Navigation

Search

Categories

On this page

Making Microsoft AJAX 1.0 Redistributable with Visual Studio 2005 Setup Projects
Microsoft Ajax 1.0 Extensions: Converting Existing ASP.NET Application Into AJAX-Enabled One
Microsoft "Acropolis" six years too late. I liked CCmdTarget of MFC back in nineties.
XBOX 360 Core as a Media Center Extender to Microsoft Vista MCE: Noise and Networking.
Making Bootable CD to Flash BIOS Without Floppy Drive

Archive

Blogroll

Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in anyway.

RSS 2.0 | Atom 1.0 | CDF

Send mail to the author(s) E-mail

Total Posts: 48
This Year: 15
This Month: 0
This Week: 0
Comments: 8

Sign In
Pick a theme:

 Saturday, June 30, 2007
Saturday, June 30, 2007 5:53:12 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00) (  |  )

MS AJAX is great, but if you wanted to make an installable application with it, there was no way of including AJAX into your MSI-based setup project. I made a Visual Studio manifest that makes MS AJAX Extensions a Visual Studio Setup Project prerequisite:

Comments [0] | | # 
 Friday, June 22, 2007
Friday, June 22, 2007 12:01:40 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00) (  |  |  )

To AJAX-enable your existing ASP.NET 2.0 application follow this video. It takes only a few minutes and essentially makes you create a dummy new Ajax-enabled ASP.NET application and then copy & paste relevant pieces of its web.config file into your application's web.config.

If you are planning to use Ajax Control Toolkit, then instead of creating dummy project from the "ASP.NET AJAX-Enabled Web Site" Visual Studio project template, create the dummy project using "AJAX Control Toolkit Web Site" template. Its web.config has additional entry in the <controls> section of the web.config that will be necessary for your application.

Comments [0] | | # 
 Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Tuesday, June 19, 2007 9:42:13 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00) (  |  |  |  )

Microsoft is showing off its new Acropolis framework for .NET. It seems to be a little more than good old CCmdTarget of late MFC. 

Back in 2001 when I was making a transition from C++/MFC to C#/.NET two things I missed the most were C++ templates and CCmdTarget/Doc/View architecture of MFC-based Windows UI. I could not believe Microsoft didn't port CCmdTarget at the time and naturally wrote my own. But pretty soon it was obvious that with C# and Visual Studio .NET writing ASP.NET web applications was easier than making Windows UI apps, and people wanted web UI more than windows UI.

Combine dwindling demand for Windows UI with inferior development tools and you end up in the situation where software architects don't even debate whether their next enterprise application should have Windows UI or web UI. It's assumed and understood that it will be a web-based application. If you think an application needs to have Windows UI - you will face an uphill battle convincing other project stakeholders it's the right way to go.

Simply put, Windows UI is so out, and web UI is so in that incremental improvements in Windows UI world like WPF and Acropolis is too little and way too late to save the day. We've got AJAX, thank you very much. In my arrogant opinion enterprise apps will not go back into Windows UI world. The last bastion of Windows UI applications is SOHO market, but that is about to change with HttpVPN making it possible to make easily redistributable web applications for consumers and small businesses. Once that happens, Windows UI will become just gaming and other graphics-heavy applications platform.

Comments [0] | | # 
 Sunday, June 03, 2007
Sunday, June 03, 2007 11:54:54 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00) (  |  |  )

Until recently I've been running MCE 2005 on Windows XP with Linksys Media Center Extender (MCX) connected to the XP box over 802.11a wireless network. That was a nice and stable setup, but with the technology moving forward it was time for an upgrade. I have successfully upgraded XP to Vista, and since Vista did not support "old" Media Center Extenders like the one I have, I had to get XBOX 360 - the only game in town when it comes to extenders supporting Windows Vista.

Cursory Google search revealed that even most basic and least expensive XBOX 360 version, the Core System, can run the extender application just fine by loading the MCX software from the Vista box over the network. Far more serious issue for me was how loud XBOX 360 is. The thing is that Media Center Extender box is located in the bedroom, and any fan noise from XBOX 360 would be very annoying. Linksys Media Center Extender was not just quiet - it was completely silent. It has no fans or motors at all. The price for the silence was that its CPU was underpowered and therefore it was mostly nothing but a dumb Remote Desktop terminal displaying the UI rendered on the XP box, with the exception of rendering the streaming media on the MCX box itself. XBOX 360 has a very powerful multi-core processor and therefore is easily fit to render all the fancy MCX UI right there, which makes UI of MCX running on XBOX 360 much more responsive compared the Linksys. The price of the performance, besides $300, is the fan and its noise. How much noise exactly? The whole reason I write this post is because after searching the "Internets" I was unable to tell whether the level of noise is acceptable or not. Some people complained that it's horrible, and some said it's OK. Well, here's the verdict: yes, the noise is bad and I can't believe Microsoft didn't find a solution to the noise problem, BUT the remedy is you can turn XBOX 360 completely off when you are not watching it! Noise level when you use the XBOX is not uncomfortable at all. The drawback is that it takes XBOX about 50 seconds to boot, load MCX application from the server, and launch the MCX UI when you turn the XBOX on (which BTW can all be done at once by pressing Mediacenter Green Button on the mediacenter remote). I don't mind paying the 50 second price for the complete silence of the turned off XBOX, while being able to enjoy fast and responsive UI of the XBOX setup.

Another quick note on the subject - the networking of the new extender. Linksys extender had both wireless and wired networking capabilities. I ran it over 802.11a (Wireless-A) network that is fast enough for streaming recoded TV and at the same time is not susceptible to interference from all the 2.4GHz devices like cordless phones and 802.11g (Wireless-G) networks of your neighbors. XBOX 360, however, has only wired networking capabilities, and since our house is not wired for Ethernet, I had to use ZyXel power line Ethernet adapter. I really like ZyXel power line adapters - they are great alternative to wiring your house or using wireless networks. When I was setting up extender piece on the Vista machine, MCE tested the network bandwidth and found the throughput not sufficient for streaming TV. I though it's strange because ZyXel PLA-100 adapter is supposed to be 85 marketing Mbit (about 45 real Mbit) - quite faster than 22 Mbit of the Wireless-A network that was working just fine. Sure enough, TV and video streaming ran absolutely smoothly over ZyXel PLA-100. However, whenever we get an HDTV set connected to the extender, we'll need to upgrade ZyXel adapters to speedier 200 marketing Mbit (hopefully about 100 real Mbit) PLA-400.

[June 12 UPDATE: The same day when I wrote this post I noticed that network performance of the setup has degraded to the point of recorded TV being unwatchable: picture would freeze or won't start playing back at all with the black screen, with "Network Issues" pop-up ever-present on the screen. I thought the problem is ZyXel PL-100. I replaced it with Viewsonic 802.11g access point connected to XBOX 360, and just like with PL-100 it worked flawlessly the first time I turned on the XBOX, but went down exactly the same way as the the power line adapter based network. Funny thing is that if I hit Fast Forward button on the MCE remote, FF works and produces absolutely smooth video! So at normal rate it crawls to the stop, but with fast forwarding there are no "Network Issues"? I was able to playback the same recorded shows over the same network connections using notebook and WIndows Media Player with no problems. I think Microsoft has a whole lot of explaining to do about its XBOX 360 "networking issues".

Comments [0] | | # 
 Saturday, June 02, 2007
Saturday, June 02, 2007 12:17:27 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00) (  |  )

If you are upgrading your Windows XP system to Vista chances are you will need to upgrade your system's BIOS to support Vista. Flash utility for my MSI motherboard BIOS can't run from Windows (how nice on MSI part), and as lots of users nowadays my system does not have a floppy drive to boot DOS from. Making a bootable CD with just a basic set of drivers to allow enough memory for Flash utility turned out to be a very frustrating endeavor. There are lots of bootable CD images out there, but the most common problem with images is that they load bunch of drivers that take up a lot of memory and hang often. To flash a BIOS all you need from DOS is CD support. I spare you details of all the options and approaches I tried and get right to what you need to do to make a bootable CD and add your flash utility and BIOS file to it.

  1. Download and save Windows ME bootable ISO image. Get WinME_bootdisk.iso file. Don't worry - it's not an entire Windows ME; it's just a 3MB DOS portion of it.
  2. Download and install Magic ISO Maker, a small utility capable of modifying an existing ISO image.
  3. Run Magic ISO Maker, open WinME_bootdisk.iso, add your Flash files, and save the WinME_bootdisk.iso file.
  4. Burn WinME_bootdisk.iso to a CD.
  5. Boot from the CD and in the boot menu select an option with a CD support. This option should leave enough "conventional" memory after loading DOS and drivers for the Flash utility to run. 
  6. Your CD drive is likely to get letter "D:". Switch to CD drive by issuing D: command and run your Flash utility.

 

Comments [1] | | #