This is why structured peer code reviews are good. Flame the dev for every stupid thing he did in his code. He will either flake out and quit coding for you (you don't need devs like that anyways) or he will learn his lessons and write better code.
OSS thinks that it has peer review like this because its open, but unfortunately the code is never read in a structured fashion with the comments getting back to the author with a little pain.
I think that along with the structure test plans that were recommended for OSS there should also be a recomendation for peer code reviews. Hell with all the people that participate in a project you should be able to review the code, its not like you have half the people you need to finish the project by your insane deadline placed by marketing or anything.
And if you test like this you waste tons of CPU cycles and do not catch the most difficult bugs. Automated testing like that is extremely useful, but its not the answer in the end. Only intelligent thought about things that have gone wrong in the past and might go wrong with your code can bring about a useful test plan.
I'm a functionality tester as a profession and I can say that without a doubt, calling every function once does not test that the function "works". Its a well known fact that exhaustive testing is impossible so a tester needs to think about what things normally go wrong and test for that.
These include things such as "What if I choose the wrong data type to send to this procedure." clear to abstract wierd things such as "What if I try to open a file after having saved a file" where you find that the programmer forgot to reinit his buffer and you get garbage appended to the end of whatever you opened. Don't even ask me about multi-threaded issues.
So anyways I'm not saying that you don't have good ideas, just trying to break the illusion that testing every function is exhaustive testing.
What happened here is MS had a team of monkies test the page on like all the browsers they can think of. The test monkies marked down "fail" any time the page didn't show up 100% exactly like the picture they had on thier little sheet. The managers then decided after looking at the 3 hours they had left to get the pages in to production to just put a little message up to tell the user that thier browser wasn't "compatible".
I doubt their was any huge push to do this to put other browsers down but more that they didn't want to take the time to fix the pages for all 100billion flavors of browsers in the world. Given that people complain over all sorts of really stupid things and given the fact that MS spends millions to decide what shape a tab should be to best satisfy thier users (and rarely does) I guess I understand the decison.
That given they should give they warning that "your browser sucks" and then show you the page broken or not.
About your first complaint. This is NOT a function of bad IT managers but rather a symptom of bueracracy and budgets in general. A budget has to be formed before a year starts, when you have no info about what will happen that year, so you look at last year to see the result. Because you are always trying to trim the budget, if you are the unlucky group that managers don't really understand why they need (IT anybody?), they take your last years budget with normal budget inflation added and then cut 10% from the final number. So knowing this you make sure to spend at least 50% more than you need this year so that next year your budget will be big enough. It sucks but don't blame the manager for the problem, blame his manager instead.
As far as your next problem, the fault likes both with the manager and with the people in the department. If the IT manager has a good reason to buy a windows box vs the mac boxes that everyone is used to, then by all means he should get them and the people in the dept should use them. However in the case you specified the IT manager forgot to calculate all the issues. Retraining a boatload of editors and writers and layout specialists is much harder than him learning a few things about mac computers. In that case he is guilty of massive short-sightedness and major power tripping.
I wish I had links to the article source, but last I heard large companies that changed from windows to linux had support costs rise. I'm not saying anything on the down side for linux, but people just don't know how to use it, and if something goes wrong they are often clueless on how to fix it. With windows it may break alot but there are also a lot more people that know how to reboot the machine... I mean fix the problem.
I am sure that the XBox is running the laptop version of the pIII. Though this is still quite warm (I've burned my legs with dell laptops before yikes) its not nearly the monster that the desktop version of the chip is.
It would help if you read the post instead of blowing hot air out your nether orifice.
The post was saying that its doubtful that xbox will be emulated on PS2.
If the PS2 were significantly faster or more efficient than the xbox then maybe it would happen, but since they are fairly equivalent from what I've seen emulation won't happen.
Thats actually a bad idea because it also had a pretty good probability of selling a large number of systems to people that never plan on buying software. Considering software licences is the only way sony makes money on this (they lose money on the hardware) they don't want to cause this necessarily.
Gates already has his legacy, maybe you are right and he doesn't think so, but think, he was at the top of an era. Gates can probably rightly claim that he brought computers to the masses in a form that they could afford and use. If it weren't for his idea to sell software cheaply to everyone, we might only see computers in businesses and schools where many of the early creators and users thought they belonged.
So you think it would be better to come out with a new version every couple months like they do with Linux?
What we need is to support other music venues...
on
RIAA to DoS Pirates?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Quit listening to Briteny Spears and the ilk and start listening to bands that are more open. If your money was where your mouth is the RIAA would be out of business right now. Granted it will take a while to find music that is "cool" but I kind of like listening to unpopular bands that sound good.
Someone needs to start something that allows artists to promote themselves online and sell music and make it profitable for the service and the artists but also so it helps consumers. MP3.com was like this at one time, now its to commercialized I think. If you want your music you will have to pay but we need to work out the evil middleman that eats all of our money and doesn't pay the artist.
Well its better than just never answering your phone which is what I've been reduced to at this point. I get on average 5 telemarketing calls a night so I end up using the answering machine as a call screen.
I've known a number of people that hung out outside all the time and STILL can't survive worth a hoot. I on the other hand spent a great deal of time playing lego. I also learned how to survive in the outdoors. There is much to be said about balance. All lego is certainly not good, but all outdoors doesn't complete you as a person either.
Maybe its just where I was raised but I have a little bit of knowledge of a whole bunch of things and some expertise in a couple of areas. I would totally recommend lego as a toy for any child today. I would also recommend that the parents get right down there and spend some time with the children playing with the lego, they might learn something, they might have a "moment", but basically it will all be good. I just with the price of the "cool" sets would go down so I could buy more of them (I'm 23 and have spent far too much on lego on the last year).
My parents always purchased me the "Technic" type lego sets. They were great fun and I rarely build the model more than ones. Though the car type models were a ton of fun because I always loved driving cars around. Mostly though I tried to build 4 wheel drive trucks with my motors which was quiet hard to do (I didn't have alot of pieces and the more efficient designs were not available to me because of this). I look at todays technic sets, and mostly there are too many tubes and big plastic plates making up the outsides of the model which means less parts to build the core of a new model. Mostly its ok though, still lots to be done.
I think there would be a LARGE market for lego bringing back some of its old sets (anyone for the black supercar set?) again.
...was called abuse. I don't know if my friend came up with the idea himself or got it somewhere else and implemented it himself. The interested thing about the language is that anything could be redefined including the keywords of the language. It allowed you to really obfuscate things. I wish I had that interpreter, it was quite fun.
I'm just saying that without its own storage, and only being able to read from the network, it really seems like a nearly useless object. Its worthless without a computer which already does a good enough job of decoding MP3's in the first place so why have it?
The problem with this thought is that even though you create more TLD's you don't create more names for people to use. In your world Coke would get Coke.* and everyone else be damned. In that case I think we should make Coke buy the TLD.coke and call it done, they can have any site they want on.coke and noone else can get on it. However they should be disallowed to get coke.com because that should go to a random person not qualified for a.coke domain.
Honestly though, a person or organization should be allowed 1 domain and 1 domain only and anything else that they want should be below that. If you are coke.com thats all you get, if you want a million servers name the rest of them *.coke.com but you can't have coke2.com. Then maybe we would be somewhere even resonably close to being able to satisfy the demand for unique rememberable domain names.
In the current world there isn't a way to distrubute names that will satisfy everyone because there are too many people to satisfy. You could say that Mr. David Coke has a more valid claim to coke.com than the Coke company does, I mean david didn't even get to choose his name. In the end the people with the most money will win, and I think thats something we will have to live with. In our world it just doesn't matter what way you distribute the names initially they will all concentrate at the top of the food chain anyways.
From that explanation all I can think that filling the speaker with helium would do is be much brighter than the same system without the helium. I also have a feeling that the effect will be minimal because everything I have read about them says they work to avoid resonance of the cabinet.
If I want an MP3 component for my stereo I want one that can at least read music from a CD. It would be nice if it could also pick up music over the network, but basically I don't want my computer to be forced to run, and if it is, it might as well play the music itself. I don't know about the quality of audio components in the audiotron (they did a good job of avoiding that aspect in the review) but my SB Live is pretty decent unless the cables linking the computer to the stereo are too long.
In the speakers you have an electronic driver that hits a particular frequency based on the timings of the circuit.
In the case of your lungs you have a string driven by the gas itself. I don't exactly know what causes the string (your vocal cords) in this case to vibrate faster but it has to do with the interaction of the gas and the cords. In the speakers you would just get a wierd response because the pressures on each side would be different.
Um? I don't think filling the speakers with helium would change the frequency the speaker operates at because thats driven by an electronic occilator of some sort. Anyways you would fill the bladders with helium, not the rest of the cabinet.
I am fairly certain that the phenomina that causes our voices to get higher pitched when we inhale helium and then talk would not affect speakers filled with helium since the gas would have no part in driving the cones.
Slashdot Mirror
OSS thinks that it has peer review like this because its open, but unfortunately the code is never read in a structured fashion with the comments getting back to the author with a little pain.
I think that along with the structure test plans that were recommended for OSS there should also be a recomendation for peer code reviews. Hell with all the people that participate in a project you should be able to review the code, its not like you have half the people you need to finish the project by your insane deadline placed by marketing or anything.
I'm a functionality tester as a profession and I can say that without a doubt, calling every function once does not test that the function "works". Its a well known fact that exhaustive testing is impossible so a tester needs to think about what things normally go wrong and test for that.
These include things such as "What if I choose the wrong data type to send to this procedure." clear to abstract wierd things such as "What if I try to open a file after having saved a file" where you find that the programmer forgot to reinit his buffer and you get garbage appended to the end of whatever you opened. Don't even ask me about multi-threaded issues.
So anyways I'm not saying that you don't have good ideas, just trying to break the illusion that testing every function is exhaustive testing.
He should have done something intelligent with the error message or recorded it and died.
Not to absolve IIS of blame, but when you run a .dll in proc and it hangs, the whole process hangs and there isn't much that IIS can do about it.
In my experience thats where I get most of the errors with IIS hanging.
I doubt their was any huge push to do this to put other browsers down but more that they didn't want to take the time to fix the pages for all 100billion flavors of browsers in the world. Given that people complain over all sorts of really stupid things and given the fact that MS spends millions to decide what shape a tab should be to best satisfy thier users (and rarely does) I guess I understand the decison.
That given they should give they warning that "your browser sucks" and then show you the page broken or not.
As far as your next problem, the fault likes both with the manager and with the people in the department. If the IT manager has a good reason to buy a windows box vs the mac boxes that everyone is used to, then by all means he should get them and the people in the dept should use them. However in the case you specified the IT manager forgot to calculate all the issues. Retraining a boatload of editors and writers and layout specialists is much harder than him learning a few things about mac computers. In that case he is guilty of massive short-sightedness and major power tripping.
I wish I had links to the article source, but last I heard large companies that changed from windows to linux had support costs rise. I'm not saying anything on the down side for linux, but people just don't know how to use it, and if something goes wrong they are often clueless on how to fix it. With windows it may break alot but there are also a lot more people that know how to reboot the machine... I mean fix the problem.
I am sure that the XBox is running the laptop version of the pIII. Though this is still quite warm (I've burned my legs with dell laptops before yikes) its not nearly the monster that the desktop version of the chip is.
The post was saying that its doubtful that xbox will be emulated on PS2.
If the PS2 were significantly faster or more efficient than the xbox then maybe it would happen, but since they are fairly equivalent from what I've seen emulation won't happen.
Thats actually a bad idea because it also had a pretty good probability of selling a large number of systems to people that never plan on buying software. Considering software licences is the only way sony makes money on this (they lose money on the hardware) they don't want to cause this necessarily.
Gates already has his legacy, maybe you are right and he doesn't think so, but think, he was at the top of an era. Gates can probably rightly claim that he brought computers to the masses in a form that they could afford and use. If it weren't for his idea to sell software cheaply to everyone, we might only see computers in businesses and schools where many of the early creators and users thought they belonged.
So you think it would be better to come out with a new version every couple months like they do with Linux?
Someone needs to start something that allows artists to promote themselves online and sell music and make it profitable for the service and the artists but also so it helps consumers. MP3.com was like this at one time, now its to commercialized I think. If you want your music you will have to pay but we need to work out the evil middleman that eats all of our money and doesn't pay the artist.
Well its better than just never answering your phone which is what I've been reduced to at this point. I get on average 5 telemarketing calls a night so I end up using the answering machine as a call screen.
Maybe its just where I was raised but I have a little bit of knowledge of a whole bunch of things and some expertise in a couple of areas. I would totally recommend lego as a toy for any child today. I would also recommend that the parents get right down there and spend some time with the children playing with the lego, they might learn something, they might have a "moment", but basically it will all be good. I just with the price of the "cool" sets would go down so I could buy more of them (I'm 23 and have spent far too much on lego on the last year).
I think there would be a LARGE market for lego bringing back some of its old sets (anyone for the black supercar set?) again.
I agree, and the bungee power is great for driving larger more complex vehicles :)
...was called abuse. I don't know if my friend came up with the idea himself or got it somewhere else and implemented it himself. The interested thing about the language is that anything could be redefined including the keywords of the language. It allowed you to really obfuscate things. I wish I had that interpreter, it was quite fun.
I'm just saying that without its own storage, and only being able to read from the network, it really seems like a nearly useless object. Its worthless without a computer which already does a good enough job of decoding MP3's in the first place so why have it?
Honestly though, a person or organization should be allowed 1 domain and 1 domain only and anything else that they want should be below that. If you are coke.com thats all you get, if you want a million servers name the rest of them *.coke.com but you can't have coke2.com. Then maybe we would be somewhere even resonably close to being able to satisfy the demand for unique rememberable domain names.
In the current world there isn't a way to distrubute names that will satisfy everyone because there are too many people to satisfy. You could say that Mr. David Coke has a more valid claim to coke.com than the Coke company does, I mean david didn't even get to choose his name. In the end the people with the most money will win, and I think thats something we will have to live with. In our world it just doesn't matter what way you distribute the names initially they will all concentrate at the top of the food chain anyways.
From that explanation all I can think that filling the speaker with helium would do is be much brighter than the same system without the helium. I also have a feeling that the effect will be minimal because everything I have read about them says they work to avoid resonance of the cabinet.
If I want an MP3 component for my stereo I want one that can at least read music from a CD. It would be nice if it could also pick up music over the network, but basically I don't want my computer to be forced to run, and if it is, it might as well play the music itself. I don't know about the quality of audio components in the audiotron (they did a good job of avoiding that aspect in the review) but my SB Live is pretty decent unless the cables linking the computer to the stereo are too long.
In the speakers you have an electronic driver that hits a particular frequency based on the timings of the circuit.
In the case of your lungs you have a string driven by the gas itself. I don't exactly know what causes the string (your vocal cords) in this case to vibrate faster but it has to do with the interaction of the gas and the cords. In the speakers you would just get a wierd response because the pressures on each side would be different.
I am fairly certain that the phenomina that causes our voices to get higher pitched when we inhale helium and then talk would not affect speakers filled with helium since the gas would have no part in driving the cones.
In that case they just need to collect the parts and follow the instructions to put the bot back together again, legos are easy to fix :)