The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics By, Gary Zukav
Mass Market Paperback: 337 pages ; Dimensions (in inches): 1.05 x 6.88 x 4.20 Publisher: Bantam Books; ISBN: 055326382X; Reissue edition (September 1994)
I'm quite surprized noone has posted this book yet. Very accessable, well written, and full of interesting anecdotes and some humor. It may be dated, given that it was published in 94, but alot of the work towards the Grand Unified Theory of Physics has been going on alot longer than 8 years:)
Atleast in the consulting biz, saying What you want training in usually isn't the problem, but finding the time to actually GO to training.
I work for a System's Integrator (whom shall remain nameless:P) that works with systems across the board. I've done lots of different projects on MS and Non-MS platforms, etc, but I've never had the chance to work directly with Oracle for long periods of time. Thus, I've sortof got the basics down, user administration, basic tables n shit, but I've never got into doing any performance tuning. I basically feel that I lack a deep understanding of how the base oracle RDBMS operates.
So, I've had Oracle training on my "Personal Development Plan", for a while now. The problem is, we have Oracle experts. So, the chances of getting into the situation where a client will pay for me to go to oracle training are nil. And lets not forget that I've been on the same project now for about 18 months, with no finish line in sight.
The long and short of it is, I could have seamstress training on there, with advanced string design, or some shit, and I'd still be fighting for time to actually go through with it.
There's a reason the Microsoft topic icon is bill gates with borg implants. And I believe that reason is because he's a child of satan sent to destroy the earth, one BSOD at a time:P
.. I'm inclined never to buy a cd again, ever, and instead I'll download high quality mp3s, or perhaps losseless APE's, and then send a flat $20 donation to bands whom I like.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm discusted that this organization recieves a cut of the money I spend on cds, and spends it on the collective ability to limit my consumer rights.
I implore anyone with the talent and forsight to give me a legal, viable alternative to this music monopoly.
Methodologies like Test First have been gaining popularity, along with their supporting tools like JUnit and NUnit, to help solve the testing dilemna. Normally when you're coding strictly against the compiler, and perhaps some defined design, the only errors you'll see are compile time, and in the case of java or (insert scripting language here), run time errors. Logic and design errors are revealed through testing your software, usually in the form of unit and/or integration tests, figuring out if your software does what it's actually supposed to do.
The Test First methodology actually takes this process one step further, elevating logic errors to the level of obviousness that compiler errors have. This is key, because it helps break the mindset of the assuming programmer that if it compiles, it must be fine.
Unfortunately, the tools I've seen that support test first only work in the context of testing Java or.NET (C#, VB, etc) code. Because of the complexities involved, I doubt a generic CUnit or C++Unit could ever be engineered for generic distribution. The best support I've found is just to get the developers to think within the guidelines of test first.
I personally think this methodology, like any other should be viewed as a possible tool to use to solve some problem, in your specific project environment and schedule and what have you. But thinking along the lines of trying to test your software before you build your software will help you to write more robust code.
-ds
References: http://www.junit.org/news/article/t est_first/ http://junit.sf.net http://nunit.sf.n et
This is exactly why methodologies like Test First have been gaining popularity, along with their supporting tools like JUnit and NUnit, exist. When you're coding strictly against you're compiler, and perhaps some defined design, the only errors you'll see are compile time, and in the case of java or (insert scripting language here), run time errors. Logic and design errors are revealed through testing your software, usually in the form of unit and/or integration tests, figuring out if your software does what it's actually supposed to do.
Test First methodology actually takes this process one step further, elevating logic errors to the level of obviousness that compiler errors have. This is key, because it helps break the mindset of the assuming programmer that if it compiles, it must be fine.
Unfortunately, the tools I've seen that support test first only work in the context of testing Java or.NET (C#, VB, etc) code. Because of the complexities involved, I doubt a generic CUnit or C++Unit could ever be engineered for generic distribution. The best support I've found is just to get the developers to think within the guidelines of test first.
I personally think this methodology, like any other should be viewed as a possible tool to use to solve some problem, in your specific project environment and schedule and what have you. But thinking along the lines of trying to test your software before you build your software will help you to write more robust code.
-ds
References: http://www.junit.org/news/article/t est_first/ http://junit.sf.net http://nunit.sf.n et
I know the feeling. I keep my starcrack cds locked in a safe that will automatically detonate, Mission Impossible style. Sanity is so hard to come by these days.
Its very fascinating that this review should come out now. The entire technical competency at my new job has invested alot into Agile as one of many methodologies practiced. Yesterday some of us were having a discussion about usecases, and how they fit into the agile world, both as a consumable from the developer's view of the world, as well as from the view of User Experience and Project Management. In practice here, it seems that usecases are a very large part of the agile management style, in some cases, depending on the completeness, making it all the way to the client as a deliverable.
I shall give this a read to see what insights Scott Ambler provides.
At face value, this is a bad idea, because it forces everyone to comply. However, I can think of some cases where the environment (say government) would demand this kind of functionality. A possible solution would be to have some kind of suite that manages expiration for installed apps/services. This would alieviate the need for each app developer to support this feature, and empower system admins who needed this functionality to easily add it (assuming the suite was implemented correctly).
OO is only good for academic reasons to show off organization...
This isn't entirely accurate. Most of the modern implementations of document management (DM) systems use some form of an OODB to enforce organization.
In my mind, database-like properties of a filesystem is a lead-in to bundling document management with the OS.
Most small organizations use plain filesystems/fileserver as a DM system. This doesn't scale well when you start looking at organizations that have more than one location, or more than a few hundred employees. Finding and sharing current versions of business documents becomes an interesting problem. Venders such as FileNet and Documentum have been addressing this problem for a while, integrating their propriatery clients with the os, etc.
So, fast forward to when MS releases this new DB-like filesystem (assuming they get it working), adding simple business process and flow around the document store, say, on a fileserver, is all they'd need to undercut much of the DM market.
For a multi-user system, I whole-heartedly agree with you. In Xf86's current formfactor, it wouldn't make sense to allow users to configure the something(anything) system wide. But in a single user setting, it does, imo.
My argument is that Xf86 doesn't allow configuration behavior, for single-user desktops, comparable to other successful single-user desktop solutions. If the goal of this exercise is to ease configuration for single-user desktops (and that's a very big if:), there needs to be an integrated way of doing so.
My pipedream (gnome specific): Imagine a panel inside gnomecc named gnomecc->Desktop->Display which allowed you to reconfigure X without restarting the session or the X server. It'd take more than just a standardized way of changing the config file to do this.
Anyway, It's quite a specialized feature for something as traditional as X to provide. I imagine it makes zero sense for the guys at XFree86 to even bother looking into it, from their point of view. But the reality is this is pretty standard behavior for any other desktop, including MacOS X.
This is aproximately 95% personal peev so it may suffer from -1 offtopic, but it's my 0.02$. Also understand that my knowledge of the X11R6 standard, and how Xfree86 functions at a low level, is quite limited.
I'd really like to see some sort of integration between Gnome/KDE user control interfaces (gnomecc, etc) and XFree86. Something that would let you configure the X server in place, without restarting your session. One of the things that's always bugged me when trying to get coworkers to checkout linux as a possible desktop is the fact that they have to configure their desktop separately from configuring the X server. Coming from the windows side, most people find it annoying to have to configure the display resolution/color depth separately from other properties of the desktop.
This would improve ease of configuration, and bring [insert free os here] closer to being a desktop os.
Now, I realize that this might be impossible to implement without breaking several other things, but I just wanted to throw the possibility out there.
De Icaza's point about their api's is very accurate. MS has gone through extraordinary efforts to keep their api's backward-compatable. They may indeed "shift" focus, but that exercise is only additive. The api's that Mono is implementing from the ".NET" spec are guaranteed to exist on microsoft's platform.
The situation with lagging behind is most likely unavoidable. But atleast one has the option of developing software using the published apis, and having the thing run on unix and windows.
Your statement is false. I tested both translation engines.
Google: "In the discussion around the copy protection for music CDs have itself now with Philips the inventor the silberscheiben to word announce. The enterprise sees no future for the protection and sees therein a break of the audio format."
Babel: "**time-out** in the discussion around the copy protection for music DS have itself now with Philips the inventor the silberscheiben to word announce. The enterprise sees no future for the protection and sees therein a break of the audio format."
Slashdot Mirror
The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics
:)
By, Gary Zukav
Mass Market Paperback: 337 pages ; Dimensions (in inches): 1.05 x 6.88 x 4.20
Publisher: Bantam Books; ISBN: 055326382X; Reissue edition (September 1994)
I'm quite surprized noone has posted this book yet. Very accessable, well written, and full of interesting anecdotes and some humor. It may be dated, given that it was published in 94, but alot of the work towards the Grand Unified Theory of Physics has been going on alot longer than 8 years
What a great idea. Anyone have Jack Valenti's ESN?
Atleast in the consulting biz, saying What you want training in usually isn't the problem, but finding the time to actually GO to training.
:P) that works with systems across the board. I've done lots of different projects on MS and Non-MS platforms, etc, but I've never had the chance to work directly with Oracle for long periods of time. Thus, I've sortof got the basics down, user administration, basic tables n shit, but I've never got into doing any performance tuning. I basically feel that I lack a deep understanding of how the base oracle RDBMS operates.
I work for a System's Integrator (whom shall remain nameless
So, I've had Oracle training on my "Personal Development Plan", for a while now. The problem is, we have Oracle experts. So, the chances of getting into the situation where a client will pay for me to go to oracle training are nil. And lets not forget that I've been on the same project now for about 18 months, with no finish line in sight.
The long and short of it is, I could have seamstress training on there, with advanced string design, or some shit, and I'd still be fighting for time to actually go through with it.
$0.02USD
There's a reason the Microsoft topic icon is bill gates with borg implants. And I believe that reason is because he's a child of satan sent to destroy the earth, one BSOD at a time :P
.. I'm inclined never to buy a cd again, ever, and instead I'll download high quality mp3s, or perhaps losseless APE's, and then send a flat $20 donation to bands whom I like.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm discusted that this organization recieves a cut of the money I spend on cds, and spends it on the collective ability to limit my consumer rights.
I implore anyone with the talent and forsight to give me a legal, viable alternative to this music monopoly.
Here on cnn and on cnet :p
-1:offtopic
There is no spoon.
Methodologies like Test First have been gaining popularity, along with their supporting tools like JUnit and NUnit, to help solve the testing dilemna. Normally when you're coding strictly against the compiler, and perhaps some defined design, the only errors you'll see are compile time, and in the case of java or (insert scripting language here), run time errors. Logic and design errors are revealed through testing your software, usually in the form of unit and/or integration tests, figuring out if your software does what it's actually supposed to do.
.NET (C#, VB, etc) code. Because of the complexities involved, I doubt a generic CUnit or C++Unit could ever be engineered for generic distribution. The best support I've found is just to get the developers to think within the guidelines of test first.
t est_first/n et
The Test First methodology actually takes this process one step further, elevating logic errors to the level of obviousness that compiler errors have. This is key, because it helps break the mindset of the assuming programmer that if it compiles, it must be fine.
Unfortunately, the tools I've seen that support test first only work in the context of testing Java or
I personally think this methodology, like any other should be viewed as a possible tool to use to solve some problem, in your specific project environment and schedule and what have you. But thinking along the lines of trying to test your software before you build your software will help you to write more robust code.
-ds
References:
http://www.junit.org/news/article/
http://junit.sf.net
http://nunit.sf.
This is exactly why methodologies like Test First have been gaining popularity, along with their supporting tools like JUnit and NUnit, exist. When you're coding strictly against you're compiler, and perhaps some defined design, the only errors you'll see are compile time, and in the case of java or (insert scripting language here), run time errors. Logic and design errors are revealed through testing your software, usually in the form of unit and/or integration tests, figuring out if your software does what it's actually supposed to do.
.NET (C#, VB, etc) code. Because of the complexities involved, I doubt a generic CUnit or C++Unit could ever be engineered for generic distribution. The best support I've found is just to get the developers to think within the guidelines of test first.
t est_first/n et
Test First methodology actually takes this process one step further, elevating logic errors to the level of obviousness that compiler errors have. This is key, because it helps break the mindset of the assuming programmer that if it compiles, it must be fine.
Unfortunately, the tools I've seen that support test first only work in the context of testing Java or
I personally think this methodology, like any other should be viewed as a possible tool to use to solve some problem, in your specific project environment and schedule and what have you. But thinking along the lines of trying to test your software before you build your software will help you to write more robust code.
-ds
References:
http://www.junit.org/news/article/
http://junit.sf.net
http://nunit.sf.
I know the feeling. I keep my starcrack cds locked in a safe that will automatically detonate, Mission Impossible style. Sanity is so hard to come by these days.
And I was holding my breath for those Flurescent Multilayered disks...
Asf
Its very fascinating that this review should come out now. The entire technical competency at my new job has invested alot into Agile as one of many methodologies practiced. Yesterday some of us were having a discussion about usecases, and how they fit into the agile world, both as a consumable from the developer's view of the world, as well as from the view of User Experience and Project Management. In practice here, it seems that usecases are a very large part of the agile management style, in some cases, depending on the completeness, making it all the way to the client as a deliverable.
I shall give this a read to see what insights Scott Ambler provides.
Just my opinion, but I think I'd consider microsoft defeated when they're nolonger defined as the second richest country in the world.
Nike shoes suck anyways. Dr. Martins all the way :p
check out seattle's adhoc network.
At face value, this is a bad idea, because it forces everyone to comply. However, I can think of some cases where the environment (say government) would demand this kind of functionality. A possible solution would be to have some kind of suite that manages expiration for installed apps/services. This would alieviate the need for each app developer to support this feature, and empower system admins who needed this functionality to easily add it (assuming the suite was implemented correctly).
My 2cents.
as long as they have this.
OO is only good for academic reasons to show off organization...
This isn't entirely accurate. Most of the modern implementations of document management (DM) systems use some form of an OODB to enforce organization.
In my mind, database-like properties of a filesystem is a lead-in to bundling document management with the OS. Most small organizations use plain filesystems/fileserver as a DM system. This doesn't scale well when you start looking at organizations that have more than one location, or more than a few hundred employees. Finding and sharing current versions of business documents becomes an interesting problem. Venders such as FileNet and Documentum have been addressing this problem for a while, integrating their propriatery clients with the os, etc.
So, fast forward to when MS releases this new DB-like filesystem (assuming they get it working), adding simple business process and flow around the document store, say, on a fileserver, is all they'd need to undercut much of the DM market.
Why would it be a good idea when you can buy Sun machines with Solaris, and get much more quality computing power for your dollar!
All this is is Sun actively protecting their brand.
my 0.025$
For a multi-user system, I whole-heartedly agree with you. In Xf86's current formfactor, it wouldn't make sense to allow users to configure the something(anything) system wide. But in a single user setting, it does, imo.
:), there needs to be an integrated way of doing so.
My argument is that Xf86 doesn't allow configuration behavior, for single-user desktops, comparable to other successful single-user desktop solutions. If the goal of this exercise is to ease configuration for single-user desktops (and that's a very big if
My pipedream (gnome specific): Imagine a panel inside gnomecc named gnomecc->Desktop->Display which allowed you to reconfigure X without restarting the session or the X server. It'd take more than just a standardized way of changing the config file to do this.
Anyway, It's quite a specialized feature for something as traditional as X to provide. I imagine it makes zero sense for the guys at XFree86 to even bother looking into it, from their point of view. But the reality is this is pretty standard behavior for any other desktop, including MacOS X.
This is aproximately 95% personal peev so it may suffer from -1 offtopic, but it's my 0.02$. Also understand that my knowledge of the X11R6 standard, and how Xfree86 functions at a low level, is quite limited.
I'd really like to see some sort of integration between Gnome/KDE user control interfaces (gnomecc, etc) and XFree86. Something that would let you configure the X server in place, without restarting your session. One of the things that's always bugged me when trying to get coworkers to checkout linux as a possible desktop is the fact that they have to configure their desktop separately from configuring the X server. Coming from the windows side, most people find it annoying to have to configure the display resolution/color depth separately from other properties of the desktop.
This would improve ease of configuration, and bring [insert free os here] closer to being a desktop os.
Now, I realize that this might be impossible to implement without breaking several other things, but I just wanted to throw the possibility out there.
De Icaza's point about their api's is very accurate. MS has gone through extraordinary efforts to keep their api's backward-compatable. They may indeed "shift" focus, but that exercise is only additive. The api's that Mono is implementing from the ".NET" spec are guaranteed to exist on microsoft's platform.
The situation with lagging behind is most likely unavoidable. But atleast one has the option of developing software using the published apis, and having the thing run on unix and windows.
My $0.02
Your statement is false. I tested both translation engines.
Google: "In the discussion around the copy protection for music CDs have itself now with Philips the inventor the silberscheiben to word announce. The enterprise sees no future for the protection and sees therein a break of the audio format."
Babel: "**time-out** in the discussion around the copy protection for music DS have itself now with Philips the inventor the silberscheiben to word announce. The enterprise sees no future for the protection and sees therein a break of the audio format."
is much better from google than from the fish, imo.
.. is that this news made it to headlines. Are there _that_ many people trading D2 items on ebay? *Cough*CT*cough*.
I wish we could moderate headlines..