I did, as did many of my classmates in the CS department. The important bit is that Stanford does their admissions for the school as a whole. Not the School of Engineering, and certainly not individual departments. Everyone shows up undeclared and has to figure out where they want to be.
Predictably, many people know right away or after freshman year. But there isn't actually a requirement to declare a major until it's time to get a degree. Personally, I was taking classes like an Econ major for two years, and then switched to Computer Science. It took me another year to declare CS as my major, and even then only did so because I was applying to the Masters program (which I never finished).
It's not strictly relevant given that this isn't a class for CS majors, but the answer to your question is that there are many, many CS majors who go on to careers in software who write their first code in their second or third year.
I struggled with the same questions, both when I was in school getting my Bachelor's and later while working (I'm 26 now, and still haven't come to a conclusion). I was doing my Bachelors in CS at Stanford, and having a great time of it. I didn't see a reason to stop, so I applied for the coterminal Masters program, in which you just keep right on taking classes. I started being a TA for CS classes, and enjoyed teaching. During the summers, I did internships all over the place, and had a good time doing it.
After a couple of years, though, I started thinking about what the goal was. I didn't actually have a reason to want the Masters: it was just a way to keep taking classes. So after five years I had my Bachelors and was partway to the Masters, but I'd had enough. I took a job at Microsoft as a developer, and have been having a great time at that, too.
But lately I've started to think again about what the goal is. Do I want to be a dev forever? I have friends here where that is absolutely their goal. Do I want to run the company? If so, I can either get an MBA, or try to start working my way up through the management chain (there are a bunch of VPs at Microsoft without MBAs). Do I want to do something completely different? I've thought about joining a start-up or working for a consulting house. Maybe I could swing working in another country for a while. The good news is that there's no deadline... I don't need to have this all decided by the time I'm 30.
So look around and figure out where you want to be in five years, and then figure out where that points you for twenty years out. If you're unhappy with that, start thinking with longer horizons in mind. I'll be honest: I've never missed my CS Masters. If I go back to school, it'll be for an MBA.
If your only goal is employability, you're barking up the wrong tree anyway: lawyers are basically always employed, and make more than I do as well. So start figuring out what's important to you besides being employed... I'm guessing it's a longer list than that.
Did you actually just link to wiki for your source for worldwide console sales numbers???
Sure, but not before I checked out their sources, which are listed at the bottom of the article. All you need to do to find out that your Xbox number is absolutely incorrect is go look at Microsoft's quarterly investor report from last quarter. It explicitly mentions having an installed base of 24 million Xbox (version 1) consoles (it's on slide 14 of the deck). So even if your GameCube number is right, Xbox is still ahead of them. Add to that the fact that Nintendo's quarterly investor report explicitly calls out having sold 20.85 million consoles over the life of the console through the end of March, and we're having an argument where you don't have any facts on your side.
I'm happy to have a discussion about which console is better, and which one will win the next generation, but being told that the sales numbers each company has made public are incorrect doesn't fly for me. You can argue the emotional side, or argue about the future, but arguing about facts that are in the past isn't productive.
Except that Nintendo placed 2nd worldwide, not 3rd.
Actually, in terms of total consoles sold, that's not correct. You can do the search for yourself, but here's one link to a wikipedia article on the console wars which includes total worldwide sales numbers. The relevant set for your comment is:
PlayStation 2: 103.69 million
Gamecube: 20.85 million
Xbox: 24 million
In addition to that, the Xbox number is from December, while the PS2 and GC numbers are from March, suggesting that the Xbox number is actually higher than 24 million (though probably only slightly, because of the release of the Xbox360).
If you want to argue that Gamecube games are more fun, or that Nintendo makes more money on every console, that may be the case (I've no idea). But it's not correct to say that the Gamecube beat out the Xbox in the last generation of consoles.
Guitar Hero is one of my favorite games ever, but I'm holding out hope for multiplayer combinations of instruments. It would just rock to have a guitarist and a drummer playing together. I'm sure this is something they've thought of, but if not, I hope it's something they'll consider in the future.
While you can't keep the copyright and go out and sell the thing, Google will let you release it as open or free software.
That's true (at least in some cases) for both Google and Microsoft. I'm very sure both companies have things that they keep to themselves, and things that they release to the world. Notably, both of them have released Open Source projects under OSI-approved licenses. That's pretty cool.
If your job encouraged private projects, as Google does, do you think your job would be more fulfilling and productive?
Google doesn't encourage private projects. Google does encourage employees to spend 20% of their time on side projects. The difference seems like semantics, but is actually a big deal. Google owns the copyright and IP to every one of those side projects.
But yes, my job is much more fulfilling because it encourages side projects. I work on WiX (http://wix.sourceforge.net/) in my spare time, and it has definitely impacted my day job in a positive way. It's not a private project, though: the copyright for WiX code is owned by Microsoft, just like any other code I write during my day job.
Re:I Already Got Mine: Impressions
on
Prepping For The 360
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The list of backwards compatible games will grow over time, so if you're not already signed up for Xbox Live (even Silver, which is free), you should do so. Enjoy your 360!
You actually don't need a Media Center PC. There is software freely available from Microsoft called Windows Media Connect, which will allow you to stream media from a PC to an Xbox 360.
Walt Mossberg reviewed it in today's Wall Street Journal, as well. You can find the article here. He mostly likes it, but wants to be able to play through multple outputs (either two Airport Expresses or an Airport Express and the local speakers). Also, the lack of remote control and display was a huge downside for him.
You really need to read "Inside Windows 2000" by Solomon and Russinovich. It's all about the hard core internals of Windows 2000, and it shows you just how beautifully designed the core stuff is. The Externals? Eh, not always so good, but our kernel devs are pretty fantastic.
Eh, I don't want to overstate my involvement, as Rob is the heart and soul of the team. But yes, I'm one of the people he mentioned in his blog as part of the core team. I did a good amount of work on the core of the compiler and linker.
To answer your question the short way: no. The long way: there's no real team that works on WiX. We alternate between calling it a "virtual team" and "the WiX movement", because at any given time there are between 5 and 25 people working on code for it, and they are likely to be in as many as 15 different groups around the company.
To the best of my knowledge, none of those people are in Research, though there are certainly a number of folks there who like OSS. See, the project got started for people who build MSIs, which limits it to groups that ship code, which means that Research won't really be involved (not a slam on that, it's just not what they do).
The WiX virtual team is less about OSS than about making WiX available to anyone who would want to use it. Rob believes (and I agree) that this is a good way to get it out there, and it was a great candidate for release like this. He runs it like an open source project inside the company, and it's a natural extension to share that with everyone, especially given that it's not of strategic value.
Actually, anyone who builds MSIs for their installation should look at it. But it's not for Linux users, and wasn't built to be. Keep in mind that we built it because we wanted to use it internally, which means on Windows systems. I'm sorry you don't have a use for it, but I'm glad that lots of others will.
This is 100% developer driven. Rob was in the process of releasing it to gotdotnet when he met up with some Business Development folks who convinced him to Open Source it. But the code was written to solve a problem that developers have, and only for that reason.
Not really on the code reviews. Rob and a few others of us spent some time in the last week doing a little bit of that, but it was basically the WiX volunteers taking care of their own code. It tends to be pretty clean, though. Hope you like it!
Actually, you need the.NET framework, not VS.NET. You can get that for free. As for the 0%, it went up last night at 3am, so you can probably forgive them that. It's actually quite a mature project that has grown over time inside Microsoft.
> If you want very specialized fast floating point performance for certain scientific applications, Itanium is where it's at.
Then why did VT actually go through the trouble of pricing out a cluster and find that G5s had the best price/performance? It's fun to speculate and all, but they actually priced it out and in reality the G5 systems had better price/performance
Bother. Sorry about the duplicate post.
Anyway, it's because he didn't say *anything* about price. Just performance. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but you can't make a price/performance argument with someone who only cares about performance: it's irrelevant.
> If you want very specialized fast floating point performance for certain scientific applications, Itanium is where it's at.
Then why did VT actually go through the trouble of pricing out a cluster and find that G5s had the best price/performance? It's fun to speculate and all, but they actually priced it out and in reality the G5 systems had better price/performance
The bottleneck statement is good, but not strictly accurate. It works for decryption through something like SSL, but not for decompression through something like ZIP, because the entire file needs to be down before it can decompress.
Decrypting is roughly equivalent to encrypting, it's the initial key exchange that's expensive.
Why would Microsoft care what Google runs on? Their tech isn't the big deal (Microsoft is months away from having their own implementation), it's the *brand*. If Microsoft were to buy Google, they'd kill them off and keep the name.
As the other response mentioned, it sounds like the problem here is your admins. Windows gives you a rich built-in set of permissions tools. In particular, everything from Windows 2000 on has ACLs on just about everything you could hope for, in the default install.
I ran a big handful of Linux and Solaris systems at school, and we always had to install ACL software for filesystems separately. Has that been fixed?
You're right that there is software out there that requires admin rights to run. It should be pretty clear that this isn't Microsoft's fault, though. If corporations demand software that runs as a non-priviliged user, they're going to get it.
As for filesystems permissions on default installs, the whole point of this thread is that it can be locked down, not that the defaults are bad.
Slashdot Mirror
I did, as did many of my classmates in the CS department. The important bit is that Stanford does their admissions for the school as a whole. Not the School of Engineering, and certainly not individual departments. Everyone shows up undeclared and has to figure out where they want to be.
Predictably, many people know right away or after freshman year. But there isn't actually a requirement to declare a major until it's time to get a degree. Personally, I was taking classes like an Econ major for two years, and then switched to Computer Science. It took me another year to declare CS as my major, and even then only did so because I was applying to the Masters program (which I never finished).
It's not strictly relevant given that this isn't a class for CS majors, but the answer to your question is that there are many, many CS majors who go on to careers in software who write their first code in their second or third year.
I struggled with the same questions, both when I was in school getting my Bachelor's and later while working (I'm 26 now, and still haven't come to a conclusion). I was doing my Bachelors in CS at Stanford, and having a great time of it. I didn't see a reason to stop, so I applied for the coterminal Masters program, in which you just keep right on taking classes. I started being a TA for CS classes, and enjoyed teaching. During the summers, I did internships all over the place, and had a good time doing it.
After a couple of years, though, I started thinking about what the goal was. I didn't actually have a reason to want the Masters: it was just a way to keep taking classes. So after five years I had my Bachelors and was partway to the Masters, but I'd had enough. I took a job at Microsoft as a developer, and have been having a great time at that, too.
But lately I've started to think again about what the goal is. Do I want to be a dev forever? I have friends here where that is absolutely their goal. Do I want to run the company? If so, I can either get an MBA, or try to start working my way up through the management chain (there are a bunch of VPs at Microsoft without MBAs). Do I want to do something completely different? I've thought about joining a start-up or working for a consulting house. Maybe I could swing working in another country for a while. The good news is that there's no deadline... I don't need to have this all decided by the time I'm 30.
So look around and figure out where you want to be in five years, and then figure out where that points you for twenty years out. If you're unhappy with that, start thinking with longer horizons in mind. I'll be honest: I've never missed my CS Masters. If I go back to school, it'll be for an MBA.
If your only goal is employability, you're barking up the wrong tree anyway: lawyers are basically always employed, and make more than I do as well. So start figuring out what's important to you besides being employed... I'm guessing it's a longer list than that.
Did you actually just link to wiki for your source for worldwide console sales numbers???
Sure, but not before I checked out their sources, which are listed at the bottom of the article. All you need to do to find out that your Xbox number is absolutely incorrect is go look at Microsoft's quarterly investor report from last quarter. It explicitly mentions having an installed base of 24 million Xbox (version 1) consoles (it's on slide 14 of the deck). So even if your GameCube number is right, Xbox is still ahead of them. Add to that the fact that Nintendo's quarterly investor report explicitly calls out having sold 20.85 million consoles over the life of the console through the end of March, and we're having an argument where you don't have any facts on your side.
You can find the slide deck for Microsoft's quarterly report in the wikipedia article, or you can get it straight from Microsoft. Likewise, you can get Nintendo's straight from Nintendo.
I'm happy to have a discussion about which console is better, and which one will win the next generation, but being told that the sales numbers each company has made public are incorrect doesn't fly for me. You can argue the emotional side, or argue about the future, but arguing about facts that are in the past isn't productive.
Actually, in terms of total consoles sold, that's not correct. You can do the search for yourself, but here's one link to a wikipedia article on the console wars which includes total worldwide sales numbers. The relevant set for your comment is:
- PlayStation 2: 103.69 million
- Gamecube: 20.85 million
- Xbox: 24 million
In addition to that, the Xbox number is from December, while the PS2 and GC numbers are from March, suggesting that the Xbox number is actually higher than 24 million (though probably only slightly, because of the release of the Xbox360).If you want to argue that Gamecube games are more fun, or that Nintendo makes more money on every console, that may be the case (I've no idea). But it's not correct to say that the Gamecube beat out the Xbox in the last generation of consoles.
Guitar Hero is one of my favorite games ever, but I'm holding out hope for multiplayer combinations of instruments. It would just rock to have a guitarist and a drummer playing together. I'm sure this is something they've thought of, but if not, I hope it's something they'll consider in the future.
While you can't keep the copyright and go out and sell the thing, Google will let you release it as open or free software.
That's true (at least in some cases) for both Google and Microsoft. I'm very sure both companies have things that they keep to themselves, and things that they release to the world. Notably, both of them have released Open Source projects under OSI-approved licenses. That's pretty cool.
If your job encouraged private projects, as Google does, do you think your job would be more fulfilling and productive?
Google doesn't encourage private projects. Google does encourage employees to spend 20% of their time on side projects. The difference seems like semantics, but is actually a big deal. Google owns the copyright and IP to every one of those side projects.
But yes, my job is much more fulfilling because it encourages side projects. I work on WiX (http://wix.sourceforge.net/) in my spare time, and it has definitely impacted my day job in a positive way. It's not a private project, though: the copyright for WiX code is owned by Microsoft, just like any other code I write during my day job.
Here are some links you'll find useful:
l itygameslist.htm u nch-day-titles/ a rketplace-launch-content/
Backwards compatible title list:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/backwardcompatibi
Launch titles:
http://www.majornelson.com/2005/11/14/xbox-360-la
Arcade titles:
http://www.majornelson.com/2005/11/15/xbox-live-m
The list of backwards compatible games will grow over time, so if you're not already signed up for Xbox Live (even Silver, which is free), you should do so. Enjoy your 360!
You actually don't need a Media Center PC. There is software freely available from Microsoft called Windows Media Connect, which will allow you to stream media from a PC to an Xbox 360.
I don't know what kind of philanthropy gives out less than it takes in and never more than ~5% of its net worth
The kind that's intended to last forever, so that it can continue giving out 5% of its net worth in perpetuity.
Walt Mossberg reviewed it in today's Wall Street Journal, as well. You can find the article here. He mostly likes it, but wants to be able to play through multple outputs (either two Airport Expresses or an Airport Express and the local speakers). Also, the lack of remote control and display was a huge downside for him.
You really need to read "Inside Windows 2000" by Solomon and Russinovich. It's all about the hard core internals of Windows 2000, and it shows you just how beautifully designed the core stuff is. The Externals? Eh, not always so good, but our kernel devs are pretty fantastic.
Eh, I don't want to overstate my involvement, as Rob is the heart and soul of the team. But yes, I'm one of the people he mentioned in his blog as part of the core team. I did a good amount of work on the core of the compiler and linker.
To answer your question the short way: no. The long way: there's no real team that works on WiX. We alternate between calling it a "virtual team" and "the WiX movement", because at any given time there are between 5 and 25 people working on code for it, and they are likely to be in as many as 15 different groups around the company.
To the best of my knowledge, none of those people are in Research, though there are certainly a number of folks there who like OSS. See, the project got started for people who build MSIs, which limits it to groups that ship code, which means that Research won't really be involved (not a slam on that, it's just not what they do).
The WiX virtual team is less about OSS than about making WiX available to anyone who would want to use it. Rob believes (and I agree) that this is a good way to get it out there, and it was a great candidate for release like this. He runs it like an open source project inside the company, and it's a natural extension to share that with everyone, especially given that it's not of strategic value.
Actually, anyone who builds MSIs for their installation should look at it. But it's not for Linux users, and wasn't built to be. Keep in mind that we built it because we wanted to use it internally, which means on Windows systems. I'm sorry you don't have a use for it, but I'm glad that lots of others will.
That's the beauty of it going out under the CPL. It doesn't matter that it's Microsoft's code, it's still a legitimate Open Source license.
This is 100% developer driven. Rob was in the process of releasing it to gotdotnet when he met up with some Business Development folks who convinced him to Open Source it. But the code was written to solve a problem that developers have, and only for that reason.
Office isn't my call (and I'm not sure it's at all the same), but for WiX, the answer is number four, thanks.
Not really on the code reviews. Rob and a few others of us spent some time in the last week doing a little bit of that, but it was basically the WiX volunteers taking care of their own code. It tends to be pretty clean, though. Hope you like it!
Actually, you need the .NET framework, not VS.NET. You can get that for free. As for the 0%, it went up last night at 3am, so you can probably forgive them that. It's actually quite a mature project that has grown over time inside Microsoft.
> If you want very specialized fast floating point performance for certain scientific applications, Itanium is where it's at.
Then why did VT actually go through the trouble of pricing out a cluster and find that G5s had the best price/performance? It's fun to speculate and all, but they actually priced it out and in reality the G5 systems had better price/performance
Bother. Sorry about the duplicate post.
Anyway, it's because he didn't say *anything* about price. Just performance. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but you can't make a price/performance argument with someone who only cares about performance: it's irrelevant.
> If you want very specialized fast floating point performance for certain scientific applications, Itanium is where it's at.
Then why did VT actually go through the trouble of pricing out a cluster and find that G5s had the best price/performance? It's fun to speculate and all, but they actually priced it out and in reality the G5 systems had better price/performance
The bottleneck statement is good, but not strictly accurate. It works for decryption through something like SSL, but not for decompression through something like ZIP, because the entire file needs to be down before it can decompress.
Decrypting is roughly equivalent to encrypting, it's the initial key exchange that's expensive.
Why would Microsoft care what Google runs on? Their tech isn't the big deal (Microsoft is months away from having their own implementation), it's the *brand*. If Microsoft were to buy Google, they'd kill them off and keep the name.
As the other response mentioned, it sounds like the problem here is your admins. Windows gives you a rich built-in set of permissions tools. In particular, everything from Windows 2000 on has ACLs on just about everything you could hope for, in the default install.
I ran a big handful of Linux and Solaris systems at school, and we always had to install ACL software for filesystems separately. Has that been fixed?
You're right that there is software out there that requires admin rights to run. It should be pretty clear that this isn't Microsoft's fault, though. If corporations demand software that runs as a non-priviliged user, they're going to get it.
As for filesystems permissions on default installs, the whole point of this thread is that it can be locked down, not that the defaults are bad.