is there anything in all that RoR buzz for those who actually have CS degrees
Well, I realize that the main focus of CS degrees these days is either Java or C#, so perhaps you haven't heard of languages like Smalltalk or Lisp.
Yes, I tend to agree with what you're saying about PHP, but the same doesn't apply to Ruby. Ruby is a language that CS grads can love, it's fully OO like Smalltalk and has: * mixins * closures * anonymous code blocks (which makes it very easy to define your own domain specific languages - in many ways RoR is a domain specific language built on Ruby + code generation) * it's very easy to extend with C code. * some functional elements * continuations * threads
You're right about PHP, but Ruby borrows heavily from Smalltalk and Lisp/Scheme (and a bit from Perl as well, I must admit, but in general they are the good/pragmatic parts).
As far as whether or not RoR is 'better' than Java or not, I'd say it's very different from Java. Ruby is dynamically typed and that can help boost productivity and makes code reuse very easy. I suspect that this is largely what makes people more productive in Ruby than they are in Java. Will RoR replace Java/Struts/J2EE/etc? Probably not in large corporate shops, but in small to medium sized shops RoR is very compelling.
It is neat and all; I like the structure, and it looks fine for form-per-table sorts of toy apps, but I really don't see the advantage for anything more complicated.
Do yourself a favor: set aside a couple of hours and give Rails a try. Go through one of the tutorials. You'll end up saving yourself a lot of time. You probably won't even be inclined to try one of the other solutions you mention as I suspect you'll be plenty happy with Rails (make that ecstatically happy).
OK, I really don't think that Tiger Woods (or any of the other guys mentioned in the article) fit the definition of 'nerd' the way we use it around here on/.
It's interesting how Gates is looking more and more like Lord Palpatine in recent years. The chin especially looks similar. I expect that Gates will be wearing a hood soon.
I tend to agree with your pessimism, but perhaps for somewhat different reasons.
The shift from PPC to Intel signals a shift in culture at Apple. It means that Apple has gone from being an innovative 'cool', 'hip' company (of course we know that a lot of that is just marketing hype) to being much more staid and conservative.
If Steve Jobbs felt he really needed to make a move to a different CPU he could have made a very bold move (something he _has_ done in the past) and chosen to move towards the Cell processor. Why would that make so much sense? Well, for one each Cell processor contains several PowerPC processors, so chances are there would have been a fairly easy transistion from PPC to Cell - almost seamless. And two, the Cell architecture promises a quantum leap in performance over what is available now.
But instead, Steve looked out over the CPU landscape and chose Intel. Intel: boring, staid, not terrifically innovative anymore, married to an old CPU architecture. Their only real gamble in recent years was the Itanium and it failed miserably.
So this time the switch from PPC to X86 is nothing like the switch from 68K to PPC for Apple. Going to the PPC really did give Apple a quantum leap in performance. This switch is being done more for bottom-line business reasons. Jobbs feels he can get better pricing out of Intel. He also feels that the relationship with IBM was somewhat rocky. I think one of the big problems was that he couldn't get a G5 in a laptop. However, he may have lost his patience at just the wrong time. IBM was apparently about to be able to fulfill that wish.
This was a huge opportunity lost for Apple. Had they gone with the Cell processor it's possible that they would have been able to create machines that were so much faster than Intel/AMD PCs that it would have drawn a lot of attention and market share. But instead Apple took the safe route. Too bad. These are strange days when Microsoft is going towards PPC (XBox 360) and Apple is moving towards Intel. Perhaps the bold move in the computing world will come from an IBM/Sony partnership creating Cell-based boxes that run Linux.
But look on the bright side: in a few years you'll be able to pick up dual 2.5GHz G5 machines at garage sales for about $25.
Two, Cocoa and friends is a wonderful language / API set. The programs I have made under OS X have been actually fun to create and build. I, for one, will still program for OS X, regardless of what everyone else does, because I use OS X.
You mean Objective C is a wonderful language and Cocoa is a wonderful API set. However, you can program with both on Linux (or even Windows too , I suppose if you were so inclined). Check out GNUStep.
Yes you really need virus protection on Linux. The situation is dire. There are thousands of viruses being brewed up around the world to infect Linux boxen. Be afraid, be very afraid!!
But now McAfee has come to your rescue. Only $49.95 for complete peace of mind.
Apple switching to Intel will actually help Linux: 1) Now it should be possible to run OSX binaries under Linux using the GNUStep libs. Might require some Wine-like mapping layer, but it would be much easier to create than Wine. 2) The PPC gave Macs a certain 'cachet' of differentness for some geeks. That's gone now. Macs were the only readily available computer that was not based on an Intel (or Intel-derived in the case of AMD) architecture. So when it comes to choosing to spend more money on an Apple product or less on a non-Apple product, why should you bother to spend the extra bucks?
Personally, as someone who has a PowerBook, I actually prefer to use Linux/KDE for development work, so I often end up using an older Linux box when I'm doing development. But I do prefer the PowerBook for how easy it is to say, plug in my digital camera and download photos, play music, Quicktime movies, etc, so I use the PB for those sorts of things. However, it's always getting easier to do those sorts of things with Linux as well. Bottom line: My next notebook or desktop purchase will probably not be an Apple. I'll most likely end up going back to an AMD-based, no-name brand and run Linux on it.
Now, who is going to make a Cell based computer? I was hoping it would be Apple, but alas, that won't be happening now. If Apple wanted to make a bold move they would have gone with the Cell. As it is they've made a very safe, boring choice by going with Intel.
Steve, Steve, Steve...I certainly hope this isn't true. I would think that if Apple _were_ thinking about switching that they would at least switch to the more advanced AMD processors, but even that would be problematic.
Maintaining two different binaries for the two architectures (for a while, at least till they allegedly dump the PowerPC) will be problematic. And eventually, those of us who have just bought PowerPc-based machines will be frozen out entirely. A few years from now when my Powerbook is no longer supported I'm not going to think very favorably about buying another Apple. Hey, I'll be able to run Darwin on my own homebuilt AMD-based boxes, why will I need to buy Apple at that point? Quartz you say? Well, KDE is working pretty well for me now - in two or three years it'll work even better. Heck, I can even run Cocoa apps under linux if they're recompiled with GNUStep.
If this rumor is true, it's also rather odd timing, isn't it? Now that Microsoft has decided to use the PowerPC in the XBox360 and multiple PowerPCs are included in the Cell processor that is being used in the PS3, one can argue that this is exactly the wrong time to switch to Intel. Instead Apple should be looking at the Cell processor which is a much more advanced architecture than the rather tired Intel offerings. The Cell could offer much greater performance and efficiency than Intel's processors can offer.
Going with Intel is akin to going to the dark side. Ok, that's a bit melodramatic, but at the very least it's a step in the wrong direction.
What ever happened to 'Think Different'? Moving to Intel would be to join the bandwagon.
Could a commercial broadcaster ever take a step like this?
Not likely, but what about PBS doing something similar to what the Beeb is doing? There are other non-commecial broadcasting entities around the world which could do similar things.
It's the "as of now" part that is worrisome. Europe could very well have software patents in the next year or two. The WTO and US are basically forcing most of the rest of the world to adopt US-style IP laws.
Maybe instead of Europe, you could distribute from Cuba. Not likely to be software patents there as long as Fidel is alive:)
But seriously, is there a list of countries somewhere that are resisting software patents? (India just signed up a few weeks back)
Seriously, though, I really think that Ruby the language is part of what makes RoR so great. I'm not sure you can do a lot of the same stuff in Python as you can with Ruby. Being able to define natural looking domain-specific languages using Ruby's code blocks seems like something that would be very difficult in Python. But as they say, imiation is the sincerest form of flattery...
Scammer: "Could you step over here and read this number for me, I need to get new glasses or something." Unsuspecting stooge: "sure, your total is.... Yeah this is tiny print..." Scammer: "maybe you can read it from a little closer" Unsuspecting stooge: "...$598. And it looks like your credit card was just approved too." Scammer: "Oh, thanks you very much." Unsuspecting stooge: "You're welcome"
What if back in the 1920's laws were passed to ensure that public electrical projects couldn't be setup to compete with private industry?
We wouldn't have had the TVA, BPA and Rural electrification. Many rural areas would probably still be without electricity.
Interestingly enough, the Bush admin wants to get rid of the BPA (Bonneville Power Admin) that runs the dams in the Northwest. Doing so will amount to a 30% rate increase for electric customers in the Northwest. So much for the free market...
will enable standards flexibility and allow for a wider variety of standards
Bummed that there is only one LSB standard? Wish you could make your own standard?
Don't worry, more LSB standards are on the way!
Don't like the LSB? You can choose from: * The Mandrake LSB standard * The RedHat LSB standard * The Gentoo LSB standard * The Debian LSB standard...and the list goes on...
The nanoceramic material is extracted from a natural stone and depending on the version, layered between 2 protective silicon foils or on 1 or 2 sides of a conductive sheet. An adhesive and protective film are added to the foil (depending on the version) to attach BatMax to the battery.
The foil and the material are designed to:
Absorb the electromagnetic waves generated from the battery.
Generate a flow of negative ions.
Interact with the battery's internal electrolyte and ions.
What a bunch of BS! Is this/. or the National Enquirer?
As someone who has contracted at Intel, believe me I'm not a fan of the company.
However, many companies now practice the rating and ranking system you describe. And it's not the bottom 25%, it's the bottom 10% from what I've heard.
As for H-1B workers: When I was last contracting at Intel (June 2004) the policy was that all permanent hiring was to be done outside of the US. In the US they could only hire contractors unless there was some very special skills needed. I suspect that this policy is still in place. This is of course worse than your claim that they only hire H1B workers - at least an H1B worker would be paying taxes in the US and contributing to the economy here. Many of Intel's former permanent employees in the US have now become contractors (via layoffs) which means that they can only work for the company for 12 months out of every 18 months (but look on the bright side, you get a six month vacation after contracting there for a year!) and no health benefits.-
Slashdot Mirror
but don't want to learn Ruby
Who wouldn't want to learn Ruby?
is there anything in all that RoR buzz for those who actually have CS degrees
Well, I realize that the main focus of CS degrees these days is either Java or C#, so perhaps you haven't heard of languages like Smalltalk or Lisp.
Yes, I tend to agree with what you're saying about PHP, but the same doesn't apply to Ruby. Ruby is a language that CS grads can love, it's fully OO like Smalltalk and has:
* mixins
* closures
* anonymous code blocks (which makes it very easy to define your own domain specific languages - in many ways RoR is a domain specific language built on Ruby + code generation)
* it's very easy to extend with C code.
* some functional elements
* continuations
* threads
You're right about PHP, but
Ruby borrows heavily from Smalltalk and Lisp/Scheme (and a bit from Perl as well, I must admit, but in general they are the good/pragmatic parts).
As far as whether or not RoR is 'better' than Java or not, I'd say it's very different from Java. Ruby is dynamically typed and that can help boost productivity and makes code reuse very easy. I suspect that this is largely what makes people more productive in Ruby than they are in Java. Will RoR replace Java/Struts/J2EE/etc? Probably not in large corporate shops, but in small to medium sized shops RoR is very compelling.
It is neat and all; I like the structure, and it looks fine for form-per-table sorts of toy apps, but I really don't see the advantage for anything more complicated.
Yeah, stick with your PHP, dude.
Do yourself a favor: set aside a couple of hours and give Rails a try. Go through one of the tutorials. You'll end up saving yourself a lot of time. You probably won't even be inclined to try one of the other solutions you mention as I suspect you'll be plenty happy with Rails (make that ecstatically happy).
OK, I really don't think that Tiger Woods (or any of the other guys mentioned in the article) fit the definition of 'nerd' the way we use it around here on /.
Ten years of hard work. Now the tired PHP has earned a well deserved rest. Ruby on Rails is much more energetic at this point.
pale his skin,
It seems to already be the right shade of pale; no photoshop (or Gimp) work needed there.
It's interesting how Gates is looking more and more like Lord Palpatine in recent years. The chin especially looks similar. I expect that Gates will be wearing a hood soon.
I tend to agree with your pessimism, but perhaps for somewhat different reasons.
The shift from PPC to Intel signals a shift in culture at Apple. It means that Apple has gone from being an innovative 'cool', 'hip' company (of course we know that a lot of that is just marketing hype) to being much more staid and conservative.
If Steve Jobbs felt he really needed to make a move to a different CPU he could have made a very bold move (something he _has_ done in the past) and chosen to move towards the Cell processor. Why would that make so much sense? Well, for one each Cell processor contains several PowerPC processors, so chances are there would have been a fairly easy transistion from PPC to Cell - almost seamless. And two, the Cell architecture promises a quantum leap in performance over what is available now.
But instead, Steve looked out over the CPU landscape and chose Intel. Intel: boring, staid, not terrifically innovative anymore, married to an old CPU architecture. Their only real gamble in recent years was the Itanium and it failed miserably.
So this time the switch from PPC to X86 is nothing like the switch from 68K to PPC for Apple. Going to the PPC really did give Apple a quantum leap in performance. This switch is being done more for bottom-line business reasons. Jobbs feels he can get better pricing out of Intel. He also feels that the relationship with IBM was somewhat rocky. I think one of the big problems was that he couldn't get a G5 in a laptop. However, he may have lost his patience at just the wrong time. IBM was apparently about to be able to fulfill that wish.
This was a huge opportunity lost for Apple. Had they gone with the Cell processor it's possible that they would have been able to create machines that were so much faster than Intel/AMD PCs that it would have drawn a lot of attention and market share. But instead Apple took the safe route. Too bad. These are strange days when Microsoft is going towards PPC (XBox 360) and Apple is moving towards Intel. Perhaps the bold move in the computing world will come from an IBM/Sony partnership creating Cell-based boxes that run Linux.
But look on the bright side: in a few years you'll be able to pick up dual 2.5GHz G5 machines at garage sales for about $25.
Two, Cocoa and friends is a wonderful language / API set. The programs I have made under OS X have been actually fun to create and build. I, for one, will still program for OS X, regardless of what everyone else does, because I use OS X.
You mean Objective C is a wonderful language and Cocoa is a wonderful API set. However, you can program with both on Linux (or even Windows too , I suppose if you were so inclined). Check out GNUStep.
Yes you really need virus protection on Linux. The situation is dire. There are thousands of viruses being brewed up around the world to infect Linux boxen. Be afraid, be very afraid!!
But now McAfee has come to your rescue. Only $49.95 for complete peace of mind.
I feel so much better already.
Apple switching to Intel will actually help Linux:
1) Now it should be possible to run OSX binaries under Linux using the GNUStep libs. Might require some Wine-like mapping layer, but it would be much easier to create than Wine.
2) The PPC gave Macs a certain 'cachet' of differentness for some geeks. That's gone now. Macs were the only readily available computer that was not based on an Intel (or Intel-derived in the case of AMD) architecture. So when it comes to choosing to spend more money on an Apple product or less on a non-Apple product, why should you bother to spend the extra bucks?
Personally, as someone who has a PowerBook, I actually prefer to use Linux/KDE for development work, so I often end up using an older Linux box when I'm doing development. But I do prefer the PowerBook for how easy it is to say, plug in my digital camera and download photos, play music, Quicktime movies, etc, so I use the PB for those sorts of things. However, it's always getting easier to do those sorts of things with Linux as well. Bottom line: My next notebook or desktop purchase will probably not be an Apple. I'll most likely end up going back to an AMD-based, no-name brand and run Linux on it.
Now, who is going to make a Cell based computer? I was hoping it would be Apple, but alas, that won't be happening now. If Apple wanted to make a bold move they would have gone with the Cell. As it is they've made a very safe, boring choice by going with Intel.
Steve, Steve, Steve...I certainly hope this isn't true. I would think that if Apple _were_ thinking about switching that they would at least switch to the more advanced AMD processors, but even that would be problematic.
Maintaining two different binaries for the two architectures (for a while, at least till they allegedly dump the PowerPC) will be problematic. And eventually, those of us who have just bought PowerPc-based machines will be frozen out entirely. A few years from now when my Powerbook is no longer supported I'm not going to think very favorably about buying another Apple. Hey, I'll be able to run Darwin on my own homebuilt AMD-based boxes, why will I need to buy Apple at that point? Quartz you say? Well, KDE is working pretty well for me now - in two or three years it'll work even better. Heck, I can even run Cocoa apps under linux if they're recompiled with GNUStep.
If this rumor is true, it's also rather odd timing, isn't it? Now that Microsoft has decided to use the PowerPC in the XBox360 and multiple PowerPCs are included in the Cell processor that is being used in the PS3, one can argue that this is exactly the wrong time to switch to Intel. Instead Apple should be looking at the Cell processor which is a much more advanced architecture than the rather tired Intel offerings. The Cell could offer much greater performance and efficiency than Intel's processors can offer.
Going with Intel is akin to going to the dark side. Ok, that's a bit melodramatic, but at the very least it's a step in the wrong direction.
What ever happened to 'Think Different'? Moving to Intel would be to join the bandwagon.
If you're interested in exploring Ruby in a similar way check out RubyQuiz.
I'm working with some dissidents who are looking for ways to use the Internet from within repressive regimes
Sounds like you're in the US, correct?
Could a commercial broadcaster ever take a step like this?
Not likely, but what about PBS doing something similar to what the Beeb is doing? There are other non-commecial broadcasting entities around the world which could do similar things.
Europe (as of now) has no software patents.
:)
It's the "as of now" part that is worrisome. Europe could very well have software patents in the next year or two. The WTO and US are basically forcing most of the rest of the world to adopt US-style IP laws.
Maybe instead of Europe, you could distribute from Cuba. Not likely to be software patents there as long as Fidel is alive
But seriously, is there a list of countries somewhere that are resisting software patents? (India just signed up a few weeks back)
Sorry...
That should be 'immolation is the sincerest form of flattery'.
Wouldn't that be PoR?
Seriously, though, I really think that Ruby the language is part of what makes RoR so great. I'm not sure you can do a lot of the same stuff in Python as you can with Ruby. Being able to define natural looking domain-specific languages using Ruby's code blocks seems like something that would be very difficult in Python. But as they say, imiation is the sincerest form of flattery...
Scammer: "Could you step over here and read this number for me, I need to get new glasses or something." .... Yeah this is tiny print..."
Unsuspecting stooge: "sure, your total is
Scammer: "maybe you can read it from a little closer"
Unsuspecting stooge: "...$598. And it looks like your credit card was just approved too."
Scammer: "Oh, thanks you very much."
Unsuspecting stooge: "You're welcome"
What if back in the 1920's laws were passed to ensure that public electrical projects couldn't be setup to compete with private industry?
We wouldn't have had the TVA, BPA and Rural electrification. Many rural areas would probably still be without electricity.
Interestingly enough, the Bush admin wants to get rid of the BPA (Bonneville Power Admin) that runs the dams in the Northwest. Doing so will amount to a 30% rate increase for electric customers in the Northwest. So much for the free market...
will enable standards flexibility and allow for a wider variety of standards
...and the list goes on...
Bummed that there is only one LSB standard?
Wish you could make your own standard?
Don't worry, more LSB standards are on the way!
Don't like the LSB?
You can choose from:
* The Mandrake LSB standard
* The RedHat LSB standard
* The Gentoo LSB standard
* The Debian LSB standard
From the website.
/. or the National Enquirer?
How it works:
The nanoceramic material is extracted from a natural stone and depending on the version, layered between 2 protective silicon foils or on 1 or 2 sides of a conductive sheet.
An adhesive and protective film are added to the foil (depending on the version) to attach BatMax to the battery.
The foil and the material are designed to:
Absorb the electromagnetic waves generated from the battery.
Generate a flow of negative ions.
Interact with the battery's internal electrolyte and ions.
What a bunch of BS!
Is this
Yet another MS [lover|employee] trying to defend the undefendable...
As someone who has contracted at Intel, believe me I'm not a fan of the company.
However, many companies now practice the rating and ranking system you describe. And it's not the bottom 25%, it's the bottom 10% from what I've heard.
As for H-1B workers: When I was last contracting at Intel (June 2004) the policy was that all permanent hiring was to be done outside of the US. In the US they could only hire contractors unless there was some very special skills needed. I suspect that this policy is still in place. This is of course worse than your claim that they only hire H1B workers - at least an H1B worker would be paying taxes in the US and contributing to the economy here. Many of Intel's former permanent employees in the US have now become contractors (via layoffs) which means that they can only work for the company for 12 months out of every 18 months (but look on the bright side, you get a six month vacation after contracting there for a year!) and no health benefits.-