The hardest part I had to deal with were the way other players in the process dealt with the development and the product. Customers, managers, projectleaders, all had 'irrational' influence on the projects and I often found political influence in what seemed strictly technical issues. My experience is that this is a part of the work, in more or lesser extent (varies per company/product/project). It sometimes was frustrating but it could also be a benefit as it enabled myself to grow as a person, sometimes even fun because of the quality of the personalities of some managers and customers. I'm afraid this is something that has to be experienced in reality, it can't be taught or simulated, I think.
Practicing a real life business case might be usefull to experience trade-offs in, for example, features vs. test effort, imho. Planning and maintaining a planning is incredibly hard, there's never enough time at the moment you need it and the 'other' people I mentioned above are going to be a pita just when you can't use it.
Open source can work if customers are interested in financing features and 3rd party coders are interested in adding to the product. The idea being that you can usually make more money with a software product than from a software product and there are more parties interested in the development of the product. This advantage gets smaller if the market's smaller. Preventing vendor lock-in and ensuring the fate of your product isn't tied in with the fate of your company may be selling points.
So when the market's too small, the only business model I can think of is having a co-operation with your customers. Like your customers also having shares in your employer. The product isn't a core business and can be released as Free Software (speech, perhaps beer).
I like taking pictures. P&S and SLR. Even like it better when digital. I like my DP&S and I'd love to have a DSLR. The one thing that prevented me from buying one is the 'field of view crop' aka 'focal length magnifier/multiplier'.
Top of the range cameras have a full size chip, the Canon D5 prosumer DSLR has one. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/
Any thoughts on that?
I have programming experience in various languages and recently started with Python. I picked up 'Core Python programming' (CPp) to get up to speed. I'm not far enough yet to comment on the quality of the book, I can only give a little of my experience so far. I'm have no relation with author, publisher or seller of this book. My local bookstore just happened to have a copy.
In general: CPp is readable, the style of writing is OK. The writer is not trying to be funny, he uses a compact, readable (dry, not as in wit) style which makes it easy for me to focus on the technical aspects of the subject. It uses a medium to large font with a modest amount of whitespace on the page. It doesn't give the impression its lay-out is just to make an impressive thick book. Code samples are small and to the point, once past the introductory pages on any subject you can often find more information in tables. Pictures and diagrams are used sparingly. It covers the core but also mentions and describes additional modules which go beyond that. The parts, chapters and paragraphs seem logical to me, although I'm still a bit surprised to find 'strings' handled before 'lists' in general, but that may tell more about me than about the book.
When you're modestly experienced in programming, reading chapters 2 and 3 (50+ pages) will be enough to get you started. That's the combination of the ease of Python and the clarity of CPp. Browse the index (which you have if you read the 'review' above) and you'll see CPp covers a lot of ground so it doesn't take much to get inspired to write some code. My experience is that I start with a subject by reading the book, test it a little with my own code and then find CPp useful in pointing out more advanced features, which I then use to improve/enhance my code. I've found I can use CPp to quickly increase the depth of my knowledge and understanding and I'd guess this goes for the absolute beginner in coding aswell. All the essential stuff is covered in the first half of CPp and it appears to me that the allocated space per subject is in the right proportion to its complexity and importance. YMMV of course, but it's within reason. The second half is called 'Advanced Topics' and covers more specialized uses like network-, web-, database and GUI programming, regular expressions, threading. I haven't reached this part yet but I'd assume CPp's usefulness would be proven here (or not). I think that if you have a good understanding of the language, on-line resources will be more useful. The GUI chapter for example, uses TK mostly and then shows a few others aswell. For a general Python book I think it's a good approach, although it might restrict its value in the long run.
In the end I'm quite positive about CPp. I find it good enough to get me started and then helps me to get more advanced too. The breadth of subjects covered will keep you entertained with the Python language for a long time if you're programming for fun. Sofar I've found no typos or errors and only one oddity: in chapter 8.4 I found "van Rossum Guido" which should've been 'Guido van Rossum' or 'Van Rossum, Guido'... I personally like the proportions of explanations, examples, backgrounds and feature-tables. I can't say whether this is the best book on Python programming but I dare say you're not going to regret it if you invest in this book. My rating: I don't want to hand out a 10/10 on anything so I'd give it a 9 out of 10 based on my experience so far.
First God booted into his OEM Windows (tm) XP Home,
The hardrive was an empty formatted wasteland, waiting to be filled.
Then God said, "Let there be internet," and there was a connection.
God saw the Internet Explorer icon on his desktop and clicked it.
God surfed the web. Thus sites came, and exploits followed--the zeroth day
My mom prefers to talk to me when I'm concentrating on something on the computer. She isn't interested in replies but does demand I answer her questions. Moms...
Javascript is apparantly a big deal. Even on completely static pages ffs not to mention entire sites coded in js.
It can be very useful but the average sitebuilder seems to include js by default, useful or not. [/rant]
I've just finished writing Tic-Tac-Toe in Python for KDE and it's running smooooth. I'm a bit indecisive about GPLv2 or GPLv3 but expect Kic-Kac-Koe to reach the shelves well before christmas.
Installing all sorts of applications without knowing it; they've got applications automagically appearing by only browsing for porn/discounts or using p2p and Outlook.
The X in xhtml comes from the x in xml and stands for eXtensible. Xhtml is an application of xml. You could see html as a single dictionary with a limited set of words. Xml would then be a way to describe words, or even to make up words for concepts. Taking this further (also from reality) you could say that extending html would require a rewrite of the dictionary where extending xhtml would only lead to publishing a xxhtml dictionary.
Html is designed for making websites. Period, although there are perhaps other uses for it. Xml can be used more versatile, you can use it for making websites for example via xhtml. In that respect there's no difference between xhtml and html. But I can also define my own xml for something specifically, say mathematics, chemistry or vectorgraphics (anything really). I would then have a markup language which is 'native' for a distinctive group of users, which can be mixed effortlessly with another application of xml designed for an entirely different field. Want to mix the data of your accountant with the data of your chemical engineers? You can with xml.
Obviously, you can't display elaborate mathematical formulae in a browser that doesn't know what to do with them. It just makes more sense to create a module for MathML (another application of xml) than to extend html with new elements.
Anecdotes? CentOS recognized my soundcard but failed to make it work (I blame ALSA). No wireless. KDE v3.3.1.
Other than that I love it. I'm going to try FC6 though, just to add my blood to the bleeding edge.
Slashdot Mirror
Those first screens, the black on whites in that loose style, they're awesome.
The hardest part I had to deal with were the way other players in the process dealt with the development and the product. Customers, managers, projectleaders, all had 'irrational' influence on the projects and I often found political influence in what seemed strictly technical issues.
My experience is that this is a part of the work, in more or lesser extent (varies per company/product/project). It sometimes was frustrating but it could also be a benefit as it enabled myself to grow as a person, sometimes even fun because of the quality of the personalities of some managers and customers.
I'm afraid this is something that has to be experienced in reality, it can't be taught or simulated, I think.
Practicing a real life business case might be usefull to experience trade-offs in, for example, features vs. test effort, imho. Planning and maintaining a planning is incredibly hard, there's never enough time at the moment you need it and the 'other' people I mentioned above are going to be a pita just when you can't use it.
Open source can work if customers are interested in financing features and 3rd party coders are interested in adding to the product. The idea being that you can usually make more money with a software product than from a software product and there are more parties interested in the development of the product. This advantage gets smaller if the market's smaller. Preventing vendor lock-in and ensuring the fate of your product isn't tied in with the fate of your company may be selling points.
So when the market's too small, the only business model I can think of is having a co-operation with your customers. Like your customers also having shares in your employer. The product isn't a core business and can be released as Free Software (speech, perhaps beer).
I like taking pictures. P&S and SLR. Even like it better when digital. I like my DP&S and I'd love to have a DSLR. The one thing that prevented me from buying one is the 'field of view crop' aka 'focal length magnifier/multiplier'.
Top of the range cameras have a full size chip, the Canon D5 prosumer DSLR has one. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/
Any thoughts on that?
Agree, it's not much of a review.
I have programming experience in various languages and recently started with Python. I picked up 'Core Python programming' (CPp) to get up to speed. I'm not far enough yet to comment on the quality of the book, I can only give a little of my experience so far. I'm have no relation with author, publisher or seller of this book. My local bookstore just happened to have a copy.
In general: CPp is readable, the style of writing is OK. The writer is not trying to be funny, he uses a compact, readable (dry, not as in wit) style which makes it easy for me to focus on the technical aspects of the subject. It uses a medium to large font with a modest amount of whitespace on the page. It doesn't give the impression its lay-out is just to make an impressive thick book. Code samples are small and to the point, once past the introductory pages on any subject you can often find more information in tables. Pictures and diagrams are used sparingly. It covers the core but also mentions and describes additional modules which go beyond that. The parts, chapters and paragraphs seem logical to me, although I'm still a bit surprised to find 'strings' handled before 'lists' in general, but that may tell more about me than about the book.
When you're modestly experienced in programming, reading chapters 2 and 3 (50+ pages) will be enough to get you started. That's the combination of the ease of Python and the clarity of CPp. Browse the index (which you have if you read the 'review' above) and you'll see CPp covers a lot of ground so it doesn't take much to get inspired to write some code. My experience is that I start with a subject by reading the book, test it a little with my own code and then find CPp useful in pointing out more advanced features, which I then use to improve/enhance my code. I've found I can use CPp to quickly increase the depth of my knowledge and understanding and I'd guess this goes for the absolute beginner in coding aswell. All the essential stuff is covered in the first half of CPp and it appears to me that the allocated space per subject is in the right proportion to its complexity and importance. YMMV of course, but it's within reason.
The second half is called 'Advanced Topics' and covers more specialized uses like network-, web-, database and GUI programming, regular expressions, threading. I haven't reached this part yet but I'd assume CPp's usefulness would be proven here (or not). I think that if you have a good understanding of the language, on-line resources will be more useful. The GUI chapter for example, uses TK mostly and then shows a few others aswell. For a general Python book I think it's a good approach, although it might restrict its value in the long run.
In the end I'm quite positive about CPp. I find it good enough to get me started and then helps me to get more advanced too. The breadth of subjects covered will keep you entertained with the Python language for a long time if you're programming for fun. Sofar I've found no typos or errors and only one oddity: in chapter 8.4 I found "van Rossum Guido" which should've been 'Guido van Rossum' or 'Van Rossum, Guido'... I personally like the proportions of explanations, examples, backgrounds and feature-tables. I can't say whether this is the best book on Python programming but I dare say you're not going to regret it if you invest in this book. My rating: I don't want to hand out a 10/10 on anything so I'd give it a 9 out of 10 based on my experience so far.
I think I've seen that prerequisite before.
It's about christmas this year. They'll get GNU/Hurd next year. Or later.
My mom prefers to talk to me when I'm concentrating on something on the computer. She isn't interested in replies but does demand I answer her questions. Moms...
Javascript is apparantly a big deal. Even on completely static pages ffs not to mention entire sites coded in js. It can be very useful but the average sitebuilder seems to include js by default, useful or not. [/rant]
I've just finished writing Tic-Tac-Toe in Python for KDE and it's running smooooth. I'm a bit indecisive about GPLv2 or GPLv3 but expect Kic-Kac-Koe to reach the shelves well before christmas.
Free as in beer, speech or proprietary formats.
I've no idea why MS hasn't released its own beer yet.
Hmm yeah. No chance for Gnome, I guess.
Installing all sorts of applications without knowing it; they've got applications automagically appearing by only browsing for porn/discounts or using p2p and Outlook.
The X in xhtml comes from the x in xml and stands for eXtensible. Xhtml is an application of xml. You could see html as a single dictionary with a limited set of words. Xml would then be a way to describe words, or even to make up words for concepts. Taking this further (also from reality) you could say that extending html would require a rewrite of the dictionary where extending xhtml would only lead to publishing a xxhtml dictionary.
Html is designed for making websites. Period, although there are perhaps other uses for it. Xml can be used more versatile, you can use it for making websites for example via xhtml. In that respect there's no difference between xhtml and html. But I can also define my own xml for something specifically, say mathematics, chemistry or vectorgraphics (anything really). I would then have a markup language which is 'native' for a distinctive group of users, which can be mixed effortlessly with another application of xml designed for an entirely different field. Want to mix the data of your accountant with the data of your chemical engineers? You can with xml.
Obviously, you can't display elaborate mathematical formulae in a browser that doesn't know what to do with them. It just makes more sense to create a module for MathML (another application of xml) than to extend html with new elements.
Anecdotes? CentOS recognized my soundcard but failed to make it work (I blame ALSA). No wireless. KDE v3.3.1. Other than that I love it. I'm going to try FC6 though, just to add my blood to the bleeding edge.
Somebody should make a movie with this. Working title something like 'Twins'. Could star, for example, Danny DeVito and Arnold Schwarzenegger.