The reason they can't fly the shuttle drunk is because they didn't learn to fly the shuttle drunk. I say get them plastered and put them in the simulator.
My organization has decided to wait until SP1 before we do any rollout of Vista to our desktops.
My company rolled out XP barely 8 months ago. I'm pretty sure we won't see Vista on our desktops anytime soon, if ever. Although, I guess it depends on how many delays Windows 7 has.
You make some excellent points. Your comments made me think of another way of summarizing this.
A good manager is a good manager regardless of his/her background. A not so good manager is worse if they have a technical background because their lack of management skills means they don't know when to stay out of the technical side.
In almost 25 years as a programmer/analyst/tech lead/architect I've reported to 12 managers/bosses, a plethora of project managers and observed dozens more. With very few exceptions the most effective managers are the ones who have had no formal IT training. The main reason for this I think is that although they can understand the problem and the solution at a high level they have no opinion as to the details of the underlying problem or the implementation of the solution - they leave that to the people who are qualified. Too often a PHB that has some IT training tries to force a solution they don't know how to implement to a problem they don't completely understand.
There's a phrase I used to use to describe a former friend of mine that I think applies to this situation. There's nothing worse than someone who knows enough about computers to be dangerous but not enough to be useful.
I overstated the 10 seconds for effect. My point was that over the execution of a long running program the translation of the Java bytecode into native code is an insignificant amount.
The problem with benchmarks is they rarely reflect real world behavior. Especially when they are specifically chosen to support a particular hypothesis.
In real world applications that have to contend with CPU, I/O, etc. there is very little difference between Java, C, C#, BASIC, COBOL, etc.
And I wouldn't use Java for a graphics intensive application any more than I would use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail.
FYI, I work for a company that has a Java transaction engine that runs at about 50% and handles over 10 million transactions a week involving heavy database I/O, computation and communication. We also have a similar.NET app that we inherited that can't handle anywhere the same load no matter how much hardware we throw at it. That's what I would call a benchmark.
simple mathematics would dictate that even assuming the java interpreter generated the same code as the native program (which is unlikely because the java runtime is very general purpose so it will keep track of things you dont necessarily need), the extra overhead of the translation will incur a performance hit.
That's true but the translation is a one time hit the first time a certain piece of code is executed. If a particular code path is not executed it is not translated. Also, the HotSpot JIT will only optimize code that will benefit from optimization further improving the performance of the translation. The reality is that for any program of significance the translation is a relatively insignificant portion of the execution time. In other words, if a native program takes an hour to execute then is it really a huge problem if it takes an hour and 10 seconds.
How can java possibly outperform native code, when the java code is itself being translated into native code in order to be executed?
I think you just answered your own question. If the Java code is translated into native code in order to be executed then it IS native code which would have to run as fast as native code.
Well since we're using stereotypes to justify our actions. You shouldn't have a problem with geeks being labeled smelly, no social skills, and virgins?
I never said it was well received with geeks. I said "consumers". Believe it or not but non-geeks buy high tech gadgets too and they're not swayed by things like reviews and features.
Yes the first generation iPods were targeted at Mac users. Why not? It was a market that was being ignored and allowed them to enter the market. And how do you create a buzz around a product that has a limited audience - national advertising campaign. The campaign was so successful even non-Mac users wanted one. Apple's been doing doing this kind of campaign since 1984 and they did it again. Now when was the last time Creative or Diamond ran a national campaign, oh yeah, NEVER!
Now once they established a foothold in this market segment that the so-called "dominant" players ignored and then started supporting non-Macs the iPod took over the market virtually overnight.
Slashdot Mirror
The ISPs advertise it as "Retarded Way of Doing Shit(TM)"
A layer 3 switch could handle this. Your D-Link router is not layer 3 and would collapse in seconds...if it lasted that long.
When it costs in the neighbourhood of $200 million to run a presidential campaign they're going to be in a number of pockets.
Yes, they pay for it with their life.
It's a little something called "a joke" which apparently went whoooosh over your head.
How can you do a biometric scan of a prison?
Ah, it was a joke.
The reason they can't fly the shuttle drunk is because they didn't learn to fly the shuttle drunk. I say get them plastered and put them in the simulator.
My company rolled out XP barely 8 months ago. I'm pretty sure we won't see Vista on our desktops anytime soon, if ever. Although, I guess it depends on how many delays Windows 7 has.
You make some excellent points. Your comments made me think of another way of summarizing this.
A good manager is a good manager regardless of his/her background. A not so good manager is worse if they have a technical background because their lack of management skills means they don't know when to stay out of the technical side.
...and I would have gotten away with it, too, if it wasn't for those meddling FBI agents!
At least that might be worth seeing.
Here,here! I totally agree.
In almost 25 years as a programmer/analyst/tech lead/architect I've reported to 12 managers/bosses, a plethora of project managers and observed dozens more. With very few exceptions the most effective managers are the ones who have had no formal IT training. The main reason for this I think is that although they can understand the problem and the solution at a high level they have no opinion as to the details of the underlying problem or the implementation of the solution - they leave that to the people who are qualified. Too often a PHB that has some IT training tries to force a solution they don't know how to implement to a problem they don't completely understand.
There's a phrase I used to use to describe a former friend of mine that I think applies to this situation. There's nothing worse than someone who knows enough about computers to be dangerous but not enough to be useful.
A feature that can be abused IS a bug.
I overstated the 10 seconds for effect. My point was that over the execution of a long running program the translation of the Java bytecode into native code is an insignificant amount.
.NET app that we inherited that can't handle anywhere the same load no matter how much hardware we throw at it. That's what I would call a benchmark.
The problem with benchmarks is they rarely reflect real world behavior. Especially when they are specifically chosen to support a particular hypothesis.
In real world applications that have to contend with CPU, I/O, etc. there is very little difference between Java, C, C#, BASIC, COBOL, etc.
And I wouldn't use Java for a graphics intensive application any more than I would use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail.
FYI, I work for a company that has a Java transaction engine that runs at about 50% and handles over 10 million transactions a week involving heavy database I/O, computation and communication. We also have a similar
That's true but the translation is a one time hit the first time a certain piece of code is executed. If a particular code path is not executed it is not translated. Also, the HotSpot JIT will only optimize code that will benefit from optimization further improving the performance of the translation. The reality is that for any program of significance the translation is a relatively insignificant portion of the execution time. In other words, if a native program takes an hour to execute then is it really a huge problem if it takes an hour and 10 seconds.
I think you just answered your own question. If the Java code is translated into native code in order to be executed then it IS native code which would have to run as fast as native code.
Quite true. Point well taken. I should have said, "How about you take responsibility for your actions and at least post with your actual handle."
Rather ironic coming from an Anonymous Coward don't you think? How about you take responsibility for your actions and post with your real name.
Even better. You need a PC with double Vista's system requirements.
The Yosemite Sam look is the new black.
Hey, hey, hey! I don't smell.
Mine's alive.
Rounded corners always reminded me of the rounded ends of safety scissors that we give children to use.
I never said it was well received with geeks. I said "consumers". Believe it or not but non-geeks buy high tech gadgets too and they're not swayed by things like reviews and features.
Yes the first generation iPods were targeted at Mac users. Why not? It was a market that was being ignored and allowed them to enter the market. And how do you create a buzz around a product that has a limited audience - national advertising campaign. The campaign was so successful even non-Mac users wanted one. Apple's been doing doing this kind of campaign since 1984 and they did it again. Now when was the last time Creative or Diamond ran a national campaign, oh yeah, NEVER!
Now once they established a foothold in this market segment that the so-called "dominant" players ignored and then started supporting non-Macs the iPod took over the market virtually overnight.