You can always make up for inexperience by being more thoughtful when making design decisions and doing proper research. There's tons of crap on how to do distributed searches, if they'd bothered to look it up, rather than 're-invent' (or degenerate) the wheel, gnutella wouldnt have been facing this now. It's not important to just hack the code. Not investing time in the analysis phase of the software development cycle is what will evoke negative review in the end, from people like ZDNet or whomever analyzes this stuff. If they had paid more attention then, and came up with a good system design, none of this would have crept up. End of story.
The U.S. is one of the most sparsly populated countries in the world. IF you want overcrowded, check out the UK. Go check your statistics, please, don't make assumptions like "overcrowded". I don't mean to offend you, but you are wrong in thinking the U.S. is "overcrowded".
This article goes to show attitude of most system (LAN/NT/UNIX) administrators (or at leat the old geezers that the US Gov't hires) - latest patches aren't applied, security news isn't read (at least rootshell.com or bugtraq or security focus or CERT), job function is minimized to only adding or deleting user accounts, and if it doesn't install "out of the box", unless you have a $5000/year service contract w/the vendor, you're scr00d. Admins are virtually the only culprits here. Can't even blame clueless users so much. A good admin would shield against dumb users on his/her intranet....
UNIX was built on borrowed VMS principles. VMS is superior to UNIX in more than just a few ways, which are beyond the scope of Slashdot or its moderator's knowledge. That is why you got moderated down. If whoever moderated it down knew the first thing about VMS, he'd have given you an Insightful comment, in spite of it being sarcastic, or at least a funny. I'm not saying Linux or UNIX sucks, I'm only saying that VMS is far superior to any UNIX in existence.
Reuse of OO code also depends on the level of abstraction of what is being re-used, if i can phrase this correctly. I.e. a class that reads/parses a Windows style.INI file and passes values back to the program is something that can be easily reused throughout many many different application domains.
Note the difference though - the highest reusability is achieved if you can design a class such that it can be virtually used across any application domain. The above example is a good example of a class that can be used in an email client, or in a software application that drives an MRI scanner.
However, let's say you designed a class that uses UNIX sockets for communication between two different hosts on the internet (let's forget about the big-endian/little endian issue on this one and assume can be used thruout all unix platforms). Now, you may be able to reuse this class when building such programs as a pop3 server, an email client, a web browser etc. but what good does it do to you when you put it outside of the realm of network applications, for instance, in a math library?
Whereas the INI class that reads/parses parameters can still be of more 'reusability' to you inside a math library than the other UNIX socket class.
So the less abstract the class is (or more tailored to a particular fitness or purpose I should say), the harder it becomes to reuse it accross different application domains.
Almost sounds like nuclear fuel would solve this problem... Now if only Honda would be the first that can build the first nuclear fuel powered Civic EX Si Pu (Pu (94) = plutonium), and all problems will be solved, eh?:-)
Mapping the genome means hardly anything... Which one of those strands is to blame for cancer? Which one is to blame for chronic backpaine? How about killer migraines? Or perhaps congenital heart problems? They mapped it, big deal. Now let me see the expert who will find what each of the billions of strands mean, and try to alter those. There are some discoveries already, but hardly any which would put prostate cancer patients at ease (i.e.). Good luck:-).
>I'd rather have BeOS being developed by paid >professionals than by a bunch of whining > open-sourcers
Who is whining in the open source community? Linus? Or some of the other Linux core/Opensource developers? Do you suppose any one of them is "less qualified" to get on the BeOS team and develop their OS perhaps even in a better manner than the BeOS people themselves? You think Opensource programmers are uneducated morons who don't know shit? Can you not imagine an "opensourcer" in a professional setting?
>It's pretty arrogant to think that the hour you >spend programming at night is going to improve >the OS...
How much time do you think a professional programmer spends writing virtually all new code in one day? The tops I've seen is 1000-1500 lines. Now granted, that code was a lot of semantically similar SQL transactions in C++ using roguewave, so the functions could be copied/pasted, and modified slightly to match the semantics. So the infrastructure of each function repeated throughout the code (all 1500 lines)... which is a consequence of good design. No one function was longer than a pagefull in an X term window.
Now, that's a mf-ing top notch programmer, peaking out. Most programmers don't do over 150-250 lines a day, peak... (my estimation, including all testing/debugging/integration/etc).
And what exactly do you mean by an "hour every night"? Any opensource programmer that works on Linux (i.e.) works on a small peculiar piece of the entire source tree. I take it, conceptually, whoever decides to write code for Linux, is very familiar on the topic of writing drivers (i.e.) and has prior experience in it, otherwise it'd be freekin stupid to undertake such a feat. Every 'hour' that each of these programmers spend every night on a very tight area of the Linux source(i.e.) is the same kind of division of labor that you would have if every professional programmer in a huge company spent one hour a day at work coding, and the rest of the day jackin off to Internet porn;-). And "one hour" was a figure of speech, most people spend more than an hour a day of coding time....
So what makes you think, given that all the people in the Opensource community have as good a level of understanding about OS programming (Linux, i.e.) or apps programming as anyone else professional, academic or what not, that an hour of a paid professional's time is of higher quality than an Opensourcer's? You are accusing, you should provide proof that these "Opensource jagoffs" don't know jack, as you imply....
> Look how far it's come as a CLOSED-source > product. Look how far EVERY closed-source OS has > come without the help of the open-source > community.
Oh, you mean the shell we called MS-DOS, the newer front-end to MS-DOS called Windows 3.1/95/98, and the in-bred of VMS/Windows/MSDOS called Windows NT, which happen to be closed-source and a prevailing monopolistic trend, have actually gotten _real_ far?:-)
> Do you really give a shit about seeing and > understanding the source code, or do > you just want to get BeOS for free?
Yes, I would truly give a shit about understanding the source code to BeOS. I hear it's pure OO code, with a documented design, full OMT(or UML, not sure) notation of every piece, clean crisp unambiguous relationships, virtually a masterpiece of OO... At least, so I heard, I'm not sure how much of that is true. I'd definitely love to get my head under it, and perhaps learn/borrow whatever is good, so that my coding improves, and my company is happier that they've hired a better, ever-learning professional who doesn't go stale and only bitch about how lame open/closed source code is, rather than doing something more constructive with his time.
Do you really think BeOS invented the god damn OS paradigm and their designs are so impeccable? Bulls**t... It's a company who has learned from other people's mistakes... and with a bad marketing plan I might add:-).
Slashdot Mirror
--
--
The U.S. is one of the most sparsly populated countries in the world. IF you want overcrowded, check out the UK. Go check your statistics, please, don't make assumptions like "overcrowded". I don't mean to offend you, but you are wrong in thinking the U.S. is "overcrowded".
This article goes to show attitude of most system (LAN/NT/UNIX) administrators (or at leat the old geezers that the US Gov't hires) - latest patches aren't applied, security news isn't read (at least rootshell.com or bugtraq or security focus or CERT), job function is minimized to only adding or deleting user accounts, and if it doesn't install "out of the box", unless you have a $5000/year service contract w/the vendor, you're scr00d. Admins are virtually the only culprits here. Can't even blame clueless users so much. A good admin would shield against dumb users on his/her intranet....
UNIX was built on borrowed VMS principles. VMS is superior to UNIX in more than just a few ways, which are beyond the scope of Slashdot or its moderator's knowledge. That is why you got moderated down. If whoever moderated it down knew the first thing about VMS, he'd have given you an Insightful comment, in spite of it being sarcastic, or at least a funny. I'm not saying Linux or UNIX sucks, I'm only saying that VMS is far superior to any UNIX in existence.
Note the difference though - the highest reusability is achieved if you can design a class such that it can be virtually used across any application domain. The above example is a good example of a class that can be used in an email client, or in a software application that drives an MRI scanner.
However, let's say you designed a class that uses UNIX sockets for communication between two different hosts on the internet (let's forget about the big-endian /little endian issue on this one and assume can be used thruout all unix platforms). Now, you may be able to reuse this class when building such programs as a pop3 server, an email client, a web browser etc. but what good does it do to you when you put it outside of the realm of network applications, for instance, in a math library?
Whereas the INI class that reads/parses parameters can still be of more 'reusability' to you inside a math library than the other UNIX socket class.
So the less abstract the class is (or more tailored to a particular fitness or purpose I should say), the harder it becomes to reuse it accross different application domains.
I hope I'm understood on this issue.
Almost sounds like nuclear fuel would solve this problem... Now if only Honda would be the first that can build the first nuclear fuel powered Civic EX Si Pu (Pu (94) = plutonium), and all problems will be solved, eh? :-)
Mapping the genome means hardly anything... Which one of those strands is to blame for cancer? Which one is to blame for chronic backpaine? How about killer migraines? Or perhaps congenital heart problems? They mapped it, big deal. Now let me see the expert who will find what each of the billions of strands mean, and try to alter those. There are some discoveries already, but hardly any which would put prostate cancer patients at ease (i.e.). Good luck :-).
>I'd rather have BeOS being developed by paid
;-). And "one hour" was a figure of speech, most people spend more than an hour a day of coding time....
:-)
:-).
>professionals than by a bunch of whining
> open-sourcers
Who is whining in the open source community? Linus? Or some of the other Linux core/Opensource developers? Do you suppose any one of them is "less qualified" to get on the BeOS team and develop their OS perhaps even in a better manner than the BeOS people themselves? You think Opensource programmers are uneducated morons who don't know shit? Can you not imagine an "opensourcer" in a professional setting?
>It's pretty arrogant to think that the hour you
>spend programming at night is going to improve
>the OS...
How much time do you think a professional programmer spends writing virtually all new code in one day? The tops I've seen is 1000-1500 lines. Now granted, that code was a lot of semantically similar SQL transactions in C++ using roguewave, so the functions could be copied/pasted, and modified slightly to match the semantics. So the infrastructure of each function repeated throughout the code (all 1500 lines)... which is a consequence of good design. No one function was longer than a pagefull in an X term window.
Now, that's a mf-ing top notch programmer, peaking out. Most programmers don't do over 150-250 lines a day, peak... (my estimation, including all testing/debugging/integration/etc).
And what exactly do you mean by an "hour every night"? Any opensource programmer that works on Linux (i.e.) works on a small peculiar piece of the entire source tree. I take it, conceptually, whoever decides to write code for Linux, is very familiar on the topic of writing drivers (i.e.) and has prior experience in it, otherwise it'd be freekin stupid to undertake such a feat. Every 'hour' that each of these programmers spend every night on a very tight area of the Linux source(i.e.) is the same kind of division of labor that you would have if every professional programmer in a huge company spent one hour a day at work coding, and the rest of the day jackin off to Internet porn
So what makes you think, given that all the people in the Opensource community have as good a level of understanding about OS programming (Linux, i.e.) or apps programming as anyone else professional, academic or what not, that an hour of a paid professional's time is of higher quality than an Opensourcer's? You are accusing, you should provide proof that these "Opensource jagoffs" don't know jack, as you imply....
> Look how far it's come as a CLOSED-source
> product. Look how far EVERY closed-source OS has
> come without the help of the open-source
> community.
Oh, you mean the shell we called MS-DOS, the newer front-end to MS-DOS called Windows 3.1/95/98, and the in-bred of VMS/Windows/MSDOS called Windows NT, which happen to be closed-source and a prevailing monopolistic trend, have actually gotten _real_ far?
> Do you really give a shit about seeing and
> understanding the source code, or do
> you just want to get BeOS for free?
Yes, I would truly give a shit about understanding the source code to BeOS. I hear it's pure OO code, with a documented design, full OMT(or UML, not sure) notation of every piece, clean crisp unambiguous relationships, virtually a masterpiece of OO... At least, so I heard, I'm not sure how much of that is true. I'd definitely love to get my head under it, and perhaps learn/borrow whatever is good, so that my coding improves, and my company is happier that they've hired a better, ever-learning professional who doesn't go stale and only bitch about how lame open/closed source code is, rather than doing something more constructive with his time.
Do you really think BeOS invented the god damn OS paradigm and their designs are so impeccable? Bulls**t... It's a company who has learned from other people's mistakes... and with a bad marketing plan I might add
L8r.