Instead, what mostly seems to be happening is that the folks who were drawn to the profession solely for money, and who don't really like using or programming computers per-se, are using every devious brown-nosing trick in the book to muscle out their more talented co-workers who might make them look bad to the clueless PHB.
I've seen this happen, yes, like when Maxager Technology ushered out too highly talented software developers in January, 2001 and kept ignorant brown-nosing wannabe's in their place to do the same work. I've found that it has become important to "do good work" *and* adeptly play the political games simultaneously. Not easy for a nerd, but it's certainly doable.
We seem to be running in circles and every loop around seems to require a toll at the Redmond Toll Booth.
In a tangential manner, you've hit upon what's the real problem. As long as software developers cede their craft and their profession (and their sanity) to the market desires of big software development companies rather than what's best for computer science, these stupidity cycles will continue dragging us all round and round and round. It's high time for a powerful programmers' guild that not only takes on poor software development management, but also software development companies that push their own selfish/myopic agendas over what's technically/financially best for the organizations we work for.
ICANN is now causing so much damage (technical and otherwise) to the future of the Internet, hopefully some force will come along and effectively destroy this organization. I'm not calling for any lives lost, but hopefully some reputations can be destroyed. Time to put Mr. Lynn on the streets and make him eat dog food.
I've tried JDeveloper, Oracle's crapped-up variant of Borland's wonderful JBuilder. Better to stick with JBuilder.
I currently use Designer. There's far better database design packages available for less money, but since my organization uses it, that's what I have to use. It's passable, but I think anyone who's actually used it as well as other packages will agree that Designer is rather nonintuitive.
Oracle's built-in tools are rather poor excuses for software. SQL*Plus is a complete joke. Better to use a third-party tool, like SQL-Programmer or SQL Navigator.
Oracle Forms is pathetic. Calling it nonintuitive would be an understatement. Better to use *anything* else.
I was confused about "Borland" being in Cringely's "effectively dead" list as well. Borland has bounced back _amazingly_ over the past couple years under Dale Fuller's leadership. Borland is profitable and has hundreds of millions of dollars in the bank. Delphi 7 is a great release and JBuilder continues to _rule_ the Java tool market. Borland has even recently acquired Starbase and BoldSoft--two very fine software companies that are great complements to Borland's business.
I read every word. The funds still helped the library. Therefore, it's still a good thing. Maybe the guy donated books the librarians deemed "unshelvable". I trust their judgment.
I do not donate books to the library because I do not want to see them sold 3/$1usd instead of being shelved. I would rather give them away to friends and people at church.
So, the purchasers of your books at 3/$1 won't read them and make good use out of them? So, the library isn't helped by this by being able to purchase more books they see fit to place onto the shelves?
...and it still contained a letter from the publisher asking them to shelve that book...
So, a publisher's request for shelving a book is a contract to do such? So, a library cannot decide what books are appropriate to shelf and which are not? Remember, a lot of *junk* is published, so not placing every possible books on the shelves is a Good Thing (TM).
I plan on donating some money to my area library this year, I hope you will too.
Another great way to help your library is to donate all your unwanted books to them. They will then decide whether they go onto the shelves or into their occasional book sales. Either way, you're helping your library (and thus your community) in a financially painless manner.
I concur that the programmers should vacate this company as soon as possible. This moron owner, this wanton Mussolini must be put in his place. How dare he advocate ruining the physical and mental health of so many people while most assuredly *not* attaining the project goals. He's a fool and shouldn't be running a software company.
Despite the history, however, 8 hours is still a reasonable point of diminishing returns for many people. For others, it might be 9 or 10. Depends upon the person's stamina and their interest in the work/project.
"If we can get the open-source movement as excited about modifying legal code as they are about C++ and Java, I think they lobbying will take off itself," Tiemann said.
Very cogent viewpoint here. Programmers should be naturals at creating (and debugging) laws, as well as using our rare skills to enact social change. I hope someday soon there will be a mass realization amongst us that we hold the balls of government and criminal monopolies in our hands.
It's too bad you ignored the clause "without a good rationale". Requiring business suits has no rationale that serves the purpose of an enterprise in ensuring that employees keep focus. If you can't understand this point, then you're just being argumentative.
Clarification: Allowing one's appearance or thoughts to be effectively controlled by another entity, without a good rationale or good return on one's choice to conform (Business dress being a great example) is tantamount to being a slave. It's certainly nothing like the work-slavery of old and new, but it's slavery nonetheless.
"Focus on one's work" is a demonstrated activity that has nothing to do with "uniform" or "uniformity." Further, many businesses allow "business casual"--a good compromise that doesn't negatively effect the work of any professional.
Of course, it's always interesting to see slaves rationalize their slavery.
Representative democracy? Where? Even if the US had that, it doesn't even begin to address the people's issues. Further, it's nice to see more drivel that's essentially the hobgoblins of mob rule. Yes, Virginia, you can have more direct democracy *and* a constitution too.
Slashdot Mirror
Instead, what mostly seems to be happening is that the folks who were drawn to the profession solely for money, and who don't really like using or programming computers per-se, are using every devious brown-nosing trick in the book to muscle out their more talented co-workers who might make them look bad to the clueless PHB.
I've seen this happen, yes, like when Maxager Technology ushered out too highly talented software developers in January, 2001 and kept ignorant brown-nosing wannabe's in their place to do the same work. I've found that it has become important to "do good work" *and* adeptly play the political games simultaneously. Not easy for a nerd, but it's certainly doable.
Chrisd's mea culpa... Ol' Dumb Lott's mea culpa... Chrisd's mea culpa... Shithead Lott's mea culpa...
Somehow, I see a wide ethical spectrum between the two. :)
Admiral Janeway: The Peter Principle is still going strong in the 24th century. Oh well...
God would have lost faster if he were up against Bill Shatner.
Microsoft digs its own grave by getting more and more huffy with its customers. High-def video at 11.
Meanwhile, Linux gets more and more free press.
In a tangential manner, you've hit upon what's the real problem. As long as software developers cede their craft and their profession (and their sanity) to the market desires of big software development companies rather than what's best for computer science, these stupidity cycles will continue dragging us all round and round and round. It's high time for a powerful programmers' guild that not only takes on poor software development management, but also software development companies that push their own selfish/myopic agendas over what's technically/financially best for the organizations we work for.
OK, so there can't be be enterprise-level Linux apps developed for pay. Huh?
ICANN is now causing so much damage (technical and otherwise) to the future of the Internet, hopefully some force will come along and effectively destroy this organization. I'm not calling for any lives lost, but hopefully some reputations can be destroyed. Time to put Mr. Lynn on the streets and make him eat dog food.
I've tried JDeveloper, Oracle's crapped-up variant of Borland's wonderful JBuilder. Better to stick with JBuilder.
I currently use Designer. There's far better database design packages available for less money, but since my organization uses it, that's what I have to use. It's passable, but I think anyone who's actually used it as well as other packages will agree that Designer is rather nonintuitive.
Oracle's built-in tools are rather poor excuses for software. SQL*Plus is a complete joke. Better to use a third-party tool, like SQL-Programmer or SQL Navigator.
Oracle Forms is pathetic. Calling it nonintuitive would be an understatement. Better to use *anything* else.
Yup. Oracle is needlessly complex and getting worse while their development tools stay crappy.
I was confused about "Borland" being in Cringely's "effectively dead" list as well. Borland has bounced back _amazingly_ over the past couple years under Dale Fuller's leadership. Borland is profitable and has hundreds of millions of dollars in the bank. Delphi 7 is a great release and JBuilder continues to _rule_ the Java tool market. Borland has even recently acquired Starbase and BoldSoft--two very fine software companies that are great complements to Borland's business.
I read every word. The funds still helped the library. Therefore, it's still a good thing. Maybe the guy donated books the librarians deemed "unshelvable". I trust their judgment.
So, the purchasers of your books at 3/$1 won't read them and make good use out of them? So, the library isn't helped by this by being able to purchase more books they see fit to place onto the shelves?
So, a publisher's request for shelving a book is a contract to do such? So, a library cannot decide what books are appropriate to shelf and which are not? Remember, a lot of *junk* is published, so not placing every possible books on the shelves is a Good Thing (TM).
OK, then give them to charities where there's no hope of them going into a public resource. Sheesh.
Another great way to help your library is to donate all your unwanted books to them. They will then decide whether they go onto the shelves or into their occasional book sales. Either way, you're helping your library (and thus your community) in a financially painless manner.
I concur that the programmers should vacate this company as soon as possible. This moron owner, this wanton Mussolini must be put in his place. How dare he advocate ruining the physical and mental health of so many people while most assuredly *not* attaining the project goals. He's a fool and shouldn't be running a software company.
Despite the history, however, 8 hours is still a reasonable point of diminishing returns for many people. For others, it might be 9 or 10. Depends upon the person's stamina and their interest in the work/project.
Very cogent viewpoint here. Programmers should be naturals at creating (and debugging) laws, as well as using our rare skills to enact social change. I hope someday soon there will be a mass realization amongst us that we hold the balls of government and criminal monopolies in our hands.
Thankfully, like you suggested, I can choose to not work for a company that values puffery over performance, like yours.
It's too bad you ignored the clause "without a good rationale". Requiring business suits has no rationale that serves the purpose of an enterprise in ensuring that employees keep focus. If you can't understand this point, then you're just being argumentative.
Clarification: Allowing one's appearance or thoughts to be effectively controlled by another entity, without a good rationale or good return on one's choice to conform (Business dress being a great example) is tantamount to being a slave. It's certainly nothing like the work-slavery of old and new, but it's slavery nonetheless.
Yes, Virginia, there are different degrees of slavery. Doesn't mean that "thought and appearance" (in other words, free speech) slavery is good.
Steve
"Focus on one's work" is a demonstrated activity that has nothing to do with "uniform" or "uniformity." Further, many businesses allow "business casual"--a good compromise that doesn't negatively effect the work of any professional.
Of course, it's always interesting to see slaves rationalize their slavery.
Representative democracy? Where? Even if the US had that, it doesn't even begin to address the people's issues. Further, it's nice to see more drivel that's essentially the hobgoblins of mob rule. Yes, Virginia, you can have more direct democracy *and* a constitution too.
Didn't say "all" of them. Just one. Also, I'm not sure that we're not already living under a corporate dictatorship.