Windows Media Player 10 license

Trond · Post by **Trond** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:50 pm

Everyone who installed WMP 10 or upgraded to version 10 from version 9 agreed to the "SUPPLEMENTAL END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT". Actually, you agree to it only by using WMP 10.

But did you read it?

It's illegal to use WMP under Linux with WINE:

The accompanying Microsoft software includes computer software and may include ... ... for use with a Microsoft client operating system product...

...IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF THE CLIENT OS SOFTWARE, YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE CLIENT OS COMPONENTS...

You're not allowed to install multiple copies on the same computer, and you're not allowed to install it on computers which are not yours:

2.1 Provided you comply with all applicable license terms and conditions contained in the Client OS Software EULA (which are hereby incorporated by reference except as set forth below) and this Supplemental EULA, Microsoft grants you the right to reproduce, install and use one copy of the Client OS Components [Here: WMP] on each of your computers that is running a validly licensed copy of the Client OS Software.

...

All rights not expressly granted to you in this Supplemental EULA are reserved.

They seem to be very well aware that .NET is slow and bloated. Because you are not allowed to publish benchmark results for benchmarks of .NET.

3.1 The Client OS Components may include the Microsoft .NET Framework. You may not disclose the results of any benchmark test of the .NET Framework to any third party without Microsoft’s prior written approval.

(Do you think it's easy to get that written approval?)

Bonne_den_kule · Post by **Bonne_den_kule** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 6:47 pm

Hahaha...

utopiomania · Post by **utopiomania** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:03 pm

Trond, you should get yourself a good PC and get to work. If .NET is a problem, you need a new PC.

techjunkie · Post by **techjunkie** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 7:57 pm

http://www.theserverside.net/articles/s ... Benchmarks
http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/compare/nileperf.aspx
http://www.rassoc.com/gregr/weblog/arch ... x?post=492
http://www.rassoc.com/gregr/weblog/arch ... x?post=494

Trond · Post by **Trond** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:24 pm

utopiomania wrote:Trond, you should get yourself a good PC and get to work. If .NET is a problem, you need a new PC.

No, you need to stop taking those sleeping pills.

va!n · Post by **va!n** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:51 am

@Trond:
thanks for the info to give a sign to think about C# (net)... its an own-goal for MS to write such things.... hehe... i have buyed C# books but i think i will stop trying to learn C# and start with C++ indeed...

@techjunkie:
thanks for the links! very shocking result diagrams! Its a shame for MS.

Post by **Dare2** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:32 am

va!n wrote:thanks for the links! very shocking result diagrams! Its a shame for MS.

I must have read them the wrong way then? I thought that was showing throughput and .net was ahead?

thefool · Post by **thefool** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:53 am

i also read the pages as .net was way faster than java..

Va!n, about c++ and C#; Dont choose c++..
It seems like the companies are going for .net. C# is more efficient, faster and more robust than c++ (language wise) and its hell of a lot easier to design large app's in using visual studio and it's great rad ide (or even sharpdevelop for that's sake)..

(AND if you want to develop gui app's let me tell you, its not easy with pure winapi. And if you use things as gtk or whatever the user still needs huge runtimes :/ then its better to get a .net linker so your exe's wont need .net)

Jesse liberty said:

C# Versus C++
While it is possible to program in .NET with C++, it isn't easy or natural. Frankly, having
worked for ten years as a C++ programmer and written a dozen books on the subject, I'd
rather have my teeth drilled than work with managed C++. Perhaps it is just that C# is so
much friendlier. In any case, once I saw C#, I never looked back.

but my advice; still stick to purebasic when it comes to smaller app's and utils

But dont forget to learn an industry language if you want to become emplyee in such a company.

Actually i cant tell you any advices as im a student

but at least let me say; the univercity's in denmark is beginning to change from c++ and java to C#.

edit:
forgot to mention, if you need management of memory at a lower level and more control, you also use purebasic

thats why its cool

and if you need com programming

The biggest win for Windows programmers with C# may be its painless integration of COM, Microsoft's Win32 component technology. In fact, it will eventually be possible to write COM clients and servers in any .Net language. Classes written in C# can subclass an existing COM component; the resulting class can be used as a COM component too, and can then be subclassed in, for example, JScript, to provide yet a third COM component. The result is an environment in which components are network services, subclassable in any .Net language.

Of course C#.net will always be a bit slower than c++ (non managed) code. However its NOT much, and IF you need real speed critical things, why not create a dll using assembler or purebasic? (or c++ for that matter)