INSERT INTO sites(host) VALUES('sax.net') 2002: Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) sax.net 网站价值¥356,945(不含域名),MYIP.CN网站综合数据统计 - 域名,Alexa,PR,反向链接,关键字
  测网速 网站优化诊断 广告招商QQ3066631932 CodeForge最好的源码站!   手机测速 测速APP

  
                       

网站页面信息

标题:
描述:
关键字:
sponsored links:
连接:
图片:
网站历史:
sponsored links:

网站流量与估价

网站流量:
网站估价:  (注:不包含域名价值,不代表公司价值)

网站排名

Alexa全球排名:
Google Page Rank:
真假PR鉴别:   (提示:若此处显示网站与查询网站不同,则疑为劫持PR)
Sogou Rank:
百度快照日期:

搜索引擎收录

搜索引擎收录情况反向链接
 谷歌Google:
 百度Baidu:
 微软Bing:
 搜搜Soso:
 雅虎Yahoo:
 有道Youdao:
 搜狗Sogou:

服务器信息

Web服务器:
IP地址:    
IP所在地:

域名注册信息

注册人:
Email:
ICANN注册机构:
创建时间:
修改时间:
过期时间:
状态:
Name Server:
Whois Server:

Alexa 排名走势数据

流量统计: 当日 一周平均 三个月平均
排名:
PV:
日独立IP:

网站在各国/地区的排名

国家/地区访问比例

下属子站点被访问比例

Alexa 排名走势图

Alexa Reach走势图

域名 Whois 记录

Who is sax.net at

No info.

网站缩略图

sponsored links:

网站访问速度测试

国内Ping速度测试      国内TraceRoute路由测试
美国Ping速度测试      美国TraceRoute路由测试

网站关键字指数 (越高越热门)

域名 sax 其他后缀注册情况   查看更多

后缀 注册时间 到期时间 是否注册
.com
.net
.org
.cn
.com.cn
.asia
.mobi

同类相似网站

查看更多
Alexa标题
3,232,844Sax.net - Communications, File Transfer, and Barcode components for C#
0Innovate | secure file transfer | fast file transfer | web browser fil
407,152Managed File Transfer - Secure File Transfer - Large File Transfer - P
472,597Secure File Transfer - Managed File Transfer - Enterprise File Transfe
939,896Desaware Inc. - Components and Tools for Microsoft Visual Studio Devel
136,303TMS Software | VCL, ASP.NET, Windows Mobile, .NET controls & compo
18,233ASP.NET - WinForms - WPF - Silverlight Controls & Components, R
0Managed File Transfer – Send large files by Email, FTP & Web Fil
15,500C#, Visual Studio 2008, Silverlight, ASP.NET, WPF, WCF, WF, and Win
0C#, Visual Studio 2008, Silverlight, ASP.NET, WPF, WCF, WF, and Win
539,705Welcome to Unlimi-Tech Software - File Transfer - web-based FTP - fast
729,967Ipswitch File Transfer: Managed File Transfer and FTP Software solutio
1,767,107Barcode Printers, Thermal Transfer Label Printer, Barcode Software,
1,908,160UIEASY--Professional GUI Components for Windows Desktop Applications,
922,228Barcode Scanners, Barcode Readers, Barcode Label Printers From ERS UK
267,063800+ Hours of Visual Studio, Visual Basic.NET, C# Database, SQL Server
9,432,247中国ASP.NET开发网(C#, ASP.NET, LINQ, Silverlight, Visual Basic
9,448,674中国ASP.NET开发网(C#, ASP.NET, LINQ, Silverlight, Visual Basic
319,521Microsoft Access, SQL Server, Visual Studio .NET, and Visual Basic
0.NET Heaven - Essential Resources for .NET, Visual C#.NET, VB.NET,
245,550Visual Assist X - an add-in for Visual Studio by Whole Tomato Software
177,529Visual Assist X - an add-in for Visual Studio by Whole Tomato Software
0Buy barcode scanners, barcode readers, barcode label printers, plas
339,456Buy barcode scanners, barcode readers, barcode printers, id card pr
0Vs8.com | Vs 8 | Visual Studio Net | VB To C++ Code | Visual C++ 6.0
97,437Barcode Fonts, Components, Label Software, RFID & Scanners by IDAu
408,626Direct Server to Server File Transfer and File Hosting Solutions. We s
661,451CMS for VWD. Content Management System for Visual Web Developer 200
0A new studio website---for the memory of that in 2005
985,209CosyShuttle - VIP transfer - Atat

模拟搜索引擎蜘蛛抓取

Title:Sax.net
Description:
Keywords:
Body:
Sax.net
iPhone AppsCustom DevelopmentBlog
Live @ Sax.net
Weblog of Mike SaxiPhone Applicationsi
Recent tweets:
I want an archive and a delete button in iOS Mail. Once the proximity sensor issue software fix is released many "antenna" issues will be resolved. Apple's new 27" LED Display is a very sweet monitor, and a suprisingly sweet deal. http://bit.ly/bjqmEi It would be interesting if the Top Grossing Apps list in the app store would also include iAd revenues. Hackers using the cloud: "Serious brute force wireless encryption cracking has become a retail commodity." http://bit.ly/d1a1Uy Subscribe
iOSRuby?
Objective C is awesome except for the awful syntax. MacRuby is very close to nirvana and I’m pretty sure Apple could make Ruby the next main language if they wanted to. Sure, Objective C would stick around, but only for super high performance code, drivers, and other special projects. I love Ruby, and I think Ruby shares the same values as Apple: powerful, clean, simple, elegant, and at times a tiny bit quirky.
However, knowing Apple’s thinking about competitive advantage I wouldn’t be surprised if they decide to create a brand new language. Apple owns the dominant mobile platform and a new elegant programming language would give developers one more reason to put all their eggs in the iOS basket.
In the midst of all of the iPhone’s and iPad’s success it may not be apparent that Apple has a serious problem today: iOS development is not productive at all. You need to hire very expensive, hard-to-find developers to write good iPhone software. One bad developer can easily ruin the stability of the entire app and memory allocation or wild pointer bugs can be hard to track down. A new language could solve these problems and bring the same elegance of Apple’s products to the development tools. Ruby or not, I hope that Apple makes a major new language announcement at the WWDC 2011 #8230; or sooner.
spanp
Posted on Tuesday, July 6, 2010 #8212;
Filed under: Apple,Development,iPhone #8212;
Comments (0)
Mobile Minority Report
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Federal Trade Commission is spending more time investigating Google #8217;s acquisition of Admob. Why on earth is the FTC investigating mobile advertising, one of the fastest growing and most competitive markets in today’s economy?
A few weeks ago I received a subpoena from the FTC to come and testify in Washington DC and share my experience with advertising in mobile applications. I have spent a good bit of time explaining to the FTC why this acquisition isn #8217;t a problem and will actually benefit app publishers.
Many of Sax.net #8217;s iPhone apps are ad-supported, and we #8217;ve been using a variety of ad-networks, including AdMob, Google Adsense, and Quattro Wireless. Using Adwhirl and some in-house technology it #8217;s very easy to monitor the results of different networks and switch in real-time to the one that yields the highest return. Other solutions, like Mobclix, provide similar technology, putting different ad networks in the most direct competition against each other.
How could there be a competitive problem in a market where customers can constantly compare results and completely switch to a different vendor in a matter of minutes? Google #8217;s acquisition of Admob and Apple #8217;s acquisition of Quattro Wireless are signs that the market is heating up. This is the type of competition the FTC should encourage.
To compete beyond price, ad networks are developing innovative new ways to yield higher returns and make their ads more appealing to consumers: Apple iAd focuses on making ads more emotional, Quattro and Admob have built highly interactive ads, and Google Adsense uses keyword targeting to make ads more relevant.
Meanwhile new players, many of them venture-funded, appear in this market on an almost monthly basis. Does this seem like a market that needs help from the Federal Trade Commission right now?
This reminds me of the movie Minority Report, where Washington DC-based law enforcement officers arrest people to stop possible murders before they happen. Is the FTC concerned that some day one of the players involved in mobile advertising might become the leader in serving engaging ads that consumers love? Is the role of the FTC really to prevent future success?
Posted on Thursday, May 13, 2010 #8212;
Filed under: Apple,Competition,Google,Mobile,iPhone #8212;
Comments (1)
Performance Matters
Tim Bray writes:
For a 1Ghz device with limited memory, the iPad is unreasonably fast.
Is it unreasonably fast or have we just become sloppy? Users have been conditioned to accept poor performance. For a 2GHz device with 4GB of memory, our PCs are unreasonably slow.
Posted on Tuesday, April 6, 2010 #8212;
Filed under: Blog #8212;
Comments (0)
Windows Phone 7: The Missing Pieces
On my way back from MIX10 I #8217;ve had a chance to reflect on both the hype and substance related to the Windows Phone 7 Series. Except for the terrible product name, Microsoft is clearly doing all the right things.
There are a few pieces missing from the puzzle, though. Below are a few things I learned during a several (non-NDA) conversations I #8217;ve had with people at MIX. Some of these issues have also been confirmed online.
No Socket Class — Currently the only way to communicate is through Windows Communications Framework or pure HTTP calls. The practical implications are no chat or mail apps, limited multi-player communications.
No Local Database — This is problematic. Storing data in a local database is essential, not only for applications that can work offline, but more importantly for regular applications to cache information, increase performance and reduce network traffic. Application vendors could include their own database engine (such as C# SqlLite) but if everyone starts doing this it will only create bloat, increase memory usage, and delay application startup.
No In-App Purchase — This is no biggie, in my opinion. Aside from a few content-centric apps, the in-app purchase in the iPhone AppStore has only been used for semi-trial versions. The trial scenario is already supported by Windows Phone.
No Copy #038; Paste — Call me superstitious, but I believe missing copy and paste in the initial version is a prerequisite for launching a successful mobile platform (look at Blackberry and iPhone vs. Newton and Palm Pre).
No Component Class — The Component class lets you create non-visible components that use the Visual Studio designer to define relationships with other components, change properties, and quickly create event handlers, all without coding. It #8217;s not essential but very nice to have if you #8217;re interested in building reusable, easy to integrate components.
No Component Licensing #8211; The lack of a LicenseProvider class means there is no standard mechanism for component vendors to license their components. Third party components give Microsoft a huge competitive advantage over other platforms, and it would be a shame if this opportunity is wasted in the mobile platform.
I was told that the Windows 7 Phone project was started only a year ago. The team has made truly remarkable progress and it #8217;s no surprise that there are a few pieces missing. Hopefully many of these issues will be addressed before the final release.
One more thing: The Windows Phone OS update mechanism will be driven by Microsoft, not the individual carriers or device manufacturers. This will allow new versions to be deployed very quickly and let the platform to evolve at a very rapid pace.
Posted on Friday, March 19, 2010 #8212;
Filed under: Development,Microsoft,Silverlight,WinPhone #8212;
Comments (2)
It #8217;s the end of the world as we know it
I #8217;ve seen the future and it is murder. Who #8217;s the victim? Your PC.
Let me explain:
Windows 7 Phone Series is clearly awesome.
It #8217;s well designed and easy to develop for. Most importantly, it creates accountability for the user experience: you #8217;ll know exactly which application is culpable if speed or battery life go down. With a tap or two you #8217;ll completely obliterate the guilty app from your device. Both adding and removing apps and content is simple, quick, and risk-free. The UI is simple, modern and consistent.
The iPad is clearly awesome.
An affordable device that feels luxurious and lets you do everything that #8217;s important to you related to words, music, pictures, and video. The iPad will become at least as popular as the iPhone. It #8217;ll be a new platform for apps and content to thrive on.
A Tablet edition of Windows 7 Phone Series is inevitable.
It #8217;s super easy for Microsoft to do this, and OEM partners will be begging for it. Because of the way the OS is designed, all the troubles that plague users of regular Windows will just vanish. The result will be a device that is so much better than any PC in everything that matters: faster, safer, dramatically more battery life, with a beautiful and consistent UI. Also, easier to support for carriers and manufacturers. It will kill the PC.
The new application platform will be something much simpler than a traditional PC. In many ways, the current PC is still a hobby device: you have to become an expert (or hire one) to simply use and maintain it. The iPad and the Windows Phone Series tablets will change that.
This change will have several important implications:
The app is the new website
The iPhone appstore has proven that people love apps if they can trust them. There will be literally millions of apps, they #8217;ll all be free or very cheap. And like websites, lots of them will be terrible, and some will become indispensable.
Apps and content will blend.
Books, magazines, and movies. They #8217;re all coming to life. Books are becoming interactive. Movies become games. Even radio shows (like This American Life) are turning into apps. Newspapers, magazines, and news TV networks are reinventing themselves. This is all happening because apps have become as easy and safe to install (and remove) as content.
A big gatekeeper battle is looming.
iTunes, Amazon Kindle, Windows Store, studios, publishers, and all the phone carriers will be waging an epic battle for a piece of the app/content pie. This is where Microsoft has an edge over Apple. Remember the All Things D interview where Jobs said he admired Microsoft #8217;s ability to partner and wished Apple had that more in their DNA? He was right, and it #8217;s still true. While Apple will continue to have a mostly adversarial relationship with many of its business partners, Microsoft will figure out a way for everyone in their eco-system to make money.
Forget Android and Chromium.
Google will never be dominant as a platform company. Android has many of the problems of desktop Windows and without apps Chromium offers too little. There #8217;s no room for a #3 in a drag race. Google will continue to be enormously successful is its core business as a match maker between people, information, and merchants. RIM/Blackberry is the wild card.
This trend is unstoppable. The era of tinkering will soon be over. Computing is for techies. Personal computing is dead. From now on, it #8217;s purely personal.
Posted on Wednesday, February 17, 2010 #8212;
Filed under: Apple,Google,Microsoft #8212;
Comments (3)
Google ChromeOS and the Apple Tablet
Six months ago I shared how less could be more with Google ChromeOS. The exact same ideas apply to Apple #8217;s rumored tablet:
Well, let #8217;s think about this for a second. How could less be more? The five main opportunities for user value that come to mind are battery life, security, robustness, user experience, and cost.
What if you could triple battery life?
The iPhone has excellent battery life because Apple doesn #8217;t allow third party background process, and because the device has built-in hardware decoding components for the most popular audio and video codecs.
If you control the entire OS there #8217;s an opportunity to optimize power consumption to a level that isn #8217;t possible with a more generic OS. In a regular OS, apps simply have too much freedom to hog the system #8217;s resources.
What if security was simply not an issue?
Because apps have very limited powers, there #8217;s very little damage an app can do to your system. When you think about it, the kind of power you give perfect strangers when you install an application on a traditional OS is insane. Unless you use Google Chrome OS Apple #8217;s Mobile OS, you are always one click away from identity total theft or the complete demolition of all your data.
What if nothing could freeze or slow down your computer?
Do you remember the snappy feeling you had when you did a fresh install on your computer? Everyone accepts that systems tend to slow down over time, as you install more software. In a traditional OS, because applications have so much power, they are able to slow down your computer (or drain your battery) at will. While the web still has the possibility of run-away scripts, the ability of a single app to cause damage or bloat is severely limited.
What if everything was as easy to use as Amazon?
People care about their stuff. They don #8217;t care about file systems, shortcuts, installers, upgrades, turning your computer on/off, and other old-fashioned concepts. These concepts don #8217;t add any real value to the user experience, so why not remove a layer of complexity and bring people directly to their data?
What if you could have everything you want for free?
Removing layers of software reduces the cost of the hardware. Being able to use specialized hardware decoding chips lets you use cheaper components that provide a much better user experience. Carriers will love Google Chrome devices the Apple Tablet because they #8217;ll be very easy to support and they #8217;re a perfect match for always-on network services. With over one billion phones being sold every year, a device that does a better job of running web apps and playing web media than any low-cost laptop may prove irresistible if it #8217;s free.
I believe there #8217;s a real opportunity here for Google Apple to build a new platform. If you cut out all the legacy support and you focus solely on what people care about, people will, with absolute certainty, fall in love with what you #8217;ve built. I hope they get it right.
Plus ça change, plus c #8217;est la même chose. (The more things change, the more they stay the same.)
Posted on Sunday, January 17, 2010 #8212;
Filed under: Google,iPhone #8212;
Comments (0)
Spinmeisters @ The Financial Times
The first paragraph in an article from today #8217;s Financial Times:
#8221; Microsoft has had discussions with News Corp over a plan that would involve the media company’s being paid to #8220;de-index #8221; its news websites from Google, setting the scene for a search engine battle that could offer a ray of light to the newspaper industry. #8220;
Nobody is paying anyone to de-index anything.
What really happened was that Murdoch said #8220;Hey, Google is making money off our WSJ news content. They better start paying or we #8217;ll block them. #8221; Google doesn #8217;t want to pay because if they start paying the WSJ they have to start paying everyone.
If Microsoft offers the WSJ payment for letting customers search their content, they #8217;re just trying to make Bing a better product. It #8217;s pro-competitive, not anti-competitive. Yet for some reason the Financial Times, a WSJ competitor, is spinning this as if Microsoft is paying the WSJ to exclude Google.
Murdoch is blazing the path to give newspapers a revenue model that may allow them to survive. If Bing and the WSJ make a search deal, Google #8217;s stock will fall because the free party will be over. Newspaper company stocks will start rising because their papers may have a future again.
Interesting Times! (only a little bit of pun intended)
Posted on Sunday, November 22, 2009 #8212;
Filed under: Competition,Google,Intellectual Property,Microsoft #8212;
Comments (0)
Partner DNA
The recent expulsion of Google Voice related apps, as well as Apple #8217;s denial of Google Latitude as a native app reminded me of the Gates/Jobs interview at All Things D last year. Gates and Jobs were asked what they had learned about running their own business that they wished they had thought of sooner or thought of first by watching the other guy. Here #8217;s Steve #8217;s response:
You know, because Woz and I started the company based on doing the whole banana, we weren’t so good at partnering with people. And, you know, actually, the funny thing is, Microsoft’s one of the few companies we were able to partner with that actually worked for both companies. And we weren’t so good at that, where Bill and Microsoft were really good at it because they didn’t make the whole thing in the early days and they learned how to partner with people really well.
And I think if Apple could have had a little more of that in its DNA, it would have served it extremely well. And I don’t think Apple learned that until, you know, a few decades later.
i
Apple #8217;s recent struggles with Google and AT #038;T, along with the poor treatment of some of its most valuable smaller partners have made it clear that Steve #8217;s insight is still painfully relevant.
Posted on Wednesday, July 29, 2009 #8212;
Filed under: Competition,Google,iPhone #8212;
Comments (2)
Google Chrome OS: How less could be more
Nearly every opinion I #8217;ve read about Google Chrome OS has been negative. The predominant thinking is that if a perfectly capable light-weight version of Linux is already available for free, why would you want an OS that can #8217;t run any apps?
Well, let #8217;s think about this for a second. How could less be more? The five main opportunities for user value that come to mind are battery life, security, robustness, user experience, and cost.
What if you could triple battery life?
The iPhone has excellent battery life because Apple doesn #8217;t allow third party background process, and because the device has built-in hardware decoding components for the most popular audio and video codecs.
If you control the entire OS there #8217;s an opportunity to optimize power consumption to a level that isn #8217;t possible with a more generic OS. In a regular OS, apps simply have too much freedom to hog the system #8217;s resources.
What if security was simply not an issue?
Because apps have very limited powers, there #8217;s very little damage an app can do to your system. When you think about it, the kind of power you give perfect strangers when you install an application on a traditional OS is insane. Unless you use Google Chrome OS, you are always one click away from identity total theft or the complete demolition of all your data.
What if nothing could freeze or slow down your computer?
Do you remember the snappy feeling you had when you did a fresh install on your computer? Everyone accepts that systems tend to slow down over time, as you install more software. In a traditional OS, because applications have so much power, they are able to slow down your computer (or drain your battery) at will. While the web still has the possibility of run-away scripts, the ability of a single app to cause damage or bloat is severely limited.
What if everything was as easy to use as Amazon?
People care about their stuff. They don #8217;t care about file systems, shortcuts, installers, upgrades, turning your computer on/off, and other old-fashioned concepts. These concepts don #8217;t add any real value to the user experience, so why not remove a layer of complexity and bring people directly to their data?
What if you could have everything you want for free?
Removing layers of software reduces the cost of the hardware. Being able to use specialized hardware decoding chips lets you use cheaper components that provide a much better user experience. Carriers will love Google Chrome devices because they #8217;ll be very easy to support and they #8217;re a perfect match for always-on network services. With over one billion phones being sold every year, a device that does a better job of running web apps and playing web media than any low-cost laptop may prove irresistible if it #8217;s free.
I believe there #8217;s a real opportunity here for Google to build a new platform. If you cut out all the legacy support and you focus solely on what people care about, people will, with absolute certainty, fall in love with what you #8217;ve built. I hope they get it right.
Posted on Wednesday, July 8, 2009 #8212;
Filed under: Competition,Google #8212;
Comments (0)
Casual use of GPL may be harmful to your health
I #8217;m writing this post using MarsEdit, a well-designed blog client maintained by Daniel Jalkut of Red Sweater Software. Daniel recently wrote a very thoughtful note about software licensing:
Violating the GPL is easy. All you have to do is write some code, intermingle it with some GPL code, distribute a changed copy of the original, and refuse to share your contributions. Bam! You’re toast.
Many developers nonchalantly include code in their applications without carefully checking which license the code comes attached with. Daniel also writes about how GPL might stifle participation:
GPL communities are open and embracing of other GPL developers, but generally off-putting to liberal-license and closed-license developers. Only the liberal-license communities are attractive to developers from all 3 camps.
I agree. Truly free licenses, like the MIT license and the BSD license, don #8217;t limit your freedom or require you to give away the fruits of your labor. Of course, GPL has seen tremendous success and popularity, but in my own projects (both as an open source consumer and contributor) I will choose a less restrictive license whenever possible.
Posted on Thursday, July 2, 2009 #8212;
Filed under: Intellectual Property #8212;
Comments (0)
Newer Posts raquo;
Copyright copy; 1994-2008, Sax Software Corp. All rights reserved. Sax.net, QuickPak, and the QuickPak logo are trademarks of Sax Software Corp.

数据更新时间

正在更新   

常用工具

桌面软件: MyIP网站信息状态条  WebShot网页快照  SiteMapMaker网站地图生成 
网站信息: Alexa排名查询  PageRank查询/真假PR鉴别/PR劫持检测  外链检查  搜索引擎收录  搜索引擎反向链接  域名注册查询 
网页编辑: 颜色代码选择器  Html特殊符号 
网站调试: 蜘蛛抓取模拟  网站Header信息  网页源代码查看 
代码转换: 火星文查询  繁体/简体转换  Html/js代码转换  Html/UBB代码转换 
友情连接: CodeForge免费源码 CodeForge.com PCFans IT资讯 Ngnix Lighttpd GPhone中国    更多... (PR<5自动转内页)
网站地图: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
免责声明 | 联系我们 | 交换友情链接 | 广告位招商QQ: 1967659002
© 2009 MyIP.cn Dev by MYIP Elapsed:82.419ms 黑ICP备09072263号