is a pretty capable language if you dig a
bit deeper.

Here's a site that might demonstrate how powerful Javascript can be:

http://tide4javascript.com/

Be sure to step through some code after setting a break point and view
the callstack and watches. It's built using extjs.

[David Clegg]

Thats a pretty useful looking site for a Javascript newbie. Thanks for
the link, Brian.
--
Cheers,
David Clegg
***@gmail.com
http://cc.codegear.com/Author/72299

QualityCentral. The best way to bug CodeGear about bugs.
http://qc.codegear.com

"I don't have to be careful. I've got a gun!" - Homer Simpson

[Brian Moelk]

Post by David Clegg
Thats a pretty useful looking site for a Javascript newbie. Thanks for
the link, Brian.

You're welcome. When I first saw it, I was blown away at how far
developers continue to push the envelope in the browser. It's really
amazing to have a mini-javascript ide running in the browser, written in
javascript. :)

Here's another link if you want to explore Javascript in fun ways:

http://usrb.in/amachang/static/gaiax01/

The page is in Japanese, but the code/samples are worth looking at to
see the progression from procedure based JS to an OO style JS.

[Eddie Shipman]

Post by Brian Moelk

Post by Brian Moelk
Don't even have to go as heavy weight as Flash or Silverlight. An
amazing amount of functionality can be built using Javascript
within the browser itself. Javascript is a pretty capable language
if you dig a bit deeper.

http://tide4javascript.com/
Be sure to step through some code after setting a break point and view
the callstack and watches. It's built using extjs.

It sad that this library has been stalled for a few years. It was one
of the pioneers in javascript: http://alladyn.art.pl/

"Look Ma', no Flash!"


--

[Gordos Colos]

Web applications instead of Desktop ones?

2 things:

a) I want to have *my* data on *my* hard drive. Web application
guarantee no portability. Wherever I go I always have to take my laptop
with me anyway. Why? Using Internet cafe's and public computers to
access private data is simply stupid.

b) I want to have access to my data when I don't have access to the
Internet. As the whole world goes more and more wireless, I think there
will be more and more security concerns and maybe one day we'll have to
stay offline to be safe.

Thank you,
GC

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Gordos Colos
Web applications instead of Desktop ones?

[...]

For that kind of data, you can simply carry a USB drive, there's no need
to have a full laptop. For all the data that is not a security risk
(which I would argue is most of peoples data), using online services is
fine.

[Gordos Colos]

Post by Brian Moelk
For that kind of data, you can simply carry a USB drive, there's no
need to have a full laptop. For all the data that is not a security
risk (which I would argue is most of peoples data), using online
services is fine.

Well, can you have an anti-virus software on a stick? Haven't heard of
any. But if so, what about updates (vir defs) and so on? Would you feel
save using it like this?

Also, it depends what kind of data you like to have handy. I always
have ~100GB óf data with me - everything I've collected since I started
using computers. No BS like pictures or videos just the things I value
(and yes, it's truecrypt protected with additional copy at home).

And moreover, I don't think any online data storage service gives you a
100% guarantee/recovery in case of a data loss/leak. It's like no
warranty coming with software.

GC

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Gordos Colos
Well, can you have an anti-virus software on a stick? Haven't heard of
any. But if so, what about updates (vir defs) and so on? Would you feel
save using it like this?

Yes, actually you can:
http://portableapps.com/news/2007-08-23_-_clamwin_portable_0.91.2

I don't have anti-virus software on my stick and I feel no burning
sensation at all. :)

Post by Gordos Colos
Also, it depends what kind of data you like to have handy. I always
have ~100GB óf data with me - everything I've collected since I started
using computers. No BS like pictures or videos just the things I value
(and yes, it's truecrypt protected with additional copy at home).

But you and I are edge cases, not the normal business user. Most people
carry their iPods around with enough storage for their
music/videos/pictures *and* their application documents. There's no
reason not to leverage this, and I feel very confident that the industry
will.

Post by Gordos Colos
And moreover, I don't think any online data storage service gives you a
100% guarantee/recovery in case of a data loss/leak.

There's no 100% guarantee for harddrives or backups either. All one can
do is mitigate risk. Life isn't certain.

Post by Gordos Colos
It's like no
warranty coming with software.

Generally there is none anyway. Online services have SLA's that define
performance characteristics. Typically there is some financial
compensation if things go really bad.

[Tom Backer Johnsen]

Post by Brian Moelk

Post by Gordos Colos
Well, can you have an anti-virus software on a stick? Haven't heard of
any. But if so, what about updates (vir defs) and so on? Would you feel
save using it like this?

http://portableapps.com/news/2007-08-23_-_clamwin_portable_0.91.2

OK. I had a look at this site and it really started me thinking. A
few days ago I was ordering a new compact Dell (Latitude D430), and
was tempted to order a USB memory stick with the capacity of 8 GB.
The price was not that forbidding for one thing, and the capacity of
those sticks are increasing incredibly fast.

I work two places and carry a portable between the two places. I now
see that this is stupid. What I really want to carry is the contents
of the hard disk (which weighs nothing), not the hardware needed to
access the hard disk. Yes, I need two computers, but I do not have to
carry them.

Having all the software on a USB stick together with the corresponding
data reduces what I have to carry to something I can carry in the same
pocket as the loose change. As a second best alternative, I bought a
Western Digital USB hard disk the other day for storage of music and
pictures. 120 GB of storage for the same price as an 8 GB memory
stick. Physically small, but probably quite fragile.

As a researcher, what I would really like to have (in addition to the
applications on the portable apps setup) on a stick or memory device are:

-- An OO type of language like Delphi.

-- A typographical system like LaTex with at good editor, the ideal
would be something like WinEdt which also handles R.

-- A statistical system like R

At least at the moment, I think this is the future. Find a computer,
plug in the thing, and start working.

Tom

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
OK. I had a look at this site and it really started me thinking.

Cool! :)

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
I work two places and carry a portable between the two places. I now
see that this is stupid.

It's not necessarily stupid at this point in time because not all
applications are portable enough.

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
What I really want to carry is the contents of
the hard disk (which weighs nothing), not the hardware needed to access
the hard disk. Yes, I need two computers, but I do not have to carry them.

Yep.

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
Having all the software on a USB stick together with the corresponding
data reduces what I have to carry to something I can carry in the same
pocket as the loose change. As a second best alternative, I bought a
Western Digital USB hard disk the other day for storage of music and
pictures. 120 GB of storage for the same price as an 8 GB memory
stick. Physically small, but probably quite fragile.

External harddrives have their place too. It's the whole
size/capacity/cost tradeoffs. I tend to use my usb drive far more often
than my external harddrive, but I still have both.

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
As a researcher, what I would really like to have (in addition to the
-- An OO type of language like Delphi.

I'm pretty certain that you can get most compilers/interpreters to work
off a USB drive. It's possible to get an IDE to run off one as well
provided that the devloper of such IDE is careful about keeping various
dependencies contained/isolated.

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
-- A typographical system like LaTex with at good editor, the ideal
would be something like WinEdt which also handles R.
-- A statistical system like R

The last two are very possible; just not sure if those specific
applications are at that state yet. Often times C/C++ applications are
very close to being portable, just a small amount of code changes can
enable this: 1) use relative paths, 2) no registry/com/etc.

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
At least at the moment, I think this is the future. Find a computer,
plug in the thing, and start working.

Agreed; and Delphi could lead that kind of development with a little bit
of extra work.

[Tom Backer Johnsen]

Post by Brian Moelk

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
OK. I had a look at this site and it really started me thinking.

Cool! :)

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
I work two places and carry a portable between the two places. I now
see that this is stupid.

It's not necessarily stupid at this point in time because not all
applications are portable enough.

True. On the other hand, when you look at the list of applications at
that site it really covers a lot, close to all you might need. When
you add things that you place on the net anyway like content
management systems (CMS's) there is not very much left.

Post by Brian Moelk

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
What I really want to carry is the contents of
the hard disk (which weighs nothing), not the hardware needed to access
the hard disk. Yes, I need two computers, but I do not have to carry them.

Yep.

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
Having all the software on a USB stick together with the corresponding
data reduces what I have to carry to something I can carry in the same
pocket as the loose change. As a second best alternative, I bought a
Western Digital USB hard disk the other day for storage of music and
pictures. 120 GB of storage for the same price as an 8 GB memory
stick. Physically small, but probably quite fragile.

External harddrives have their place too. It's the whole
size/capacity/cost tradeoffs. I tend to use my usb drive far more often
than my external harddrive, but I still have both.

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
As a researcher, what I would really like to have (in addition to the
-- An OO type of language like Delphi.

I'm pretty certain that you can get most compilers/interpreters to work
off a USB drive. It's possible to get an IDE to run off one as well
provided that the devloper of such IDE is careful about keeping various
dependencies contained/isolated.

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
-- A typographical system like LaTex with at good editor, the ideal
would be something like WinEdt which also handles R.
-- A statistical system like R

The last two are very possible; just not sure if those specific
applications are at that state yet. Often times C/C++ applications are
very close to being portable, just a small amount of code changes can
enable this: 1) use relative paths, 2) no registry/com/etc.

I think I will place a question on the discussion lists for these two
applications and see what crops up.

Post by Brian Moelk

Post by Tom Backer Johnsen
At least at the moment, I think this is the future. Find a computer,
plug in the thing, and start working.

Agreed; and Delphi could lead that kind of development with a little bit
of extra work.

That would be VERY nice.

Tom

[Q Correll]

Brian,

| External harddrives have their place too. It's the whole
| size/capacity/cost tradeoffs. I tend to use my usb drive far more
| often than my external harddrive, but I still have both.

Yep, ditto. My 4 GB USB Flash Drive can't come close to holding
several cycles of my 30 GB development system back-ups that my 200 GB
external FireWire 800 hard drive holds.

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Q Correll
Yep, ditto. My 4 GB USB Flash Drive can't come close to holding
several cycles of my 30 GB development system back-ups that my 200 GB
external FireWire 800 hard drive holds.

And your external hard drive could be able to run those development
systems...if there were enough desire/care put forth from the vendors to
make it happen.

[Graham Stratford]

Kind of like I run my webserver (Apache), database (MySQL) and PHP
development environment off a 512KB flash drive. It's so liberating.

http://www.apachefriends.org/en/xampp.html

Post by Brian Moelk

Post by Q Correll
Yep, ditto. My 4 GB USB Flash Drive can't come close to holding
several cycles of my 30 GB development system back-ups that my 200 GB
external FireWire 800 hard drive holds.

And your external hard drive could be able to run those development
systems...if there were enough desire/care put forth from the vendors to
make it happen.

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Graham Stratford
Kind of like I run my webserver (Apache), database (MySQL) and PHP
development environment off a 512KB flash drive. It's so liberating.
http://www.apachefriends.org/en/xampp.html

Yes, exactly like that.

[Q Correll]

Brian,

| And your external hard drive could be able to run those development
| systems...if there were enough desire/care put forth from the vendors
| to make it happen.

Except that I find the data-transfer rate to be sub-optimal using
either FireWire 800 or USB 2.0 external HD's. Having HD DMA is
difficult to beat. Not too much of a problem at keyboarding-developing
speeds but considerably slower when copying, etc.,.

I fantasy-configured a couple of 2 TB dual quad-core systems (MAC Pro
and a Dell) for myself. However, I cannot justify spending eight grand
plus tax on either of them. <g>

[Chris Morgan]

Post by Q Correll
Except that I find the data-transfer rate to be sub-optimal using
either FireWire 800 or USB 2.0 external HD's. Having HD DMA is
difficult to beat. Not too much of a problem at keyboarding-developing
speeds but considerably slower when copying, etc.,.

For USB hard disks, reformatting them from FAT32 to NTFS
will dramatically improve I/O.
We tested a couple of identical 500GB disks (maxtor?)
and the NTFS formatted one was 2 or 3x faster for write/delete
and also faster for reading IIRC.

Cheers,

Chris

[Brion L. Webster]

Post by Chris Morgan

Post by Q Correll
Except that I find the data-transfer rate to be sub-optimal using
either FireWire 800 or USB 2.0 external HD's. Having HD DMA is
difficult to beat. Not too much of a problem at keyboarding-developing
speeds but considerably slower when copying, etc.,.

For USB hard disks, reformatting them from FAT32 to NTFS
will dramatically improve I/O.
We tested a couple of identical 500GB disks (maxtor?)
and the NTFS formatted one was 2 or 3x faster for write/delete
and also faster for reading IIRC.

They tend to come factory pre-formatted FAT32 for MAC interoperability.
Once you go NTFS, you lose the ability to write data from a MAC. If raw
speed is an issue, format whatever works for you. If you go NTFS, do not
CONVERT - you'll lose space. Format. Also, try different cluster sizes.
The default 4k allocation size may not be optimal if you're just doing
huge files. OTOH, it's probably better for text type files.

One other thing that you may run in to - many hard drive diagnostic tools
don't run as well across the USB port. Data Life Guard (Western Digital)
and SeaTools (Seagate / Maxtor) both seem to have this problem. They also
take longer.

[Chris Morgan]

Post by Brion L. Webster
They tend to come factory pre-formatted FAT32 for MAC interoperability.
Once you go NTFS, you lose the ability to write data from a MAC.

Yeah, but who needs MACs? <g> (or linux come to that...!)

Cheers,

Chris

[Brion L. Webster]

Post by Chris Morgan
Yeah, but who needs MACs? <g> (or linux come to that...!)

Oooh! Hope you put on your asbestos undies! Even if we are in the
"Delphi - Linux, we've heard of it, don't need it, and MAC's can piss off"
newsgroup!

[Q Correll]

Chris,

| For USB hard disks, reformatting them from FAT32 to NTFS
| will dramatically improve I/O.

I did that. <g>

[Brion L. Webster]

Post by Q Correll
Brian,

Post by Brian Moelk
And your external hard drive could be able to run those development
systems...if there were enough desire/care put forth from the vendors
to make it happen.

Except that I find the data-transfer rate to be sub-optimal using
either FireWire 800 or USB 2.0 external HD's. Having HD DMA is
difficult to beat. Not too much of a problem at keyboarding-developing
speeds but considerably slower when copying, etc.,.
I fantasy-configured a couple of 2 TB dual quad-core systems (MAC Pro
and a Dell) for myself. However, I cannot justify spending eight grand
plus tax on either of them. <g>

Dell has a new, apparently proprietary, "Powered USB" port to run D/Bay
devices. I haven't seen transfer speeds for external hard drives.

My new Latitude 830 has 3 regular USB ports and one of these "Powered USB"
ports - different connector, essentially useless.

http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/latit_d830?c=us

Port is listed under expandability, view isn't really visible on "Back
View".

The D/Bay itself appears to hold Dell modular devices:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/products/Docking_Station/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=19&sku=313-1669

I can't find a darn thing else that uses this port. Wish they'd have a
"Powered USB -> real USB" adapter, if nothing else. ;-)

[Q Correll]

Brion,

| My new Latitude 830 has 3 regular USB ports and one of these "Powered
| USB" ports - different connector, essentially useless.

Hmmm,... Does make one wonder.

[Paul Scott]

Post by Q Correll
| My new Latitude 830 has 3 regular USB ports and one of these "Powered
| USB" ports - different connector, essentially useless.

Brion,

Unless Dell have recently changed the design, the bottom half of a
"Powered USB" (double-decker) port is a standard USB port - giving you *4*
regular USB's.

AFAICT the top half is a USB socket with power but no data lines (and
modified so you can't push a normal USB plug into it)

This is used for external Dell peripherals such as the docking bay which
require more power than can be supplied by a single USB port.

It would also be ideally suited for SWMBO's IcyBox external drive which
comes without a power brick but has two USB leads (so getting 2x DC
power). Since her X300 mini-laptop only has one regular and one powered
USB socket, at the moment she can either have the disk but no mouse, or a
mouse but no disk :(

Unfortunately I couldn't find anyone selling the Dell double plugs (or a
Double-plug to two-socket adaptor)

Does anyone know of a UK supplier?

[Brion L. Webster]

Post by Paul Scott
Unless Dell have recently changed the design, the bottom half of a
"Powered USB" (double-decker) port is a standard USB port - giving you 4
regular USB's.
AFAICT the top half is a USB socket with power but no data lines (and
modified so you can't push a normal USB plug into it)
This is used for external Dell peripherals such as the docking bay which
require more power than can be supplied by a single USB port.

I've put a picture of the back of the laptop in .attachments, "Dell
Latitude D830 Powered USB Port". On this particular model, I have 3
regular USB ports, and this "thing" that won't accept any standard USB
connector - Type A, B, mini-B, micro-B, etc. The spec sheet says I have 3
USB's and a powered USB. Sounds like maybe the other "thing" is just a
power amp for these external devices.

[Paul Scott]

On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:05:01 -0000, Brion L. Webster
<***@nospam.ci.fresno.ca.us> wrote:

Brion,

Post by Brion L. Webster
I've put a picture of the back of the laptop in .attachments, "Dell
Latitude D830 Powered USB Port". On this particular model, I have 3
regular USB ports, and this "thing" that won't accept any standard USB
connector

Looks exactly like the socket on the back of our Inspirons and on my
missus's X300

Bottom half of the "thing" takes a standard type A USB plug (same way up
as for the other sockets - that's usually with the USB logo on the plug
"up")

If it won't fit, I'd suggest you contact Dell.

[Brion L. Webster]

Post by Paul Scott
Bottom half of the "thing" takes a standard type A USB plug (same way up
as for the other sockets - that's usually with the USB logo on the plug
"up")

Yes, the bottom half takes a standard USB-A plug. That counts as one of
the three USB ports on the system. ;-) Would have rather had four normal
USB type A ports... Guess I got garbled in my description somewhere.

[Q Correll]

Brion,

| I've put a picture of the back of the laptop in .attachments,

Nice macro shot. What did you use to take it?

[Brion L. Webster]

Post by Q Correll
Brion,

Post by Brion L. Webster
I've put a picture of the back of the laptop in .attachments,

Nice macro shot. What did you use to take it?

Believe it or not, a Sony Mavica MVC-CD 500, using the "flower" setting.
The regular user didn't know what the flower was for before I asked him to
take the picture. Laptop was held in my hands while he moved around
trying to get the lighting right to penetrate down in there.

http://www.sonydigital-link.com/dime/digistill/mavica/mavica.asp?l=en&m=MVC-CD500

Looks like it's a 5MP camera. Not sure what it was actually set at, to be
honest.

[Q Correll]

Brion,

| Believe it or not, a Sony Mavica MVC-CD 500, using the "flower"
setting.

Thanks.

| The regular user didn't know what the flower was for before I asked
| him to take the picture.

<chuckle> That doesn't surprise me one bit. ;-)

| Laptop was held in my hands while he moved around trying to get the
| lighting right to penetrate down in there.

Give your friend Kudos for doing a good job with the lighting. It came
out great.

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Q Correll
Except that I find the data-transfer rate to be sub-optimal using
either FireWire 800 or USB 2.0 external HD's. Having HD DMA is
difficult to beat.

A lot of enclosures are now USB 2.0 and eSATA. So if you have an eSATA
port, you'll get much better transfer rates. Going forward, I suspect
we'll see eSATA ports become a lot more common place.

Post by Q Correll
Not too much of a problem at keyboarding-developing
speeds but considerably slower when copying, etc.,.

Indeed. :)

[Q Correll]

Brian,

| A lot of enclosures are now USB 2.0 and eSATA. So if you have an
| eSATA port, you'll get much better transfer rates. Going forward, I
| suspect we'll see eSATA ports become a lot more common place.

Unfortunately, I have an "older" system. It's SCSI. <g>

[TJC Support]

Post by Q Correll
Unfortunately, I have an "older" system. It's SCSI. <g>

My old system is scuzzy, but not SCSI. :^)

Cheers,
Van

[Q Correll]

TJC,

| My old system is scuzzy, but not SCSI. :^)

<chuckle>

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Q Correll
Unfortunately, I have an "older" system. It's SCSI. <g>

It's easy enough to throw an eSATA card into a desktop. There are
express card and PCMCIA options for notebooks as well.

[Q Correll]

Brian,

| It's easy enough to throw an eSATA card into a desktop.

Hmmm,... I hadn't thought of looking at that possibility.

Any recommendations?

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Q Correll
| It's easy enough to throw an eSATA card into a desktop.
Hmmm,... I hadn't thought of looking at that possibility.
Any recommendations?

Nope, I haven't done it yet either. :)

I'm not due for an external harddrive yet, but the next one I get will
most likely have an eSATA interface, at which point I'll probably throw
in a card. I would think almost any eSATA card would work; some brands
better than others like NICs or any other card.

The biggest issue is that with eSATA I believe you'll need external
power. So it's a tradeoff between convenient/slow (usb),
inconvenient/fast (esata).

[Q Correll]

Brian,

| I'm not due for an external harddrive yet,

I have an external (200 GB) HD. Firewire 800. I was thinking of
getting more capacity internally.

I'll keep-on fret'n 'bout it. <g>

[David Erbas-White]

Post by Q Correll
Brian,
| A lot of enclosures are now USB 2.0 and eSATA. So if you have an
| eSATA port, you'll get much better transfer rates. Going forward, I
| suspect we'll see eSATA ports become a lot more common place.
Unfortunately, I have an "older" system. It's SCSI. <g>

I remember working on that back when it was "Shugart"... <G>

David Erbas-White

[Q Correll]

David,

| I remember working on that back when it was "Shugart"... <G>

LOL!

Al died this last year. <sigh> Al and I bowled on the same team when
we worked at the IBM San Jose Development Lab back in the "Ol'Days."

[Q Correll]

David,

| "Shugart"

I put a .jpg (Al, Q, et al - Circa 1962) in attachments.

[Henrick Hellström]

Post by Brian Moelk
For all the data that is not a security risk
(which I would argue is most of peoples data), using online services is
fine.

I beg to differ. Most people do not have that much data they wouldn't
mind sharing with everyone. However, most of the time it isn't the CIA
or NSA they want to keep the data secret from, but rather friends,
relatives, neighbors, their employer, their potential future employers,
their bank contact etc.

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Henrick Hellström
I beg to differ. Most people do not have that much data they wouldn't
mind sharing with everyone. However, most of the time it isn't the CIA
or NSA they want to keep the data secret from, but rather friends,
relatives, neighbors, their employer, their potential future employers,
their bank contact etc.

But the reality is that that kind of data is in the cloud anyway.
Certainly bank/financial information is already there. Most email, IM,
etc passes in clear text over the internet.

IMO, it's a false belief that people cling to that they have more
privacy than they do. Might as well accept/acknowledge it and do
something productive with it. :)

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Brian Moelk
IMO, it's a false belief that people cling to that they have more
privacy than they do. Might as well accept/acknowledge it and do
something productive with it. :)

I should have added "Might as well accept/acknowledge/encrypt it...." :)

[Craig]

Post by Brian Moelk

Post by Brian Moelk
IMO, it's a false belief that people cling to that they have more
privacy than they do. Might as well accept/acknowledge it and do
something productive with it. :)

I should have added "Might as well accept/acknowledge/encrypt it...." :)

I agree with you. People seem to be more paranoid these days trying to
hide all their 'secrets'. The reality is the government and big
business probably know more about you and your family than you do.

Craig.

[Henrick Hellström]

Post by Brian Moelk
But the reality is that that kind of data is in the cloud anyway.
Certainly bank/financial information is already there. Most email, IM,
etc passes in clear text over the internet.

My point was that a very large amount of data is still a security risk,
even though you neither can nor want to keep it 100% confidential. In
most cases people trust their ISPs enough to be prepared to send such
data by unprotected email, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are
comfortable taking the risk of putting the same data in a persistent
storage somewhere on the Internet.

Mostly, the sensitive information ordinary people have is usually such
that casual eavesdropping would be discomforting, but it would be a
personal disaster if the information ended up in the major search engines.

Case #1: Your mortgage corresponds to 90% of the market value of your
house. You discover some damage that reduces the market value by 20%,
and you can't afford to fix the problem until next year. If your bank
found out they would force you to sell your house right away.

Case #2: You email some boudoir photos of yourself to your spouse.

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Henrick Hellström
My point was that a very large amount of data is still a security risk,
even though you neither can nor want to keep it 100% confidential.

Understood.

Post by Henrick Hellström
In
most cases people trust their ISPs enough to be prepared to send such
data by unprotected email, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are
comfortable taking the risk of putting the same data in a persistent
storage somewhere on the Internet.

Which my point is that that is foolish since there's a risk of that
happening and is happening with echelon anyway.

Things like arrest records, mortgage details, etc. are available online
as a matter of public record on government websites.

Post by Henrick Hellström
Mostly, the sensitive information ordinary people have is usually such
that casual eavesdropping would be discomforting, but it would be a
personal disaster if the information ended up in the major search engines.

Right, but I don't see any of those major search engines indexing my
gmail or hotmail account for public consumption. The point is that the
information is there already.

[...]

Post by Henrick Hellström
Case #2: You email some boudoir photos of yourself to your spouse.

Have you browsed flickr? I really don't think people think about these
things before they do what they do. It's only the paranoid few that
know enough to be concerned: developers, etc.

Finally, all of these complaints do not address the USB alternative I
proposed either, which is 100% viable and no different from a
laptop/desktop in terms of personal confidentiality. If one is really
concerned about that stuff, just store it on a USB drive, but there's no
technical need for a "personal" computer.

[Uwe]

Brian

Post by Brian Moelk
Which my point is that that is foolish since there's a risk of that
happening and is happening with echelon anyway.

That's like saying "let them violate my constitutional rights - they do it
anyway".

If you use web based applications to write personal letters for example and
store those (not encrypted) on a server, there is always a risk that
somebody is snooping and does some profiling based on their content. With my
own PC and hard disk, those letters will never be publicly available.

Uwe

[Craig]

Post by Uwe
If you use web based applications to write personal letters for example and
store those (not encrypted) on a server, there is always a risk that
somebody is snooping and does some profiling based on their content. With my
own PC and hard disk, those letters will never be publicly available.

Maybe they will never be publicly available on your own PC. I think in
reality having them stored on your local PC makes them more
susceptible to prying eyes. From your kids or family who know your
computer passwords to the guy down at the local computer repair store.
Getting hold of information stored on computers is not difficult. One
of the oldest tricks for hackers is just to rifle through the rubbish
bins out the back of companies and find old hardware or documents
thrown out. At least online businesses that store private information
are required to have some kind of privacy policy that is probably much
stricter than the privacy policy of entering your office door.

Thinking only storing documents locally is a false sense of security.

Craig

[Brian Moelk]

Post by Uwe

Post by Brian Moelk
Which my point is that that is foolish since there's a risk of that
happening and is happening with echelon anyway.

That's like saying "let them violate my constitutional rights - they do
it anyway".

No, I'm realistic about what is actually happening. I do not condone it
one bit. But beyond the echelon issue, lots of information is in the
cloud (banks, stocks, public records) and customers *want* it to be.

Post by Uwe
If you use web based applications to write personal letters for example
and store those (not encrypted) on a server, there is always a risk that
somebody is snooping and does some profiling based on their content.

Right, like gmail, hotmail, and other extremely popular applications
that millions of people use by choice.

Post by Uwe
With my own PC and hard disk, those letters will never be publicly
available.

Presumably you'll actually send those letters, so there is a risk of
them being compromised in the mail before delivery or after it has been
opened/read. Certainly it's a felony (at least in the US) to do open
someone else's mail and it's not really respectful to read someone
else's open letters, but there is a *risk*.

I would also argue that a properly secured electronic letter is *more*
secure than a physical letter. But I digress...

Regardless, none of this changes the fact that there is the same amount
of privacy/security with your PC as a USB flash drive or portable harddrive.

[Q Correll]

Gordos,

| b) I want to have access to my data when I don't have access to the
| Internet. As the whole world goes more and more wireless, I think
| there will be more and more security concerns and maybe one day we'll
| have to stay offline to be safe.

What do you mean "one day?" That day is here and now and will only get
worse.

[Gordos Colos]

Post by Q Correll
What do you mean "one day?" That day is here and now and will only
get worse.

Ok, that's exactly what I meant. And it can only change for worse.

GC

[A Nielsen]

Post by Steve Thackery
Either that, or they run as separate Java programs, again with the usual
hideous interface.

Why do you think people prefer a web application?

(when there is one that is usable, that is)

Post by Steve Thackery
When all they needed to do was write
a browser and a lightweight kernel to generate the screen display and
catch the key strokes?

And catch mouse events, and recognize mice and keyboards, and detect
video capabilities, and manage movie playback, and play sounds...
browsers only lack a good component system to allow developers to attach
better widgets.

Post by Steve Thackery
Something doesn't add up. I'm puzzled. Just how much of the 25GB of
software on my hard disk can be ditched and delivered through IE and a
Java engine? Just how realistic is it to run an application like Word
2007, or Photoshop, from a USB stick on any computer you happen to be
near, without touching the registry or "installing" anything?

I agree with that. I want a PC owned and controled by me. But it's not
an easy task for everyone to maintain one.

Post by Steve Thackery
make serious inroads into the domain of the traditional Windows desktop
applications? Can we realistically carry our applications around with
us on a USB stick?

Some applications are very suitable for a portable version. Also I see
some new trends in data storing. I find more and more practical to have
data in external hard disks or mini file servers. My laptop has an
encrypted drive for personal files. I use more and more my gmail account
instead of "fixed" email. I can keep even confidential files there using
encryption.

Of course there are some applications not very suitable for this
arrangement. But I've seen another trend in companies: disk cloning with
a lot of common use application "preinstalled".

[Brian Moelk]

Post by A Nielsen
browsers only lack a good component system to allow developers to attach
better widgets.

Various Javascript libraries offer this.

Post by A Nielsen
Of course there are some applications not very suitable for this
arrangement. But I've seen another trend in companies: disk cloning with
a lot of common use application "preinstalled".

Exactly, with all custom IT being pushed into the browser.

[TB]

Wouldnt it be great if we could compile delphi apps to a browser. Some like
flash which is a plug in, and we could compile delphi apps to run under it.

[Dean Hill]

Post by TB
Wouldnt it be great if we could compile delphi apps to a browser.
Some like flash which is a plug in, and we could compile delphi apps
to run under it.

Silverlight 2.0 might make that possible for Delphi .NET.

[I.P. Nichols]

Post by Dean Hill

Post by TB
Wouldnt it be great if we could compile delphi apps to a browser.
Some like flash which is a plug in, and we could compile delphi apps
to run under it.

Silverlight 2.0 might make that possible for Delphi .NET.

I've read several posts here that expressed a lot of skepticism about the
practically of browser hosted apps or as they are sometime referred to, RIA
aka "Rich Internet Applications". Needless to say I don't share that
scepticism and here is an example of why I think it has great potential.
This is a site where a talented guy is just beginning a step-by-step of how
he is building a new Silverlight app he calls MasterCHEF.
http://tinyurl.com/38y3x6

His "inspiration" is a partially finished Mac Leopard desktop cookbook app
and you can see it's "eye-candy" screenshots etc at this site:
http://mydreamapp.com/

To get an idea of what's in store you can see his last Silverlight
step-by-step which was a lookalike of Apple's iTunes app which he decided to
not finish because of concern that Apple might take legal action for his
having cloned iTunes. http://tinyurl.com/2ytgl9

BTW - Silverlight 2.0 is just a renamed Silverlight 1.1, and there are some
details here: http://tinyurl.com/35aglu

Golly Gee Whiz, ain't Microsoft's naming policies wonderful. ;>)

[Uwe]

What's so exicting about it? The interface looks nice but can easily be done
by a talented web designer. A database full of recipes and photos? Use MySQL
or any other database of your liking. The program logic? Well, use some CGI,
PHP or whatever and with a little bit of coding it should work.

And that should be the reason why I should give up my PC and replace it with
a settop box ( or an Internet PC, as it was called several years ago)?

Uwe

[I.P. Nichols]

Post by Uwe
What's so exicting about it? The interface looks nice but can easily be
done by a talented web designer. A database full of recipes and photos?
Use MySQL or any other database of your liking. The program logic? Well,
use some CGI, PHP or whatever and with a little bit of coding it should
work.

I assume you are a talented web designer so I'd be interested to see the
result of your little bit of coding when you get it working. :)

Post by Uwe
And that should be the reason why I should give up my PC and replace it
with a settop box ( or an Internet PC, as it was called several years
ago)?

Whatever...

[Uwe]

Post by I.P. Nichols
Whatever...

That's the way you usually deal with people that don't agree with your point
of view? Very telling... :-)

Uwe

[I.P. Nichols]

Post by Uwe

Post by I.P. Nichols
Whatever...

That's the way you usually deal with people that don't agree with your
point of view? Very telling... :-)

I'm a prickly old geezer SOB who has absolutely no point of view about
whether you should do the things you said below. It sounds to me like you
are trolling... :-(

Post by Uwe
And that should be the reason why I should give up my PC and replace it
with a settop box ( or an Internet PC, as it was called several years
ago)?

[Uwe]

It sounds to me like you are trolling... :-(

There was absolutely no pun intended with what I said. Sorry, if I came
across differently.

My whole point is that I believe that old ideas/concepts are just sold under
a different name now. Replacing a PC with some other device that accesses
web applications (be it JAVA or something else) is one of those. Why should
I use something like Silverlight when I can achieve almost the same
functionality with traditional techniques like HTML/CSS and scripting
languages? I don't see the advantage and the necessity.

I not only have security concerns. For my business, web applications would
be completely unusable at the moment. I have to deal with huge image files
(> 300MB) all the time - getting them ready for printing. Am I supposed to
transfer such an amount of data over the web first, before I can work with
it with a web based application and simply change brightness/contrast for
example?

Uwe

[Uwe]

Am I supposed to transfer such an amount of data over the web first...

In the imaginary world without PC, that is.

[Chris Morgan]

Post by Uwe
I not only have security concerns. For my business, web applications would
be completely unusable at the moment. I have to deal with huge image files
(> 300MB) all the time - getting them ready for printing. Am I supposed to
transfer such an amount of data over the web first, before I can work with
it with a web based application and simply change brightness/contrast for
example?

There will always be a need for specialist software to run on dedicated
desktop devices for specific industries.
I develop seismic processing/imaging and GIS software. Seismic data runs
to giga- or terra-bytes - and oil companies are very jealous about
the security/confidentiality of their data. Even here though, web-based
data access portals and such are starting to be investigated

But most "office" software - spreadsheets, word processing, database
querying
and data input etc can conceivably be internet (or intranet) based
even with today's technology.

Cheers,

Chris

[Uwe]

Chris

Post by Chris Morgan
There will always be a need for specialist software to run on dedicated
desktop devices for specific industries.

Well, what does that mean for us if there are no PC's anymore in the future?
Will we be ripped off by hardware manufacturers again as it happened in the
past?

Post by Chris Morgan
Even here though, web-based data access portals and such are starting to
be investigated

Interesting. I assume that those companies will be running their own servers
instead of renting external storage, right?

Post by Chris Morgan
But most "office" software - spreadsheets, word processing, database
querying and data input etc can conceivably be internet (or intranet)
based even with today's technology.

I don't doubt that, but as I said earlier - I have certain security
concerns.

Uwe

[Chris Morgan]

Post by Uwe

Post by Chris Morgan
Even here though, web-based data access portals and such are starting to
be investigated

Interesting. I assume that those companies will be running their own
servers instead of renting external storage, right?

Yeah it's mainly corporate intranets. sometimes intercontinental
intranets, but still intranets.

Post by Uwe

Post by Chris Morgan
But most "office" software - spreadsheets, word processing, database
querying and data input etc can conceivably be internet (or intranet)
based even with today's technology.

I don't doubt that, but as I said earlier - I have certain security
concerns.

If the data is encrypted to a high enough level, it shouldn't matter
(in theory) where it is stored.
And you could still store your data locally, but use internet apps
to edit the data. It would save installing Office on every single PC
in the universe!

Cheers,

Chris

[Dean Hill]

Post by I.P. Nichols
BTW - Silverlight 2.0 is just a renamed Silverlight 1.1, and there
are some details here: http://tinyurl.com/35aglu

Yep. The nice thing about Silverlight 2.0 (aka 1.1) is that it will
include a compact version of the .NET framework and support C#
(Delphi.NET???). I worked with Flash a while back and it was an
absolute pain in the neck.

[I.P. Nichols]

Post by Dean Hill

Post by I.P. Nichols
BTW - Silverlight 2.0 is just a renamed Silverlight 1.1, and there
are some details here: http://tinyurl.com/35aglu

Yep. The nice thing about Silverlight 2.0 (aka 1.1) is that it will
include a compact version of the .NET framework and support C#
(Delphi.NET???).

C# without design time support is like a day without sunshine. <opps>

[David Clegg]

Post by I.P. Nichols
C# without design time support is like a day without sunshine. <opps>

You realize you may have confused a whole bunch of folks here (e.g us
Aucklanders) as to whether you see that as a normal occurance or a bad
thing :-)
--
Cheers,
David Clegg
***@gmail.com
http://cc.codegear.com/Author/72299

QualityCentral. The best way to bug CodeGear about bugs.
http://qc.codegear.com

"The three little sentences that will get you through life. Number 1:
Cover for me. Number 2: Oh, good idea, Boss! Number 3: It was like that
when I got here." - Homer Simpson

[I.P. Nichols]

Post by David Clegg

Post by I.P. Nichols
C# without design time support is like a day without sunshine. <opps>

You realize you may have confused a whole bunch of folks here (e.g us
Aucklanders) as to whether you see that as a normal occurance or a bad
thing :-)

So your saying the weather there is craptacular ;>)

[David Clegg]

Post by I.P. Nichols
So your saying the weather there is craptacular ;>)

Lets just say that one of the things I miss the most from my time in
Australia is its vastly superior weather (especially summers). In
Auckland it seems like we only get about a weeks worth of useable
summertime weather per year. This isn't a trait shared by the rest of
the country thankfully, but Auckland is where I lay my hat currently.
--
Cheers,
David Clegg
***@gmail.com
http://cc.codegear.com/Author/72299

QualityCentral. The best way to bug CodeGear about bugs.
http://qc.codegear.com

"What about those red balls they have on car aerials so you can spot
your car in a park? I think all cars should have them." - Homer Simpson

[JED]

Post by David Clegg
Lets just say that one of the things I miss the most from my time in
Australia is its vastly superior weather (especially summers).

Feel free to send some consistent rain our way. We won't knock it back.

[David Clegg]

Post by JED
Feel free to send some consistent rain our way. We won't knock it back.

Good point. I'll see what I can do. :-)
--
Cheers,
David Clegg
***@gmail.com
http://cc.codegear.com/Author/72299

QualityCentral. The best way to bug CodeGear about bugs.
http://qc.codegear.com

"I hope I didn't brain my damage." - Homer Simpson

[Chris Morgan]

Post by I.P. Nichols
craptacular ;>)

That is such a good word!

Cheers,

Chris

[I.P. Nichols]

Post by Chris Morgan

Post by I.P. Nichols
craptacular ;>)

That is such a good word!

I used it because I thought Cleggy would giggle since that's what Bart
Simpson said when he saw Homer's Christams-Light decorating abilities. ;-)

[Chris Morgan]

Post by I.P. Nichols

Post by Chris Morgan

Post by I.P. Nichols
craptacular ;>)

That is such a good word!

I used it because I thought Cleggy would giggle since that's what Bart
Simpson said when he saw Homer's Christams-Light decorating abilities. ;-)

Everything good can be traced back to the Simpsons...!

Cheers,

Chris

[I.P. Nichols]

"I.P. Nichols" wrote :

Here I am replying to my own message but I wanted to post two Silverlight
1.0 applications from Vertigo one of my favorite application developers.

http://www.vertigo.com/slideshow.aspx

Note his saying "A Picture is Worth 0x3E8 Words" ;-)

http://www.vertigo.com/videoshow.aspx

And I keep hoping they will publish a Silverlight client for their
Family.Show so I can eMail just my GEDCOM files to show to my friends who
don't have .NET 3.0 on their computers.

http://www.vertigo.com/familyshow.aspx