For the next couple of weeks I'll be crossing Java and Bali, so don't expect any posts from me :P

Edit: I'm back again; it was wonderful, but this is not the place to discuss it. Maybe I should start a Java-blog as well :D

Ever since Wizards announced that D&D Insider would have a virtual D&D enviroment, I've been wanting to try it out. In the meantime, I'm creating something similar myself, albeit ever so much simpler. It's going to be more of an elaborate chat client with Text Balloons, where a picture of each player surrounds a tile-based map that is controlled by the DM.

Read More...

I'm currently preparing a presentation about usability of WPF for Business Applications. I think it is; but not becauses of the eye-candy (which, if used in a proper way can be very helpful btw), but most of all because of databinding, command and routed events.

After reading Kathleen Dollard's great article (even though it's in VB) WPF Goes to Work and the replies in Why WPF is not ready for LOB my belief was strengthened even more. Today I came across the Composite Application Guidance for WPF which to me is another proof that Microsoft themselves feel WPF should jump on the LOB-wagon! I haven't played with it yet, but I'll give it a good try as soon as I can find the time...

What's more, Karl Shifflet has a promising 11-part WPF for LOB series of articles on CodeProject. I hope he writes the other parts as well!

Why does it seem people at MS have to 'improve' everything all the time? Even a very small thing like a MCTS logo you can place on your site? Let me show you:

This is what the .Net 2.0 MCTS logo looks like:


And this is what the .Net .. er.. .NET 3.5 logo looks like (it's too wide for my blog so it gets scaled):


It gets even worse if you want to consolidate all your certifications into one logo:


Now it's .NET, .Net bold and non-bold mixed... If you want people to use those logo's without having to modify them (which is not allowed), make them at least look good!

Why did they make the new ones so much wider? Why use the all-bold text? Whye use .NET instead of .Net? Why not make it look like the 2.0 version (btw. by using Paint.NET to fiddle with the logo I am in violation of the logo agreemtent, but I'm making a point here):


I just don't get it. Why of why did they change it... It seems trivial and I'm probably being a whino about it, but stuff like this really bugs me!

Go me! I just passed the Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 – Windows Presentation Foundation Application Development exam! I scored 747 out of a 1000 points, which is not great, but certainly enough :D

Read More...