> ran the PDA gauntlet myself and have found hat much time is wasted syncing, charging > and reinstalling the software. Have there been any studies on PDA turnover? I think the PDA as become more of a status symbol
With battery life getting better all the time and easy to use software that automatates backup when your battery dies (Pocket Backup) I wouldn't really call it running the gauntlet anny more....
Is this application going to be a gui only application or will there be some large domain object model (client or server side) driving the application ?
From my experience with large scale OO systems the complexity of the domain model and its interaction with the gui views (e.g. corba/messaging/relational mapping etc etc) becomes the most complex part of a large dynamic system, to the point where the gui becomes irrelevant.
If this is the case I would also concider whether the choosen language is going to sit nicely with the persistance layer you choose, and also another point overlooked; what constructs will the language provide for implementing your object model (for example I prefer the template based C++ collection classes to the everything inherits from Object hetrogenous (read cast!) way that java handles collections). To often I have seen that the bulk of the complexity in the implementation model come about because the language, libraries and persistancy layer do not allow an easy mapping from the conceptial model. Not what you want when you are modelling a complex domain!
Yes MS are secure on the desktop market but does that mean I should be forced to use M$ Windows ?
Even if Linux was half of what any Microsoft operating system was (which it isn't) I would still use it because of the choice and freedoms it gives me.
Am I not entitled to use a GUI on my choosen platform then because another one exists with a bigger market share ?
It is not like distributions are going to put a big old icon on the desktop "Click me to build a new kernel!"
People who decide they are going at rolling their own kernel are going to attempt it whatever the tools are.
Why not make it easier for them ?
Hopefully people won't be so intimidated and we'll end up with a bigger smarter community. And if they make a mistake...hey they'll soon learn. I sure made plenty!
They did something similar with earlier version of Borland C++ (the one after the venerable 3.1 I think).
Clauses included restrictions against using it to build competing products and even worse restrictions on the number of distributions that one could make before permission was required from Borland.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone let them know how great they are :)
. jsp
https://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/contact/email
> ran the PDA gauntlet myself and have found hat much time is wasted syncing, charging
> and reinstalling the software. Have there been any studies on PDA turnover? I think the PDA as become more of a status symbol
With battery life getting better all the time and easy to use software that automatates backup when your battery dies (Pocket Backup) I wouldn't really call it running the gauntlet anny more....
Is this application going to be a gui only application or will there be some large domain object model (client or server side) driving the application ?
From my experience with large scale OO systems the complexity of the domain model and its interaction with the gui views (e.g. corba/messaging/relational mapping etc etc) becomes the most complex part of a large dynamic system, to the point where the gui becomes irrelevant.
If this is the case I would also concider whether the choosen language is going to sit nicely with the persistance layer you choose, and also another point overlooked; what constructs will the language provide for implementing your object model (for example I prefer the template based C++ collection classes to the everything inherits from Object hetrogenous (read cast!) way that java handles collections). To often I have seen that the bulk of the complexity in the implementation model come about because the language, libraries and persistancy layer do not allow an easy mapping from the conceptial model. Not what you want when you are modelling a complex domain!
Just my 2C
Yes MS are secure on the desktop market but does that mean I should be forced to use M$ Windows ?
Even if Linux was half of what any Microsoft operating system was (which it isn't) I would still use it because of the choice and freedoms it gives me.
Am I not entitled to use a GUI on my choosen platform then because another one exists with a bigger market share ?
It is not like distributions are going to put a big old icon on the desktop "Click me to build a new kernel!"
People who decide they are going at rolling their own kernel are going to attempt it whatever the tools are.
Why not make it easier for them ?
Hopefully people won't be so intimidated and we'll end up with a bigger smarter community. And if they make a mistake...hey they'll soon learn. I sure made plenty!
They did something similar with earlier version of Borland C++ (the one after the venerable 3.1 I think).
Clauses included restrictions against using it to build competing products and even worse restrictions on the number of distributions that one could make before permission was required from Borland.
Sure they changed their mind after the backlash.
I have linked them from my homepage and asked all my friends to.....
How stupid we have fallen for there trap!