Generally, when people suggest that printf/scanf are evil, they're advocating the use of the operator>. Note that these are C++, not C. There are a number of reasons, not the least of which is that they're much more easily guarded regarding insane inputs, and that they're able to handle any type (useful for generic programming.)
Other people just want you to bootstrap your machine with a paperclip.
That's a weird laundry list of languages. Also, we're not interested in what you've programmed; granted it's an extreme example, but that a language can suck is embodied by intercal. Or maybe PL/I. (You've written in PL/I and you don't think language matters?)
The fact of the matter is, there are a number of languages in which I can simply work quite a bit faster (Delphi, ruby, lua, PHP.) There are a number of languages in which I can express really evil concepts (lisp, C++, ml/ocaml.) There are a number of langauges in which I can write really tight, efficient code (C++, forth, assembly.)
And then there are some languages which just gargle scrotum. I can't deal with VB. You have to bend over backwards just to get certain things done, the syntax is hard on the eyes, and so forth. Some people insist there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the language, that it does everything other languages do; that's (sort of) true, and if you like the language, fine, use it.
Still, it slows me down/badly./ No language in this office is more prone to bugs, and that's across all fifteen of our programmers (I can say the same for previous jobs.) I don't think it's about the people I've known. No language in this office, except when we had Jim writing C, is harder to debug. In my opinion, it's just a mess.
Normally, I'd think it was just an opinion, but nearly every proficient programmer I know also believes so. I had tried it before I heard anyone tell me about it, so I acquired my disgust fairly, and without influence.
But, look, you quoted three languages that are famous for being awful - APL, COBOL and PL/I - and claim it doesn't matter. ou also named one of my pet peeves, Tcl. Also, you named almost no famous-for-being-good languages (*some* people would argue the point on algol. I would argue the point on REXX, but I'd probably be alone.) So, maybe you've developed in all of those languages. Maybe not. That kinda looks like it came from the "hello, world" list to me.
But it's well known that languages provide facilities with levels of support; assembly, for example, is dead as an application language for a very good reason. Would you try to write an operating system in ASM these days? What about a word processor? Alternately, would you write a low-level interrupt handler in VB?
Your answer: hell no. There are languages that are appropriate for certain complexities; you don't use a 4gl to boot a machine and you don't write a web server in a hex editor. There are languages that are bad at expressing things (pascal for generic programming, C for self-modifying code, or anything in your list for functional/applicative programming (haskell, ml/ocaml, scheme) or logical programming (prolog, mercury.) BTW, tell us that language doesn't matter when you learn your first non-imperative language.
You do, however, use perl for text manipulation and glue; php for scripting, glue, and increasingly for lightweight apps; c for systems programming, OSes, drivers, and baremetal stuff; prolog for symbol manipulation stuff, like language translation; lisp for lots of stuff but especially math; lua for situations where lightweight scripting languages are desired, such as user extensions for video games (qv angband); specialty languages for their specialties (AGT for example); Delphi for lots of stuff but especially RAD fast development tools and for database work; TCL for (unsurprisingly) low level machine control; the list goes on.
When you want to find out how much language matters, try writing a zip decompressor in TCL.
Can we stop arguing about languages? Of course not. Arguing about them exposes their flaws, allowing us to address them or route around them. Also, we hate VB. And maybe its supporters. Watch your back.
Why not just write it in XML and XSLT? No virtual machine overhead, no need for a daemon, etc. It's really just pushing data around. No sense involving all that software.
You seem to have a near-miraculous capacity for answering half of the concerns of a rebuke at once while blindly ignoring the other half, and missing the bigger picture. As this is getting way too long, I'm going to cull most of the diatribe; if you feel I've left out important bits, go 'head and reintroduce them. Culling is a dangerous act (especially during debate, even moreso when making mirrored statements,) so I welcome suggestions that I've missed an issue.
Well, I think we need to be realistic here. I started this flame talking about IE3 and NS3, there is most likely no need to get down to the 3 or 2 versions: They are gone.
(sarcasm dropped) The bigger issue here isn't supporting browsers from the depths of history. The issue is that the VML solution not only drops viewers needlessly, but does so on a closed corporate agenda plan which is being passed over by other browsers in favor of superior open standards; furthermore, that there are alternate, superior, lower cost of development/deployment commercial open platforms with greater market penetration. Each and every statement you make in VML's defense works better for both Flash *and* SVG, with the notable exception of complaints regarding SVG's immature penetration (which I agree are quite valid.)
The core of my argument is this, and this is what I'd like you to address: VML gains you nothing over Flash, while rendering more slowly, touching fewer platforms, rendering in lower quality, and providing much less support for outside-object integration. Furthermore, VML has no construction facilities in popular dynamic systems, whereas Flash has a good many. Further still, VML is a platform-locked solution not only now but for the foreseeable future. Also, VML is boring.
Flash is in all of the installers too. And javascript can be turned off. This is a nonissue.
Well, in a different way. Flash is included in the installer as an option, JavaScript is part of the core of the browser. That's what native means. Granted you can disable JavaScript.
You're dodging the point. In both cases, the default is for the system to be installed, and in both cases the user must go to effort to disable the system. Does it matter that the user may more thoroughly disable Flash than Javascript? I think it doesn't. If you can find counterpoint, I'm all ears. Critical ears, but ears nonetheless.
In almost every other office there was a PC running on the network to allow you to use Office/IE when needed. Ah! By targetting IE I also get those
Meaningless rhetoric. "I had a store that sold doughnuts. Then, I decided to restrict my doughnuts to those wearing at least four items of clothing, including shoes and jewelry. This excluded 5% of my customers. In almost every home there was an extra hat or scarf that would allow the customers to visit my store if needed. By targetting people with four clothing items, I was able to reach them too."
No. That's just not how it works. If you exclude 5% of the audience for no good technical reason or advantage whatsoever, then by targetting their exclusion mechanism, when there's a seperate machine than their normal machine which they must laboriously visit to view your ill-designed site, you are not also targetting them. They're getting by on the prevalance of the machination that you've chosen, nothing more.
As I said, the common denominator of the JS implementation in the version 4+ browsers is largely good enough to animate a stupid pie chart.
Nonetheless, this only holds merit if Flash cannot, which it can. More quickly, more appealingly in a graphic sense, with a better capacity for scaling complexity to the machine environment, with more limited resources or older deployments, and plagued by fewer of the implementation bugs that you seem unwilling to address as significant simply because you feel that they're rare.
Because really, if it only affects a few percentage points, then the advan
I don't know how you can find that Flash has a better deployment than JavaScript.
As I already told you, because Shockwave and Flash are circa 2nd generation browsers and Moreover, in legacy browsers, Javascript has notorious implementation problems. Moreover, any browser which can pick up netscape plugins - of which there are quite a few - can pick up flash; none of them can pick up exetrnal JS/ECMAS implementations. And if a browser doesn't have one, it doesn't have both, in general (lately, 6th gen browsers have begun to strip the machine down, so this is becoming less true. Still.)
For the sake of the example, let's focus on 99.5% of the browsers which are: Netscape4+, Opera5+, IE4+ and Konqueror
I can't understand this. They're not 99.5% of the user base, they're not 99.5% of the broswer list by a longshot.
Flash can run on any browser, if you choose to install it, while JavaScript runs natively on every one of them.
That said, Flash is enabled in essentially every deployment, whereas as any web master has learned the hard way, JavaScript is oftentimes turned off. Moreover, there are many legacy browsers which support shockwave, flash, or futuresplash which don't support JavaScript.
Ah, but here's the killer, which I also already told you: Gen 3 browsers won't help. Their JS/ECMAS implementations don't touch the DOM, so you can't use them to write VML or SVG.
Moreover, VML has no chance of making it into other browsers. If you're going to use a standard, use a W3C standard like SVG.
You just can't disable it or 50% of the websites out there doesn't work anymore,
Nonetheless, many people do indeed have it disabled, just like cookies. You strike me as the sort of person that used the marquee tag and got angry when some of the web didn't use IE.
so you re-enable it very quickly.
You'll find that most people which go to the effort of turning off parts of their browser aren't clueless and are aware of the ramifications of their actions. That is to say, "nuh-uh."
So I hope the JavaScript question is settled. And please, even with the bugs that are out there, the common denominator of all the JavaScript engine deployed is still a good enough language to animate a bar/pie chart.
When you're writing browser select clauses for your DOM touching, just remember, someone warned you.
Now for VML, the computation is simple: Netscape4+: 2% Opera5+: 1.5% Konqueror: ??% (most likely below 1) IE4: 0.5% Leaves the winner: IE5+: 94%
Something tells me you made these numbers up. For example, this shows netscape holding about 11% of the market (IE holds 84; other parties, 5.)
Even so, there's something mildly infuriating about people which rebuke perfectly good cross platform standards just because 5% of the market can't see them. What's wrong with using the standards that get to everyone? Why do you feed Microsloth's market dom
The view from Mount Washington (ask for mount warshingon) in Pittsburgh. Also, the Carnegie Museum and Library hubs in Oakland.
Atlanta in general.
Cleveland, so you know how to spit.
New Jersey, so you know how to vomit.
Non-chain theme parks, such as Kennywood, Hershey Park, King's Island, and so on.
Telluride.
Pennsik.
Furthur Festival (the wisconsin rave, not the washington state hippie gather)
Further Festival (the washington hippie gather, not the wisconsin rave)
Tijuana (it's almost america)
Stratford-on-Avon, Ontario (it's almost america)
The middle of nowhere, in Utah
Death Valley in Arizona. But be prepared for $4.00 single scoops at the World's Most Lucrative Baskin Robbins.
The Yellowstone National Park (the hell with the tourist areas, especially old faithful)
Silicon Valley. Briefly.
Anime Weekend Atlanta, where not everyone is a complete posing fucktard.
GenCon - no explanation needed.
E3. More nerds than slashdot, and even fewer people who bathe.;)
Origins.
Just about any tech festival at MIT or CMU
The CMU fair in south oakland, but only if you like getting drunk and laid.
Frat induction week on College Ave or Boyce campuses, Rutgers New Brunswick (don't know if this is still cool)
San Antonio, despite the goddamn alamo
Minnesota, just so you know that places like that really do exist
Route 66
Route 420
420 in general;) Especially Mendocino and Humboldt counties
South Street in Philadelphia
Beacon or Monitor street in Berkeley
Carson Street in Pittsburgh
Somewhere remote (I recommend Lower Turkeyfoot, PA; if you can't find it, it's maybe half an hour east of Hidden Valley, the ski resort, not the salad dressing.)
Your best friend's living room, with a case of beers, some food, and no warning.
And because my comment has too few characters per line (sorry): the rain in spain falls mainly on the plain, while my brain gwains about sprained pain waning in vain, so refrain but maintain while complaining about the LAME MOTHERFUCKING SLASHDOT MESSAGE FILTERS THAT ALWAYS SCREW ME OVER. (ahem) Ooga chaka ooga ooga ooga chaka ooga ooga I just get this feeling, like I've hit this crap before, and I (i i, duh duh duh) am stopped on a filter! (nah nah na-nah) I'm dumbfounded, bewildered, (nah nah na-nah) how I will get this pooooost through, I'm stuck on a filter! (grumble) I've added so much to this I don't know what to write.
Funny, I don't know how Flash could have a better deployment than Javascript which is built in virtually ALL browsers.
JavaScript nee ECMAScript became standard-ish around the 3rd generation browsers. Shockwave and Flash are circa 2nd generation browsers. Moreover, in legacy browsers, Javascript has notorious implementation problems.
Where do you get the statistic that VML is 93% native? I, for one, would be stunned if that were true. That said, if the graphing has to be pure-client-side, VML won't help, and neither will SVG, without JavaScript over the DOM, which is even less common and even less uniform.
Flash is probably over kill and a closed technology.
Flash isn't overkill at all. Except for sound. This is essentially the sort of thing it's designed for: to quickly render vector graphics. Notably, it's got a far larger deployment than SVG, Java/Javascript, or VML. Also, because the viewer is closed, it's both compliant with its own standard, and relatively stable. Moreover, it's ubiquitous; it ships with pretty much everything, and can be downloaded in a form appropriate to nearly every major web browser in short order.
But it's not closed technology. Macromedia set up OpenSWF some years back (april 1998, to be specific.) They release all of their specs usually a month or two late; F6MX is indeed out.
Moreover, PHP (and presumably others) have Flash support libraries set up. It seems that PHP+Flash is exactly what you want. It's a little bit of a pain in the butt the first time around, but once you get used to describing everything in terms of arcs, it's actually kind of intuitive. Plus, you get all of the graphics effects that Flash provides. And you can see it on your Palm Pilot. And probably your watch, these days.
Oh my god, someone that argues pleasantly and without slander? Am I still on slashdot?:D Mod parent up. He deserves it.
Well, you have to factor the cost of your equipment into your expenses. Computers are considered to have a useful life of 3 years (in general, in Australia for tax purposes, probably in corporate America), so you have to add 33% of the cost of your equipment to the expense of delivering the service each year. It's accounting and it's a mysterious thing, I agree.
Hm. That's an interesting take. For the purposes of finding a way to squeeze money out of taxes, that's probably great. But if they're being sensible and using drives with a high MTBF, then their estimated life span seems less important than their actual life span. Granted, I've never run a service like this, but I'm willing to wager that an average whole-drive turnover of 5.5 years or more isn't unreasonable. Either way, it seems quite likely to compare very favorably to the cost of commercials.
The more general point I'm trying to make is that corporate costings are way different to what most people would consider reasonable and it's mostly due to accounting, which is the result of many things that most people don't think of.
There's certainly something to this. However, the better a job we do of nailing down those actual numbers, the better job we can do of comparing those numbers to numbers we made up about other industries.;)
because the memory would cost $AUD30K (about $USD15K) a year!
Now that you've presented it that way, that gives me a very different take on costs. That said, I stand by my argument, because I'm comparing it to another cost which has an ongoing nature: advertising.
Remember, if it were a service issue, I'd be with you: too expensive and a bother. But I really think that they'll do it on the advertising basis alone. I mean, think about the discounts that malls give to big "destination" stores, because they drive up the visit rates to the other stores in the mall, allowing those smaller stores to pay the otherwise exorbitant rent.
And besides, I want them to host my friend's band, so maybe a viral meme started here will eventually get back to them.
The first signs of a pussy defending someone else on the internet. The guy was being a real asshole, and using retarded logic like "Unemployed people should just invest in the companies that fired them". So, I called him an idiot. Can't take the heat? Then fuck off.
I take it that insults and cursing make you feel like a big person? (By the way, when someone calls you clueless, it's not because they can't take the heat - it's generally because they think your flame is out. In my case, that's exactly what I believe, except perhaps not sarcastic enough; it's the icicles on your heat that're slipping me up, so to speak.)
The guy was being a real asshole
Value judgement that I don't agree with. Besides, you've got twice the asshole factor he does, easily. So keep on with the self referential criticisms.
and using retarded logic like "Unemployed people should just invest in the companies that fired them"
It sounds less bad when you realize that what he really said was "quit whining about not being a big businessman; you're just as able to invest as anyone else." He didn't say to invest, or where to invest, just that you have the option of investment, and that therefore you're in no different boat than the big boys.
It's a point I personally disagree with, but certainly not what you're representing here.
Two paragraphs of sarcasm make you look like a pretentious jackass.
That'd be even funnier if you realized what pretention is. Specifically, it means acting in a fashion so as to suggest that one is more important than one really is.
Calling people a jackass without attacking their arguments is one sure road to pretention. Sure that's the word you want to use?
(In the meantime, I am a pretentious jackass. So it doesn't bother me that you say that. What bothers me is that you don't seem to have the faintest clue what an asshole you are, or how your overbearing in the attempt to look correct via argumentum ad baculum really makes you seem. But, c'est la vie: it's the human condition to have to put up with people like you.)
Say what you mean, or shut up.
I did. I said that I disagree with you, and I gave reasons. Enough with the red herrings.
India has a very, very strong tech sector, jackass.
Not on the scale to absorb 8% of the united states' programmer population without a salary boost, which is explicitly what was being discussed. Though I'm glad to see that you're carrying a cursing theme; surely there are people out there nodding their heads. "The loud guy keeps swearing. Surely he must be right."
In this very thread there was mention of IBM India employing 10,000 people.
See, if you'd bother researching, you'd find that IT is expected to grow by almost 400,000 this decade. 10,000 isn't really that many, and IBM India is one of India's largest employers. Moreover, that's in four cities, mostly - Delhi, Bangalore, Bangladesh, and Calcutta.
As early as 1998, there was already a white-collar tech middle-class forming in tech cities such as Bangalore and Bangladesh.
You mean two of their largest cities have had an IT industry for almost five years? My god, I'm quaking in my boots.
Have a look into Indonesia some time.
These cities are now overrun with Mercedes-Benzes. Well, relatively speaking, anyway.
No, they aren't. I've been there, though I would be surprised if you had. I saw more Benzes in rural Kentucky. You're just making things up to seem on point. It's time for you to back what you say with numbers, you very angry little man.
So, there is an exploding tech sector in central Asia. I know this, you do not. You are wrong, and you lose.
Well, at least I got a good laugh in today. A hint: "exploding
I don't think capitalism is the problem, it's greed.
Capital ism. You know what capital is, right? This is the practice built around movable money. IE, Greed.
We're still in the early evolution of megacorporations.
That's funny, we've had megacorporations so powerful that they've annexed entire companies as far back as The British East India Company. What, now they're getting more powerful?
Up until the 1950's it wasn't practical to manage a company as large as they come today.
This is insightful, up and until you have a look at history, or consider that governments have been managing for quite some time. Rather than spewing hyperbole, why not consider things like Western Union, JP Morgan's various entities, the Heinz empire, or Walmart?
Oh, right, because since they've been growing since, obviously it's the new technologies, rather than time, which has allowed them to grow this large.
Exactly what critical function does technology serve that would make business at this scale impossible 100 years ago? Remember, they had accountants to cover for computers, which were accurate, and the only reason overnight delivery and instant info are required is to be competitive with everyone else who has it.
Stock managers can make do without SAS and peoplesoft. Be sure to be very specific in your examples, as I fully intend to act like a flamebait asshole at anyone who just says "you're wrong, you're dumb, i'm leet."
so its okay to outsource jobs to reduce costs but not okay to lower salaries of the top management to reduce costs?
I've always found it interesting that a CEO which can drive the profits of a $1b/y net company up by 30% is often not seen as worthy of their $4m/y or so paycheck. Is it really that hard to see the $296m/y profit that that individual is making for the company?
Hint: if you make your company $296m/y, you will not be moved overseas. You might even get a window office.
You know there's almost a billion people in India, right? And even with our current job situation in the US, wages have fallen through the floor. How many of these jobs do expect to be created in India? 100 million? Think.
Because clearly, the entire billion-strong population of India are computer programmers. Also, because Visual C++ has such wonderful Hindi support, as well as the other 17 languages recognized by their constitution.
Also, there's such a strong tech sector there, and they've all got such easy access to PCs.
So as long as you're being sarcastic at someone else for thinking things through, you might try it yourself. He didn't say they'd go up to American salaries, but he's right, they certainly will go up; this is just how supply and demand works. There is/not/ a programmer glut there. Do some research before calling bullshit.
Damn those corporations with their Congress-bought laws that prevent Joe Sixpack from joining the New Elite by, umm... opening up a brokerage account, hey, that was easy
Remember: JOE SIXPACK NO LONGER HAS A JOB.
Isn't it nice when the person that replies to you in a yelling fashion is yelling exactly what you're being sarcastic about? Here's a hint: the reason he was making it seem uncertain is that he was talking about a steel worker going online and becoming an online broker. It's a fantasy; the market doesn't make money, it only exchanges it. And it's generally the untrained that are doing the losing, despite the legions of Slashdotters who are sure that they missed the RedHat IPO boat but the next one's on its way.
Please stop jumping on posts you clearly don't grok.
So what would happen if American's moved to India, protested for jobs under India Affirmative Action, and then requested US salaries since they are still US citizens working for a US company?
Um, they wouldn't get hired. Hate to be the one to break it to you, but affirmative action doesn't let you demand triple salary here; it's something you can sue for when the company shows a pattern of hiring against a group when there are equivalent workers available. That's why, even though PA had 1-1-1-1 laws for a while, if it was in the middle of the state where there just weren't any black people, they weren't forced to hire completely inappropriate individuals.
If a company moves jobs overseas to reduce salary costs, you aren't going to be able to follow them and get your old salary. Work harder and become indispensible, or face the fact that you're living in a tremendous pay bubble, and it's not going to last.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, if you don't correct him, but assume that really is what he meant, this becomes funny.
Generally, when people suggest that printf/scanf are evil, they're advocating the use of the operator>. Note that these are C++, not C. There are a number of reasons, not the least of which is that they're much more easily guarded regarding insane inputs, and that they're able to handle any type (useful for generic programming.)
Other people just want you to bootstrap your machine with a paperclip.
That's a weird laundry list of languages. Also, we're not interested in what you've programmed; granted it's an extreme example, but that a language can suck is embodied by intercal. Or maybe PL/I. (You've written in PL/I and you don't think language matters?)
/badly./ No language in this office is more prone to bugs, and that's across all fifteen of our programmers (I can say the same for previous jobs.) I don't think it's about the people I've known. No language in this office, except when we had Jim writing C, is harder to debug. In my opinion, it's just a mess.
The fact of the matter is, there are a number of languages in which I can simply work quite a bit faster (Delphi, ruby, lua, PHP.) There are a number of languages in which I can express really evil concepts (lisp, C++, ml/ocaml.) There are a number of langauges in which I can write really tight, efficient code (C++, forth, assembly.)
And then there are some languages which just gargle scrotum. I can't deal with VB. You have to bend over backwards just to get certain things done, the syntax is hard on the eyes, and so forth. Some people insist there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the language, that it does everything other languages do; that's (sort of) true, and if you like the language, fine, use it.
Still, it slows me down
Normally, I'd think it was just an opinion, but nearly every proficient programmer I know also believes so. I had tried it before I heard anyone tell me about it, so I acquired my disgust fairly, and without influence.
But, look, you quoted three languages that are famous for being awful - APL, COBOL and PL/I - and claim it doesn't matter. ou also named one of my pet peeves, Tcl. Also, you named almost no famous-for-being-good languages (*some* people would argue the point on algol. I would argue the point on REXX, but I'd probably be alone.) So, maybe you've developed in all of those languages. Maybe not. That kinda looks like it came from the "hello, world" list to me.
But it's well known that languages provide facilities with levels of support; assembly, for example, is dead as an application language for a very good reason. Would you try to write an operating system in ASM these days? What about a word processor? Alternately, would you write a low-level interrupt handler in VB?
Your answer: hell no. There are languages that are appropriate for certain complexities; you don't use a 4gl to boot a machine and you don't write a web server in a hex editor. There are languages that are bad at expressing things (pascal for generic programming, C for self-modifying code, or anything in your list for functional/applicative programming (haskell, ml/ocaml, scheme) or logical programming (prolog, mercury.) BTW, tell us that language doesn't matter when you learn your first non-imperative language.
You do, however, use perl for text manipulation and glue; php for scripting, glue, and increasingly for lightweight apps; c for systems programming, OSes, drivers, and baremetal stuff; prolog for symbol manipulation stuff, like language translation; lisp for lots of stuff but especially math; lua for situations where lightweight scripting languages are desired, such as user extensions for video games (qv angband); specialty languages for their specialties (AGT for example); Delphi for lots of stuff but especially RAD fast development tools and for database work; TCL for (unsurprisingly) low level machine control; the list goes on.
When you want to find out how much language matters, try writing a zip decompressor in TCL.
Can we stop arguing about languages? Of course not. Arguing about them exposes their flaws, allowing us to address them or route around them. Also, we hate VB. And maybe its supporters. Watch your back.
Why not just write it in XML and XSLT? No virtual machine overhead, no need for a daemon, etc. It's really just pushing data around. No sense involving all that software.
Granted it's five days late, but still. You realize Duke3d is made by somebody else, right?
You seem to have a near-miraculous capacity for answering half of the concerns of a rebuke at once while blindly ignoring the other half, and missing the bigger picture. As this is getting way too long, I'm going to cull most of the diatribe; if you feel I've left out important bits, go 'head and reintroduce them. Culling is a dangerous act (especially during debate, even moreso when making mirrored statements,) so I welcome suggestions that I've missed an issue.
Well, I think we need to be realistic here. I started this flame talking about IE3 and NS3, there is most likely no need to get down to the 3 or 2 versions: They are gone.
(sarcasm dropped) The bigger issue here isn't supporting browsers from the depths of history. The issue is that the VML solution not only drops viewers needlessly, but does so on a closed corporate agenda plan which is being passed over by other browsers in favor of superior open standards; furthermore, that there are alternate, superior, lower cost of development/deployment commercial open platforms with greater market penetration. Each and every statement you make in VML's defense works better for both Flash *and* SVG, with the notable exception of complaints regarding SVG's immature penetration (which I agree are quite valid.)
The core of my argument is this, and this is what I'd like you to address: VML gains you nothing over Flash, while rendering more slowly, touching fewer platforms, rendering in lower quality, and providing much less support for outside-object integration. Furthermore, VML has no construction facilities in popular dynamic systems, whereas Flash has a good many. Further still, VML is a platform-locked solution not only now but for the foreseeable future. Also, VML is boring.
Flash is in all of the installers too. And javascript can be turned off. This is a nonissue.
Well, in a different way. Flash is included in the installer as an option, JavaScript is part of the core of the browser. That's what native means. Granted you can disable JavaScript.
You're dodging the point. In both cases, the default is for the system to be installed, and in both cases the user must go to effort to disable the system. Does it matter that the user may more thoroughly disable Flash than Javascript? I think it doesn't. If you can find counterpoint, I'm all ears. Critical ears, but ears nonetheless.
In almost every other office there was a PC running on the network to allow you to use Office/IE when needed. Ah! By targetting IE I also get those
Meaningless rhetoric. "I had a store that sold doughnuts. Then, I decided to restrict my doughnuts to those wearing at least four items of clothing, including shoes and jewelry. This excluded 5% of my customers. In almost every home there was an extra hat or scarf that would allow the customers to visit my store if needed. By targetting people with four clothing items, I was able to reach them too."
No. That's just not how it works. If you exclude 5% of the audience for no good technical reason or advantage whatsoever, then by targetting their exclusion mechanism, when there's a seperate machine than their normal machine which they must laboriously visit to view your ill-designed site, you are not also targetting them. They're getting by on the prevalance of the machination that you've chosen, nothing more.
As I said, the common denominator of the JS implementation in the version 4+ browsers is largely good enough to animate a stupid pie chart.
Nonetheless, this only holds merit if Flash cannot, which it can. More quickly, more appealingly in a graphic sense, with a better capacity for scaling complexity to the machine environment, with more limited resources or older deployments, and plagued by fewer of the implementation bugs that you seem unwilling to address as significant simply because you feel that they're rare.
Because really, if it only affects a few percentage points, then the advan
If Linux is M$' number two threat, then doesn't it make sense to attempt to bolster the lawsuit that might do it serious damage?
;)
Then again, I'm a paranoid creep. I think this was all Billy Boy's idea to start with.
JavaScript nee ECMAScript became standard-ish around the 3rd generation browsers.
Well, download: IE3+, Netscape3+, Opera3+, Konkeror1+. They all have JavaScript.
Uh huh. Remember that if I tell you something, you don't need to tell me back. Download IE2 and Netscape2; you can still get Shockwave.
Natively. It is not an option of the installer, you just can't have one of these browsers without JavaScript.
Flash is in all of the installers too. And javascript can be turned off. This is a nonissue.
Since Flash doesn't even run on all of them,
Flash on Opera, Flash on Konqueror. So, what again? Or do you think it fails to run in IE or Netscape?
I don't know how you can find that Flash has a better deployment than JavaScript.
As I already told you, because Shockwave and Flash are circa 2nd generation browsers and Moreover, in legacy browsers, Javascript has notorious implementation problems . Moreover, any browser which can pick up netscape plugins - of which there are quite a few - can pick up flash; none of them can pick up exetrnal JS/ECMAS implementations. And if a browser doesn't have one, it doesn't have both, in general (lately, 6th gen browsers have begun to strip the machine down, so this is becoming less true. Still.)
For the sake of the example, let's focus on 99.5% of the browsers which are: Netscape4+, Opera5+, IE4+ and Konqueror
I can't understand this. They're not 99.5% of the user base, they're not 99.5% of the broswer list by a longshot.
Flash can run on any browser, if you choose to install it, while JavaScript runs natively on every one of them.
That said, Flash is enabled in essentially every deployment, whereas as any web master has learned the hard way, JavaScript is oftentimes turned off. Moreover, there are many legacy browsers which support shockwave, flash, or futuresplash which don't support JavaScript.
Ah, but here's the killer, which I also already told you: Gen 3 browsers won't help. Their JS/ECMAS implementations don't touch the DOM, so you can't use them to write VML or SVG.
Moreover, VML has no chance of making it into other browsers. If you're going to use a standard, use a W3C standard like SVG.
You just can't disable it or 50% of the websites out there doesn't work anymore,
Nonetheless, many people do indeed have it disabled, just like cookies. You strike me as the sort of person that used the marquee tag and got angry when some of the web didn't use IE.
so you re-enable it very quickly.
You'll find that most people which go to the effort of turning off parts of their browser aren't clueless and are aware of the ramifications of their actions. That is to say, "nuh-uh."
So I hope the JavaScript question is settled. And please, even with the bugs that are out there, the common denominator of all the JavaScript engine deployed is still a good enough language to animate a bar/pie chart.
When you're writing browser select clauses for your DOM touching, just remember, someone warned you.
Now for VML, the computation is simple:
Netscape4+: 2%
Opera5+: 1.5%
Konqueror: ??% (most likely below 1)
IE4: 0.5%
Leaves the winner: IE5+: 94%
Something tells me you made these numbers up. For example, this shows netscape holding about 11% of the market (IE holds 84; other parties, 5.)
Even so, there's something mildly infuriating about people which rebuke perfectly good cross platform standards just because 5% of the market can't see them. What's wrong with using the standards that get to everyone? Why do you feed Microsloth's market dom
And because my comment has too few characters per line (sorry): the rain in spain falls mainly on the plain, while my brain gwains about sprained pain waning in vain, so refrain but maintain while complaining about the LAME MOTHERFUCKING SLASHDOT MESSAGE FILTERS THAT ALWAYS SCREW ME OVER. (ahem) Ooga chaka ooga ooga ooga chaka ooga ooga I just get this feeling, like I've hit this crap before, and I (i i, duh duh duh) am stopped on a filter! (nah nah na-nah) I'm dumbfounded, bewildered, (nah nah na-nah) how I will get this pooooost through, I'm stuck on a filter! (grumble) I've added so much to this I don't know what to write.
Funny, I don't know how Flash could have a better deployment than Javascript which is built in virtually ALL browsers.
JavaScript nee ECMAScript became standard-ish around the 3rd generation browsers. Shockwave and Flash are circa 2nd generation browsers. Moreover, in legacy browsers, Javascript has notorious implementation problems.
Where do you get the statistic that VML is 93% native? I, for one, would be stunned if that were true. That said, if the graphing has to be pure-client-side, VML won't help, and neither will SVG, without JavaScript over the DOM, which is even less common and even less uniform.
Flash is your answer.
Flash is probably over kill and a closed technology.
Flash isn't overkill at all. Except for sound. This is essentially the sort of thing it's designed for: to quickly render vector graphics. Notably, it's got a far larger deployment than SVG, Java/Javascript, or VML. Also, because the viewer is closed, it's both compliant with its own standard, and relatively stable. Moreover, it's ubiquitous; it ships with pretty much everything, and can be downloaded in a form appropriate to nearly every major web browser in short order.
But it's not closed technology. Macromedia set up OpenSWF some years back (april 1998, to be specific.) They release all of their specs usually a month or two late; F6MX is indeed out.
Moreover, PHP (and presumably others) have Flash support libraries set up. It seems that PHP+Flash is exactly what you want. It's a little bit of a pain in the butt the first time around, but once you get used to describing everything in terms of arcs, it's actually kind of intuitive. Plus, you get all of the graphics effects that Flash provides. And you can see it on your Palm Pilot. And probably your watch, these days.
The guy expressly noted that, as it has to be interactive, static images are not an option.
How do we sustain a cyber perimeter that encompasses multiple continents?
What perimeter?
I presume me means the wall of half eaten hot pockets and empty Bawls cans around the developers' desks.
I'm getting a little verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves. I'll give you a topic. Parent was neither a question, nor was it rhetoric. Discuss.
US is down there at 2.5 million... how many programming jobs in the world do you think there need to be?
;)
That depends on if you count writing Winders security patches as a programming job.
That's from the folks that bring us the Duke Nukem games. C'mon. Let's give credit where credit's due.
.plan from the developmental Doom 2 era. Nice try, though.
It's straight out of Carmack's
You lose all context, and a sarcastic remark really can seem trollish
:D
I agree with you here. I kinda wish that context were automatically provided, instead of needing to be requested.
Then again, if I had to read that much to metamoderate, I just wouldn't do it. So... whatever.
Oh my god, someone that argues pleasantly and without slander? Am I still on slashdot? :D Mod parent up. He deserves it.
;)
Well, you have to factor the cost of your equipment into your expenses. Computers are considered to have a useful life of 3 years (in general, in Australia for tax purposes, probably in corporate America), so you have to add 33% of the cost of your equipment to the expense of delivering the service each year. It's accounting and it's a mysterious thing, I agree.
Hm. That's an interesting take. For the purposes of finding a way to squeeze money out of taxes, that's probably great. But if they're being sensible and using drives with a high MTBF, then their estimated life span seems less important than their actual life span. Granted, I've never run a service like this, but I'm willing to wager that an average whole-drive turnover of 5.5 years or more isn't unreasonable. Either way, it seems quite likely to compare very favorably to the cost of commercials.
The more general point I'm trying to make is that corporate costings are way different to what most people would consider reasonable and it's mostly due to accounting, which is the result of many things that most people don't think of.
There's certainly something to this. However, the better a job we do of nailing down those actual numbers, the better job we can do of comparing those numbers to numbers we made up about other industries.
because the memory would cost $AUD30K (about $USD15K) a year!
Now that you've presented it that way, that gives me a very different take on costs. That said, I stand by my argument, because I'm comparing it to another cost which has an ongoing nature: advertising.
Remember, if it were a service issue, I'd be with you: too expensive and a bother. But I really think that they'll do it on the advertising basis alone. I mean, think about the discounts that malls give to big "destination" stores, because they drive up the visit rates to the other stores in the mall, allowing those smaller stores to pay the otherwise exorbitant rent.
And besides, I want them to host my friend's band, so maybe a viral meme started here will eventually get back to them.
The first signs of a pussy defending someone else on the internet. The guy was being a real asshole, and using retarded logic like "Unemployed people should just invest in the companies that fired them". So, I called him an idiot. Can't take the heat? Then fuck off.
://www.bls.gov/oco/images/ocotjc08.gif
I take it that insults and cursing make you feel like a big person? (By the way, when someone calls you clueless, it's not because they can't take the heat - it's generally because they think your flame is out. In my case, that's exactly what I believe, except perhaps not sarcastic enough; it's the icicles on your heat that're slipping me up, so to speak.)
The guy was being a real asshole
Value judgement that I don't agree with. Besides, you've got twice the asshole factor he does, easily. So keep on with the self referential criticisms.
and using retarded logic like "Unemployed people should just invest in the companies that fired them"
It sounds less bad when you realize that what he really said was "quit whining about not being a big businessman; you're just as able to invest as anyone else." He didn't say to invest, or where to invest, just that you have the option of investment, and that therefore you're in no different boat than the big boys.
It's a point I personally disagree with, but certainly not what you're representing here.
Two paragraphs of sarcasm make you look like a pretentious jackass.
That'd be even funnier if you realized what pretention is. Specifically, it means acting in a fashion so as to suggest that one is more important than one really is.
Calling people a jackass without attacking their arguments is one sure road to pretention. Sure that's the word you want to use?
(In the meantime, I am a pretentious jackass. So it doesn't bother me that you say that. What bothers me is that you don't seem to have the faintest clue what an asshole you are, or how your overbearing in the attempt to look correct via argumentum ad baculum really makes you seem. But, c'est la vie: it's the human condition to have to put up with people like you.)
Say what you mean, or shut up.
I did. I said that I disagree with you, and I gave reasons. Enough with the red herrings.
India has a very, very strong tech sector, jackass.
Not on the scale to absorb 8% of the united states' programmer population without a salary boost, which is explicitly what was being discussed. Though I'm glad to see that you're carrying a cursing theme; surely there are people out there nodding their heads. "The loud guy keeps swearing. Surely he must be right."
In this very thread there was mention of IBM India employing 10,000 people.
Heh.
http://www.bls.gov/oco/images/ocotjc09.gif
http
See, if you'd bother researching, you'd find that IT is expected to grow by almost 400,000 this decade. 10,000 isn't really that many, and IBM India is one of India's largest employers. Moreover, that's in four cities, mostly - Delhi, Bangalore, Bangladesh, and Calcutta.
As early as 1998, there was already a white-collar tech middle-class forming in tech cities such as Bangalore and Bangladesh.
You mean two of their largest cities have had an IT industry for almost five years? My god, I'm quaking in my boots.
Have a look into Indonesia some time.
These cities are now overrun with Mercedes-Benzes. Well, relatively speaking, anyway.
No, they aren't. I've been there, though I would be surprised if you had. I saw more Benzes in rural Kentucky. You're just making things up to seem on point. It's time for you to back what you say with numbers, you very angry little man.
So, there is an exploding tech sector in central Asia. I know this, you do not. You are wrong, and you lose.
Well, at least I got a good laugh in today. A hint: "exploding
Oy.
I don't think capitalism is the problem, it's greed.
Capital ism. You know what capital is, right? This is the practice built around movable money. IE, Greed.
We're still in the early evolution of megacorporations.
That's funny, we've had megacorporations so powerful that they've annexed entire companies as far back as The British East India Company. What, now they're getting more powerful?
Up until the 1950's it wasn't practical to manage a company as large as they come today.
This is insightful, up and until you have a look at history, or consider that governments have been managing for quite some time. Rather than spewing hyperbole, why not consider things like Western Union, JP Morgan's various entities, the Heinz empire, or Walmart?
Oh, right, because since they've been growing since, obviously it's the new technologies, rather than time, which has allowed them to grow this large.
Exactly what critical function does technology serve that would make business at this scale impossible 100 years ago? Remember, they had accountants to cover for computers, which were accurate, and the only reason overnight delivery and instant info are required is to be competitive with everyone else who has it.
Stock managers can make do without SAS and peoplesoft. Be sure to be very specific in your examples, as I fully intend to act like a flamebait asshole at anyone who just says "you're wrong, you're dumb, i'm leet."
Hey, what do you have against... aw, you didn't leave anyone nonreprehensible in there.
so its okay to outsource jobs to reduce costs but not okay to lower salaries of the top management to reduce costs?
I've always found it interesting that a CEO which can drive the profits of a $1b/y net company up by 30% is often not seen as worthy of their $4m/y or so paycheck. Is it really that hard to see the $296m/y profit that that individual is making for the company?
Hint: if you make your company $296m/y, you will not be moved overseas. You might even get a window office.
My only question is, if you have questions with the code, aren't you going to need a translator for the comments?
/* haiku */.
Wait, people comment code? And here I thought I had an eccentric hobby.
Guess it's time to move back to
OK, I don't mean to be rude, but you're an idiot.
/not/ a programmer glut there. Do some research before calling bullshit.
Ah, the first signs of enlightened argument.
You know there's almost a billion people in India, right? And even with our current job situation in the US, wages have fallen through the floor. How many of these jobs do expect to be created in India? 100 million? Think.
Because clearly, the entire billion-strong population of India are computer programmers. Also, because Visual C++ has such wonderful Hindi support, as well as the other 17 languages recognized by their constitution.
Also, there's such a strong tech sector there, and they've all got such easy access to PCs.
So as long as you're being sarcastic at someone else for thinking things through, you might try it yourself. He didn't say they'd go up to American salaries, but he's right, they certainly will go up; this is just how supply and demand works. There is
Damn those corporations with their Congress-bought laws that prevent Joe Sixpack from joining the New Elite by, umm... opening up a brokerage account, hey, that was easy
Remember: JOE SIXPACK NO LONGER HAS A JOB.
Isn't it nice when the person that replies to you in a yelling fashion is yelling exactly what you're being sarcastic about? Here's a hint: the reason he was making it seem uncertain is that he was talking about a steel worker going online and becoming an online broker. It's a fantasy; the market doesn't make money, it only exchanges it. And it's generally the untrained that are doing the losing, despite the legions of Slashdotters who are sure that they missed the RedHat IPO boat but the next one's on its way.
Please stop jumping on posts you clearly don't grok.
So what would happen if American's moved to India, protested for jobs under India Affirmative Action, and then requested US salaries since they are still US citizens working for a US company?
Um, they wouldn't get hired. Hate to be the one to break it to you, but affirmative action doesn't let you demand triple salary here; it's something you can sue for when the company shows a pattern of hiring against a group when there are equivalent workers available. That's why, even though PA had 1-1-1-1 laws for a while, if it was in the middle of the state where there just weren't any black people, they weren't forced to hire completely inappropriate individuals.
If a company moves jobs overseas to reduce salary costs, you aren't going to be able to follow them and get your old salary. Work harder and become indispensible, or face the fact that you're living in a tremendous pay bubble, and it's not going to last.