Contract developers and new programmers joining an organization, especially a small organization, appreciate thorough documentation of processes and modules from an overview down to details on each specific component. Legacy engineers tend to hate documenting so it may require some effort.
OOP helps resolve issues of efficient use of code so that development efforts aren't wasted on modules that may already exist created by previous developers no longer with an organization. A clear naming schema and again, documentation on each class and how it works is very helpful.
Structured programming practices. Documented code. Standards such as variable naming conventions and efforts to maintain code uniformity.
I personally like Version Control with Subversion, we use it in our China office and everything there takes very well to it.
We have learned a lot from our China operation for the organization I am with. They make extensive use of Wiki's too. This lends itself well to the documentation task.
I believe the rest is management style and your corporate culture.
An editorial is simply someone's opinion, and in this case a non-technical person with an opinion. The editorial should not have made it on slashdot. I wasted valuable time reading it because I assumed there was some value, being as it appeared on/. when, in fact, I am left with considering the removal of/. from my RSS reader.
I will publish your book
on
The New C Standard
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I work for a publisher and would like to speak to you about publishing your book.
Microsoft is so embarrassed about their iLoo proposal, they have tried to
claim it was all a hoax.
However, ABCNews says the iLoo
was real but has been killed. Microsoft can't even keep their story straight on something as
ridiculous as building a computer system into a public toilet!
Now giants IBM and Intel battle to maintain the performance curve established by Moore's Law and a new chip making technique called "strained silicon" should make it possible.
The article is
"Straining Moore's Law"
and discusses how this new technology is the next step in allowing chip makers to keep up the pace.
This
story
was run on
Yahoo! News
today under the title "Napster Files Bankruptcy Under Bertelsmann Deal" which is
misleading at first because it suggests to the reader that Napster is now dead when they have, in fact, been dead for
many months now.
According to the article, at its peak Napster had approximately 60 million users. It is easy to identify the key to
their success. They provided a way for the common non-technical computer user to locate and obtain practically any
recorded music by practically any artist with little or no effort.
We all know it is true that stopping Napster did not put a halt to the trade of copyright music and media. However, the
average non-technical computer user does not go to News Groups or IRC to obtain Mp3's, because most of them do not know
how. Those of us that do know how find it just as easy to find what we are looking for now as we did when Napster was
still functionally operational.
The Evil Empires use the legal system and their own economic power to crush their enemies and then assimilate them into
their collective. Sound familiar? The very laws that are supposed to protect our freedoms and liberties are being
leveraged to take those freedoms away from us and replace them with costly capitalist and controlled forms of expression
by a few giant monopolies. Is it right to limit people's exposure to artistic forms of expression?
Assisting in the limitations on our exposure to culture and artistic expression are the major recording labels united in
picking on children who download music and bringing down services such as Napster. Some of the major recording labels
that were united against Napster are: AOL Time Warner / Warner Music, BMG Music, EMI Group, Sony Music, and Universal
Music.
I wonder how many AOL users were and still are downloading MP3's? Maybe AOL should be sued and brought to their knees
because they are, in fact, facilitating the propagation of copyrighted music. Both Napster and AOL are Internet
technologies that may be used for either legitimate or illegitimate purposes. I don't see the distinction, do you?
On a positive note, the ATI All In Wonder series offers a lot of value packed features include the Multi Media Center not available with other capture cards. Mostly, like being able to record LEXX with the digital VCR feature when I know I wont be home on a Friday night. Then I can watch it later and not mess with videotape!
With that said, I would like to offer a very serious warning. This warning is to those considering the purchase of any ATI capture card. For I, will never purchase another ATI product again.
My intention was to ARCHIVE all of my existing and aging VHS multimedia. This is permitted under the terms of copyright law as "Fair Use". I have some really good movies I purchased on VHS over the years and I cannot afford to replace the entire collection on DVD, even it they were all available on DVD. Besides, I have already paid for the movies. I can't help it if the tapes are going bad.
Macrovision, an anti-copy technology implemented on VCR's over ten years ago is still being used today in more effective forms. It prevents you from being able to dub a video onto another tape from VCR to VCR. Computer digital capture doesn't even notice Macrovision and will capture any VHS tape.
Our friends at ATI are in bed with those anti-copy groups. They intentionally built in measures to DETECT Macrovision and PREVENT capture from any VHS or DVD that uses this anti-copy technology. They did this on purpose. VCR's suffer the Macrovision effect mostly my accident since Macrovision tricks the automatic gain circuit in them. There is no AGC circuit in video capture boards, at least not in the way there is in a VCR. So ATI went out of their way to cripple the capabilities of an otherwise good capture card. They didn't even have to do this by law. There are plenty of other capture cards that completely ignore Macrovision.
Also, what ATI calls VCD standard is completely off the mark. They offer a VCD capture mode that captures in a variable bit rate, and only 1.05 bps, which is below and off spec to the actual VCD standard. The result is an extremely low quality capture that has to be ran through a program such as TMPGenc to be corrected and actually usable in order to burn a working VCD disc.
ONLY PURCHASE THIS PRODUCT if you do not intend to archive your old VHS movies or capture anything that might have anti-copy technology such as VHS, DVD, some new Digital Cable broadcast, or from a Sony DSS unit.
Details? Visit www.vcdhelp.com and learn what I've mentioned here and much more.
First, on the subject of television advertising: When I was a kid I watched TV shows like Magnum PI and Rockford files. They had commercials, but not nearly as many or as long duration of commercial interruption. Yes, we need to pay for broadcast television with commercials. Lets increase the advertising cost per commercial and reduce the number of commercials down to a reasonable amount or duration of commercial interruption.
Why did television networks increase commercial interruptions during regular television programming in the 1990's? Well it is not because they needed more money to pay for "quality" television. Excuse me but I cannot with any sense of honesty claim that programs like "Friends" is quality television. They basically wanted to increase profit so the network fat cats could make more money. Well that is fine too, the all mighty dollar is at the core of the American dream. So as I mentioned above, increase the cost per commercial and reduce the number down to where it was in the late 1970's or early 1980's.
Secondly, on the subject of the network logo: I must say I am rather shocked at some of the ignorant posts here with regards to this subject. I cannot believe that some/.ers actually excuse or even support network logo'ing of the programs I watch. The logos started out small and benign, as the different networks started sneaking them one. Each network following the example of the last, sneaking tiny little translucent logos that remained on the screen during the programs that I watch. Then one network decides to enlarge, colorize, or animate their persistent logo. The other networks copycat this action. Now we have large, colored, often opaque logos with vivid animation. TNN actually blocks off the entire lower portion of the screen. Jim Rockford was holding something in his hand that was significant to the plot of the program I was viewing. But I could not see it as it was covered by an obnoxious TNN logo and animated scrolling text and spacecraft to advertise that they now broadcast Star Trek reruns in the evening. Well I watch Star Trek too, but I need not be reminded at five-minute intervals during the entire duration whilst I am attempting to view the Rockford files in the morning. Enough already, can anyone understand "reasonable advertising" as opposed to "cramming it down the viewers throat"?
In conclusion: Television logos, go away! People, realize that it has gone too far and this is just another Micro$oftism metaphor for corporate America. I believe there is creative value to some programming and the fact that it is being vandalized by corporate logos is very offensive. Next, will museums be placing their logos over valued pieces of art? How about a big sicker right on the canvas of a van Gogh?
Yes it is the ultimate in secure reliable email and here is why. Bill Gates often performs personal audits and read-throughs of all of your hotmail to make sure it is all there and safe. He also checks your content to make sure you are not one of those linux zealots. We NEED Bill Gates to protect us from OURSELVES, and with HOTMAIL you not only get this type of personal protection, but you also get secure and reliable email service! And like everything with Micro$oft, it is absolutely free! Because, afterall, does the human soul really have a monetary value?
Actually, most people know that RH dot zero versions might just as well be beta. As a "good" sysadmin I would actually wait for the dot two, but even dot one is acceptable; and then apply all the patches necessary to that; and remove wu-ftpd if you use ftp, use pro-ftpd. I hate to see this bug, now I can't poke fun at M$ for uptime anymore:o(
As a Microsoft Windows NT user, running NT 4 server and MS SQL 7
server on our primary e-commerce site, I have some observations to
share with you on your article...
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/tech/FredMoody/mo ody.html
You are quite possibly one of the worst journalists I have ever
encountered while reading articles on abcnews online. You have
falsified information and ignored the facts in a way that is
blatantly obvious to almost anyone, including yourself.
You seem to really like Microsoft products, but as a journalist
you are not supposed to bias your articles to reflect your own
personal opinions. I certainly hope that you do not write any
political articles or anything with actual reader impact.
If I were to ever encounter you in a public place, I would strike
you bluntly in the face with my fist. You disgust me and I am
nauseated by this kind of shoddy journalism.
You are a rude b@stard. I agree with the first guy, as a monthly downloader. Maybe you do not notice as features are creeping up on you... hence the use of the word "creep".
vapour I believe you have landed on the wrong web site, you must have taken a left at Amazon.com instead of a right, because I think you were looking for Micro$oft.com where the idea of open source is simply too bizarre to imagine!
Don't be such hard asses on the guy. It was a suggestion and you may have taken it incorrectly. How many more cliche browbeatings are you people going to subject this guy (Harold) to? Question: Why can't this company patent their secret technology and then open source the code? Ok, now flame me...
Boy I hope you don't get your way. I think the intellectual value of your posting is certainly in question. Maybe you should consider dropping a resume at Microsoft. I am opposed to a dullard year based version numbering system. Lets continue with the traditional methodology.
It is practically impossible to make a web browser truly open source today. There are too many (arguably) necessary components to the browser that are proprietary, like the Java.
A agree with the Anonymous Coward that posted "Bob Lisbonne needs to go". That is so true. Netscape is down, but not necessarily out if they would get rid of that guy.
It is ironic that on mozilla.org there is a link to "The Cathedral & Bazaar" when the Mozilla project does not even fit the model. It is also ironic that Jamie Zawinski resigns on the date of the projects anniversary.
I wish this was another April fools day article.
Zawinski defiantly has valid reasons for his resignation, however I wish he had not thrown in the towel. It is only through perseverance that our dreams are achieved.
Mozilla would or will pick up momentum when the open source community that wishes to contribute to it has some source code that is both comprehensive and can be compiled. To gain momentum the project can not afford to lose valuable people and the intellectual fuel it needs to accelerate to a completed product.
There are some very insightful views by Zawinski on his web site www.jwz.org moreover the page censor.html is defiantly worth taking the time to read. Spend some time on this guys web site!
AOL is an evil empire, along with Micro$oft. Are they in bed together or competing against each other? I would say both. Their shared vision is the all mighty dollar and they play by the rules Zawinski describes in the page aol.html and censor.html
I foresee an Internet dominated by AOL and modeled on a Micro$oft architecture with AOL rules and censorship running all Micro$oft products as the future... This is not my vision, I hate this vision, maybe it is a nightmare I am having.
Will AOL use Netscape in version 5? I don't understand the relationship with MSIE bonded AOL version 4 and what the company plans on doing with Netscape.
Clue less and "trendy" users that contribute to a pool of useless suggestions which will eventually result in the creation of another bloated and dummy operating system (see Micro$oft Windows 95 for an example
Obviously Bias. I would like to comment on how the author stated: "it's ironic that both NT and UNIX have roots in the mid-1970s" This is only true in the most vague and remote sense. I think the NT community feels like the children in the enterprise server operating system market. UNIX has been around for a very long time and NT has not. So the NT community feels the need to point out so called "roots" dating back to the 70's. The only "roots" I can see dating back to the 70's for any Micro$oft operating system is to Palo Alto.
Slashdot Mirror
Contract developers and new programmers joining an organization, especially a small organization, appreciate thorough documentation of processes and modules from an overview down to details on each specific component. Legacy engineers tend to hate documenting so it may require some effort.
OOP helps resolve issues of efficient use of code so that development efforts aren't wasted on modules that may already exist created by previous developers no longer with an organization. A clear naming schema and again, documentation on each class and how it works is very helpful.
Structured programming practices. Documented code. Standards such as variable naming conventions and efforts to maintain code uniformity.
I personally like Version Control with Subversion, we use it in our China office and everything there takes very well to it.
We have learned a lot from our China operation for the organization I am with. They make extensive use of Wiki's too. This lends itself well to the documentation task.
I believe the rest is management style and your corporate culture.
An editorial is simply someone's opinion, and in this case a non-technical person with an opinion. The editorial should not have made it on slashdot. I wasted valuable time reading it because I assumed there was some value, being as it appeared on
I work for a publisher and would like to speak to you about publishing your book.
If interested I will provide you my contact info.
openvpn to a u.s. or swiss server and traffic tcp over vpn.
yet another disposable product
Microsoft is so embarrassed about their iLoo proposal, they have tried to claim it was all a hoax. However, ABCNews says the iLoo was real but has been killed. Microsoft can't even keep their story straight on something as ridiculous as building a computer system into a public toilet!
The article is "Straining Moore's Law" and discusses how this new technology is the next step in allowing chip makers to keep up the pace.
"No matter who utilizes the technology first, it will be the next step in pushing performance powering the world's personal computers. In recent times the industry has not been able to keep pace with Moore's Law. With innovations such as strained silicon, maybe the industry can pick up the pace and hold to Gordon Moore's expectation that Moore's Law will hold for at least another two decades. "
Battle Strategy of the Evil Empire
This story was run on Yahoo! News today under the title "Napster Files Bankruptcy Under Bertelsmann Deal" which is misleading at first because it suggests to the reader that Napster is now dead when they have, in fact, been dead for many months now.
According to the article, at its peak Napster had approximately 60 million users. It is easy to identify the key to their success. They provided a way for the common non-technical computer user to locate and obtain practically any recorded music by practically any artist with little or no effort.
We all know it is true that stopping Napster did not put a halt to the trade of copyright music and media. However, the average non-technical computer user does not go to News Groups or IRC to obtain Mp3's, because most of them do not know how. Those of us that do know how find it just as easy to find what we are looking for now as we did when Napster was still functionally operational.
The Evil Empires use the legal system and their own economic power to crush their enemies and then assimilate them into their collective. Sound familiar? The very laws that are supposed to protect our freedoms and liberties are being leveraged to take those freedoms away from us and replace them with costly capitalist and controlled forms of expression by a few giant monopolies. Is it right to limit people's exposure to artistic forms of expression?
Assisting in the limitations on our exposure to culture and artistic expression are the major recording labels united in picking on children who download music and bringing down services such as Napster. Some of the major recording labels that were united against Napster are: AOL Time Warner / Warner Music, BMG Music, EMI Group, Sony Music, and Universal Music.
I wonder how many AOL users were and still are downloading MP3's? Maybe AOL should be sued and brought to their knees because they are, in fact, facilitating the propagation of copyrighted music. Both Napster and AOL are Internet technologies that may be used for either legitimate or illegitimate purposes. I don't see the distinction, do you?
On a positive note, the ATI All In Wonder series offers a lot of value packed features include the Multi Media Center not available with other capture cards. Mostly, like being able to record LEXX with the digital VCR feature when I know I wont be home on a Friday night. Then I can watch it later and not mess with videotape!
With that said, I would like to offer a very serious warning. This warning is to those considering the purchase of any ATI capture card. For I, will never purchase another ATI product again.
My intention was to ARCHIVE all of my existing and aging VHS multimedia. This is permitted under the terms of copyright law as "Fair Use". I have some really good movies I purchased on VHS over the years and I cannot afford to replace the entire collection on DVD, even it they were all available on DVD. Besides, I have already paid for the movies. I can't help it if the tapes are going bad.
Macrovision, an anti-copy technology implemented on VCR's over ten years ago is still being used today in more effective forms. It prevents you from being able to dub a video onto another tape from VCR to VCR. Computer digital capture doesn't even notice Macrovision and will capture any VHS tape.
Our friends at ATI are in bed with those anti-copy groups. They intentionally built in measures to DETECT Macrovision and PREVENT capture from any VHS or DVD that uses this anti-copy technology. They did this on purpose. VCR's suffer the Macrovision effect mostly my accident since Macrovision tricks the automatic gain circuit in them. There is no AGC circuit in video capture boards, at least not in the way there is in a VCR. So ATI went out of their way to cripple the capabilities of an otherwise good capture card. They didn't even have to do this by law. There are plenty of other capture cards that completely ignore Macrovision.
Also, what ATI calls VCD standard is completely off the mark. They offer a VCD capture mode that captures in a variable bit rate, and only 1.05 bps, which is below and off spec to the actual VCD standard. The result is an extremely low quality capture that has to be ran through a program such as TMPGenc to be corrected and actually usable in order to burn a working VCD disc.
ONLY PURCHASE THIS PRODUCT if you do not intend to archive your old VHS movies or capture anything that might have anti-copy technology such as VHS, DVD, some new Digital Cable broadcast, or from a Sony DSS unit.
Details? Visit www.vcdhelp.com and learn what I've mentioned here and much more.
-Roach
You are a j@ck@ss. Maybe America should block you out.
First, on the subject of television advertising: When I was a kid I watched TV shows like Magnum PI and Rockford files. They had commercials, but not nearly as many or as long duration of commercial interruption. Yes, we need to pay for broadcast television with commercials. Lets increase the advertising cost per commercial and reduce the number of commercials down to a reasonable amount or duration of commercial interruption.
/.ers actually excuse or even support network logo'ing of the programs I watch. The logos started out small and benign, as the different networks started sneaking them one. Each network following the example of the last, sneaking tiny little translucent logos that remained on the screen during the programs that I watch. Then one network decides to enlarge, colorize, or animate their persistent logo. The other networks copycat this action. Now we have large, colored, often opaque logos with vivid animation. TNN actually blocks off the entire lower portion of the screen. Jim Rockford was holding something in his hand that was significant to the plot of the program I was viewing. But I could not see it as it was covered by an obnoxious TNN logo and animated scrolling text and spacecraft to advertise that they now broadcast Star Trek reruns in the evening. Well I watch Star Trek too, but I need not be reminded at five-minute intervals during the entire duration whilst I am attempting to view the Rockford files in the morning. Enough already, can anyone understand "reasonable advertising" as opposed to "cramming it down the viewers throat"?
Why did television networks increase commercial interruptions during regular television programming in the 1990's? Well it is not because they needed more money to pay for "quality" television. Excuse me but I cannot with any sense of honesty claim that programs like "Friends" is quality television. They basically wanted to increase profit so the network fat cats could make more money. Well that is fine too, the all mighty dollar is at the core of the American dream. So as I mentioned above, increase the cost per commercial and reduce the number down to where it was in the late 1970's or early 1980's.
Secondly, on the subject of the network logo: I must say I am rather shocked at some of the ignorant posts here with regards to this subject. I cannot believe that some
In conclusion: Television logos, go away! People, realize that it has gone too far and this is just another Micro$oftism metaphor for corporate America. I believe there is creative value to some programming and the fact that it is being vandalized by corporate logos is very offensive. Next, will museums be placing their logos over valued pieces of art? How about a big sicker right on the canvas of a van Gogh?
Yes it is the ultimate in secure reliable email and here is why. Bill Gates often performs personal audits and read-throughs of all of your hotmail to make sure it is all there and safe. He also checks your content to make sure you are not one of those linux zealots. We NEED Bill Gates to protect us from OURSELVES, and with HOTMAIL you not only get this type of personal protection, but you also get secure and reliable email service! And like everything with Micro$oft, it is absolutely free! Because, afterall, does the human soul really have a monetary value?
-roach
I am curious, does anyone actually know if it would download an update for itself, and fix itself? (the update daemon that is)
Actually, most people know that RH dot zero versions might just as well be beta. As a "good" sysadmin I would actually wait for the dot two, but even dot one is acceptable; and then apply all the patches necessary to that; and remove wu-ftpd if you use ftp, use pro-ftpd. I hate to see this bug, now I can't poke fun at M$ for uptime anymore :o(
Fred Moody melmoth73@hotmail.com,
o ody.html
As a Microsoft Windows NT user, running NT 4 server and MS SQL 7
server on our primary e-commerce site, I have some observations to
share with you on your article...
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/tech/FredMoody/m
You are quite possibly one of the worst journalists I have ever
encountered while reading articles on abcnews online. You have
falsified information and ignored the facts in a way that is
blatantly obvious to almost anyone, including yourself.
You seem to really like Microsoft products, but as a journalist
you are not supposed to bias your articles to reflect your own
personal opinions. I certainly hope that you do not write any
political articles or anything with actual reader impact.
If I were to ever encounter you in a public place, I would strike
you bluntly in the face with my fist. You disgust me and I am
nauseated by this kind of shoddy journalism.
-Roach
You are a rude b@stard. I agree with the first guy, as a monthly downloader. Maybe you do not notice as features are creeping up on you... hence the use of the word "creep".
vapour I believe you have landed on the wrong web site, you must have taken a left at Amazon.com instead of a right, because I think you were looking for Micro$oft.com where the idea of open source is simply too bizarre to imagine!
-dbw
Don't be such hard asses on the guy. It was a suggestion and you may have taken it incorrectly. How many more cliche browbeatings are you people going to subject this guy (Harold) to? Question: Why can't this company patent their secret technology and then open source the code? Ok, now flame me...
-dbw
Boy I hope you don't get your way. I think the intellectual value of your posting is certainly in question. Maybe you should consider dropping a resume at Microsoft. I am opposed to a dullard year based version numbering system. Lets continue with the traditional methodology.
-Roach
It is practically impossible to make a web browser truly open source today. There are too many (arguably) necessary components to the browser that are proprietary, like the Java.
A agree with the Anonymous Coward that posted "Bob Lisbonne needs to go". That is so true. Netscape is down, but not necessarily out if they would get rid of that guy.
It is ironic that on mozilla.org there is a link to "The Cathedral & Bazaar" when the Mozilla project does not even fit the model. It is also ironic that Jamie Zawinski resigns on the date of the projects anniversary.
I wish this was another April fools day article.
Zawinski defiantly has valid reasons for his resignation, however I wish he had not thrown in the towel. It is only through perseverance that our dreams are achieved.
Mozilla would or will pick up momentum when the open source community that wishes to contribute to it has some source code that is both comprehensive and can be compiled. To gain momentum the project can not afford to lose valuable people and the intellectual fuel it needs to accelerate to a completed product.
There are some very insightful views by Zawinski on his web site www.jwz.org moreover the page censor.html is defiantly worth taking the time to read. Spend some time on this guys web site!
AOL is an evil empire, along with Micro$oft. Are they in bed together or competing against each other? I would say both. Their shared vision is the all mighty dollar and they play by the rules Zawinski describes in the page aol.html and censor.html
I foresee an Internet dominated by AOL and modeled on a Micro$oft architecture with AOL rules and censorship running all Micro$oft products as the future... This is not my vision, I hate this vision, maybe it is a nightmare I am having.
Will AOL use Netscape in version 5? I don't understand the relationship with MSIE bonded AOL version 4 and what the company plans on doing with Netscape.
Clue less and "trendy" users that contribute to a pool of useless suggestions which will eventually result in the creation of another bloated and dummy operating system (see Micro$oft Windows 95 for an example
Boca Research had the best memory manager of the time. I used it with my isa memory card on 286 epson desktop.
Maybe it was buggy, but atleast it was not Micro$oft and it offered an alternative.
Obviously Bias.
I would like to comment on how the author stated:
"it's ironic that both NT and UNIX have roots in the mid-1970s"
This is only true in the most vague and remote sense.
I think the NT community feels like the children in the enterprise server operating system market.
UNIX has been around for a very long time and NT has not. So the NT community feels the need to
point out so called "roots" dating back to the 70's. The only "roots" I can see dating back to
the 70's for any Micro$oft operating system is to Palo Alto.