I don't know why everyone is so excited by handwriting recognition. I've been typing since I was three and can do it much better and faster then writing. WTF would I want a slower method for getting data into a computer?
It isn't a theory; software is easy to change in comparison to a bridge. It may be costly, but it is still easy and ultimately cheaper proportionally than changing a bridge.
Also remember that just because you can show how better engineering could have avoided a costly bug fix down the road doesn't mean it would have made better business sense to use better engineering in the first place. There is always cash flow to consider when working on software projects for businesses.
The fact that software is so easy to change is exactly why we shouldn't treat software development like bridge engineering. While the software fail rate may be high and the software development industry may be in need of better practices, you simply can't apply bridge engineering to software development or you will lose a significant amount of cost savings.
HTTP is not a marshalling protocol, which is why a marshalling protocol like SOAP is often used on top of HTTP. In fact, Flash can only use SOAP over HTTP.
Based on this comments and others I think you need to read up on Web services and get a better understanding of them because you seem misinformed.
First, Fusebox isn't an architecture. Second, MVC isn't a methodology.
Any good methodology wouldn't be specific to a programming language. A good architecture for Web applications would also not be specific to a programming language. MVC is a design pattern that can be applied to be different architectures and programming languages. About the only specific thing you really need for CF is an application framework. Fusebox is an application framework; it just isn't very good.
Is Slashdot the place for this kind of solicitation? Sure it seems like a great place to find technical people, but isn't that what ads are for? I really don't see how the health of some technical publication is really news for nerds or even stuff that matters.
It would be pretty straight forward to write such an application if the all the vendors would finish the XML based sync specification and then actually implement it.
Are you sure?
on
3D LCD Display
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I didn't see any indication in the article that Sharp had developed a 3D LCD. As far as I can tell, Sharp has developed a 3D flat screen.
Re:Employers don't like them either
on
Honest Job Sites?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
That is the typical experience with recruiters and it is why they have such a bad name. I think it is all a misunderstanding. IMHO, you should think of a recruiter as an agent. You need to recruiter to find you a job because you don't have the time to deal with all the potential employers. The recruiter should only be willing to take you on if two things are true. First, they can make a decent amount of money on you. Second, the employer has very little hope of getting someone of your skill set without going through a recruiter.
None of the above helps people of average skill set in a down economy. Thus, if you are one of those people you sould avoid recruiters.
Re:Employers don't like them either
on
Honest Job Sites?
·
· Score: 2
Sorry for the confusion, but I was referring to technical mailing lists; not job lists.
Employers don't like them either
on
Honest Job Sites?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
As a former hiring manager at various dot coms and now CEO of my own, I can tell you that I would never bother to put an ad on a job site. Doing so would just be asking for a barage of emails from people I have no interest in hiring. The only effective way I have found is to network. I always get my people from user groups or from mailing lists I am apart of. If in the rare case that I can't find someone from those two places then I use a recruiter. Not any recruiter mind you as only good ones are worth their weight. For those who care, I am currently using the services of WaveStaff, which is a company started by my former agent.
Many colleges and universities allow user groups to make use of their facilities. Their facilities are generally really nice and include high speed Internet access. Check with your membership to see if anyone has a higher education affiliation that might be able to help.
I don't know enough about chemristry to help you, but as a geek I have always found computational chemistry quite interesting. My father has several books published related to the subject that may be of interest. I don't know really where to buy them, but here are the ones available on Amazon.
Sure! To use XML with an RDBMS you have to do one of two things. First, map the XML to a relational schema. It is well understood that doing this has two main problems. The first problem is the resulting schema. To create a schema to support heirarchical data results in a complex and ugly schema. The second problem is a spatial one. To retrive a given XML document, the database must pull data from a variety of pages. This results in poor performance as the database has no context to store the different bits of an XML document together on the disk. FYI, this one of the main reasons for the creation of OO databases.
The second way of handling XML in an RDBMS is to store the document as a CLOB. Storing it as a CLOB has the advantage of solving the two above issues, but introduces one of its own; You can't query the data that is represented by the CLOB because it is all stored in a single column. This means you have to extract the document from the CLOB and parse it before being able to use any of the data. Some databases now have built in XML parsers so you can do this from stored procedures and combine the XML document with tabular data, but the performance sucks.
I do cover why you would want to use an XML database and how to use Xindice in an article I wrote for DevX that can be found here.
I am curious what the poster thinks is wrong with Xindice. He seems to indicate that he is looking for an XML to RDBMS mapping engine, not a native XML database. Further, he seems to think that Xindice is limited to one type of store. This is simply not true.
In Xindice, XML documents are stored in collections that have filers associated with them that do the actually storage. Xindice provides a Filer interface as well as several different implementations both in-memory and persistent. Additionally, it would be quite trival to implement a DBFiler that stored the data in an RDBMS.
Slashdot Mirror
Since so many people are against banning guns, I suggest we forget it and ban bullets instead.
I don't know why everyone is so excited by handwriting recognition. I've been typing since I was three and can do it much better and faster then writing. WTF would I want a slower method for getting data into a computer?
you really should get out more!
It isn't a theory; software is easy to change in comparison to a bridge. It may be costly, but it is still easy and ultimately cheaper proportionally than changing a bridge.
Also remember that just because you can show how better engineering could have avoided a costly bug fix down the road doesn't mean it would have made better business sense to use better engineering in the first place. There is always cash flow to consider when working on software projects for businesses.
The fact that software is so easy to change is exactly why we shouldn't treat software development like bridge engineering. While the software fail rate may be high and the software development industry may be in need of better practices, you simply can't apply bridge engineering to software development or you will lose a significant amount of cost savings.
HTTP is not a marshalling protocol, which is why a marshalling protocol like SOAP is often used on top of HTTP. In fact, Flash can only use SOAP over HTTP.
Based on this comments and others I think you need to read up on Web services and get a better understanding of them because you seem misinformed.
Flash can use SOAP or AMF as the marshalling protocol. SOAP is quite open as it is a W3C standard.
Let's not forget the Rich Internet Application paradigm suggested by Macromedia.
Flash front-end + Web services backend = RIA
First, Fusebox isn't an architecture. Second, MVC isn't a methodology.
Any good methodology wouldn't be specific to a programming language. A good architecture for Web applications would also not be specific to a programming language. MVC is a design pattern that can be applied to be different architectures and programming languages. About the only specific thing you really need for CF is an application framework. Fusebox is an application framework; it just isn't very good.
Is Slashdot the place for this kind of solicitation? Sure it seems like a great place to find technical people, but isn't that what ads are for? I really don't see how the health of some technical publication is really news for nerds or even stuff that matters.
It would be pretty straight forward to write such an application if the all the vendors would finish the XML based sync specification and then actually implement it.
I didn't see any indication in the article that Sharp had developed a 3D LCD. As far as I can tell, Sharp has developed a 3D flat screen.
That is the typical experience with recruiters and it is why they have such a bad name. I think it is all a misunderstanding. IMHO, you should think of a recruiter as an agent. You need to recruiter to find you a job because you don't have the time to deal with all the potential employers. The recruiter should only be willing to take you on if two things are true. First, they can make a decent amount of money on you. Second, the employer has very little hope of getting someone of your skill set without going through a recruiter.
None of the above helps people of average skill set in a down economy. Thus, if you are one of those people you sould avoid recruiters.
Sorry for the confusion, but I was referring to technical mailing lists; not job lists.
As a former hiring manager at various dot coms and now CEO of my own, I can tell you that I would never bother to put an ad on a job site. Doing so would just be asking for a barage of emails from people I have no interest in hiring. The only effective way I have found is to network. I always get my people from user groups or from mailing lists I am apart of. If in the rare case that I can't find someone from those two places then I use a recruiter. Not any recruiter mind you as only good ones are worth their weight. For those who care, I am currently using the services of WaveStaff, which is a company started by my former agent.
Anyone else think the poster has had a little too much caffeine?
Many colleges and universities allow user groups to make use of their facilities. Their facilities are generally really nice and include high speed Internet access. Check with your membership to see if anyone has a higher education affiliation that might be able to help.
You should check out Apache Cactus http://jakarta.apache.org/cactus/.
I don't what was worse. The fact that a bunch of nerds were playing a role playing game in the sewer or that they were attacked by giant rats.
All I can think of is the red stapler from Office Space.
I don't know enough about chemristry to help you, but as a geek I have always found computational chemistry quite interesting. My father has several books published related to the subject that may be of interest. I don't know really where to buy them, but here are the ones available on Amazon.
Sure! To use XML with an RDBMS you have to do one of two things. First, map the XML to a relational schema. It is well understood that doing this has two main problems. The first problem is the resulting schema. To create a schema to support heirarchical data results in a complex and ugly schema. The second problem is a spatial one. To retrive a given XML document, the database must pull data from a variety of pages. This results in poor performance as the database has no context to store the different bits of an XML document together on the disk. FYI, this one of the main reasons for the creation of OO databases.
The second way of handling XML in an RDBMS is to store the document as a CLOB. Storing it as a CLOB has the advantage of solving the two above issues, but introduces one of its own; You can't query the data that is represented by the CLOB because it is all stored in a single column. This means you have to extract the document from the CLOB and parse it before being able to use any of the data. Some databases now have built in XML parsers so you can do this from stored procedures and combine the XML document with tabular data, but the performance sucks.
I do cover why you would want to use an XML database and how to use Xindice in an article I wrote for DevX that can be found here.
I am curious what the poster thinks is wrong with Xindice. He seems to indicate that he is looking for an XML to RDBMS mapping engine, not a native XML database. Further, he seems to think that Xindice is limited to one type of store. This is simply not true.
In Xindice, XML documents are stored in collections that have filers associated with them that do the actually storage. Xindice provides a Filer interface as well as several different implementations both in-memory and persistent. Additionally, it would be quite trival to implement a DBFiler that stored the data in an RDBMS.
So again I ask, what is wrong with Xindice?
RAID 1 is mirrored not striped. RAID 0 is striped.
I co-authored an article that compares all the open source implementations of the .NET CLI. You can find it here.