A Motorola V330? That certainly wouldn't fit my description of minimalist in any way.
When I had to buy a new phone a year an a half ago, I had to hunt to find a phone that didn't include a camera. I ended up with a Samsung E105.
At the time friends hassled me about the decision. "camera phones are cheap, and I can take these [shitty] pictures". They didn't seem to understand that A: I don't want a camera on my phone B: more complexity means more things to break C: unnecessary features probably drain the battery, and D: I go places where cameras are not allowed.
I don't expect my refrigerator to make coffee, why would I want my phone to take pictures?
This ain't nucular physics they's teaching in high school.
Now George, you know you aren't supposed to be posting on Slashdot. You have countries to invade. I hear Iran is still working on their nuclear weapons.
If the retards at the school board didnt want kids to explore and learn about how systems work, why would they give them laptops?
Legislators and school administrators have bought into the computer industry's story that our kids won't be able to become functioning adults in today's society without computer skills, and that the only way they they can get them is to have a computer of their own. By giving students their own laptop, it somehow 'balances' the students' financial inequalities.
There is a lot of money involved. Computer manufacturers lobby hard to get money allocated to purchase their gear, schools plead poverty and parents pressure their elected officials to provide state and federal grants.
We have whole school districts that are having trouble teaching fundamentals, why are we surprised when they don't have coherent policies for managing computer technology?
If the computer is a shared resource (classroom computer), it should be reasonbly locked down to prevent one student from disrupting the education of others who need to use it. If they are personally assigned laptops, then they should be protected to reduce unnecessary tech support.
At the same time, those protections and punishments should be reasonable. If a child pulls the fire alarm to get out of a class they don't like, you don't drag them off in handcuffs.
Amazing. At some time in our life, most of us have trumpeted computers in classrooms as teaching aids. It was bad enough that the result has been diversion of scarce tax dollars and distractions in the classroom. We've built a system of ignorant purchasing and a general lack of training for the teachers we supply these tools to. But now, we build an environment where we turn the students into criminals over juvenile jokes and 'inappropriate' curiosity.
If I were a parent in these school districts, I would refuse to allow my kids to have the school computers. And if there was ANY detrimental effect on their grades or education, I'd file a lawsuit. These heavy handed policies endanger the future of students in those districts.
If administators had been this ignorant when I was learning my skills, I wouldn't have worked with computers for the last 20 years. At a tech school I attended we used a system 34. I found out the hard way that you don't name a BASIC program Merge. It resulted in the system being frozen for hours while the history file filled and then printed. We also found that with the menuing tools and a set of manuals, we could get into functions we weren't intended to use. When the admin found out, instead of calling the cops he tightened security and the told us we weren't supposed to be using those functions and that he had locked us out.
When you give a child a learning tool, you don't punish them for exploring. The problem here isn't students hacking computers, it's the adults not properly supervising them. You wouldn't turn a bunch of HS students loose in the wood shop unsupervised.
I think the danger to MS and Linux from OS X is being exaggerated.
Windows - the people that would have to switch to hurt MS are the ones that won't even look at Linux because it's 'different'. They are either comfortable with the Windows way of doing things or they are barely computer literate. Gnome and KDE have themes to make things look/work very similar to Windows. Apple makes no excuses, they know the 'best' way to do things. These users are already used to MS's 'best' way.
Linux - OS X has many of the same annoyances that Windows has, just in a different form. A lot of us don't like having an OS make assumptions for us and then make it extremely difficult change. I still remember when Win95 came out and it had 'modem drivers' that were basically the modem's init strings. If the manufacturers' defaults didn't work for you, you had to fight to get the correct settings. OS X assumes I want that menu bar across the top of my screen. Linux servers are for production, Linux desktops is still for the tinkerers. OS X (IMO) sucks for tinkering.
I have you by a year. And currently happen to be in a position where we are migrating to an ERP package. (made by MS, no less) It kind of feels like I'm being asked to take all of my skills that I have worked hard for, convert our codebase, and turn my job into a glorified helpdesk. Is it practical to think quality can be maintained when there isn't even a code versioning system available for the package?
The quality of work that I put out is important to me. I used to like my job, when I was finding elegant solutions to problems. (just as quickly as the ones who wouldn't do analysis, BTW) I will admit, I don't usually make charts either. I consider it a flaw in my discipline. I don't have failed projects, missing features, or feature creep, but the documentation isn't there for other developers either.
So anyway, after 11 years of not needing a resume, I'm currently learning how they are written now. I personally believe that there are businessmen out there that still prefer quality. I'm also not into the whole "the sky is falling, all of our jobs are going to India" panic. I consider my business knowledge as important as my programming knowledge. Of course, it does concern me that so much of our manufacturing is going to China....
i havent been ABLE to do a flow chart or warnier orr diagram in more than 15 years...
If you are incapable of doing a flowchart any longer, then you either don't understand the system you are building or you need to refresh your skills. I heard the arguments with OOP and things like windows messaging or linux signals. If you're screaming "but they are events and methods, the program doesn't flow", you're already thinking about coding, not design. The data still flows through the system. Customers still place orders, those orders are picked, packed, and shipped. And when you don't do the analysis necessary you end up with things like a system that is about to go live but can't create something like an export document. Guess they'll have to ignore all those Canadian customers. Charting a system is a visual method of making sure all the requirements have been recognized.
If you're saying that you can't do quality work because management requires you to take shortcuts, then I guess your choice is to suck it up and quit whining or get out and get a job at a company that understands quality. But in the end, you are still responsible for what you produce.
I have to wonder how many who are willing to blame management or say "it's not possible to estimate, because we've never done it" actually sit down and do system flow charts during the design stage. I don't mean it as a criticism. But we are comparing developing software to building houses. Houses have blueprints, shouldn't software have flowcharts? If I went out and said "I have a design in my head for a house" and just started building. Shouldn't I expect to fail?
The front door is there, but it has no lock. Because the owners would just tape the key to the door anyway.
Of course, if we did use a lock, our key would be a minimum of 6" long and must be made out of steel, plastic, and at least one bit of glass. Then we would be confused at why the owners found it annoying to carry.
How will it make proof of delivery a snap? Are you going to have the customer scan the boxes? They won't scan the 'missing' boxes. Is there going to be some magical, all seeing RFID network? UPS and Yellow Freight aren't going to keep track of your RFIDs. Their data networks are built to handle their own tracking/PRO numbers. They could care less about yours. Here is how you will determine whether your customer got the complete shipment:
UPS: track 40 tracking numbers and check delivery confirmation.
LTL: you will call your carrier and give them the PRO number, and they will tell you if all the pallets were delivered. Then you will check your pallet weights with the order weight, and see if it's reasonable. But in the end, you will compare what the missing parts cost to the value of your customer and decide whether you're going to credit them for the 'missing' parts.
And if each item is valuable enough you need to know what specific RFID it had, it will already have a human readable serial number.
(2) Reverse logistics.
This one is really simple. You don't care. If you are doing a recall you've covered your liability when you sent out the notice. BF Goodrich doesn't care that I'm not going to have my recalled tires replaced. (missing treadwear indicator) They told Walmart, Walmart told me. Warranty returns and RMAs? They are under no obligation to replace anything until you get it to them. They don't care if it's "on the way."
These arguments are technology for technology's sake. They don't provide any business value.
In warehousing it's useful for keeping track of inventory movement. Databases are only as good as the people that use them, and people occasionally make mistakes. So while your database might tell you that you have 10,000 of product X, someone might have accidently overshipped, so you really only have 9,975. With RFID you can do a quick cycle count. Another problem in warehouses is when an employee records that s/he put the product in bin A, but actually put it in bin D. When you can have thousands of rack locations it can be next to impossible to find mistakes like that without doing a physical inventory. A time consuming process. From my experience in retail many, many years ago, I can see some benefit for finding 'lost' product there too. Retail stores have gremlins that move product randomly around the store. Because that Black & Decker cordless drill is supposed to be in lingerie.
I doubt that very many product handling facilities care about tracking product once it leaves their domain. So you really have to wonder who interest it is to keep RFID active once it leaves a retailer.
You have obviously never owned a courier. I have owned both, and I can tell you with absolute certainty there is no way the two came off the same production line.
There are problems with your example that might make the process actionable by the customers. Two more cylinders of moving parts that could break, for instance.
Instead, what you would see is two 'models' of v8s tuned to different specs by the computer. The 'standard' v8 would be de-tuned and provide better fuel economy. The 'performance' v8 would be tuned for higher horsepower and the transmission with harder shiftpoints. The only difference would be software settings.
The trucking industry does this, BTW, although not as a price point on the purchase of the truck. The dealers or trucklines will turn down the HP on trucks that won't be doing mountain driving. It's easier than dealing with lead-footed drivers.
Or they could get sick and tired of not being appreciated for the work that they do, and abandon FOSS entirely. If they aren't adding features fast enough to suit you, feel free to implement them yourself. Nagging and whining is not motivating.
I have one too. All in all, the cute Tux picture has garnered exactly 3 conversations about Linux and probably 50 comments by women saying, "cute penguin!"
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Maybe if they get this straightened out, I'll switch my MBNA mastercard to LinuxFund. Although I don't use it much (vacations), but no point in that money going to a fraternity I wasn't real impressed with anyway.
Or you could just rent a car for those trips. At that point it would come down to analyzing costs. Do you own a trailer, or just rent one when you need it?
And of course there's no gearing *inside* an engine.
Actually, if you want to be pedantic.... there are gears inside an automotive engine. Depending on the type of engine, the camshaft is driven by the crankshaft with a combination of gear/gear, gear/chain, or gear/belt. And the oil pump, while not part of the power producing chain, is often driven by a gear on the back of the camshaft.
No gears in the engine and having a transmission with gears is totally different.
No transmission is necessary. And it's a process that has been well tested. Trains are diesel electric. They have motors mounted in the wheel assemblies. Then they have one large diesel engine running a generator providing the power to the drives. And another that runs a separate generator that provides power to the train. And a bit of trivia... the unit that powers the drives is a 2 cycle engine while the other is a 4 cycle.
The reason they use a diesel electric is the amount of torque required would require a huge transmission. Gas/Diesel engines need transmission because they have a sweet spot where they provide the most torque. Electric motors, on the other hand, are capable of providing pretty much the same torque at 1 rpm as they are at their max rpm.
Personally, I'm with another poster here. Diesel electric should be investigated for heavy duty applications like Semis and Buses.
But even with the current hybrid (gas) electric cars there is a healthy gain in efficiency.
A 1.4GHz Pentium M is speced to draw a peak of 10W, considerably less than the 1.4GHz G4 used in the "high end" Mac Mini.
Just an FYI, my 'slower' Mac Mini peaks around 38 watts overall. That's when you're driving it hard enough to get the fan running (heavy HD access, rendering graphics, my WoW test).
That's about 10 watts less than my 2g Celery laptop. But to be fair, the laptop also includes the display. Performance is comparable, but the Mac has a faster HD.
If that is his reason, maybe he should shut up. Nothing motivates people more than the desire to make some loudmouth look like an ass. If he wants a BitKeeper equivalent of Firefox, the best thing he can do is keep telling people they aren't good enough to make one. It's about as smart as saying "you can't slashdot my website".
Re:So, you programmers ready to give up your jobs?
on
McVoy Strikes Back
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
So, what happens to all the programmers in the world when everything goes open source and free?
My job consists of writing software that the company I work for will never earn a dime from. (directly) We don't write software for the sake of earning money from it. We write it to solve a business need.
The majority of our time is not spent doing software development. It's spent supporting our users, fixing bugs, adding small features, or modifications. All of which would still be required if we were using OSS.
I'm valuable to the company I work for not so much because I'm a programmer, but because I understand our business environment and can apply that knowledge to software. It's unlikely management would ever be able to surf over to Freshmeat and download something that could replace what I do.
Besides, I wouldn't work for McDonalds, I'm partial to driving trucks. I'm already used to long hours and low pay.
I personally, would prefer that you wrote good, clean, documented code and add new features when the code is ready for them.
As a user, I find it frustrating when features almost, sometimes work. Nothing is more fun than having your browser crash while you have 10 tabs with various pages loaded.
As a developer, I work with other people's sloppy, undocumented code on a regular basis. Some days I wonder if it's worth the pain.
Having said that, the last time I used Konqueror it was better than Mozilla and not as good as Firefox, from an ease of use perspective. But that's been a year or two ago.
Slashdot Mirror
A Motorola V330? That certainly wouldn't fit my description of minimalist in any way.
When I had to buy a new phone a year an a half ago, I had to hunt to find a phone that didn't include a camera. I ended up with a Samsung E105.
At the time friends hassled me about the decision. "camera phones are cheap, and I can take these [shitty] pictures". They didn't seem to understand that A: I don't want a camera on my phone B: more complexity means more things to break C: unnecessary features probably drain the battery, and D: I go places where cameras are not allowed.
I don't expect my refrigerator to make coffee, why would I want my phone to take pictures?
This ain't nucular physics they's teaching in high school.
Now George, you know you aren't supposed to be posting on Slashdot. You have countries to invade. I hear Iran is still working on their nuclear weapons.
If the retards at the school board didnt want kids to explore and learn about how systems work, why would they give them laptops?
Legislators and school administrators have bought into the computer industry's story that our kids won't be able to become functioning adults in today's society without computer skills, and that the only way they they can get them is to have a computer of their own. By giving students their own laptop, it somehow 'balances' the students' financial inequalities.
There is a lot of money involved. Computer manufacturers lobby hard to get money allocated to purchase their gear, schools plead poverty and parents pressure their elected officials to provide state and federal grants.
We have whole school districts that are having trouble teaching fundamentals, why are we surprised when they don't have coherent policies for managing computer technology?
If the computer is a shared resource (classroom computer), it should be reasonbly locked down to prevent one student from disrupting the education of others who need to use it. If they are personally assigned laptops, then they should be protected to reduce unnecessary tech support.
At the same time, those protections and punishments should be reasonable. If a child pulls the fire alarm to get out of a class they don't like, you don't drag them off in handcuffs.
Amazing. At some time in our life, most of us have trumpeted computers in classrooms as teaching aids. It was bad enough that the result has been diversion of scarce tax dollars and distractions in the classroom. We've built a system of ignorant purchasing and a general lack of training for the teachers we supply these tools to. But now, we build an environment where we turn the students into criminals over juvenile jokes and 'inappropriate' curiosity.
If I were a parent in these school districts, I would refuse to allow my kids to have the school computers. And if there was ANY detrimental effect on their grades or education, I'd file a lawsuit. These heavy handed policies endanger the future of students in those districts.
If administators had been this ignorant when I was learning my skills, I wouldn't have worked with computers for the last 20 years. At a tech school I attended we used a system 34. I found out the hard way that you don't name a BASIC program Merge. It resulted in the system being frozen for hours while the history file filled and then printed. We also found that with the menuing tools and a set of manuals, we could get into functions we weren't intended to use. When the admin found out, instead of calling the cops he tightened security and the told us we weren't supposed to be using those functions and that he had locked us out.
When you give a child a learning tool, you don't punish them for exploring. The problem here isn't students hacking computers, it's the adults not properly supervising them. You wouldn't turn a bunch of HS students loose in the wood shop unsupervised.
That's because it's a COM, not an ORG. opensourceCMS
You have to be patient. They have to build new sets for the sequel.
I think the danger to MS and Linux from OS X is being exaggerated.
Windows - the people that would have to switch to hurt MS are the ones that won't even look at Linux because it's 'different'. They are either comfortable with the Windows way of doing things or they are barely computer literate. Gnome and KDE have themes to make things look/work very similar to Windows. Apple makes no excuses, they know the 'best' way to do things. These users are already used to MS's 'best' way.
Linux - OS X has many of the same annoyances that Windows has, just in a different form. A lot of us don't like having an OS make assumptions for us and then make it extremely difficult change. I still remember when Win95 came out and it had 'modem drivers' that were basically the modem's init strings. If the manufacturers' defaults didn't work for you, you had to fight to get the correct settings. OS X assumes I want that menu bar across the top of my screen. Linux servers are for production, Linux desktops is still for the tinkerers. OS X (IMO) sucks for tinkering.
I have you by a year. And currently happen to be in a position where we are migrating to an ERP package. (made by MS, no less) It kind of feels like I'm being asked to take all of my skills that I have worked hard for, convert our codebase, and turn my job into a glorified helpdesk. Is it practical to think quality can be maintained when there isn't even a code versioning system available for the package?
The quality of work that I put out is important to me. I used to like my job, when I was finding elegant solutions to problems. (just as quickly as the ones who wouldn't do analysis, BTW) I will admit, I don't usually make charts either. I consider it a flaw in my discipline. I don't have failed projects, missing features, or feature creep, but the documentation isn't there for other developers either.
So anyway, after 11 years of not needing a resume, I'm currently learning how they are written now. I personally believe that there are businessmen out there that still prefer quality. I'm also not into the whole "the sky is falling, all of our jobs are going to India" panic. I consider my business knowledge as important as my programming knowledge. Of course, it does concern me that so much of our manufacturing is going to China....
i havent been ABLE to do a flow chart or warnier orr diagram in more than 15 years...
If you are incapable of doing a flowchart any longer, then you either don't understand the system you are building or you need to refresh your skills. I heard the arguments with OOP and things like windows messaging or linux signals. If you're screaming "but they are events and methods, the program doesn't flow", you're already thinking about coding, not design. The data still flows through the system. Customers still place orders, those orders are picked, packed, and shipped. And when you don't do the analysis necessary you end up with things like a system that is about to go live but can't create something like an export document. Guess they'll have to ignore all those Canadian customers. Charting a system is a visual method of making sure all the requirements have been recognized.
If you're saying that you can't do quality work because management requires you to take shortcuts, then I guess your choice is to suck it up and quit whining or get out and get a job at a company that understands quality. But in the end, you are still responsible for what you produce.
I have to wonder how many who are willing to blame management or say "it's not possible to estimate, because we've never done it" actually sit down and do system flow charts during the design stage. I don't mean it as a criticism. But we are comparing developing software to building houses. Houses have blueprints, shouldn't software have flowcharts? If I went out and said "I have a design in my head for a house" and just started building. Shouldn't I expect to fail?
The front door is there, but it has no lock. Because the owners would just tape the key to the door anyway.
Of course, if we did use a lock, our key would be a minimum of 6" long and must be made out of steel, plastic, and at least one bit of glass. Then we would be confused at why the owners found it annoying to carry.
(1) Proof of delivery
How will it make proof of delivery a snap? Are you going to have the customer scan the boxes? They won't scan the 'missing' boxes. Is there going to be some magical, all seeing RFID network? UPS and Yellow Freight aren't going to keep track of your RFIDs. Their data networks are built to handle their own tracking/PRO numbers. They could care less about yours. Here is how you will determine whether your customer got the complete shipment:
UPS: track 40 tracking numbers and check delivery confirmation.
LTL: you will call your carrier and give them the PRO number, and they will tell you if all the pallets were delivered. Then you will check your pallet weights with the order weight, and see if it's reasonable. But in the end, you will compare what the missing parts cost to the value of your customer and decide whether you're going to credit them for the 'missing' parts.
And if each item is valuable enough you need to know what specific RFID it had, it will already have a human readable serial number.
(2) Reverse logistics.
This one is really simple. You don't care. If you are doing a recall you've covered your liability when you sent out the notice. BF Goodrich doesn't care that I'm not going to have my recalled tires replaced. (missing treadwear indicator) They told Walmart, Walmart told me. Warranty returns and RMAs? They are under no obligation to replace anything until you get it to them. They don't care if it's "on the way."
These arguments are technology for technology's sake. They don't provide any business value.
In warehousing it's useful for keeping track of inventory movement. Databases are only as good as the people that use them, and people occasionally make mistakes. So while your database might tell you that you have 10,000 of product X, someone might have accidently overshipped, so you really only have 9,975. With RFID you can do a quick cycle count. Another problem in warehouses is when an employee records that s/he put the product in bin A, but actually put it in bin D. When you can have thousands of rack locations it can be next to impossible to find mistakes like that without doing a physical inventory. A time consuming process. From my experience in retail many, many years ago, I can see some benefit for finding 'lost' product there too. Retail stores have gremlins that move product randomly around the store. Because that Black & Decker cordless drill is supposed to be in lingerie.
I doubt that very many product handling facilities care about tracking product once it leaves their domain. So you really have to wonder who interest it is to keep RFID active once it leaves a retailer.
You have obviously never owned a courier. I have owned both, and I can tell you with absolute certainty there is no way the two came off the same production line.
There are problems with your example that might make the process actionable by the customers. Two more cylinders of moving parts that could break, for instance.
Instead, what you would see is two 'models' of v8s tuned to different specs by the computer. The 'standard' v8 would be de-tuned and provide better fuel economy. The 'performance' v8 would be tuned for higher horsepower and the transmission with harder shiftpoints. The only difference would be software settings.
The trucking industry does this, BTW, although not as a price point on the purchase of the truck. The dealers or trucklines will turn down the HP on trucks that won't be doing mountain driving. It's easier than dealing with lead-footed drivers.
Or they could get sick and tired of not being appreciated for the work that they do, and abandon FOSS entirely. If they aren't adding features fast enough to suit you, feel free to implement them yourself. Nagging and whining is not motivating.
I have one too. All in all, the cute Tux picture has garnered exactly 3 conversations about Linux and probably 50 comments by women saying, "cute penguin!"
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Maybe if they get this straightened out, I'll switch my MBNA mastercard to LinuxFund. Although I don't use it much (vacations), but no point in that money going to a fraternity I wasn't real impressed with anyway.
Or you could just rent a car for those trips. At that point it would come down to analyzing costs. Do you own a trailer, or just rent one when you need it?
And of course there's no gearing *inside* an engine.
Actually, if you want to be pedantic.... there are gears inside an automotive engine. Depending on the type of engine, the camshaft is driven by the crankshaft with a combination of gear/gear, gear/chain, or gear/belt. And the oil pump, while not part of the power producing chain, is often driven by a gear on the back of the camshaft.
No gears in the engine and having a transmission with gears is totally different.
No transmission is necessary. And it's a process that has been well tested. Trains are diesel electric. They have motors mounted in the wheel assemblies. Then they have one large diesel engine running a generator providing the power to the drives. And another that runs a separate generator that provides power to the train. And a bit of trivia... the unit that powers the drives is a 2 cycle engine while the other is a 4 cycle.
The reason they use a diesel electric is the amount of torque required would require a huge transmission. Gas/Diesel engines need transmission because they have a sweet spot where they provide the most torque. Electric motors, on the other hand, are capable of providing pretty much the same torque at 1 rpm as they are at their max rpm.
Personally, I'm with another poster here. Diesel electric should be investigated for heavy duty applications like Semis and Buses.
But even with the current hybrid (gas) electric cars there is a healthy gain in efficiency.
A 1.4GHz Pentium M is speced to draw a peak of 10W, considerably less than the 1.4GHz G4 used in the "high end" Mac Mini.
Just an FYI, my 'slower' Mac Mini peaks around 38 watts overall. That's when you're driving it hard enough to get the fan running (heavy HD access, rendering graphics, my WoW test).
That's about 10 watts less than my 2g Celery laptop. But to be fair, the laptop also includes the display. Performance is comparable, but the Mac has a faster HD.
If that is his reason, maybe he should shut up. Nothing motivates people more than the desire to make some loudmouth look like an ass. If he wants a BitKeeper equivalent of Firefox, the best thing he can do is keep telling people they aren't good enough to make one. It's about as smart as saying "you can't slashdot my website".
So, what happens to all the programmers in the world when everything goes open source and free?
My job consists of writing software that the company I work for will never earn a dime from. (directly) We don't write software for the sake of earning money from it. We write it to solve a business need.
The majority of our time is not spent doing software development. It's spent supporting our users, fixing bugs, adding small features, or modifications. All of which would still be required if we were using OSS.
I'm valuable to the company I work for not so much because I'm a programmer, but because I understand our business environment and can apply that knowledge to software. It's unlikely management would ever be able to surf over to Freshmeat and download something that could replace what I do.
Besides, I wouldn't work for McDonalds, I'm partial to driving trucks. I'm already used to long hours and low pay.
I personally, would prefer that you wrote good, clean, documented code and add new features when the code is ready for them.
As a user, I find it frustrating when features almost, sometimes work. Nothing is more fun than having your browser crash while you have 10 tabs with various pages loaded.
As a developer, I work with other people's sloppy, undocumented code on a regular basis. Some days I wonder if it's worth the pain.
Having said that, the last time I used Konqueror it was better than Mozilla and not as good as Firefox, from an ease of use perspective. But that's been a year or two ago.